Local resource-based development potential as reflected in waste management/circularity transition: Governance barriers in Hungary

• Authors: Viktor Varjú , Cecília Mezei , Csaba Vér
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Waste as a local resource is a development opportunity for resource owners as waste may act as a foundation for bottom-up development at local levels. This paper presents the most important governance challenges that hamper a paradigmatic change in resource efficiency, a transition towards circular economy in the case of Pécs (Hungary). In recent years waste management infrastructure has evolved to provide resource potentials for recycling and reuse, this is a first step towards a (circularity) transition, however, the centralisation of power is hampering local transitions. The article concludes by arguing that in Pécs (Hungary), the transition towards a local resource-based development is impeded by a myriad of legal, institutional and administrative obstacles created by recent efforts towards institutionalisation.

Keywords

EN

waste management; governance; local resource-based development; sustainability transition; circular economy

• Publisher: Uniwersytet Łódzki. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Łódzkiego
• Journal: European Spatial Research and Policy
• Year: 2020
• Volume: 27
• Issue: 2
• Pages: 79-93

Dates

published

2020-12-30

Contributors

author

Viktor Varjú

• KRTK Institute for Regional Studies, 22 Papnövelde Street, 7621, Pécs, Baranya county, Hungary

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3954-4518

author

Cecília Mezei

• KRTK Institute for Regional Studies, 22 Papnövelde Street, 7621, Pécs, Baranya county, Hungary

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2109-2293

author

Csaba Vér

• University of Pécs, Institute of Smart Technology and Engineering, Department of Environmental Engineering, Ifjúság útja 20, 7624 Magyarország Pécs, Hungary

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4750-9360

References

• BOMBERG, E. (2004), ‘Adapting form to function? From economic to sustainable development governance in the European Union’, [in:] LAFFERTY, W.M. (ed.) Governance for Sustainable Development: the Challenge of Adapting Form to Function, Edward Elgar: Cheltenham, pp. 61–94.
• COENEN, L., BENNEWORTH, P. and TRUFFER, B. (2012), ‘Toward a spatial perspective on sustainability transitions’, Research Policy, 41 (6), pp. 968–979. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.02.014
• DANNERT, É. and PIRISI, G. (2017), ‘Rusty Hungary: New Insights in Brownfield Research’, European Spatial Research and Policy, 24 (1), pp. 5–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/esrp-2017-0001
• EC, 2015. Closing the loop – An EU action plan for the Circular Economy.
• FARAGÓ, L. (ed.) (1997), Pécs-Komló komplex tájrehabilitációs és környezetállapotot javító programja I-II. Manuscript, MTA RKK DTI: Pécs.
• GHISELLINI, P., CIALANI, C. and ULGIATI, S. (2016), ‘A review on Circular Economy: the Expected Transition to a balanced interplay of environmental and economic systems’, Journal of Cleaner Production, 114, pp. 11–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.09.007
• GYÜRE, J., MAKKAI, B. and TRÓCSÁNYI, A. (2013), ‘Az egyetemvárosiasodás kérdései a PTE nyugati kampusza alapján’, Területfejlesztés és Innováció, 7 (3), pp. 25–33.
• HEURKENS, E. and DĄBROWSKI, M. (2020), ‘Circling the square: Governance of the circular economy transition in the Amsterdam Metropolitan Area’, European Spatial Research and Policy, 27 (2), pp. 11–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.18778/1231-1952.27.2.02
• HOFFMAN, I. (2018), ‘Hungarian Counties and Regional development – Changing Roles in a Transforming Environment’, Deturope, 10 (3), pp. 162–179.
• ITS (2014), Pécs Megyei Jogú Város Integrált Településfejlesztési Stratégiája, 2014–2020. (Pécs Megyei Jogú Város Önkormányzata Közgyűlése 261/2014. (09.25.) számú határozatával elfogadva), Eco-cortex Kft. és Msb Zrt. Konzorcium, Pécs.
• KISS, T. (2004), Pécs Eco-City Mecsek-Dráva Ecological Region Programme, Executive Summary. Manuscript.
• LOORBACH, D. (2010), ‘Transition management for sustainable development: a prescriptive, complexity-based governance framework’, Governance, 23 (1), pp. 161–183.
• MANERGY (2014), http://www.deldunantul.com/sites/default/files/manergy_projektleiras.pdf [accessed on: 02.07.2016]
• MARKARD, J., RAVEN, R. and TRUFFER, B. (2012), ‘Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects’, Research Policy, 41 (6), pp. 955–967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.02.013
• MASON-RENTON, S.A. and LUGINAAH, I. (2018), ‘Conceptualizing waste as a resource: Urban biosolids processing in the rural landscape’, The Canadian Geographer / Le Géographe canadien, 62 (2), pp. 266–281. https://doi.org/10.1111/cag.12454
• MEADOWCROFT, J. (2011), ‘Engaging with the politics of sustainability transitions’, Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 1 (1), pp. 70–75.
• MEZEI, C. (2016), ‘A helyi gazdaságfejlesztés fogalmi meghatározása’, Tér és Társadalom, 20 (4), pp. 85–96. https://doi.org/10.17649%2FTET.20.4.1079
• MEZEI, C. (ed.) (2018), Útmutató a helyi erőforrástérkép elkészítéséhez (ajánlás egy erőforrás alapú gazdaságfejlesztést támogató tervezési eszköz alkalmazására) Készült a KÖFOP-2.3.3-VEKOP-16-2016-00001 azonosító jelű “Helyi versenyképesség-fejlesztési kutatási program” című kiemelt projekt kapcsán. Manuscript. Available at: https://bm-oki.hu/News/ViewFile?fileID=1130 [accessed on: 01.04.2020]
• MEZEI, C. (2019), Fejlesztési kényszerpályák. Budapest: Dialóg Campus Kiadó.
• MEZEI, C. and VARJÚ, V. (2018), ‘Erőforrás-alapú, fenntartható önkormányzati fejlesztések le-hetősége/modellezhetősége’, [in:] BÁNYAI, O. and BARTA, A. (eds.) A települési környezetvédelem elméleti és gyakorlati megközelítései, Budapest: Gondolat Kiadó, pp. 119–137.
• MILLIGAN, B. and O’KEEFFE, M. (2019), ‘Global governance of resources and implications for resource efficiency in Europe’, Ecological Economics, 155, pp. 46–58.
• MORENO-PIRES, S. and FIDÉLIS, T. (2012), ‘A proposal to explore the role of sustainability indicators in local governance contexts: The case of Palmela, Portugal’, Ecological Indicators, 23, pp. 608–615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2012.05.003
• NAGYHÁZI, Gy. (2015), ‘Regional Development Trends and the Regional Development Institutions in the Visegrad Countries – Enabling or Hindering Institutional Environment?’, Deturope, 7, pp. 28–44. http://www.deturope.eu/img/upload/content_31421917.pdf
• OBERSTEG, A., FRASER, T., ARLATI, A., ACKE, A., BAŃSKI, J., CZAPIEWSKI, K., WÓJCIK, M., MEZEI, C. and VARJÚ, V. (2017), D6.2 Governance and Decision-Making Processes in Follow-up Cases. Resource Management in Peri-urban Areas (REPAiR), Horizon2020, European Commission. http://h2020repair.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Deliverable-6.2-Governance-and-Decision-Making-Processes-in-Follow-up-Cases.pdf
• OHKT (2017), 2003/2017. (XII. 22.) Korm. határozat a 2017. évre szóló Országos Hulladékgazdálkodási Közszolgáltatási Tervről
• PÁLNÉ KOVÁCS, I. (2015), ‘Local knowledge based development. What can local governments do for it?’, Region: Ekonomika I Sociologija, 4 (88), pp. 261–277.
• PÉNZES, J. (2014), Periferikus térségek lehatárolása Magyarországon – módszertani és területi sajátosságok. Available at: http://real.mtak.hu/19472/1/penzes_periferikus_2014.pdf [accessed on: 04.04.2019]
• PIRISI, G., STEFÁN, K. and TRÓCSÁNYI, A. (2009), ‘A kultúra fővárosa előtt: a bányászat szerepe Pécs dinamikus funkcionális morfológiájában’, [in:] CSAPÓ, T. and KOCSIS, Zs. (eds.): A közép- és nagyvárosok településföldrajza. Savaria University Press, Szombathely, pp. 257–269.
• PISSOURIOS, I.A. (2014), ‘Top-Down and Bottom-Up Urban and Regional Planning: Towards a Framework for the Use of Planning Standards’, European Spatial Research and Policy, 21 (1), pp. 83–99. https://doi.org/10.2478/esrp-2014-0007
• RÁCZ, Sz. (2016), ‘Horvátország térszerkezete’, Tér és Társadalom, 30 (3), pp. 81−104. https://doi.org/10.17649/TET.30.3.2792
• RUSSO, M., AMENTA, L., ATTADEMO, A., CERRETA, M., FORMATO, E; REMØY, H., VAN DER LEER, J. and VARJÚ, V. (2017), D 5.1: PULLsHandbook. Resource Management in Peri-urban Areas (REPAiR), Horizon2020, European Commission. http://h2020repair.eu/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Deliverable_5.1_PULLs_Handbook.pdf
• SLEE, B. (1994), ‘Theoretical Aspects of the Study of Endogenous Development’, [in:] VAN DER PLOEG, J.D. and LONG, A. (eds.), Born from within. Practice and Perspectives of Endogenous Rural Development, Van Gorcum, Assen: The Netherlands, pp. 184–194.
• SMITH, A., STIRLING, A. and BERKHOUT, F. (2005), ‘The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions’, Research Policy, 34, pp. 1491–1510.
• STEAD, D. and PÁLNÉ KOVÁCS, I. (2016), ‘Shifts in governance and government across Europe’, [in:] SCHMITT, P. and VAN WELL, L. (eds.), Territorial governance across Europe. Pathways, Practices, and Prospects, Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 21–35.
• TRÓCSÁNYI, A. (2011), ‘The spatial implications of urban renewal carried out by the ECC programs in Pécs’, Hungarian Geographical Bulletin 60 (3), pp. 261–284. Available at: http://www.mtafki.hu/konyvtar/kiadv/HunGeoBull2011/HunGeoBull_2011_3_261-284.pdf [accessed: 05.03.2019]
• TRUFFER, B. and COENEN, L. (2012), ‘Environmental Innovation and Sustainability Transitions in Regional Studies’, Regional Studies, 46 (1), pp. 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2012.646164
• UNCED (1992), Agenda 21. United Nations Conference on Environment and Development: New York. http://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf [accessed on: 16.03.2020]
• VAN EWIJK, S. and STEGAMANN, J. (2020), ‘Recognising waste use potential to achieve a circular economy’, Waste Management, 105, pp. 1–7.
• VARJÚ, V. (2016), ‘Environmental cohesion across the Hungarian-Croatian border’, Bulletin of the Serbian Geographical Society, 96 (1), pp. 81–92. https://doi.org/10.2298/GSGD1601081V
• VARJÚ, V. (2020), ‘Foreword. Governing Circular Economy – place-specific barriers that hamper to close the loop. Special Issue’, European Spatial Research and Policy, 27 (2), pp. 5–10. https://doi.org/10.18778/1231-1952.27.2.01
• VARJÚ, V., MEZEI, C., VÉR, Cs., LOVÁSZ, V., GRÜNHUT, Z., BODOR, Á., SZABÓ, T., JARGALSAIKHAN, K. and AZIZLI, B. (2018), D3.7 Process model Pécs. Resource Management in Peri-urban Areas (REPAiR), Horizon2020, European Commission. http://h2020repair.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Deliverable-3.7-Process-model-Pecs.pdf
• VARJÚ, V., LOVÁSZ, V., GRÜNHUT, Z., BODOR, Á. and PIRMAJER, A. (2019), D3.8 Report – findings on socio-cultural, socio-economic and company related investigations. Resource Management in Peri-urban Areas (REPAiR), Horizon2020, European Commission. http://h2020repair.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Deliverable-3.8-Report-%E2%80%93-findings-on-socio-cultural-socio-economic-and-company-related-investigations.pdf
• WITTMAYER, J.M. and LOORBACH, D. (2016), ‘Governing Transitions in Cities: Fostering Alternative Ideas, Practices, and Social Relations Through Transition Management’, [in:] LOORBACH, D., WITTMAYER, J.M., SHIROYAMA, H., FUJINO, J. and MIZUGUCHI, S. (eds.), Governance of Urban Sustainability transitions, Springer: Japan, pp. 13–32.

Identifiers

DOI

10.18778/1231-1952.27.2.06