Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Neoliberal Reconfiguration of the Hungarian Political Economy, 1990–2006

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Political Economy of Hungary

Abstract

This chapter examines the methods by which neoliberal ideas and practices were consolidated in Hungary between 1990 and 2006, as well as the variegated impact of neoliberal restructuring on society. Challenging accounts of neoliberal transformation as a relatively harmonious process, the chapter argues for a more critical understanding of this process, which stresses the importance of both economic and political coercion, as well as the extensive investment in the ideological underpinnings of neoliberalism by both external organisations, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, the European Union (EU), the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), multinational corporations (MNCs), and neoliberal think tanks, and domestic economic and political elites. Analysing the politico-economic trajectory of Hungary from 1990 to the mid-2000s, the chapter shows that, although the country did become a ‘poster boy’ of neoliberal transformation in the region, its emergent regime of accumulation was fraught with contradictions and limitations. These limitations were revealed during the massive anti-government protests that rocked Hungary during the autumn of 2006.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The level of consensus amongst Hungarian policymakers in the early 1990s was summed up well by Stiglitz, when he reflected on the ‘irony’ of the privatisation (non-)debate in the country: ‘There is a joke about the debate on the speed of privatization in Hungary, with those who advocate rapid privatization arguing that privatization must be achieved in five years, while those who advocate slow privatization urging that matters be taken calmly—privatization should take place over five years’ (Stiglitz, 1994, p. 181; see also Drahokoupil, 2009, p. 103; Greskovits, 2000, p. 131).

  2. 2.

    The group was headed by Bokros and Surányi, but also included other neoliberal economists associated with the FRI, including László Antal, Tibor Draskovics, Csaba László, and Riecke Werner. (On the preparation of the programme, see Andor, 2004, p. 175; Antal, 1995; Bokros, cited in Rádai, 2001, p. 181.)

  3. 3.

    The most noticeable privatisations included the sale of Postabank to Austrian banking giant Erste Bank, in 2003, for a total of US$ 450 million, and the sales of Antenna Hungária to Swisscom, for around US$ 240 million, and Budapest Airport to the British Airport Authority Plc. for more than US$ 2.1 billion (the largest privatisation deal in Hungary’s history) in 2005.

  4. 4.

    In the early 2000s, gross monthly wages in the EU-accession countries ranged from less than 15 percent of average German wages (Latvia and Lithuania) to about 30 percent (Hungary and the Czech Republic) (Jacoby, 2010, p. 422).

  5. 5.

    The relative weakness of labour in CEE is reflected by two statistics. First, union density in new EU member states (24.6 percent on average) is significantly lower than that of the old member states (38.6 percent on average). Second, since 1990 to the present, strike rates in the CEE have been significantly lower than in Western Europe (Crowley, 2008, pp. 7, 10; Vanhuysse, 2006). In Hungary, trade union membership was even below the CEE average (between 12 and 16 percent) in 2008, and unions were divided along political lines, with six different confederations competing with each other (ETUI, 2016).

  6. 6.

    According to official statistics, there are around 200,000 Roma living in Hungary (representing around 2 percent of the population). However, this figure is disputed by international organisations; the European Commission (EC) puts the figure at 700,000 (‘Hungary: Situation of Roma’, 2012).

  7. 7.

    Between 1999 and 2004 Hungary’s share of total FDI inflows to the region fell by more than 50 percent (from 31 to 13.6 percent). As FDI inflows decreased, economic growth began to run out of steam: Hungary was the only country in the region where the average annual growth decreased following EU accession (Bohle & Greskovits, 2012, p. 240).

References

  • ‘A Széles-birodalom’. (2005, October 9). 24.hu . Retrieved March 13, 2018, from http://24.hu/fn/gazdasag/2005/10/09/szeles_birodalom.

  • ACEA. (2008). Country Profile: Hungary. European Automobile Manufacturers Association (ACEA). Retrieved from http://www.acea.be/uploads/press_releases_files/20081104_Hungary_country_profile.pdf.

  • Andor, L. (2000). Hungary on the Road to the European Union: Transition in Blue. Westport, CT: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andor, L. (2004). Medgyessytől Medgyessyig: Vázlat az MSZP gazdaságpolitikájának tizenöt évéről. In I. Feitl, G. Földes, & L. Hubai (Eds.), Útkeresések: A magyar szociáldemokrácia tegnap és ma (pp. 168–195). Budapest: Napvilág Kiadó.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andor, L. (2010). Eltévedt éllovas: Siker és kudarc a rendszerváltó gazdaságpolitikában. Budapest: Napvilág.

    Google Scholar 

  • Antal, L. (1995). A Bokros-csomag. Beszélő, 5(5). Retrieved March 10, 2019, from http://beszelo.c3.hu/cikkek/a-bokros-csomag.

  • Åslund, A. (2002). Building Capitalism: The Transformation of the Former Soviet Bloc. Cambridge and New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avery, N. (1993, September). Stealing from the State. Multinational Monitor. Retrieved January 9, 2013, from http://multinationalmonitor.org/hyper/issues/1993/09/mm0993_10.html.

  • Bandelj, N. (2008). From Communists to Foreign Capitalists: The Social Foundations of Foreign Direct Investment in Post-socialist Europe. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodnár, J. (2007). Becoming Bourgeois: (Post-socialist) Utopias of Isolation and Civilization. In M. Davis & D. B. Monk (Eds.), Evil Paradises: Dreamworlds of Neoliberalism (pp. 140–151). New York, NY: The New Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohle, D. (2010). Countries in Distress: Transformation, Transnationalization, and Crisis in Hungary and Latvia. Employment and Economy in Central and Eastern Europe, 1(1), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohle, D., & Greskovits, B. (2006). Capitalism without Compromise: Strong Business and Weak Labor in Eastern Europe’s New Transnational Industries. Studies in Comparative International Development, 41(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02686305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohle, D., & Greskovits, B. (2007a). Neoliberalism, Embedded Neoliberalism and Neocorporatism: Towards Transnational Capitalism in Central-Eastern Europe. West European Politics, 30(3), 443–466. https://doi.org/10.1080/01402380701276287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohle, D., & Greskovits, B. (2007b). The State, Internationalization, and Capitalist Diversity in Eastern Europe. Competition & Change, 11(2), 89–115. https://doi.org/10.1179/102452907X181929

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohle, D., & Greskovits, B. (2012). Capitalist Diversity on Europe’s Periphery. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brainerd, E. (2000). Women in Transition: Changes in Gender Wage Differentials in Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union. ILR Review, 54(1), 138–162. https://doi.org/10.1177/001979390005400108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cass, F. (2007). Attracting FDI to Transition Countries: The Use of Incentives and Promotion Agencies. Transnational Corporations, 16(2), 77–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crouch, C. (2009). Privatised Keynesianism: An Unacknowledged Policy Regime. British Journal of Politics & International Relations, 11(3), 382–399. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-856X.2009.00377.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crouch, C. (2011). The Strange Non-death of Neoliberalism. Cambridge and Malden, MA: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crowley, S. (2008). Does Labor Still Matter? East European Labor and Varieties of Capitalism (Working Paper No. 823-14n). Seattle, WA: National Council for Eurasian and East European Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crowley, S., & Ost, D. (2001). Workers after Workers’ States: Labor and Politics in Post-communist Eastern Europe. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csaba, L. (2000). Between Transition and EU Accession: Hungary at the Millennium. Europe-Asia Studies, 52(5), 805–827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Csáki, G., & Karsai, G. (2001). Evolution of the Hungarian Economy, 1848–2000. Vol. 3. Boulder, CO: Social Science Monographs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Csurka, I. (1992). Néhány gondolat és nyolc társgondolat. Budapest: Magyar Fórum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denton, N. (1990, September 26). A Flawed Jewel Impatient to Enhance Its Lustre. Financial Times.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denton, N., & Bobinski, C. (1990, September 15). Hungary Releases Its Privatization Shortlist. Financial Times.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dimireva, I. (2009, October 29). Hungary Investment Climate 2009. EU Business. Retrieved June 8, 2010, from http://www.eubusiness.com/europe/hungary/invest.

  • Dörrenbächer, C. (2007). Challenges for Foreign-Owned Subsidiaries in FDI-Led Modernization Strategies: The Case of Hungary. Competition & Change, 11(2), 179–197. https://doi.org/10.1179/102452907X181965

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drahokoupil, J. (2009). Globalization and the State in Central and Eastern Europe: The Politics of Foreign Direct Investment. London and New York, NY: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunn, B. (2009). Global Political Economy: A Marxist Critique. London: Pluto Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • EBRD. (2002). Transition Report 2002: Agriculture and Rural Transition. London: European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.

    Google Scholar 

  • EBRD. (2004). Transition Report 2004: Infrastructure. London: European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD).

    Google Scholar 

  • Endnotes, & Benanav, A. (2010). Misery and Debt. Endnotes, 2, 20–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ernst & Young. (2013). The Central and Eastern European Automotive Market: Hungary. Retrieved July 31, 2013, from http://www.ey.com/gl/en/industries/automotive/the-central-and-eastern-european-automotive-market%2D%2D-country-profile%2D%2Dhungary.

  • ETUI. (2016). Hungary: Trade Unions. European Trade Union Institute (ETUI). Retrieved April 24, 2018, from http://www.worker-participation.eu/National-Industrial-Relations/Countries/Hungary/Trade-Unions.

  • Eurequal. (2006). The State of Inequality in the Central and Eastern Europe: Desk Research on Hungary (Working Paper). Oxford: Eurequal.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eurostat. (2018). Eurostat Statistical Database. Retrieved April 18, 2018, from http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database.

  • ‘Excerpts: Hungarian “lies” speech’. (2006, September 19). BBC News. Retrieved July 21, 2016, from http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/5359546.stm.

  • Fabry, A. (2009). End of the Liberal Dream: Hungary since 1989. International Socialism Quarterly, 124, 71–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fink, P. (2006). FDI-Led Growth and Rising Polarisations in Hungary: Quantity at the Expense of Quality. New Political Economy, 11(1), 47–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fóti, K. (Ed.). (2003). Towards Alleviating Human Poverty: Analysis and Recommendations. Human Development Report for Hungary, 2000–2002. Budapest: Institute for World Economics of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).

    Google Scholar 

  • Frydman, R., & Rapaczynski, A. (1994). Privatization in Eastern Europe: Is the State Withering Away? Budapest and New York, NY: Central European University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gács, J. (2003). Structural Change and Catching Up: The Experience of Ten Candidate Countries. In G. Tumpel-Gugerell & P. Mooslechner (Eds.), Economic Convergence and Divergence in Europe. Growth and Regional Development in an Enlarged European Union (pp. 131–167). Cheltenham and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Genov, N. (2010). Global Trends in Eastern Europe. Farnham and Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gill, S. (2001). Constitutionalising Capital: EMU and Disciplinary Neo-liberalism. In A. Bieler & A. D. Morton (Eds.), Social Forces in the Making of the New Europe (pp. 47–69). Basingstoke: Palgrave.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gowan, P. (1999a). The Global Gamble: Washington’s Faustian Bid for World Dominance. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gowan, P. (1999b). The Theory and Practice of Neo-liberalism for Eastern Europe. In Ibid., The Global Gamble: Washington’s Faustian Bid for World Dominance (pp. 187–247). London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greskovits, B. (2000). Hungary’s Post-communist Development in Comparative Perspective. In W. Baer & J. L. Love (Eds.), Liberalization and Its Consequences: A Comparative Perspective on Latin America and Eastern Europe (pp. 126–149). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greskovits, B. (2001). Brothers-in-Arms or Rivals in Politics? Top Politicians and Top Policy-makers in the Hungarian Transformation. In J. Kornai, S. Haggard, & R. Kaufman (Eds.), Reforming the State: Fiscal and Welfare Reform in Post-socialist Countries (pp. 111–141). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hamar, J. (1999). Regional Effects of FDI Inflows in Hungary. Acta Oeconomica, 50(1–2), 169–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanley, E., King, L., & János, I. T. (2002). The State, International Agencies, and Property Transformation in Post-communist Hungary. American Journal of Sociology, 108(1), 129–167.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardy, J. (2008). Poland’s New Capitalism. London: Pluto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, D. (2007). A Brief History of Neoliberalism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ‘History of the Hungarian American Enterprise Scholarship Fund’ (HAESF). (2013). Retrieved November 27, 2013, from http://www.haesf.org/about_haesf/history.html.

  • HITD. (2007). The Automotive Industry in Hungary: Engine of Growth. Budapest: Hungarian Investment and Trade Development Agency (HITD).

    Google Scholar 

  • Horn, G. (1999). Azok a kilencvenes évek. Budapest: Kossuth Kiadó.

    Google Scholar 

  • ‘Hungary: Situation of Roma’. (2012, July 13). Refworld (UNHCR). Retrieved August 19, 2016, from http://www.refworld.org/cgi-bin/texis/vtx/rwmain?page=search&docid=5036010888&skip=0&query=Roma&coi=HUN&querysi=situation%20of%20Roma&searchin=title&sort=date.

  • Hunya, G. (1999). Integration through Foreign Direct Investment: Making Central European Industries Competitive. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iankova, E. A. (2002). Eastern European Capitalism in the Making. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Inzelt, E. (2011). White-Collar Crime during the Political and Economic Transition in Hungary. US-China Law Review, 8(2), 352–379.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacoby, W. (2010). Managing Globalization by Managing Central and Eastern Europe: The EU’s Backyard as Threat and Opportunity. Journal of European Public Policy, 17(3), 416–432. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501761003661935

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeffries, I. (1993). Socialist Economies and the Transition to the Market: A Guide. London and New York, NY: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Kiss, J. P. (2001). Industrial Mass Production and Regional Differentiation in Hungary. European Urban and Regional Studies, 8(4), 321–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, N. (2007). The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. London: Allen Lane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kornai, J. (1990). The Road to a Free Economy. Shifting from a Socialist System: The Example of Hungary. New York, NY: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kornai, J. (2006). The Great Transformation of Central Eastern Europe. Economics of Transition, 14(2), 207–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ladányi, J. (2002). Residential Segregation Among Social and Ethnic Groups in Budapest during the Post-communist Transition. In P. Marcuse & R. van Kempen (Eds.), Of States and Cities: The Partitioning of Urban Space (pp. 170–182). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laky, T. (2002). Labour Market in Hungary. In K. Fazekas & J. Koltaz (Eds.), The Hungarian Labour Market, 2002 (pp. 11–36). Budapest: Institute of Economics, HAS; National Employment Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lapavitsas, C. (2013). Profiting Without Producing: How Finance Exploits Us All. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lapavitsas, C., & Research on Money and Finance (RMF). (2010). Eurozone Crisis: Beggar Thyself and Thy Neighbour (Occasional report). London: Research on Money and Finance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipton, D., & Sachs, J. (1990). Creating a Market Economy in Eastern Europe: The Case of Poland. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 1990(1), 75–147. https://doi.org/10.2307/2534526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lóránt, K. (2007). A Magyarország eladósódásával kapcsolatos legfontosabb tudnivalok. Nemzeti Érdek, 1(4), 28–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Magyar Nemzeti Bank (MNB). (2007). Foreign Direct Investment in Hungary, 1995–2005. Budapest.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marx, K. (1980). Capital. A Critique of Political Economy. Volume 1 (B. Fowkes, Trans.). London: Penguin Classics.

    Google Scholar 

  • McNally, D. (2011). Global Slump: The Economics and Politics of Crisis and Resistance. Oakland, CA: PM Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ‘Médiabirodalmat épít Széles Gábor’. (2005, September 15). Index.hu . Retrieved March 13, 2018, from http://index.hu/gazdasag/magyar/szelm050915.

  • Medve-Bálint, G. (2014). The Role of the EU in Shaping FDI Flows to East Central Europe. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 52(1), 35–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitra, P., Selowsky, M., & World Bank (Eds.). (2002). Transition, the First Ten Years. Analysis and Lessons for Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union. Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mocsáry, J. (2001). Visszapillantás a privatizációra. Eszmélet, 1(52), 4–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mommen, A. (2004). Magyarország neoliberális forradalma, a kapitalista globalizáció sikertörténete? Eszmélet, 1(63), 159–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Myant, M., & Drahokoupil, J. (2011). Transition Economies: Political Economy in Russia, Eastern Europe and Central Asia. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagy, P. (2003). From Command to Market Economy in Hungary under the Guidance of the IMF. Budapest: Akadémiai Kiadó.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2004). OECD Economic Surveys: Hungary 2004. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2011). Divided We Stand: Why Inequality Keeps Rising. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Pascall, G., & Manning, N. (2000). Gender and Social Policy: Comparing Welfare States in Central and Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union. Journal of European Social Policy, 10(3), 240–266. https://doi.org/10.1177/a013497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavlínek, P. (2004). Regional Development Implications of Foreign Direct Investment in Central Europe. European Urban and Regional Studies, 11(1), 47–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969776404039142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R., Henderson, J., Andor, L., & Hulme, D. (2006). Usurping Social Policy: Neoliberalism and Economic Governance in Hungary. Journal of Social Policy, 35(4), 585–606. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047279406000092

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piketty, T. (2018, January 16). 2018, The Year of Europe. Le blog de Thomas Piketty. Retrieved April 4, 2018, from http://piketty.blog.lemonde.fr/2018/01/16/2018-the-year-of-europe.

  • Pirani, S. (2009). Change in Putin’s Russia: Power, Money and People. London: Pluto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pogátsa, Z. (2009). Hungary: From Star Transition Student to Backsliding Member State. Journal of Contemporary European Research, 5(4), 597–613.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rádai, E. (2001). Pénzügyminiszterek reggelire. Rádai Eszter beszélget Békesi Lászlóval, Bokros Lajossal, Kupa Mihállyal, Medgyessy Péterrel, Rabár Ferenccel, Szabó Ivánnal. Budapest: Helikon; Beszélő.

    Google Scholar 

  • Radosevic, S., & Yoruk, D. E. (2001). Videoton: The Growth of Enterprise through Entrepreneurship and Network Alignment (Working Paper No. 3). London: UCL School of Slavonic and East European Studies (SSEES).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ringold, D. (2000). Roma and the Transition in Central and Eastern Europe: Trends and Challenges. Washington, DC: World Bank Publications.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ringold, D., Orenstein, M. A., & Wilkens, E. (2005). Roma in an Expanding Europe: Breaking the Poverty Cycle. Washington, DC: World Bank Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saad-Filho, A. (2010). Neoliberalism in Crisis: A Marxist Analysis. Marxism 21, 14(1), 247–270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sachs, J. (1990, June 13). What Is to Be Done? The Economist.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sass, M. (2003). The Effectiveness of Host Country Policy Measures in Attracting FDI: The Case of Hungary. In A. B. Zampetti & T. Fredriksson (Eds.), The Development Dimension of FDI: Policy and Rulemaking Perspectives (pp. 49–58). Geneva: UNCTAD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheiring, G., Stefler, D., Irdam, D., Fazekas, M., Azarova, A., Kolesnikova, I., & King, L. (2018). The Gendered Effects of Foreign Investment and Prolonged State Ownership on Mortality in Hungary: An Indirect Demographic, Retrospective Cohort Study. The Lancet: Global Health, 6(1), e95–e102. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(17)30391-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A., & Timár, J. (2010). Uneven Transformations: Space, Economy and Society 20 Years after the Collapse of State Socialism. European Urban and Regional Studies, 17(2), 115–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. E. (1994). Whither Socialism? Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stiglitz, J. E. (2002). Globalization and Its Discontents. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szalai, E. (2001). Gazdasági elit és társadalom a magyarországi újkapitalizmusban. Budapest: Aula.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szalai, E. (2008). New Capitalism—And What Can Replace It. Budapest: Pallas Kiadó.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szalavetz, A. (2005). Structural Change—Structural Competitiveness (Working Paper No. 155). Budapest: Institute of World Economics, Hungarian Academy of Sciences.

    Google Scholar 

  • Szelényi, S. (1987). Social Inequality and Party Membership: Patterns of Recruitment into the Hungarian Socialist Workers’ Party. American Sociological Review, 52(5), 559–573.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ‘The MMI Top 50 for 2017’. (2017). Retrieved March, 13 2018, from https://mfgmkt.com/httpsmfgmkt-comwp-contentuploads201704top-50-ems-companies-2016-pdf.

  • Tosics, I. (2000). Lakáspolitika – szociális várospolitika. Budapesti Negyed, 8(2), 133–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • ‘Transformed: EU membership has worked magic in Central Europe’. (2005, June 23). The Economist, pp. 6–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNCTAD. (2005). World Investment Report, 2005: Transnational Corporations and the Internationalization of R&D. New York, NY and Geneva: United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).

    Google Scholar 

  • USAID. (2013). The Enterprise Funds in Europe and Eurasia: Successes and Lessons Learned. Washington, DC: United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Retrieved from https://www.usaid.gov/sites/default/files/documents/1863/EE_Enterprise_Funds-LessonsLearned.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Vanhuysse, P. (2006). Divide and Pacify: Strategic Social Policies and Political Protests in Post-communist Democracies. Budapest and New York, NY: Central European University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • VIDEOTON. (n.d.). Record Income in the Life of Videoton Holding. Retrieved May 28, 2018, from http://www.videoton.hu/index.php/en/news/headlines/150-record-income-in-the-life-of-videoton-holding.

  • VIDEOTON. (2017). VIDEOTON: One Company—Infinite Possibilities. Székesfehérvár: VIDEOTON. Retrieved from http://www.videoton.hu/downloads/videoton_general_eng.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Völgyes, I. (1978). Modernization, Stratification and Elite Development in Hungary. Social Forces, 57(2), 500–521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Voszka, É. (1995). Centralization, Re-nationalization, and Redistribution: Government’s Role in Changing Hungary’s Ownership Structure. In J. Hausner, B. Jessop, & K. Nielsen (Eds.), Strategic Choice and Path-dependency in Post-socialism (pp. 287–308). Brookfield, CT: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wedel, J. R. (1998). Collision and Collusion: The Strange Case of Western Aid to Eastern Europe. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (1996). From Plan to Market. New York, NY: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

  • World Bank. (1999). Hungary: On the Road to the European Union. Washington, DC: World Bank.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Study on Culture and Society National Scientific and Technical Research Council, National University of Córdoba, Córdoba, Argentina

    Adam Fabry

Authors
  1. Adam Fabry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Fabry, A. (2019). The Neoliberal Reconfiguration of the Hungarian Political Economy, 1990–2006. In: The Political Economy of Hungary. Palgrave Pivot, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-10594-5_4

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation