In some parts of Hungary, climate change can hurt the economy. European Union (EU) subsidies from the “Széchenyi 2020” development initiative did not benefit endangered regions. Even in a prosperous economy, a 0.5°C temperature rise can bring over a 10% drop in employment in some countries.
This can only be prevented by many well-targeted ecologically conscientious projects in these locations. EU green project financing does not seem to reflect these aspirations, either in number or usefulness. Thus, many economically needy Hungarians may face severe problems if they do not receive proportional aid quickly.
NATéR, a Hungarian social and environmental database and research project, received EU financing. The system projects and predicts environmental and socioeconomic data to explore climate change’s social effects. Agriculture share, mobile labour force, demographics, and industrial structure were examined by experts. The project scientists conducted multiple regression analyses to identify socioeconomically susceptible places to temperature increases and predict which areas will suffer more labour market effects from climate change.
Areas appear to differ greatly. Five classifications of temperature vulnerability are used by the project, from low to high. A highly sensitive location will see job growth 2.78% lower than normal for every 0.1°C temperature increase. The indicator would likely go negative with 0.5°C warming, resulting in 15% poorer employment growth than the national average and much higher unemployment.
Where Green Investments Are Needed Most?
Highly vulnerable areas dominate four counties: Hajdú-Bihar, Csongrád-Csanád, Békés, and Bács-Kiskun. We are talking about isolated rural towns with low mobility and agricultural-focused labour forces. Thus, these places must support current firms and encourage rural investment and expansion.
Thus, green projects in these places must be examined from two angles. These initiatives can help fragile, sometimes shuttered, rural enterprises weather climate change-related energy and heating and cooling costs. Green infrastructure and aqua-cultural investments can also conserve land quality, keeping more people in agriculture, which is sometimes the only viable career for inhabitants.
Also, green projects like church or stadium green energy development or city transportation sustainability do not address the most important climate change threats to vulnerable areas. Thus, many projects are insufficient if they don’t meet local needs.
Where Winning Projects Went
The winning green bids under the “Széchenyi 2020” initiative show that vulnerable counties have fewer winners than elsewhere in the country, and Békés has a worryingly low number of winners.
Usually, vulnerable counties have fewer than 5% of national winners. Thus, these places have fewer winners than usual. If projects get divided equitably between Hungary and Budapest’s 19 counties, each vulnerable county would receive 5% of all projects and 20% in total. Due to their dire need, these countries should also have successful initiatives over this ratio. However, 19 of the 49 tenders analysed had no winners from any of the four counties.
Candidates from these counties won 21.6% of projects. While not as high as these countries’ susceptibility suggests, it is not exceptionally low compared to other areas of Hungary. When we divide statistics down by county, the picture is extremely different. The best position is in Hajdú-Bihar, where 8.4% of successful projects occur. This ratio is the worst in Békés at 2.6%.
Békés County had no winners in 30 of 49 tenders. In 11 tenders, Békés had more than 5% national winners, while the best was 13.8%. This tender supported environmentally responsible aquaculture, and 4 of the 29 national winners were from Békés. Thus, the “Széchenyi 2020” plan shows fewer green initiatives in Békés compared to the nation. The area’s climate sensitivity and economic concerns may increase, causing alarm.
Viewing Various Programmes
A study of successful tenders in Hajdú-Bihar, Bács-Kiskun, Békés, and Csongrád counties reveals that the success rate of susceptible counties varies according to the issue. Additionally, some projects are better at tackling climate change’s economic risks than others.
Winners of GINOP industrial development tenders financing renewable energy transition of buildings had good area distribution. GINOP bids offered support and combined loan constructions in various amounts, so smaller and larger firms could benefit.
The four sustainability-related GINOP initiatives awarded 26-42.5% of winning projects to vulnerable counties, a great ratio. Additionally, firms’ sustainable energy innovations directly match climate change costs. Thus, renewable energy development may help protect jobs in the long run. However, GINOP only funded four sustainability initiatives, which appears inadequate given the project’s performance and potential demand.
VEKOP isn’t good for considering location vulnerability. None of the 6 VEKOP green tenders with vulnerable areas won. This is due to tender site requirements. VEKOP promotes Middle-Hungary competitiveness. Whether this region with minimal environmental sensitivity is suitable for programme sustainability infrastructure investments is yet unclear.
Another unique tender kind is the KÖHOP group. This green tender has one winner. The National Development Ministry received 2 billion forints (5.4 million euros) for developing two operating plans, one on environmental protection and one on transport.
Green Cash For Useless Causes
The KEHOP programme offered the greenest tenders, but vulnerable counties got few projects and their effectiveness varied. A tender was held for sustainable energy development of national stadiums. Although vulnerable counties won some of the 20 nationwide projects, including as Hajdú-Bihar and Bács-Kiskun, it is unclear if these initiatives will help them prepare for economic challenges. Békés, which had a low tender success rate, won a tender promoting church-sustainable energy development. This appears to be ineffective in combating climate change’s economic impacts.
Two costly green transport initiatives were implemented in Csongrád-Csanád and Hajdú-Bihar, two fragile counties. In Csongrád-Csanád, a tram-train between Szeged and Hódemezővásárhely was controversial in Hungary for being an expensive prestige project. The tram-train won two “Széchenyi 2020 IKOP” projects. It got 1.25 billion forints (3.38 million euros) for project preparations and 3.5 billion (9.45 million euros) for vehicle park construction. Besides the tram-train’s slowness and errors just days after it opened, it’s problematic to spend so much on a transport option between two cities in an area that suffers from mobility issues in predominantly agrarian villages.
The Debrecen transit centre in Hajdú-Bihar, which won 21 billion forints (56.75 million euros) in an IKOP green tender in 2016, raises similar concerns. The city paid National Infrastructure Development Ltd. 750-800 million forints (2-2.15 million euros) for the multimodal transport centre plans, which were supported fully by EU funds.
After discarding these exorbitant designs, the mayor urged the city council to fund a “simplified” version by the same company. No transport centre has been established since 2020. More than three years after the project’s planned completion, the “simplified” plans were publicised in April 2022. While the centre may improve Debrecen’s transportation, it is unlikely to reduce the area’s climate sensitivity. Unfinished construction is another issue. The project may have been delayed, so we may have to wait a few years for any positive effects. Climate change is ticking, and each year without development increases the area’s vulnerability.