Tourism and Local Governments in Hungary: The Position of Tourism in Local Council Committees of Local Governments

Open access

Abstract

Introduction. The objective of this paper is to investigate the position of tourism in the committee structure of the local councils of Hungarian local governments. Material and methods. The data were sourced from websites of the settlements concerned and all the results obtained statistically evaluated using the method of descriptive statistics. Results. From the data available, we can clearly determine the role of tourism in the committees of local governments, as well as the direction of changes after the 2010 election. The results also clearly identified the factors that determine the role of tourism in local council committees and the sectors that constitute the same committees with tourism. Conclusions. The role of tourism in committees of local councils is fundamentally unfavourable and the situation deteriorated after the 2010 election. The role of tourism in committees of local councils is closely related to the size of the population and the role of tourism in the given settlements.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • 1. Michalkó G. (1999). The theory and practice of urban tourism (1st edition). Budapest Hungary: MTA Fôldrajztudományi Kutatóintézet. [in Hungarian]

  • 2. Michalkó G. (2007). The foundations of tourism theory (1st edition). Székesfehérvár Hungary: Kodolányi János Fóiskola. [in Hungarian]

  • 3. Maitland R. (2006). How can we manage the tourist-historic city? Tourism strategy in Cambridge UK 1978-2003. Tourism Managemen 127(6) 1262-127 3.

  • 4. Russo A. (2002). The „vicious circle” of tourism development in heritage cities. Annals of Tourism Research 29(1) 165-182.

  • 5. Borg. J. & Russo A (2002). Planning considerations fracultural tourism: a case study of four European cities. Tourism Management 23(6). 631-G37.

  • 6. Connell. J.. RigeS. & Bentley T. (2009). Towards sustainable tourism planning in New Zealand: Monitoring local government planning under the Resource Management Act. Tourism Management 30(6).867-877.

  • 7. Barker. M. & fóge S. (2002). Visitor safety in urban tourism environments - the case of Auckland. New Zealand. Cities 19(4). 2 7 3-282.

  • 8. Hoffman. L.. Eainstein S. & Judd ID. (Eds.) (2003). Cities and visitors - regulating people markets and city space. Oxford. United Kingdom: Blackwell.

  • 9. Edwards. ID.. Griffin T. & Havllar B. (2008). Urban tourism research - developing an agenda. Annals of Tburism Re- search 35(4). 1032-1052.

  • 10. Bramwell. B. & Rawding L. (1996). Tourism marketing images of industrial cities. Annals of Tourism Research 23[1). 201-221.

  • 11. Judd. ID. (1995). Promoting tourism in US cities. Tourism Management 16(3). 175-187.

  • 12. Chang. T.f Milne S.. fóllon ID. & Rihlmann C. (1996). Urban heritage tourism-the global-local nexus. Annals of Tourism Re search 23(2). 284-305.

  • 13. Ashworth. G. & ftge S. (2011). Urban tourism research: recent progress and current paradoxes. Tourism Management 32(1). 1-15.

  • 14. Berényi. I. (2002). Theoretical and methodological questions of applied social geography. Budapest. Hungary. MTA Fóldrajztudományi Kutatóintézet. [in Hungarian]

  • 15. Egedy. T.. Eôldi Zs.. Balogi A. & Kovács Z. (2009). Budapest in the eyes of creative foreigners - the view of transnational migrants. Amsterdam: ACRE report no 7.4.

  • 16. Snaith. T. & Haley A. (1999). Residents' opinions of tourism development in the historic city of York. England. Tourism Management 20(5). 595-603.

  • 17.IDredge. ID. (2006). Policy networks and the local organisation of tourism. Tourism Management 27(2). 269-280.

  • 18. Bakucz M. (2001). Reflections on the future development of municipal tourism - based on visitor surveys in two twinned cities. Térés Társadalom 15(1). 131-151. [in Hungarian]

  • 19. Hegyi Zs. (2010). Marketing activity for reinforcing the tourism effects of Pécs 2010 programme on tourism. Turizmus Bulletin 14(1-2). 44-46. [in Hungarian]

  • 20. Michalkó. G. (1996). The possibilities of applied social geography in the research of tourism. Térés Társadalom 10( 2- 3). 1 -17.1 [in Hungarian]

  • 21. Mo In ár. Cs.. Kineses A. & Tňth G. (2009). The effects of spa- development in East Hungary: a comparison of Hajdúszo- boszló. Mezókóvesd and Orosháza. 'lil rizmus Bulletin 13(4). 20-31. [in Hungarian]

  • 22. Puezkó. L. & Ráta T. (2003) Tourism in historical cities: planning and management. Budapest. Hungary: Turisztikai OkUtô és Ku tat ó Press. [ in Hungarian]

  • 23.Sudár. A (2003). The relations of tourism and settlement development in Gódólló. Térés Társadalom. 17(4). 67-83. [in Hungarian]

  • 24.Csefkó. F. (1997). focal governmental system (1st edition). Budapest-Pécs. Hungary: Dialóg (kampus Kiadó. [in Hungar- ian]

  • 25. Belányi. M.. Csalló K.. Feik Cs.. Fogarasi J. & Tábi R. (2010). laical governments (1* edition). Budapest-Pécs. Hungan". HVG-ORAC Kiadó. [in Hungarian]

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor


Index Copernicus: ICV 2018 = 100.00
Ministry of Science and Higher Education: 14 points

Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 135 66 7
PDF Downloads 67 36 0