IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ora/journl/v1y2012i2p385-389.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Development Possibilities Of The Hungarian-Ukrainian

Author

Listed:
  • Pasztor Szabolcs

    (University of Debrecen, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration)

Abstract

Thanks to the all pervasive globalisation trends previous state borders have become more permeable and subject to change. As borders disappear previously separated borderlands can unite and form a spatial unit where more increased economic interactions could integrate both sides to the global economy.The European continent is such a case which previously had been puctuated by strong state borders. Today the continent sees the physical and intellectual disappearance of borders. Regional integrations '" like the European Union '" spur this process and helps the integration of borderland inside and outside of the common market. The creation of a common market was a huge success and still a great deal of benefits are anticipated from the fulfillment. We are not taken by surprise when we see a massive increase in the number of border related studies and researchers. This field is very popular today.However the difference between Western and Eastern Europe is huge because eastern state borders are still strong or they link peripheral regions. There - under the communist times- border crossings were restricted and trade links were quite poor. No wonder that the tendencies of the past are still determining.This paper focuses on of one the most peripheral external borderland of the Schengen zone: the Hungarian-Ukrainian borderland. Expectations are running high and the disappearance of the border is a long-awaited hope. First I take into consideration the relevant economic theory in connection with more intense borderland dynamics. In the literature the trade theory, new economic geography and the traditional location theory approach this question. The approaches do not give coherent and clear-cut answers so I have to turn my attention to different empirical approaches. These show huge heterogeneity depending on the nature and character of the borderlands. In the mentioned case, settlement-level data are not fully available so I conduct a questionnaire-based survey. With 432 cases collected from 6 micro regions from the Ukrainian side I can measure the possible cross-border dynamics of the borderless situation. With this method I follow the empirical approach of other regionalists who have come to the conclusion that the opening-up of borders can lead to different dynamism.In this way I try to shed new light on the development possibilities and more increased economic interactions the Hungarian-Ukrainian borderland. The most important conclusion of this paper is the fact that with more intensive cross-border interactions not the neighbouring borderaland benefits but centrally located or larger towns in Hungary. In this way I can point to the fact that borderland dynamics could be quite limited in the research area. With this paper I could confirm previous studies and point to the fact that empirical analysis is needed to understand the local dynamism of a borderless space.

Suggested Citation

  • Pasztor Szabolcs, 2012. "Development Possibilities Of The Hungarian-Ukrainian," Annals of Faculty of Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1(2), pages 385-389, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:ora:journl:v:1:y:2012:i:2:p:385-389
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://anale.steconomiceuoradea.ro/volume/2012/n2/054.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Annekatrin Niebuhr & Silvia Stiller, 2004. "Integration and Labour Markets in European Border regions," ERSA conference papers ersa04p29, European Regional Science Association.
    2. Fujita,Masahisa & Thisse,Jacques-François, 2013. "Economics of Agglomeration," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781107001411, September.
    3. Buettner Thiess & Rincke Johannes, 2007. "Labor Market Effects of Economic Integration: The Impact of Re-Unification in German Border Regions," German Economic Review, De Gruyter, vol. 8(4), pages 536-560, December.
    4. Niebuhr, Annekatrin, 2004. "Spatial Effects of European Integration: Do Border Regions Benefit Above Average?," HWWA Discussion Papers 307, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWA).
    5. H. Hanson, Gordon, 2005. "Market potential, increasing returns and geographic concentration," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 1-24, September.
    6. repec:bla:germec:v:8:y:2007:i::p:536-560 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Fujita, Masahisa & Mori, Tomoya, 1996. "The role of ports in the making of major cities: Self-agglomeration and hub-effect," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(1), pages 93-120, April.
    8. Herbert Giersch, 1949. "Economic Union Between Nations and the Location of Industries," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 17(2), pages 87-97.
    9. J. V. Henderson & J. F. Thisse (ed.), 2004. "Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 4, number 4.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Takatoshi Tabuchi & Kristian Behrens & Andrea R. Lamorgese, 2004. "Testing the Home Market Effects in a Multi-country World: The Theory," Econometric Society 2004 Far Eastern Meetings 595, Econometric Society.
    2. Sabyasachi Tripathi, 2013. "Do Large Agglomerations Lead To Economic Growth? Evidence From Urban India," Review of Urban & Regional Development Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(3), pages 176-200, November.
    3. Niebuhr, Annekatrin & Stiller, Silvia, 2002. "Integration Effects in Border Regions - A Survey of Economic Theory and Empirical Studies," Discussion Paper Series 26340, Hamburg Institute of International Economics.
    4. G Ottaviano & Diego Puga, 1997. "Agglomeration in a global Economy: A Survey," CEP Discussion Papers dp0356, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    5. Theodore Tsekeris & Klimis Vogiatzoglou, 2014. "Public infrastructure investments and regional specialization: empirical evidence from Greece," Regional Science Policy & Practice, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 6(3), pages 265-289, August.
    6. Kyoji Fukao & Victoria Kravtsova & Kentaro Nakajima, 2014. "How important is geographical agglomeration to factory efficiency in Japan’s manufacturing sector?," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 52(3), pages 659-696, May.
    7. Christian Düben & Melanie Krause, 2021. "Population, light, and the size distribution of cities," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(1), pages 189-211, January.
    8. Lall, Somik V. & Shalizi, Zmarak & Deichmann, Uwe, 2004. "Agglomeration economies and productivity in Indian industry," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(2), pages 643-673, April.
    9. Bianca Mitrică & Irena Mocanu & Monica Dumitraşcu & Ines Grigorescu, 2017. "Socio-Economic Disparities in the Development of the Romania’s Border Areas," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 134(3), pages 899-916, December.
    10. Bosker, Maarten & Buringh, Eltjo, 2017. "City seeds: Geography and the origins of the European city system," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 139-157.
    11. Yannis M. Ioannides & Henry G. Overman, 2004. "Spatial evolution of the US urban system," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 131-156, April.
    12. James R. Fain, 2017. "City formation with complex landscapes," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(4), pages 125-137, October.
    13. Martinho, Vítor João Pereira Domingues, 2011. "A non linear model of the new economic geography for Portugal. Another perspective," MPRA Paper 33511, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Vitor Joao Pereira Domingues Martinho, 2011. "The Importance of Increasing Returns to Scale in the Process of Agglomeration in Portugal: A Non-linear Empirical Analysis," Papers 1110.5538, arXiv.org.
    15. Stef Proost & Jacques-François Thisse, 2019. "What Can Be Learned from Spatial Economics?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 57(3), pages 575-643, September.
    16. Harris Dobkins, Linda & Ioannides, Yannis M., 2001. "Spatial interactions among U.S. cities: 1900-1990," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 701-731, November.
    17. Duranton, Gilles & Puga, Diego, 2004. "Micro-foundations of urban agglomeration economies," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: J. V. Henderson & J. F. Thisse (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 4, chapter 48, pages 2063-2117, Elsevier.
    18. Zierahn, Ulrich, 2012. "The effect of market access on the labor market: Evidence from German reunification," HWWI Research Papers 131, Hamburg Institute of International Economics (HWWI).
    19. Gordon H. Hanson, 2000. "Scale Economies and the Geographic Concentration of Industry," NBER Working Papers 8013, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. María Ayuda & Fernando Collantes & Vicente Pinilla, 2010. "From locational fundamentals to increasing returns: the spatial concentration of population in Spain, 1787–2000," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 25-50, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    globalisation; spatial impact; borderlands; Hungary-Ukraine;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • F22 - International Economics - - International Factor Movements and International Business - - - International Migration
    • J61 - Labor and Demographic Economics - - Mobility, Unemployment, Vacancies, and Immigrant Workers - - - Geographic Labor Mobility; Immigrant Workers
    • R12 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Size and Spatial Distributions of Regional Economic Activity; Interregional Trade (economic geography)

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ora:journl:v:1:y:2012:i:2:p:385-389. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catalin ZMOLE (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feoraro.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.