Discussion Papers 2009.
Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins 40-50. p.
THE REGIONAL STRUCTURE AND
DECENTRALISATION OF SCIENCE IN CENTRAL
AND EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES
GYULA HORVÁTH
Introduction
Europe’s further development depends on the way in which growth factors are
spread across its regions, and one reason for the lower level of competitiveness is
major regional differences in R&D. Weak regional cohesion and an exaggerated
spatial concentration of modern regional development factors have a clearly nega-
tive effect on European competitiveness today. Activities with high value added are
concentrated within the London–Paris–Milan–Berlin–Amsterdam pentagon, but the
distribution of innovative industries differs even in the developed countries. The
role of national core areas is vital to R&D capacity, high-technology industries and
to developed services – but, again, the situation is very similar in the Central and
Eastern European countries, where the level of concentration, in fact, increased
after the change of regime.
The aim of this paper is to identify regional differences in the R&D structure of
six large and medium-sized EU member states in Eastern and Central Europe. The
basic hypothesis is that exaggerated intellectual polarisation hampers the strength-
ening of regional cohesion and that R&D must be given a priority role in economic
development strategies.
The organisation of scientific institutions in Central and Eastern
Europe, 1950–1990
The different levels of development of the two sides of Europe are particularly
evident in relation to science, and the roots of this reach back several centuries. The
university foundation period of the Middle Ages, in fact, had its influence on only a
very small part of Eastern Europe. In this region were founded four universities
(which play a prominent role until today). These are the universities of Prague
(1347), Krakow (1364), Vienna (1365) and Pécs (1367). Higher education ap-
peared in other parts of Europe only several centuries later. For example, Bul-
garia’s first university was founded in Sofia in 1888 (after many years of Turkish

Horváth, Gyula : The Regional Structure and Decentralisation of Science in Central and Eastern European Countries.
In: Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 40-50. p. Discussion Papers, Special
THE REGIONAL STRUCTURE AND DECENTRALIZATION OF SCIENCE …
41
rule) but newer universities in the country appeared only after 1970. The first uni-
versities of Romania were founded in Bucharest in the 1850s and in Iaşi (Molda-
via) in the 1860s. In some major cities a university network – primarily in Transyl-
vania – developed between the two World Wars, and in the communist era many
new universities were founded in major cities or industrial centres, including the
underdeveloped parts of the country.
Developments in many Eastern European countries were relatively uniform.
The basis of higher education and research appeared only after the Great War and
the number of institutions was very small. Only four universities were operating in
Hungary between the two World Wars, the number of students being 14,000 out of
a population of 9 million in 1938.
Due to regional development issues, and from the viewpoint of sectoral educa-
tion, few adjustments were made after the Second World War. The University of
Heavy Industry in Miskolc and the University of the Chemical Industry in Vesz-
prém were founded in 1949, at the beginning of the communist era.
The foundation of national academies of sciences was crucial for the scientific
systems of the countries of Eastern Europe, and all had organised their academies
by the beginning of the 1950s. The academies were not only the coordinating in-
stitutions for science in their respective country, but had an extensive research net-
work, typically embracing some 40–70 institutions. The consequence of centralised
government was that these academic research institutions were, with few excep-
tions, organised in the capital cities.
The modest changes in over-centralisation introduced in some countries have
some influence in the deconcentration of the institutions. For example, the gov-
ernment in Hungary issued a decree reforming science policy within the economic
reform programme started in 1968, and a communist party document issued in
1969 also asserted the need for science to be decentralised. The decree declared the
negative aspects of the excessive concentration of research in Budapest and pro-
posed to decrease the differences between the disciplines and to develop the social
sciences. The enactment of the decree, however, was only partially successful. At
the beginning of the 1970s science developed noticeably in the regional centres,
and the Hungarian Academy of Sciences organised a Biological Research Centre in
Szeged, which was the most highly developed in Central Europe. The Faculty of
Business and Economics began to operate at the University of Pécs – only the sec-
ond institution of education in economics in the country – and the academic re-
search institutions of Pécs acquired a new profile – that of regional science. How-
ever, the resettlement of research institutions or HE institution from Budapest was
not successful. A decision had been made to move the Faculty of Veterinary Sci-
ence from Budapest to Debrecen in the east of Hungary – the centre of Hungarian
agriculture, but, due to obdurate opposition (for personal interests) by the leaders of
the university, the plan failed.

Horváth, Gyula : The Regional Structure and Decentralisation of Science in Central and Eastern European Countries.
In: Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 40-50. p. Discussion Papers, Special

42
GYULA HORVÁTH
Although the communist party’s policy for science had different characteristics
in individual countries – as in other spheres of the economy and society, we can
detect some characteristics common to all:
1. Science enjoyed a privileged position in the socialist era – a typical feature
of the Soviet model. The favoured groups of people in the sciences (academicians,
principal researchers) received higher incomes and enjoyed a variety of social
benefits.
2. Intensive state intervention and government control were accompanied by
continuous and adequate budgetary resources, although these varied in the different
branches of science. Of the national income, 2– per cent was spent on R&D in the
Eastern European countries in the 1970–80s. This high rate was due in part to re-
search in the armaments industry, and a further explanation is that many industrial
products (in telecommunications and computer technology) were produced on the
basis of domestic research because of the boycott on exports of Western European
technology.
3. The state established research institutes in technology and the natural sci-
ences in the 1950s, a period of extensive development and promotion of science,
but the social sciences remained in an inferior position for decades, due to the
dominance of Marxist ideology. The new branches of science (sociology, political
and regional sciences) developed relatively late, and they were only embedded in
the HE system with difficulty. The ratio of researchers employed in the social sci-
ences amounted to less than one-fifth of that in several countries.
4. Academic research networks, sectoral research institutes controlled by the
ministries and corporate research units were dominant in the institutional structure
of research. For example, in Hungary in 1985, corporate research units absorbed 48
per cent of all R&D expenditure. Universities were primarily institutions of educa-
tion and research expenditure within universities was marginal. In Hungary, in
1985, HE institutions accounted for no more than 12 per cent.
The impact of the change of regime on the regional structure
of Eastern and Central European R&D
The change of regime at the beginning of the 1990s produced a significant re-
structuring of the scientific potential of Eastern and Central European countries.
One characteristic common to all was a considerable reduction in scientific capac-
ity. Two fields of research capacity shrank dramatically, one of these being the
sectoral research institute network. The majority of research institutes funded by
national bodies (such as ministries) were closed and the number of employees in
academic research institutes declined equally dramatically. As a direct conse-

Horváth, Gyula : The Regional Structure and Decentralisation of Science in Central and Eastern European Countries.
In: Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 40-50. p. Discussion Papers, Special
THE REGIONAL STRUCTURE AND DECENTRALIZATION OF SCIENCE …
43
quence, the percentage of GDP allocated to R&D was greatly reduced – to one-
third or even one-fifth. In Table 1 we show this in terms of GERD/GDP (Gross
expenditure on research and development as a percentage of Gross domestic prod-
uct).
After the change of regime R&D underwent a substantial restructuring. The re-
organisation of the HE system was the starting-point of a range of positive changes.
In Central and Eastern European countries the number of undergraduates doubled
or tripled, new colleges and universities were established and R&D was given an
important role. One part of the major, state-owned research institutes closed (apart
from the academic networks) and the other part was privatised. Certain groups of
companies started to increase their R&D activity, including several multinationals
settled in the region. The structure of expenditure changed perceptibly, with
spending on state- or community-financed research continuously decreasing and
that on corporate research rising.
Table 1
Changes in R&D main indicators in Eastern and Central Europe, 1980–2005
Name Bulgaria
Czechoslovakia
Poland
Hungary
Romania
1980 2005 1980 2005 1980 2005 1980 2005 1980 2005
GERD/GDP
2.5
0.5
3.9
1.41
2.2 0.6 3.2 1.0 No 0.4
0.52
data
Number of
31.6 21.6 39.6 37.51
96.3 55.0 31.4 23.0 71.1 33.4
researchers,
17.52
‘000s
Note: 1 Czech Republic, 2 Slovakia.
Source: Author’s compilation based on national statistical database 1980, and Europe in Figures.
Eurostat Yearbook 2008.
There are, however, considerable differences between the countries of Central
and Eastern Europe. In the Czech Republic, expenditure in business research loca-
tions accounts for nearly two third of all GERD – data similar to the EU-27 aver-
age. The ratio of company-financed research is the lowest in Bulgaria where gov-
ernment finance is still of great importance. In two countries, Hungary and Poland,
the influence of HE institutions in financing research exceeds the EU average, and
in all countries government-supported research institutes have a notably higher
share of GERD than the EU average due to the maintenance of a network of Acad-
emies of Sciences (Table 2).

Horváth, Gyula : The Regional Structure and Decentralisation of Science in Central and Eastern European Countries.
In: Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 40-50. p. Discussion Papers, Special

44
GYULA HORVÁTH
Table 2
Distribution of GERD by sectors, 2005, per cent
Name
Business sector
Budgetary institutions
Higher education
Bulgaria 22.2
67.3
10.5
Czech Republic
64.7
19.0
16.3
Hungary 45.0
28.6
26.4
Poland 31.6
36.8
31.6
Romania
48.0 34.1 17.9
Slovakia 50.0
30.0
20.0
EU-27 64.0
13.4
22.6
Sources: Europe in Figures. Eurostat Yearbook, 2008; Statistical Yearbook Romania, 2007.
The sectoral transformation of research institutions was followed in none of the
countries by a positive change in regional structure, and it remained typical of the
spatial structure of research centres that they were still mainly concentrated in the
capitals. In the 1990s, however, the spatial structure of R&D changed in several
countries. The central or core areas declined in importance, and the major results of
decentralisation are evident in the regionalised and federalised countries. The rela-
tive weight of Vienna in Austria decreased by 15 percentage points and, in Spain,
that of Madrid by 12. There was a slight decrease – or even no movement at all – in
the unitary states of Hungary and Greece. In the latter, the Attica region even in-
creased its share in the GERD of the country (Figure 1).
In Central and Eastern Europe the capitals and metropolitan regions are the
bastions of research and science, the weight of the metropolitan region being great-
est in Bulgaria. Four-fifths of the country’s research potential is concentrated in
Sofia and its vicinity, and two-thirds of Hungary’s GERD is found in the Central
Hungarian (NUTS2) region which consists of Budapest and Pest county. The re-
search capacities of the Czech Republic, Poland, and Slovakia reveal a slightly
more balanced picture – the metropolitan proportion in these countries being under
50 per cent (Table 3).
Most of the important R&D indicators in the core areas of CEE countries are
below the EU average, and in no more than 2 (Czech) regions of the 49 NUTS2
regions of the 6 do CEE countries exceed the EU average for the GERD/GDP ratio.
In 8 regions the GERD/GDP level is between 1.0 and 1.9 per cent, and in 39 the
level does not reach 1 per cent. In 20 regions it is even below 0.3 per cent (Figure
2).

Horváth, Gyula : The Regional Structure and Decentralisation of Science in Central and Eastern European Countries.
In: Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 40-50. p. Discussion Papers, Special

46
GYULA HORVÁTH
Figure 2
GERD as per cent of GDP in CEE regions, 2005

Source: Compiled and edited by the author based on http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu.
If we look at the regional spread of R&D activity, we would draw a similar
conclusion. In most countries the most highly concentrated R&D activity is corpo-
rate-financed, and foreign joint ventures’ target locations for establishing R&D
units in CEECs were almost solely capital cities.
The location of the academic institutions, the leading basic researchers, is no
more positive. Most of the institutes of academies of sciences are located in na-
tional capitals and no more than 7 (19 per cent) of the 37 research institutes of the
Hungarian Academy of Sciences operate outside Budapest. This means that only

Horváth, Gyula : The Regional Structure and Decentralisation of Science in Central and Eastern European Countries.
In: Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 40-50. p. Discussion Papers, Special

48
GYULA HORVÁTH
was undeveloped. The unfavourable spatial structure of HE was preserved, with
some 30–40 per cent of students still concentrated in the capital (Table 4). A fur-
ther characteristic of rapid change was the significant increase in the incidence of
the social sciences in the HE system of most countries – important in terms of es-
tablishing the economic bases of regional development. The weight of social sci-
ences in HE is higher in CEE countries than in other member states of the EU, but
at the same time the importance of natural sciences and technology in HE is lower
(Table 5).
Table 4
The distribution of students in HE in central areas, 2006
Country
Number of students, ‘000s
As national per cent
Bulgaria 114
47.1
Czech Republic
125
37.0
Poland 445
20.7
Hungary 187
42.6
Romania 294
35.2
Slovakia 65
32.8
Source: Compiled by the author based on http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu data.
Table 5
Students in HE by field, 2006, per cent
Country
Students, ‘000s
Social sciences1
Technology and
Other fields 3
natural sciences2
Bulgaria 243
43.5
35.2
21.3
Czech Republic
337
27.6
38.7
33.7
Poland 2,145
40.9
30.1
29.0
Hungary 439
41.5
28.6
29.9
Romania 835
50.0
31.5
18.5
Slovakia 198
28.3
43.9
28.3
Austria 253
34.9
35.1
30.0
Finland 309
22.4
52.8
24.8
Netherlands 572 38.0 32.1 29.9
Ireland 186
23.1
36.0
40.9
Note: 1Business, behaviour, law and other social sciences; 2Biological and physical natural sciences;
3Teacher training, liberal arts, personal and security services, environmental protection.
Source: Compiled by the author based on http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu data.

Horváth, Gyula : The Regional Structure and Decentralisation of Science in Central and Eastern European Countries.
In: Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 40-50. p. Discussion Papers, Special
THE REGIONAL STRUCTURE AND DECENTRALIZATION OF SCIENCE …
49
In Hungary, at the beginning of the 1990s faculties of social sciences were
founded in many cities by the former political elite. The establishment of university
faculties or colleges in regional public administration centres was a result of politi-
cal change, and the, now unused, official buildings and education centres of the
communist party offered an adequate infrastructure for HE. The Ministry of Edu-
cation accepted implicitly the relatively cheap and extensive developments in so-
cial science education. As a result of the demand for specialists required to work in
the market economy, the growth in numbers in economics education can be under-
stood.
The slight decrease in the regional distribution of R&D was generated by the
fact that research and development was given an important role in university func-
tions. In the analysis of the R&D investment structure, we have already mentioned
the different distribution of HE in different CEE countries, and we saw that in Po-
land and Hungary HE represents a higher weight than the EU average in terms of
R&D expenditure, There is no other type of research organisation outside higher
education to be seen in any CEE country: the role of corporate research is well-
nigh invisible and the number of regional development planning institutions and
research centres of many West European countries can rarely be found.
Conclusions
If we examine the spatial location of R&D activity, which should be one of the
factors supporting the dynamic of European regional development, we can see that
the change of regime and the transition have had the effect of preserving the “status
quo” in the new member-states in Central and Eastern Europe. Major regional ine-
qualities are still evident in the regional structure of developed innovation institu-
tions, and the core areas and capital cities still have their privileged position. The
regional and structural policies based on EU norms have not stimulated the devel-
opment of R&D in the new member states, as the operational programmes for
2007–2013 demonstrate. There is no Central or Eastern European country with a
regional or competitiveness-related operational programme targeting a comprehen-
sive transformation of human resource development in respect of research.
Changes in the factors influencing regional development require the regional
policy system of objectives, together with the related instruments and institutions,
to be transformed. The long-term trends of European spatial development require
the widest range of institutionalised forms of decentralisation to be established in
the countries of Europe in the face of their different traditions. The new, Central
and Eastern European member states can only meet EU cohesion requirements
with the help of decentralised institutions. This is not only a public administration
issue, but also a prerequisite for the success of R&D in helping to improve com-

Horváth, Gyula : The Regional Structure and Decentralisation of Science in Central and Eastern European Countries.
In: Old and New Borderlines /Frontiers/ Margins.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2009. 40-50. p. Discussion Papers, Special

50
GYULA HORVÁTH
petitiveness. If regionalism progresses, it can bring about the modernisation of
regional structures and the need for multi-polar regional development may change
the hierarchies of power in those countries still in transition quite profoundly. The
sub-national level of the power structure, the region, is a territorial entity which
supports the sustainable development of the economy and the modernisation of the
spatial structure – with its own financial resources and having at its disposal an
autonomous development policy based upon local governmental rights. The re-
gions are becoming the stage for innovative development, and the degree of re-
gional-level embeddedness among the fundamental institutions of innovation out-
put is becoming stronger.
The decentralisation of science and R&D has a number of positive effects on
the improvement of the regions. The formation of research-intensive sectors in-
creases the number of quality jobs and the business development effects of setting
up spin-off companies are clearly evident. Innovative business develops the re-
gion’s export capacity and helps it integrate into the European and international
research area. Companies which demand or rely on research contribute to the re-
industrialisation of the region and to the spread of modern services. All of these
improve the income-generating ability of the regions and contribute to the en-
hancement of territorial cohesion. The Lisbon criteria cannot be met without de-
centralisation.