Drawing and applying poverty maps The Hungarian case Open Society Foundations Making the Most of EU Funds for Roma initiative 23 Jan 2012

Settlement (LAU2, NUTS5) or sub-settlement Micro-region (LAU1, NUTS4) settlements in HU; average population besides Bp 2.500; sub-settlement level for those over settlements in HU; population besides Bp aim: classification of segregated areas; share of people without more than primary education and without employment over 50% aim: classification of all areas; 80 more developed, 47 less developed (below average), 14 least developed (bottom 15%), 33 least developed with integrated programme (bottom 10%) 2 social indicators31 social, economic and infrastructural indicators used for integrated urban development strategies, etc. used for the integrated programme of the less developed micro-regions, etc. Mapping at 2 levels

Indicators Settlement level: 2 social: education (primary school), employment Micro-region level: 14 social: 6 income, property, demography, etc.: income, flat, car, migration, mortality, urbanisation 5 poverty, etc.: education (secondary school), unemployed households, social assistance, child protection assistance, aging index 3 employment: unemployment, long term unemployment, activity 8 economic: number and change in number of enterprises, agriculture, services, tourism, retail, research, tax income 9 infrastructural: piped water, sewage, gas, waste collection, road and motorway accessibility, phone, cable TV, broadband internet Foreseen change: smaller number of indicators, more focus on social indicators

Indicators – *census data Settlement level: 2 social: education (primary school)*, employment Micro-region level: 14 social: 6 income, property, demography, etc.: income, flat, car, migration, mortality, urbanisation 5 poverty, etc.: education (secondary school)*, unemployed households*, social assistance, child protection assistance, aging index 3 employment: unemployment, long term unemployment, activity* 8 economic: number and change in number of enterprises, agriculture*, services*, tourism, retail, research, tax income 9 infrastructural: piped water, sewage, gas, waste collection, road and motorway accessibility, phone, cable TV, broadband internet Foreseen change: smaller number of indicators, more focus on social indicators

AreaPopulationPeople without more than primary education and without employment Ózd % Segregated area no % Segregated area no % Segregated area no % Segregated area no % Ózd, Hungary

Segregated area no 7, Ózd, Hungary

Ranking micro-regions

dark green:least developed micro-regions with integrated programme (33) medium green: least developed micro-regions (14) light green: less developed micro-regions (47) striped:micro-regions with high rate of Roma, census data (44)

Territorial targeting of funds Funding – 300 meur, 1% of NSRF – From 8 OPs Directly: 4 Regional OPs (ERDF), Social infra OP (ERDF), Social renewal OP (ESF) Indirectly: State reform OP (ESF), Implementation OP (CF) – Allocation to each micro-region, 5-15 meur (based on No of population and settlements) Coordination – No formal power – Informal organisational and personal power, coordination unit as all OP MAs in National Development Agency Challenges – Lack of support from OP MAs (allocation, specific conditions) – Time

Per capita funding of least developed micro-regions

Equal opportunities guarantees Tools – Planning, project generation Roma inclusion among main objectives of the programme Involvement of local Roma leaders Involvement of equal opportunities experts, commissioned by the coordination unit Mapping of segregated areas, preparation of equal opportunities analysis and plans – Initial project selection Equal opportunities among main criteria of assessment of plans and project ideas Involvement of equal opportunities experts 2 weakest plans sent back for revision A number of projects selected from reserve list – Project preparation Initial project selection with draft project ideas (3 pages each) Specific conditions for project selection Cooperation with MtM in project preparation Results – Intervention does not increase internal differences in any micro-region, decreases internal differences in 1/3 of the micro-regions – Around 40 meur, 13% with direct Roma inclusion or equal opportunities impact

Thanks for your attention Where the Paved Road Ends