Trends in regional inequalities between 1910 and 1930 in Hungary and the successor states

Abstract

Trends in regional inequalities between 1910 and 1930 in Hungary and the successor states The present article is a summary of a 5-year research on historical peripheries of Hungary between 1910 and 2010. The identification of peripheral zones in Hungary in 1910 – which geographers failed to do up to now – contributed to the assessment of mistargeted regional development planning policies in the last hundred years. On the other hand it also caused debates, because many of the backward areas coincided with regions dominated by ethnic minorities, thus strengthening the opinion of the historians of the successor states that Austria-Hungary oppressed national minorities. The first part of the article summarizes the opinions, interpretations, misunderstandings emerging from this debate around mapping of inequalities and the implementation of geographical methods in historical research. The second part of the article goes further and – by drawing up the regional differences in 2010 – evaluates the development policies of the successor states, claiming that these were not better, than in historical Hungary; the successor states were driven by the same convictions and pursued similar policies toward zones inhabited by minorities as Hungary did. We show that there were remarkable shifts in the extension of backward zones and the question naturally arises when this process began. Using the census data of the 1930s we try to analyze whether some of these changes observable by 2010 can be traced back to WWII (or were generated only later), and if yes, whether these are direct consequences of the new borders drawn in 1920 or, contrary, it was the former processes during the Hungarian rule that culminated (implying that the first 10 years of the successor states was a failure regarding the integration attempts of the new territories). For this a distric level complex development level map of the region was created by combining 10 variables and the patterns in the 1930s were compared to those in 1910 and in 2010.

On diverging roads? Patterns of territorial development in the Czechoslovak-Hungarian border zone (1910 – 1941)

“…Ako ukázal predchádzajúci výskum, dlhodobým vývojom sa rozvojové trajektórie sídel na oboch stranách Dunaja postupne rozdvojili. Kým na začiatku 20. storočia patrila táto oblasť medzi bohatšie oblasti Maďarska, v súčasnosti by sme komunity na maďarskej strane mohli charakterizovať dynamickými sociálno-ekonomickými indexmi rozvoja, zatiaľ čo na slovenskej strane sú niektoré z hľadiska sociálneho a ekonomického rozvoja periférne (Demeter 2019(Demeter , 2020a(Demeter a 2020b.…”

“…Dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Monarchy and its long-term effects on local communities has attracted scholarly interest in the past. As the existing works of historians, ethnographers, sociologists, human geographers show, the consequences of this historical event and the creation of new border zones can be approached in different ways: changes in ethnic configuration (Szarka 2003), transformation of economic and settlement networks (Kovács 1990, Gaucsík 2004, Jaschitz 2010and Klapka and Erlebach 2021 and their consequences (such as smuggling -Bencsik 2020), the tools and goals of identity building (Mannová 2009), the role of different state policies, and the changes in quality of life and territorial development (Győri and Jankó 2009, Szilágyi 2019, Pénzes 2020, Demeter 2020aand 2020band Jankó et al 2022) are just a number of aspects that has already been researched.…”

“…Different state policies emerged in Czechoslovakia and Hungary, first of all in terms of agricultural reforms and ethnic policies. As previous research has shown, long-term development paths of the settlements on different sides of river Danube bifurcated: while at the beginning of the 20th century the area was well-off compared to other territories of Hungary, today the communities on the Hungarian side can be characterised by dynamic socio-economic indices, while some of those located in Slovakia are rather peripheral in terms of social and economic development (Demeter 2019(Demeter , 2020a(Demeter and 2020b.…”