ChapterPDF Available

Environmental Tools of the Local Governments in Hungary (an overview)

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Although local governments possess limited autonomy in Hungary, they play a significant role in environmental policy. Apart from fulfilling mandatory tasks such as waste management, they face environmental challenges relating to other activities such as urban development. They adopt strategies and regulations, exercise public authority, enter into contracts, organise public services in order to protect the environment. This essay demonstrates that the scope of discretion of local governments is legally limited; nonetheless, some environmental considerations do not play a role thanks to lack of interest and knowledge. Based on questionnaires, case studies and interviews as well as on the analysis of the central regulations, the most important tools are introduced from environmental law point of view.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Prof. László Fodor: Environmental Tools of the Local Governments in Hungary (an
overview)
1
Although local governments possess limited autonomy in Hungary, they play a significant
role in environmental policy. Apart from fulfilling mandatory tasks such as waste
management, they face environmental challenges relating to other activities such as urban
development. They adopt strategies and regulations, exercise public authority, enter into
contracts, organise public services in order to protect the environment. This essay
demonstrates that the scope of discretion of local governments is legally limited; nonetheless,
some environmental considerations do not play a role thanks to lack of interest and
knowledge. Based on questionnaires, case studies and interviews as well as on the analysis of
the central regulations, the most important tools are introduced from environmental law point
of view.
1. Introduction
Protection and preservation of local interests and values against either local or global negative
phenomena (be it by environmental, economics, social or by other impacts) is one of the key
elements of sustainable development. Significant documents aim at determining the global
framework of sustainability-oriented policies such as Agenda 21, Millennium Development
Goals or Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development also highlight the
significance of local level (Horváth Zs., 2016). We wish to focus on environmental
sustainability and its strictly related issues this time, so the other pillars of sustainable
development will not form part of the current essay.
Numerous actors can take actions at local level (local interests, urban policies), such as the
inhabitants (voters) of the settlement (part of a settlement, a multihousehold building) and
their associations, local property owners by the harmonised utilization of the land, or by
shooting on the basis of a lease, student of an educational institution (e.g. the Student
Association of the University of Debrecen organises waste collection at Nagyerdő forest from
time to time), entrepreneurs (chambers, cooperative societies can bring them together), the
local actors of a sector (e.g. wine communities regarding the harmonisation of plant protection
measures), but a family, a parish, a minority local government, ad hoc community of
protesters against an investment can be the actors of local environmental policy.
Domestically, the most powerful local authority - partly public power - , and at the same time,
local government representing all citizens of a settlement have a number of compulsory
environmental tasks. (The other form of the local governments is the territorial or county
municipality is of limited relevance compared to municipalities. Concerning the development
of these levels as well as the declining role of county municipalities, see: ld. BencsikBarta,
2017. 85.)
Municipalities organize the life of one (or more smaller) settlements, including settlement
development, education, culture, health care, social services, public security, transport, waste
management and environmental protection. They represent the interests of local communities,
adopt local regulations and programs, and define the structure of the settlement. Their plans,
their own regulations, and certain central standards are also enforced through authorization
1
The study is a part of the research project No. K 115530 (Roles and instruments of local governments in the
realization of ecological sustainability) and was supported by the National Research, Development and
Innovation Office.
(giving permissions), control, sanctioning or through providing public services (e.g. municipal
waste management, sewage treatment), investments. Besides local public affairs, some of
their bodies also exercise public authority tasks, which were delegated by the central
legislative power. To carry out their duties, they have their own assets, which they utilize, set
up companies, operate their public institutions, and establish public domains. Therefore, it
goes without saying that environmental protection is not considered being their most
important task (Varjú, 2012). Nonetheless, they face a number of challenges relating to
environmental protection in many situations, the requirements concerning sustainability,
which has been particularly emphasized since the '90s. This essay (as indicated in the subtitle)
aims at providing an overview of environmental instruments implemented in the Hungarian
municipalities. This research was basically carried out from a legal point of view, as part of a
comprehensive research at the University of Debrecen, under the "Local government roles
and tools in the implementation of ecological sustainability."
During this research lasted from 2015 until 2018, we attempted to capture a rather broad
subject. However, this was only possible with certain restrictions and by applying several
different research methods complementing each other. As a first step, without aiming to give
an exhaustive list, we identified problems relating to the environmental measures of local
governments as well as the lack of such kind of measures, the local investments, the
lawfulness of local regulations and the enforcement of central regulations. With due respect
for central regulation, some policy areas can be highlighted such as water management and
protection, air protection, energy, climate protection, nature conservation or waste
management. We prepared thematic studies concerning these topics at local level, and take
them into consideration while carrying out case studies. A questionnaire was compiled based
on national legislation, court decisions, literature review, and interviews in some
municipalities (partial evaluation by Fónai-Pénzes 2017). In this questionnaire, among others,
it was asked how local authorities can adapt to frequent changes in central regulations, what
strategies they have, what environmental problems and conflicts arise, what patterns they
follow to solve them, whether they have adequate legal and administrative tools and organs.
Regarding the tools, we have listed those elements we regard as the most important ones and
they were asked to rank them. We had several open questions as well, which also revealed
problems that we did not know. The questions as a whole have proved to be good enough to
show how satisfied the local governments are with the tools they have. Our questionnaire was
answered by 516 local governments (two waves), which is a remarkably good ratio. The
database created from the questionnaire replies can therefore be used in many ways. However,
only a small part of the issues that were important to us were included in the questionnaire.
(The compilation of the questionnaire is the result of the cooperation of 12 researchers
participating in the research. Typical that the questionnaire set up in the first round consisted
of hundreds of questions. This number had to be significantly reduced to be able to manage
this survey. For this reason, a further, decisive method of research was applied, which allows
a deeper absorption than the questionnaire, namely the case study, which means a thorough
study of a settlement. In some selected settlements (Miskolc, Debrecen, Szarvas, Bogács,
Somogyvámos, Tiszaújváros, Siófok, IX. District of the capital, Dorog, Biharkeresztes,
Hajdúböszörmény, Lakitelek), we reviewed the local documents (decrees, strategies and
protocols); further, on the spot, we conducted focus-group interviews with local government
officials, complemented by personal interviews with environmental policy specialists and
members of nongovernmental organizations. As a result of this work, analysis were prepared
(sometimes separated into several publications) that illustrate the local values, the conflicts
that arise during their management, the measures taken by local governments to deal with the
problems and their ideas (Bányai 2017a, Bujdos 2018, Fodor 2016b, 2017a and 2017b).
2
In
addition to dealing with each field of expertise being relevant for the settlement in question,
we address the relationship to the central regulations and sometimes the quality of legislation
and other measures, not only from environmental sustainability but, for example, also from a
legal point of view. Due to the partial results of the research and the thematic discussions (e.g.
regarding the preparation of agricultural law and civil law studies), we also used subjects and
approaches that were originally not planned (such as the concept of a smart city combined
with different sustainability considerations).
On the whole, we can say that we aim at representativeness rather than completeness in our
research, since we cannot deal with each local government separately; further, all areas of
environmental protection cannot be examined in its entirety. The tools of local governments
in the field of environmental policy came up relating to all approaches indicated above and
through the application of all research methods. In our previous publications we have dealt
with such kind of tools, such as adoption of decrees, preparation of programmes, or
associations (e.g. Barta 2017, Bányai 2017b, Fodor 2016a). This study wishes to provide a
comprehensive approach regarding environmental policy instruments instead of their detailed
examination.
2. Far from the ideal (some general consequences of the research)
When we set out the research goals in 2015, we defined our hypotheses and outlined the
subject of the research (Fodor et al., 2016), we had several premises. Based on the enormous
scope and diversity of the central (national and EU) environmental legislation (given that
environmental protection cannot be looked at in isolation from construction, water
management or transport situation as well as it covers a wide variety of areas from waste
management through air protection to noise protection), it can be suggested that the same
extension and diversity can be observed relating to the decrees of the local governments.
However, this premise has only been partially proved. The environmental activities of local
governments encompass a wide range of areas, and the local governments apply a wide range
of tools. In addition, although it can be stated that the centrally defined scope of discretion of
the local governments is the same, and it can be observed that they follow certain patterns,
local environmental policy is different from settlement to settlement. (Where, for example, the
mayor also takes care of the environment, there is a strong interest in tourism, stronger
measures are being taken.)
At the same time, we found out that the central regulation (together with the practice of the
Constitutional Court), in the years following the regime change, ensured much more scope of
discretion for local authorities than today. The regime change laid down the autonomy of the
local governments and the constitutional framework of democracy. Then, Hungary’s
application for EU and OECD membership required strengthened national environmental
policy. In the 1990s, the tasks of the local government were increasing (which was not
followed by the volume of funding), but later, priority status was taken on central regulation
and programming, and in recent years, conscious centralization and nationalization have taken
place at the expense of local governments (Pálné 2014 ).
Since 1995 [based on paragraph 48 (2) of the Act LIII of 1995 on the General Rules of
Environmental Protection in principle] only the mandate of the central legislative authority
may impose more stringent environmental protection requirements on the local authorities
(milder requirements have not been previously determined based on the decision of the
Constitutional Court); further, the scope of the living conditions not regulated centrally is also
2
Regarding the completed case studies see: the essays of Attila Barta and Ágnes Bujdos in the present volume.
constantly decreasing. More and more law regulates local public affairs (e.g. public services
organized by local governments, such as district heating or waste management) in greater
detail than earlier, and as local governments can only regulate local affairs in accordance with
the acts, their regulatory autonomy has decreased. Further, such kind of living conditions have
appeared (e.g. restriction the number of animals) where adopting local decrees is explicitly
prohibited by law. This trend is not surprising given that in the public law framework laid
down in the new Fundamental Law since 2012, the autonomy of local governments is no
longer defined, and local governments are not the local counterpoint of the central power (so,
in this sense, we can talk about less division of power), but as part of the unified state
(Horváth M. 2014). We believe that this is not good for environmental sustainability and
environmental democracy. There had been a need for changes since the local government
system set up at the beginning of the 1990s had a number of faults that had to be resolved. It
can be identified as a failure, among others, the unequal and mostly inadequate funding, the
weakness of the medium-level and the fragmentation (currently about 3180) of local
governments, as opposed to about 1800 municipalities in Romania, where the territory of the
country is much larger than in Hungary. The reform of local governments was executed from
2010 until 2013; however, did not solve the fragmentation issue, and gave up strengthening
the middle-level. This is regrettable because if the starting point for environmental (and
building on it, the economic and social) sustainability is the bearing capacity (ie resource
management must be adapted to local ecological potential, and community needs must be met
primarily by utilizing local resources) it can be said that the local government structure is not
adapted to ecological conditions, and in itself it questions whether within its framework
environmental sustainability can be achieved.
In principle, this complex problem can be answered in many ways, such as economic,
technological, infrastructure development, and a change in lifestyle, and of course, legal-
political responses can be given. As far as legal-policy solutions are concerned, we would find
it ideal to create a strong, autonomous, cooperative, smaller number of local governments
with medium-level local governments that adapt to natural conditions. Of course, we are
aware that carrying out such a state reform would be against the government's decisions of 5-
8 years ago, and it cannot be a reality in the foreseeable future.
However, the fact that the full range of environmental protection cannot be found at local
level is not merely attributable to the legally restricted scope of discretion. The challenge of
environmental protection cannot be seen in that complexity by local governments and local
communities as science does. This is problematic because in the absence of a comprehensive
approach, certain environmental measures often result in damage to other environmental
interests and values. Typical, e.g. local governments consider the development of aesthetic
environment, "value creation", paving of roads, kerbs and stream channel, regular cutting of
road edges, and cleaning down the undergrowth, which, however, can be overcome and could
result in losses from the nature conservation or even climate protection point of view, not to
mention, the waste generated and the sealed soil surface. A complex approach could be
guaranteed by the adoption and enforcement of the environmental programs of the
municipalities, for which local governments could use scientific and professional assistance.
Most Hungarian settlements, however, have not had such a program for many years, despite
the obligation imposed by the Act LIII of 1995 on the General Rules of Environmental
Protection (Article 48/E). There is no money to prepare the program, to involve experts
(remark: there was still some support for the preparation of programs around 2004, however,
it had been terminated), they do not co-operate with NGOs for this purpose, but there are no
NGOs in smaller settlements. Even if it were a program, local governments would not
necessarily wish to follow it, as it often makes it harder to exploit many of the ad-hoc
investment and job creation opportunities, and in many places environmental protection is still
contrasted with economic "development." In fact, therefore, not only the complexity of
knowledge, but also, in some respects, the conflict of interest or the lack of interest are
attributable to the absence of comprehensive environmental protection at the municipal level.
(At this point, it is also important to note that the local governments are not the same in this
respect, so there are many settlements - especially bigger, richer and better equipped ones -
with programs, professionals, local requirements, conscientious developments, etc., even if
these are not always ideal.) The preference, sequence and recognition of the values
3
are also
decisive in terms of the content of the environmental protection of the settlements.
It also follows that the ideal government requires an ideal local community, which is
environmentally conscious, initiating, seeking to assert democratic values. In a community
(society) that, apart from the ecosystem services directly provided to them and the financial
value of natural resources, also accepts these treasures for themselves (or, if you like, because
of the other components of the natural environment or because of the services for the future
generations) and even if they find it important to preserve local values as a local patriot (in
fact, considering the precious value of these natural and manufactured objects), the local
government's sustainability aspirations have a greater chance. This ideal situation, however,
only exists in a small fraction of the settlements. It is typical that the short-term environmental
problems that form the source of conflict within the community are given greater attention
than problems with long-term threats, which are more serious, but which are still less
pronounced. Thus, e.g. in case of a tourism resort (Fodor 2017a), a major environmental
concern can be to reduce night-time noise or create an aesthetic (environmentally sound)
environment while extracting more and more thermal water for revenue and tourism, utilising
it a wasteful way, forgetting about the balance of water extraction and water supply and about
the energetic utilization of waste heat.
3. Overview of the Local Environmental Toolbox
3.1. The range of tools
Based on the environmental law scientific literature and the central regulation, we opted for
the following ones in the first phase of the research: strategy formulation, adoption of decrees,
control, authorisation, sanctioning, public services and the exercise of ownership rights. Local
governments were asked for ranking these tools in the questionnaire survey.
4
The reason for their selection was that we considered them the most important from a legal-
political point of view, and at the same time, they were the ones that were centrally regulated
in the most detailed way. Most of them are closely linked to other tools (e.g. public service
management and the exercise of ownership rights are regulated (partly by local rules),
compliance with the rules has to be checked, compliance check can be followed by e.g.
sanctions, it has to enter into contract with a public service provider); however, tools that are
methodologically completely different and independent from each other (e.g. the strategy
usually obliges the local government itself, and sanction cannot be typically linked to its
enforcement) can be also found. The following figure shows the results of the survey.
3
See also: Tibor Hartel’s essay in the present volume referring to local communities who often fail to accept the
nature conservation protection of certain values and the restrictions caused by this protection.
4
The paper analyzes a part of the results of an on-line questionnaire responded by 516 local governments. The
questionnaire was filled up by the most relevant officials of the mayors offices, notaries, vice mayors or
especially in smaller settlements mayors (See Fónai-Pénzes 2017). The questionnaire is available under the
link http://evasys.unideb.hu/evasys/online.php?p=UG411.
Figure: the ranking of the most important tools
Source: own chart
The ranking of the seven tools (from 1 to 7 points, where the highest score is the most
important tool) has brought interesting results. The highest score was given to the adoption of
decree. Very high proportion (37%) were ranked by the local governments in the very first
place. This was followed by control and public services, then head-to-head by authorisation,
ownership and strategy formulation, and ultimately backed by sanctions. Most of the last
places (1 point) were given to strategy formulation and not to sanction (20%), indicating the
low weight of strategies, programs and concepts in domestic public policy processes. Since
scoring is based only on the order, it does not express exactly the difference in emphasis
between each tool. Thus, the tension between the first and the last place is striking: the most
significant expression of the will of the local government is embodied in the adoption of
decree, but the local governments find insufficient the tools available for sanctioning the
violations of rules.
Nonetheless, in the questionnaire, other tools beyond the above mentioned were also
displayed. We asked, e.g. whether they apply an impact assessment prior to their decisions,
have access to professional assistance (consultancy), which authorities and professional
organizations work together, whether their environmental indicators have been improved
through investments, improvements, whether their body (administrative) specialised for
environmental can serve as a positive example for the local population. In the other phases of
the research (during personal interviews and case studies), the circle has expanded and tools
have emerged such as support, information, local taxes, mediation, association of local
governments, professional associations (movement), participation in tenders, the
establishment of companies and contract. These tools are legally less binding (e.g. most of
them are not or are just partly mandatory), but often complement the other measures
effectively.
Such tools can be used by local authorities not only for the protection of the environment, but
also in other areas, but it can be stated that the tools together, in such a wide variety of fields
can be applied in a very few areas. At local level, therefore, regulation-methodological
diversity regarding environmental regulation, is similar to the central environmental
regulation, of course, it does not mean that the tools applied by the central regulation can be
also applied by the local authority. The central regulation as well as the territorial authority's
competency often displaces the local ones. Thus, e.g. (pursuant to paragraph 89 of the Act
LIII of 1995 on the General Rules of Environmental), the local authority may not regulate
environmental thresholds in a regulation (at most, it can be set individually by the notary, e.g.
as a noise protection authority). Our case studies and other researches also point out that many
settlements are losing sight of this constraint (Gajdics-Kiss-Szilágyi 2011). Another example
(in accordance with paragraph 66 of the said Act on the General Rules of Environmental
Protection., but contrary to the list of competences in the Local Government Conventions
drawn up by the Ministry of the Interior)
5
is that the municipal environmental authority (the
notary) cannot authorize the activities subject to environmental impact assessment (obviously,
local governments know that they would not be able to carry out an impact assessment
procedure, and therefore, they do not issue an environmental permit instead of the territorial
environmental authority).
3.2. Local Strategies
As already mentioned, plans can play a major role in the preparation of environmental
measures (rules, investments, services, etc.), and the municipal environmental program may
be the most suitable for this purpose. Such a comprehensive program covering almost all parts
of the environment, however, does not currently have in many municipalities. (Although local
governments were questioned during this survey, and there are some previous literature data
(Var 2013), we do not know the exact ratio since local authorities are not consistently using
environmental legal concepts, so it is assumed that there are a large number of respondents
who answered yes if they had any local strategy affecting this field. The result of our
questionnaire confirmed by scientific literature data (Bányai 2017a) is that nearly 95% of
respondents possess some kind of environmental protection program. (The result is distorted
by the fact that out of 3178 respondent municipalities, those municipalities responded to the
questionnaire that take more seriously their environmental duties.) At the same time, only six
out of a dozen of settlements selected for our detailed examination (50%) have valid,
municipal environmental protection program as indicated in the Act LIII of 1995 on the
General Rules of Environmental Protection. This proportion supports our assumption. It
should be also noted that the law does not set out a deadline and does not impose any sanction
(Bándi 1999).
The gap is only partially corrected by the fact that almost every settlement has an integrated
settlement development strategy and settlement development concept that necessarily
addresses environmental protection. In addition to these, many other local documents are also
concerned with environmental protection. This can be fulfilled, for example by a local equal
opportunities program, a voluntary local sustainable development strategy, a climate change
strategy, a renewable energy strategy, a transport development strategy or other integrated
territorial programs, sustainable energy and climate action plan, Green City program as
expected by various supporters (EU) and international organizations (Covenant of Mayors,
Green Cities). At the same time, the disadvantage of the diverse programs is that they often
fail to reconcile them and that their realization is not guaranteed (unless they are supported).
3. 3. Local regulations
The adoption of decree is the most important public authority tool of local governments. In a
few areas of environmental protection (e.g. radiation protection, hazardous substances and
technologies) there is no local government regulatory level. Where applicable, local
legislation and central legislation share this area. Environmental protection does not only
appear in regulations on environmental issues but it is also incorporated into a number of
5
https://hirlevel.egov.hu/2017/11/04/onkormanyzatok-elektronikus-hataskori-jegyzeke-2017-harmadik-
negyedev/ (2018. 01. 11.).
other local living conditions. Accordingly, the title of local legislation does not always
indicate whether or not the environmental issues are involved.
Pursuant to Article 31 (2) of the Fundamental Law, local governments shall adopt decree in
the management of local public affairs. The protection of the environment based on Act
CLXXXIX of 2011 on the Local Authorities of Hungary is one of the tasks of the local
governments, closely related to other tasks (e.g. settlement management, waste management,
water management and public transport services). In addition to the central regulations (such
as paragraph 48 of the Act LIII of 1995 on the General Rules of Environmental Protection), it
is also possible that the municipality itself undertakes environmental protection tasks, e.g. in
its strategies (Pump 2017). Some of the most important regulatory subjects can be found
below, and within that we will consider such kind of living conditions that can be regulated by
local governments or it is mandatory to be regulated by them. It is marked with one asterisk, if
it is mandatory to adopt a decree, and with double asterisk if the adoption is mandatory only
in certain settlements.
Table: overview of the contents of the local decrees
environmental or related subject/field of
expertise
regulatory competence of the local government within the
field of expertise
air protection
smog alert plan**, specific rules on air pollution originating
from domestic sources as well as the regulation of incineration
of dry fallen leaves and garden waste
noise protection
establishment of local rules relating to noise protection, silent
zone as well as declaration of certain areas as highly protected
from noise protection point of view, opening hours of stores
wildlife protection, nature protection
protection of wooded plants remaining unadressed by other acts
(e.g. forest protection, nature conservation); establishment of
nature conservation area (restrictions relating to protected areas
and protected zones, management plan); establishment of
watchkeeper (field, nature conservation)
water management, water protection
water utilities, waste water management in the absence of public
nets (it is also collected public service)*, water damage
elimination, soil loading fee*
environmental protection (as an umbrella)
in theory, any environmental requirement can be listed here
excluding those not directly belong to public service as well as
to settlement management (construction) (e.g. time limitation of
disturbing activities, establishment of environmental fund)
settlement management /construction
local construction code* (e.g. land use requirments relating to
certain zones, installation ratio of plots, conditions for placing
livestock buildings), townscape protection* (within this the
following subjects can be controlled: use of materials, placement
of advertisements, protection of architectural heritage, creation
of green surfaces, etc.), urban regeneration
order of public domains
conditions of public domain use, sanitation, establishment of
public domain inspectorate
waste
local regulations of communal waste management public
service*
non-environmental public services
e.g. when disconnecting from district heating system,
determining payment of the fee for carbon dioxide emissions;
free parking opportunity for vehicle with green registration
number
local coexistence (as an umbrella)
breach of rules relating to local coexistence (sanitation, air
protection, noise protection, etc.) as well as sanctioning of their
violation
others
restricting the placement of election posters in the context of
environmental and monument protection; ragweed control, local
taxes (e.g. tax on tourism), etc.
Source: own table
Local decrees shall not conflict with other (national) laws. The legitimacy of the regulations is
governed by county government offices, which, if necessary, seek the annulment of local
regulations from the Curia (Hoffman 2014, Balogh 2014). Occasionally, the government
delegate steering the government office replaces the missing decree (based on the decision of
the Curia) or the ombudsman initiates the replacement of the missing regulation by the local
government. Our case studies highlight that there are quite a lot of unlawful local regulations
in the field of environmental protection (thresholds, rules that do not follow the frequent
changes in central rules or prescribe less stringent rules). However, it is an exceptional
situation when the necessary decree is not adopted at all (known from the practice of the
Curia, for example, that some municipalities have failed to regulate the treatment of
wastewater collected by non-public utility). It is much more common that some sub-questions
remain unaddressed (e.g. the Waste Management Decree excludes provisions encouraging
separate collection of waste and garden waste composting; the local building code does not
limit the installation of the river banks).
6
The relationship between local and central regulation is not always clear. A typical example is
that in 1995 the law called for the protection of tumuli. Subsequently, the Ministry of the
Environment called on municipalities to repeal their provisions protecting tumuli. However,
the real central protection of tumuli has not been realized in practice, so it is still necessary to
provide local protection (to demarcate areas and to impose restrictions on usage).
7
Many solutions applied in Western European cities cannot be found. Although central
regulation allows, there is no practice in the designation of an environmental zone restricting
the entrance of vehicles (in Hungarian: low emission zone); regarding environment-friendly
heating methods (e.g. renewable energy or district heat) are considered being illegal by the
judicial practice.
8
3. 4. Authority Instruments
Authorization, control and sanction provide feedback to enforce the requirements. Municipal
affairs are the authorization of public domain use, which falls under the competence of a body
(e.g. mayor, notary) defined in the organizational and operational rules of the local
government. In the field of environmental protection, the officials of the local government
have a number of official powers, which serve the enforcement partly the central and partly
local standards. Thus, the mayor orders the smog alarm (and thus it restricts, e.g. the traffic,
the operation of some plants), while the notary issues the construction permit (e.g. with the
exception of priority cases and special facilities) and the permission to minor industrial
facilities, permits the opening hours of pubs at night, logging at public domain, drilling
smaller private wells, and activities carried out in areas under local protection (e.g. use of
chemicals). The owner is required disposing the illegally deposited (omitted) communal waste
by the local notary and imposing the waste management fine. In case of breach of the rules of
coexistence in the community, a fine may be also imposed. Local authorities, competent
6
E.g. Curia’s decisions No. Köf. 5012/2013/4, Köf. 5015/2013/6, Köf. 5016/2013/6, Köf. 5076/2013/3.,
5018/2013/6., Köf. 5 059/2015/4, Köf. 5 060/2015/4, Köm.5025/2013/7 as well as the statements of the
Commissioner (and deputy commissioners) for Fundamental Rights, such as AJB-4051/2014., AJB-397/2015.,
AJB - 4211/2014.
7
Statements of the Commissioner (and deputy commissioners) for Fundamental Rights, No. AJB-1906/2012.
8
28/2011. (III. 31.) decision of the Constiutional Court (ABH 2011, 682), 126/2009. (XII. 17.) decision of the
Constiutional Court (ABH 2009, 1297), 59/2009. (V. 22.) decision of the Constiutional Court (ABH 2009,
1152), 21/2009. (II. 26.) decision of the Constiutional Court (ABH 2009, 1083), 22/2009. (II. 26.) decision of the
Constiutional Court (ABH 2009, 1090).
committees of the representative body, public domain inspectors (if any) and occasionally the
public service providers participate in controlling and sanctioning. It is true especially for the
controlling among the tools that their intensity and efficiency vary from settlement to
settlement. If a settlement has its own law enforcement, it is easier to detect any breach of
environmental protection. For small settlements (for example, unless they have significant
income thanks to tourism), there is no money for public domain inspection, but it can be also
helpful if the leaders who live in the settlement in question pay attention.
3. 5. Public Services
As the adoption of detailed local rules regulating public services falls within the sphere of
local government competence, the most relevant public services have been discussed earlier.
Waste management, sewage treatment (water utilities, non-municipal household waste
management), which is a mandatory task, can be considered as environmentally-friendly
public services. For these tasks, local governments have influence on the selection of the
public service provider (sometimes they have ownership over the public service provider),
entering into contract and adopting regulations relating to the service; however, this has
diminished significantly in recent years due to the role of the state. Thus, e.g. a prior opinion
of a state-owned company is required to the selection of a waste management public service
provider; the service fee is no longer fixed locally but centrally (Szilágyi 2014, Pump 2017).
Besides, it is important to refer, for example, to district heating (can contribute to the
improvement of air quality and energy saving) and public transport (e.g. by the replacement
of individual transport and purchasing low emission vehicles). Other public services (e.g.
street lighting) can be energy-saving or can have less environmental impact.
3. 6. Ownership rights
Pursuant to Article 38 of the Fundamental Law, “(1) The property of the State and of local
governments shall be national assets. The management and protection of national assets shall
aim at serving public interest, meeting common needs and preserving natural resources, as
well as at taking into account the needs of future generations…” Municipalities also influence
the status of other local actors and the environment through the exercise of ownership rights
and the right of management of state property. Various activities are carried out on their real
estates (e.g. construction, well drilling, establishment of agricultural farm, covering public
domains, water abstraction for a spa or irrigation). According to our case studies, mainly in
larger cities, the local government (in accordance with the concept of economic development)
thinks over who can rent its real estate, as well as in the business park set up by the local
government itself, company, technology can be established by providing a site.
Environmental protection also forms part of this decision-making process. There is a need for
a number of decisions on a large-scale investment, and there is a chance, for example, that a
district of the capital city (in the absence of public authority) can prevent an environmentally
unfavourable construction by denying its contribution as an owner.
Municipalities carry out a number of their tasks (urban management, district heating, waste
management, water utilities, public transport, sanitation, etc.) by communal companies. It is
not typical for small settlements, but smaller cities are also able to set up their own
companies. Ownership and management rights are exercised over these companies, for
example, by approving business plans, appointing senior executives, and thereby influencing
the environmental orientation of these companies. Local governments can own rented
dwelling, as well as the infrastructure of community institutions and the public services
(buildings, equipment, vehicles, etc.). By the manner of operation, the state of infrastructure
(e.g. by means of development), local government has a direct influence through the exercise
of ownership rights.
3. 7. Other private law tools
Contracts are often used as a tool. In addition to the public service contracts already
mentioned (with partly public law complexion), the association agreements of several local
governments have to be also referred to. These agreements often include provisions relating to
ownership (e.g. the joint organization of the waste management public services). The sale,
lease, concession and licensing contracts relating to the exercise of ownership rights have
little environmental impacts in practice, but indirectly they have an environmental
significance (e.g. establishing public parking areas, acquiring environmental investments or
providing real estate for environmental NGOs for use). Contracts concerning public domain
use, however, always contain relevant clauses (e.g. public domains shall be kept clean, the
generated waste shall be transported) and occasionally deposit has to be paid.
Private property is odd-one-out when it comes to land protection. The possessor of a disturbed
possession (such as noise generation or airborne combustion products) may also seek
protection from the notary, which results in faster solution than judicial proceedings. It is a
specific instrument concerning both private law (because of the specific authority process)
and environmental policy instruments, as property protection - while helping to restore peace
in the local community - does not directly serve the implementation of local environmental
policy.
3. 8. Non-legal instruments
Non-legal and non-legally-regulated instruments also play a role on a case-by-case basis. It is
common, e.g. the leaders of the settlement mediate between the investors and the local
residents (e.g. the mayor negotiates with the operators of catering facilities relating to noise
reduction). In some settlements, the environmental associations and the local government
leaders consult each other on timely tasks. Municipalities may, in the course of their other
(e.g. social) tasks, inform residents about the correct way of heating of the residential
properties (avoid heating, for example, by burning plastic waste). Through local government
forums and media, they can also promote the spread of the environmentally conscious
patterns of behaviour, and may even show examples through the manner they operate their
own buildings and institutions.
4. Closing remarks
As can be seen, the municipal environmental toolbox offers a wide variety of legal and non-
legal opportunities to protect the environment. Which tool is considered to be the best, is
highly influenced by their economic and geographic characteristics, the needs of their
residents, and so on. For example, ownership of property is less important tool if the
municipality does not have significant real estate assets. The regulation of the parking system
and the construction of public parks are of no environmental significance if the traffic of the
town is low. In less-favoured areas, local governments have little chance to influence which
companies would settle down in the settlement in question.
It seems, however, that the larger the settlement, the more complex the local settlement
structure, the economy and the society, the more chances are for environmental conflicts to
emerge. For this reason, larger settlements with an industrial background typically use more
tools in practice than smaller ones. Nonetheless, much depends on how the mayor thinks
about environmental protection.
In the last few years, local governments in Hungary have lost regulatory and authority
responsibilities, public services and the assets they have acquired from them. Apart from the
decrease of autonomy, it is a serious problem that it is difficult to adapt to the frequent
changes in the central regulatory and policy environment, it cannot be planned for a long time,
while it is a basic requirement for environmental policy.
Bibliography
BALOGH Zsolt
2014 A környezetvédelem, köztisztaság problémái az önkormányzati rendeletek
törvényességi vizsgálata során (Problems of environmental protection and sanition
while examining the lawfulness of local government decrees). Új Magyar
Közigazgatás 7. 2. 8487.
BARTA Attila
2017 Önkormányzati társulások a helyi környezetvédelmi feladatok ellátásában (The
role of local government associations in exercising environmental functions). In:
Fodor László–Bányai Orsolya: A települési önkormányzatok szerepe a környezeti
politika és jog alakításában (The role of local governments in formulating
environmental law and policy). Debreceni Egyetemi Kiadó, Debrecen, 109–125.
BÁNDI Gyula
1999 Az önkormányzati környezetvédelmi tervezés (Environmental planning of local
governments). In: Bándi Gyula (szerk.): Önkormányzati környezetvédelmi kézikönyv
(Environmental Handbook of Local Governments). KJK, Budapest, 4881.
BÁNYAI Orsolya
2017a Helyi stratégiák és környezetvédelem (Local strategies and environmental
protection). In: Fodor László–Bányai Orsolya: A települési önkormányzatok szerepe a
környezeti politika és jog alakításában (The role of local governments in formulating
environmental law and policy). Debreceni Egyetemi Kiadó, Debrecen, 91–108.
2017b Somogyvámos és Krisna-völgy környezetvédelmi szabályozása az ökológiai
fenntarthatóság nézőpontjából (The environmental regulation of Somogyvámos and
Krisna-valley from environmental sustainability point of view). Justum Aequm
Salutare 13. 4. 265285.
BUJDOS Ágnes
2017 A fenntartható fejlődés és a víz kapcsolata Debrecen példáján keresztül ((The
relationship between sustainable development and water based on the example of the
city of Debrecen). Profectus in Litteris IX. (completed but not yet published)
BENCSIK András–BARTA Attila
2017 A települési önkormányzatok szerepe a környezetvédelmi igazgatás átalakult
rendszerében (The role of local governments in the transformed system of the
environmental administration). Pro Futuro 6. 1. 85.
FODOR László
2016a A helyi szabályok eltérése a központi előírásoktól környezetvédelmi
megfontolások (The deviation of local rules from the central ones environmental
considerations). Jogtudományi Közlöny 71. 78. 353364.
2016b A környezetvédelem helyi szintje egy dél-borsodi kistelepülés, Bogács példáján
(The local level of environmental protection in a small settlement in South-Borsod
through the example of Bogács). Miskolci Jogi Szemle 12. 2. 528.
2017a Szarvas város környezetvédelme (szemelvények a helyi környezeti politika és
szabályozás köréből) (The environmental protection of Szarvas (segments from the
local environmental policy and regulation)). In Gellén Klára (szerk.): Honori et virtuti.
Ünnepi tanulmányok Bobvos Pál 65. születésnapjára (Honori et virtuti. Studies on the
occasion of the 65th birthday of Bobvos Pál). Pólay Elemér Alapítvány, Szeged, 71–
84.
2017b Környezetvédelem az épített környezet alakítására és védelmére vonatkozó
miskolci szabályozásban (Environment protection in the regulations for shaping and
protecting the built environment in Miskolc). Miskolci Jogi Szemle 13. 2. (completed
but not yet published)
FODOR László et alii
2016 Települési környezetvédelem Magyarországon: Egy kutatás előfeltevései (Urban
environmental protection in Hungary: Premises a research). Tér és Társadalom 30. 3.
1939.
FÓNAI Mihály – PÉNZES Ferenc
2017 Önkormányzatok és helyi környezeti politika egy empirikus kutatás
eredményei (Local governments and local environmental policy the results of an
empirical research). In: Fodor László–Bányai Orsolya: A települési önkormányzatok
szerepe a környezeti politika és jog alakításában. (The role of local governments in
formulating environmental law and policy). Debreceni Egyetemi Kiadó, Debrecen,
7390.
GAJDICS Ágnes–KISS Csaba–SZILÁGYI Szilvia
2011 Települési önkormányzatok lehetőségei a zaj elleni küzdelemben. A helyi
rendeletalkotás keretei (Opportunities of settlement municipalities in the fight against
noise. The framework for local regulation). EMLA Egyesület, Budapest
HOFFMAN István
2014 Az önkormányzati rendeletek bírósági felülvizsgálata a Kúria Önkormányzati
Tanácsa gyakorlata tükrében (Judicial review of local government regulations in the
light of the practice of the Curia’s Local Government Council). Magyar Jog 61. 6.
340349.
HORVÁTH M. Tamás
2014 Helyi sarok: Sarkalatos átalakulások. A kétharmados törvények változásai 2010–
2014: Az önkormányzatokra vonatkozó szabályozás átalakulása (Local Corner:
Crucial Transformations. Changes in two-thirds laws 2010-2014: Transformation of
rules relating to local governments). MTA Law Working Papers 4. 110.
HORVÁTH Zsuzsanna
2016 Fenntartható fejlődés. Fenntartható termelés és fogyasztás az Európai Unióban
(Sustainable development. Sustainable production and consumption in the European
Union). Dóm–Dialóg Campus, Budapest–Pécs
PÁLNÉ KOVÁCS Ilona
2014 Az önkormányzati rendszer és a területi közigazgatás átalakulása 2010–2013
(The transformation of the municipality system and the territorial administration 2010-
2013). MTA Law Working Papers 2. 19.
PUMP Judit
2017 Helyi környezetpolitika – göröngyök az úton (Local environmental policy -
bumps on the road). In: Fodor László–Bányai Orsolya (szerk.): A települési
önkormányzatok szerepe a környezeti politika és jog alakításában (The role of local
governments in formulating environmental law and policy). Debreceni Egyetemi
Kiadó, Debrecen, 2017, 29–53.
SZILÁGYI János Ede
2014 A magyar víziközmű-szolgáltatók integrációja jogi nézőpontból (The integration
of the Hungarian water utilities from a legal point of view), Pro Futuro 4. 1. 144162.
VARJÚ Viktor
2013 A települési önkormányzatok környezetvédelmi orientáltsága (The
Environmental orientation of local governments). Comitatus: Önkormányzati Szemle
23. 13. 2136.
***
The author is a professor at the University of Debrecen Faculty of Law focusing on
environmental regulation, energy law, agricultural law and carries out family history
researches in a recreational manner. He has awarded several scholarships to research in
Germany and Austria. He has lead numerous research projects, among others, the Roles and
instruments of local governments in the realization of ecological sustainability. He is a
member of the National Environmental Council and the editor in chief for the legal journal
Pro Futuro.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
Az alábbi cikk a Nemzeti Kutatási, Fejlesztési és Innovációs Hivatal által támogatott, Helyi önkormányzati szerepek és eszközök az ökológiai fenntarthatóság megvalósításában címet viselő, alapvetően jogtudományi (de emellett szociológiai és politológiai) megközelítésű kutatás bevezető tanulmánya. Célja rögzíteni az interdiszciplináris kutatás hipotéziseit és várható eredményeit. Úgy véljük, hogy a helyi cselekvési szintnek az ökológiai fenntarthatóság elérésében játszott szerepe nélkülözhetetlen, habár nem egyedüli, és nem is az elsődleges tényező. Ha az önkormányzatok túl sok feladatot és hatáskört kapnak, akkor azokat nem tudják megfelelően ellátni, illetve a környezetpolitika, környezetjog egészének hatékonysága gyenge (hiszen számos probléma nem közelíthető meg helyi szinten). Ha túl kevés feladatuk, illetve hatáskörük van, akkor amellett, hogy csorbul a helyi önkormányzáshoz való jog, a környezetpolitika, illetve környezetjog összességében megint nem lesz eléggé hatékony. Egyensúlyt kell tehát találni valahol, ami a változó lehetőségek és kihívások függvényében nem egy statikus egyensúly, hanem csakis dinamikus egyensúly lehet, folyamatos súlypontváltoztatással. Abból indulunk ki, hogy környezeti fenntarthatósági szempontból jelenleg is számos változás indokolt, melyek részben intézményi, strukturális jellegűek. Úgy véljük, hogy a helyi közösségek igényei, érdekei és elvárásai sem hagyhatók figyelmen kívül, ezért a kérdéskör értelmezése során több aktor szempontjaival és cselekvéseivel kell számolni.
A környezetvédelem, köztisztaság problémái az önkormányzati rendeletek törvényességi vizsgálata során (Problems of environmental protection and sanition while examining the lawfulness of local government decrees)
  • Balogh Bibliography
  • Zsolt
Bibliography BALOGH Zsolt 2014 A környezetvédelem, köztisztaság problémái az önkormányzati rendeletek törvényességi vizsgálata során (Problems of environmental protection and sanition while examining the lawfulness of local government decrees). Új Magyar Közigazgatás 7. 2. 84-87.
The environmental protection of Szarvas (segments from the local environmental policy and regulation)). In Gellén Klára (szerk.): Honori et virtuti. Ünnepi tanulmányok Bobvos Pál 65. születésnapjára (Honori et virtuti. Studies on the occasion of the 65 th birthday of Bobvos Pál)
2017a Szarvas város környezetvédelme (szemelvények a helyi környezeti politika és szabályozás köréből) (The environmental protection of Szarvas (segments from the local environmental policy and regulation)). In Gellén Klára (szerk.): Honori et virtuti. Ünnepi tanulmányok Bobvos Pál 65. születésnapjára (Honori et virtuti. Studies on the occasion of the 65 th birthday of Bobvos Pál). Pólay Elemér Alapítvány, Szeged, 71-84. 2017b Környezetvédelem az épített környezet alakítására és védelmére vonatkozó miskolci szabályozásban (Environment protection in the regulations for shaping and protecting the built environment in Miskolc). Miskolci Jogi Szemle 13. 2. (completed but not yet published)
Az önkormányzati rendeletek bírósági felülvizsgálata a Kúria Önkormányzati Tanácsa gyakorlata tükrében (Judicial review of local government regulations in the light of the practice of the Curia's Local Government Council)
  • Kiss Csaba-Szilágyi Gajdics Ágnes
  • Szilvia
GAJDICS Ágnes-KISS Csaba-SZILÁGYI Szilvia 2011 Települési önkormányzatok lehetőségei a zaj elleni küzdelemben. A helyi rendeletalkotás keretei (Opportunities of settlement municipalities in the fight against noise. The framework for local regulation). EMLA Egyesület, Budapest HOFFMAN István 2014 Az önkormányzati rendeletek bírósági felülvizsgálata a Kúria Önkormányzati Tanácsa gyakorlata tükrében (Judicial review of local government regulations in the light of the practice of the Curia's Local Government Council). Magyar Jog 61. 6. 340-349.
Helyi sarok: Sarkalatos átalakulások. A kétharmados törvények változásai 2010-2014: Az önkormányzatokra vonatkozó szabályozás átalakulása (Local Corner: Crucial Transformations. Changes in two-thirds laws 2010-2014: Transformation of rules relating to local governments)
  • Horváth M Tamás
HORVÁTH M. Tamás 2014 Helyi sarok: Sarkalatos átalakulások. A kétharmados törvények változásai 2010-2014: Az önkormányzatokra vonatkozó szabályozás átalakulása (Local Corner: Crucial Transformations. Changes in two-thirds laws 2010-2014: Transformation of rules relating to local governments). MTA Law Working Papers 4. 1-10.
Helyi környezetpolitika -göröngyök az úton (Local environmental policybumps on the road). In: Fodor László-Bányai Orsolya (szerk.): A települési önkormányzatok szerepe a környezeti politika és jog alakításában (The role of local governments in formulating environmental law and policy)
  • Horváth Zsuzsanna
HORVÁTH Zsuzsanna 2016 Fenntartható fejlődés. Fenntartható termelés és fogyasztás az Európai Unióban (Sustainable development. Sustainable production and consumption in the European Union). Dóm-Dialóg Campus, Budapest-Pécs PÁLNÉ KOVÁCS Ilona 2014 Az önkormányzati rendszer és a területi közigazgatás átalakulása 2010-2013 (The transformation of the municipality system and the territorial administration 2010-2013). MTA Law Working Papers 2. 1-9. PUMP Judit 2017 Helyi környezetpolitika -göröngyök az úton (Local environmental policybumps on the road). In: Fodor László-Bányai Orsolya (szerk.): A települési önkormányzatok szerepe a környezeti politika és jog alakításában (The role of local governments in formulating environmental law and policy). Debreceni Egyetemi Kiadó, Debrecen, 2017, 29-53.
In: Fodor László-Bányai Orsolya: A települési önkormányzatok szerepe a környezeti politika és jog alakításában. (The role of local governments in formulating environmental law and policy)
  • Pénzes Fónai Mihály
  • Ferenc
FÓNAI Mihály -PÉNZES Ferenc 2017 Önkormányzatok és helyi környezeti politika -egy empirikus kutatás eredményei (Local governments and local environmental policy -the results of an empirical research). In: Fodor László-Bányai Orsolya: A települési önkormányzatok szerepe a környezeti politika és jog alakításában. (The role of local governments in formulating environmental law and policy). Debreceni Egyetemi Kiadó, Debrecen, 73-90.
A magyar víziközmű-szolgáltatók integrációja jogi nézőpontból (The integration of the Hungarian water utilities from a legal point of view), Pro Futuro 4. 1. 144-162. VARJÚ Viktor 2013 A települési önkormányzatok környezetvédelmi orientáltsága (The Environmental orientation of local governments)
  • Ede Szilágyi János
SZILÁGYI János Ede 2014 A magyar víziközmű-szolgáltatók integrációja jogi nézőpontból (The integration of the Hungarian water utilities from a legal point of view), Pro Futuro 4. 1. 144-162. VARJÚ Viktor 2013 A települési önkormányzatok környezetvédelmi orientáltsága (The Environmental orientation of local governments). Comitatus: Önkormányzati Szemle 23. 13. 21-36.