The 26th NISPAcee Annual Conference

Conference photos available

Conference photos available

In the conference participated 317 participants

Conference programme published

Almost 250 conference participants from 36 countries participated

Conference Report

The 28th NISPAcee Annual Conference cancelled

The 29th NISPAcee Annual Conference, Ljubljana, Slovenia, October 21 - October 23, 2021

The 2020 NISPAcee On-line Conference

The 30th NISPAcee Annual Conference, Bucharest, Romania, June 2 - June 4, 2022

An opportunity to learn from other researchers and other countries' experiences on certain topics.

G.A.C., Hungary, 25th Conference 2017, Kazan

Very well organised, excellent programme and fruitful discussions.

M.M.S., Slovakia, 25th Conference 2017, Kazan

The NISPAcee conference remains a very interesting conference.

M.D.V., Netherlands, 25th Conference 2017, Kazan

Thank you for the opportunity to be there, and for the work of the organisers.

D.Z., Hungary, 24th Conference 2016, Zagreb

Well organized, as always. Excellent conference topic and paper selection.

M.S., Serbia, 23rd Conference 2015, Georgia

Perfect conference. Well organised. Very informative.

M.deV., Netherlands, 22nd Conference 2014, Hungary

Excellent conference. Congratulations!

S. C., United States, 20th Conference 2012, Republic of Macedonia

Thanks for organising the pre-conference activity. I benefited significantly!

R. U., Uzbekistan, 19th Conference, Varna 2011

Each information I got, was received perfectly in time!

L. S., Latvia, 21st Conference 2013, Serbia

The Conference was very academically fruitful!

M. K., Republic of Macedonia, 20th Conference 2012, Republic of Macedonia

 :: Anonymous user Login / Register 

Optimised for Tablet | Smartphone

 Paper/Speech Details of Conference Program  

for the  20th NISPAcee Annual Conference
  Program Overview
Public Finance
Author(s)  Mihaly Lados 
  HUN-REN Centre for Economic and Regional Studies
Gyor  Hungary
 
 
 Title  After twenty years: A chance for changes in local government finance in Hungary
File   Paper files are available only for conference participants, please login first. 
Presenter  Mihaly Lados
Abstract  
  
The paper would join the General track: East and West: Twenty Years of Development: Fiscal Policy and Public Finance of the working group.
Twenty years in local governance and local government finance is a long period wich can be brroken down into several periods. At least for CEE cuntries which attend the European Uniion this 20 years consists of two major periods:
1. Transition - period until the assession of the country to the European Union
2. Post-transition - the actual period from the assession
Both periods have own characteristics and driving forces which has some global and national effects.
After the brief introduction of the Hungarian PA and local finance system, the first part of the paper analyses of the features of the two identified periods with a special tool of comparision. Firts, it is looking for the global trends of the given period which has effects on national regulation. Such global trends in the first period is decentralisation of te state and the theory on new public management. In the second period the Neo-Weberian State approach and the global financial crisis can be such global effects Additionally the effects of teh European Union on localgovernment finance is also discussed in both period.
After global and the European issues the paper evaluates the reaction of local governments regarding the national regulation. The evaulation is based on the main factors of the two sides of local budget (revenues and expenditures) like government transfers, local revenues and credit system on the one hand, and operating and capital budgeting on the other hand.
Over this 20 years the general problem of the Hungarian local government system is the disharmony between the scale of local governents and the allocation of functions and resources. This contradictory sitiuation is known and clear since 10-15 years. However, the major change was not possible because the missing two-third majority in the Parliament to reform Act on Local Governments. Since the last election (2010) the governemnt party has this majority. So the change ormajorcorrections of the regulation is not only timely but it has a chance to do that. The second part of the paper draws the potential directions of changes.