Governance system

Hungary

Budapest, 18 January 2012

András Magyarics

National Directorate for Water Management (OVF)

(former Central Directorate for Water and Environment -VKKI / PP9)

Content

Precise theme/issue tackled by the Practice

Objectives of the practice

Location

Detailed description of the practice- Origin

- Objective of the practice

- Legislation background

Evaluation

Lessons learnt from the practice

Precise theme/issue tackled by the PracticeThe handling of the state’s tasks in the field of the

multifunctional use of the inland waterways

Objectives of the practice

Forming of well organized structure for handling of the state’s role in the field of different use of the inland

waterways

Location- Country: Hungary

- NUTS 1: HU

- Whole territory of Hungary

Europe/Carpathian Basin/Hungary

Detailed description of the practice

Origin

Landlocked Hungary is situated in the centre of the Danube

Basin with its whole territory of 93.030 km2 belonging to the

Danube River Basin.

Rivers enter the country from the west, north and east and

drain towards the south.

In Hungary there is a dense river network and within it

there are 1484 kms possible navigable river stretches. In

addition we have the three above mentioned great lakes

with total 700 km2 free surface water.

The rivers are very variable in their size and - connecting

to it - the multifunctional use of them.

The main river is Danube. It traverses in the country,

forming border with Slovakia in the North-West and then

flowing southward into the territory of Croatia and

Republic of Serbia.

Danube runs through the country on 417 km from which

the first 142 km are common with Slovakia on its left

bank.

Important tributaries are the Lajta (Leitha), Rába,

Marcal, Garam (Hron), Ipoly (Ipel) and the Sió. As the

part of the transport route No. VII in the European Union,

the Danube represents a major waterway. Within the

whole Hungarian stretch a 378 kms long section is a

very important international waterway.

Major tributaries of Danube are River Tisza flowing 595

km down the eastern part of Hungary (and flow into

Danube in the territory of Serbia near Titel/Belgrade)

and River Dráva.

The inland Hungarian waterways within the rivers are

classified to different navigation transport classes from I. to

VI/b according to the UNECE regulations and DC -

recommendations.

Hungary has 7 neighbouring countries and with 5 of them

(Austria, Slovakia, Romania, Serbia, Croatia) river stretches

with common interest – common problems in the field of the

waterways maintenance and operation, common

navigational problems. There are bilateral agreements with

all neighbouring countries.

The cross border activities are running on basis of the

different organisation of the water management level.

Surface waters in Hungary

Sometimes there is not appropriate balance between the different forms of use (e.g. commercial and leisure ones) of the inland waterways.

The role of the organisations from the state side is to provide the secure multifunctional use of the waterways for everyone both of the participants of transport and recreation.

It has to provide as well as the balance among the all users.

Detailed description of the practice

Objective of the practice

In the past the Hungarian governments in power organised

different structures for the completion of the state’s tasks in

the field of the waterways administration.

The basis of the current nation-wide water management

system has organized in the middle of the 60’s.

In 1955 a central governmental body (called National Water

Management Office – “OVH”) and 12 territorial water

management directorates were established.

It means a two-level system.

Water management

units - 12 directorates

General centralized structure

administrative units - 19 counties

General & water management

administration units

Since 1990 we have a three-level system: the water management has got any higher state representation in one of the ministries – mixed with some other tasks: transport, environment, telecommunication, rural development etc. (Nowadays the water management issues are organized within the tasks of Ministry of Interior.)

In these years (about till 2004) the solution of the tasks of the development, operation and maintenance of the waterways was strongly centralized.

The initiation of the implementation of the activities was one of the tasks of the ministries and the mid-level ministerial bodies – e. g. „OVF” situated in the same decision-maker position.

The most important steps of the development, operation,

maintenance of the waterways/fairways were

implemented by central orders from the central

institutions so the territorial branches were merely the

executive bodies without serious decisional rights.

The splitting and transformation of the tasks and roles

between the central and territorial organizations in the

field of the water management sector has began in

2004 (Hungary is as EU member since this date) and

more and less went on to 2006.

Despite the system of the administrative structure’s network

not transformed basically, it has been a significant change

in the field of the decision making among the different levels

of the structure.

The role of the members of the management’s structure

modified. The territorial bodies all around the country know

best the local problems, the local situations being close

connection with the local stakeholders, users of the

waterways who have been involved into the common thinking

about the implementation of the most important goals in the

local water management including especially the

development, operation and maintenance of the waterways.

Territorial responsibility

The 12 territorial directorates - within their other numerous tasks - are directly responsible for the good condition of the rivers including the different categories of waterways.

Their continuous activities are: river engineering; river bed-, shoreline-, water-level regulation, maintenance and operate of the fairways, making of the marking plans, providing of the floating and coastal marking, mapping/charting, cooperation with the relevant local authorities.

They carry out the survey, collection, store, forwarding of data of river bed, shoreline as well as the waterways.

The initiations are coming from the territorial(local) level so in the process of the implementation of an idea (idea – proposal – decision – confirmation – planning - execution – evaluation - control) participates the relevant territorial water management bodies.

The higher central bodies have got (important) role in some parts of this process as well (e.g. evaluation and control) but their main role has been modified in the last some years.

The relevant ministry (nowadays the Ministry of Interior –the highest level of the water management network) and National Water Authority – OVF – (former Central Director-ate for Water and Environment –VKKI) as the mid-level body of the water management network are working shared nation-wide responsibility in their profession. It means that they coordinate, supervise, control all activities of the local directorates all around the country.

The ministry practices mostly the theoretical and OVF

(VKKI) the operational part of these roles.

They harmonise the local planning with the national development one in the different places of the water management activities

explore the possible international (funding of EU, Norwegian, Flanders, Swiss etc.) and national financial sources tracing its efficiently use,

concentrate all the form of the necessary source (human, financial) for the interest of the best outcomes.

The start of the operation of a new, decentralized water management system went on 2004/2006, butthis is a never ended process:

the upgrading/modernization of the administration network is a permanent purpose for each government – the end of this process is not possible identified.

Legislation background

Act. 1995. LVII. on Water Management

Act. 1995. LIII. on Environmental Protection

Act. 2000. XLII. on Water Traffic

Gov. Decree 151/2000. on inland waterways with

international importance

Gov. Decree 347/2006. on Environmental, Nature

Conversation and Water Management authorities

Gov. Decree 300/2011. on Water management

authorities

Gov. Decree 219/2007. on River Information Services

Legislation background

KöViM Decree 17/2002. on classification of

waterways for navigation

GKM Decree 27/2002. on marking of the

waterways

Evaluation

Lessons learnt from the practice There are generally good opinions about the new,

decentralized network.

There are positive experience about the shared responsibility

between the navigation (freight and passenger transport) and

waterway maintenance and operation. (Within the

governmental structure the transport sector is responsible for

the first one and the water management sector is responsible

for the second one.)

The changes of the government (2006, 2010) and the

ministerial structure during the 4 year long governance

period did not caused any disruption.

Evaluation

Lessons learnt from the practice

There are more decisional levels – but less responsible,

professional people.

Less and less involved people are in the all administrative

organisations all around the country – in all structural levels.

It should be more representation for heritage protection.

It should be more representation for tourism sector.

Thank you for your attention!

SWOT analysis

Strengths Weaknesses

+ well organized survey, data collection,

transfer, publicity

+ continuous 24/365 duty

+ correct connection with neighbouring country

in the joint stretch

+ well qualified staff

+

+ Existing general knowledge on waterway

maintenance thanks to the increased

amount of information

- Restoration process progresses slowly

- Reducing diffuse pollution control is still at

basic level

- Research and reduction of storm water

loading is still at basic level

- Co-operation among the different ministries

not good enough

- Quality of research and monitoring

information/data are varying

- Assessment of effects of restoration is scarce

- Monitoring network is sufficient only on the

three large lakes

- Joint ownership of water areas hinders

some projects because receiving the

approval of owners can be difficult

Opportunities Threats

+

+ Development of mapping/charting methods

+

+ speed vessels

-

-

-

-

- state has got a few sources for maintenance

and implementation

-

Organisational structure of (a) former

waterway administration

Ministry of Environment

and Water

(KvVM)

Ministry of Transport, Energy

and Telecommunication

(KEHM)

National Association of

Radio Distress-Signalling

and Infocommunications

(RSOE)

Central Directorate for

Water and

Environment

(VKKI)

Institute of Environmental

Protection and Water

Management

(VITUKI)

Environmental

and Water

Directorates (12)

National Navigation Authority

(NHH)

Organisational structure of recent

waterway administration

Ministry of Rural

Development

(VM)

Ministry of National

Development

(NFM)

National Association of

Radio Distress-Signalling

and Infocommunications

(RSOE)

Central Directorate for

Water and

Environment

(VKKI)

Institute of Environmental

Protection and Water

Management

(VITUKI)

Environmental

and Water

Directorates (12)

National Navigation Authority

(NHH)

Organisational structure of future

waterway administration

Towards to a possible sharing:

Ministry of Rural Development (VM) –

Ministry of Interior

(and its background organizations)

Organisational structure of a possible future

waterway administration

Ministry of Rural Development

(VM)

Ministry of Interior

(MoI)

Ministry of National

Development

(NFM)

National Association of

Radio Distress-Signalling

and Infocommunications

(RSOE)

Central Directorate for

Water and

Environment

(VKKI)

Institute of Environmental

Protection and Water

Management

(VITUKI)

Environmental

and Water

Directorates (12)

National Navigation Authority

(NHH)