Discussion Papers 2008.
Socio-Economic Analysis of the Carpathian Area 45-60. p.
5 Carpathian settlement structure
Carpathian development region (CDR) with its borders roughly defined covers
parts of 8 countries. Moreover it covers not only the mountain range of Carpathi-
ans but also foothills of the mountains and areas neighbouring the mountains as
well as some areas which apparently have little to do with Carpathians in a geo-
graphic sense. Their inclusion into the project area is rather the result of adminis-
trative division, social and economic links than of physical features of the area.
Analyzing the settlement structure covering the CDR, authors have concen-
trated on the substantive area covered by Carpathian Mountains with respect to
administrative units (mostly NUTS3 level). The first step was to divide popula-
tion living in these units into urban and rural. On this level it is necessary to say
that in some countries there are not only cities, towns and villages as the main
types of settlements, but there are also other urban settlements like e.g. town type
villages in Ukraine (treated in the analysis as urban settlements) or Marktge-
mainde in Austria (treated in the analysis as rural settlements).
The urban settlements have been divided into four ranges:
above 500,000 inhabitants,
100,000 – 499,999 inhabitants,
20,000 – 99,999 inhabitants,
below 20,000 inhabitants.
Moreover the urbanization index and population density have been calculated.
The results are included in the final table “General Characteristic of Carpathian
Settlements’’. Because of the fact that there has been lack of data concerning the
number of villages for some regions, settlement density had not been included in
the table. Some information about settlement density and spatial distribution are
included in the text and in Table 13.
This study covers the characteristics of settlement structure in each country
within the project area and its final part contains conclusions concerning the
whole project area.
5.1 Austria
Generously drafted the Carpathian development region encompasses 3 NUTS2
units of Austria namely Niederösterreich, Burgenland and the capital city of
Vienna. Population of such territory amounts to 3,473,000 inhabitants. Leaving
aside the very city of Vienna population density in Niederösterreich is 80 inh./km2
and in Burgenland 70 inh./km2. So the settlement network of this part of Austria
consists of the metropolis of Vienna (1,651,365 inh.) and of several towns
Carpathian Settlement Structure.
In: Socio-Economic Analysis of the Carpathian Area.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2008. 45-60. p. Discussion Papers, Special
46
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE CARPATHIAN AREA
Table 13
General characteristic of Carpathian settlements
Administrative unit
Urban settlements
Urban
Rural
Total
Urbaniza-
Area
Population
population population population tion index
(km2)
density
above 100,000 – 20,000 – below
(%)
(inh./km2)
500,000 499,999 99,999 20,000
inhab. inhab.
inhab. inhab.
AUSTRIA
Bezirk Bruck an der
0 0 0 3 16,693
23,313
40,006
41.7 495.0 81
Leitha
Czech
Republic
Jihomoravský kraj
0
1
5
16
621,641 508,717
1,130,358 55.0 7,196.0
157
Zlínský
kraj
0
0
5 15 325,649 265,057 590,706 55.1 3,963.0
149
Olomoucký
kraj
0 1 3 9 329,455 309,706 639,161 51.5 5,267.0
121
Moravskoslezský
kraj
0
1 11 21 939,941 310,828
1,250,769 75.1 5,427.0
230
HUNGARY
Békés 0
0
4
12
267,303
131,999 399,302 66.9 5,631.1
71
Borsod-Abaúj-
0
1
2 14 398,284 352,538 750,822 53.1 7,247.2
104
Zemplén
Csongrád
0 1 3 4 299,666
118,908
418,574
71.6
4,262.7 98
Győr-Moson-Sopron
0 1 2 4 236,154
192,388
428,542
55.1
4,088.7 105
Hajdú-Bihar 0
1
2
14
402,242
142,340 544,582 73.9 6,210.6
88
Heves
0 0 3 4 139,803
185,329 325,132 43.0 3,637.4
89
Jász-Nagykum-
0
0
4 12 273,991 143,017 417,008 65.7 5,581.7
75
Szolnok
Komárom-Esztergom
0 0 4 4 191,400 122,958 314,358 60.9 2,265.1
139
Nógrád
0 0 1 5 98,248
123,394
221,642
44.3
2,544.2 87
Carpathian Settlement Structure.
In: Socio-Economic Analysis of the Carpathian Area.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2008. 45-60. p. Discussion Papers, Special
CARPATHIAN SETTLEMENT STRUCTURE
47
Count. Table 13
Administrative unit
Urban settlements
Urban
Rural
Total
Urbaniza-
Area
Population
population population population tion index
(km2)
density
above 100,000 – 20,000 – below
(%)
(inh./km2)
500,000 499,999 99,999 20,000
inhab. inhab.
inhab.
inhb.
Pest
0
0 11 16 496,891
570,690
1,067,581 46.5 6,393.5
167
City of Budapest
1
0
0
0
1,712,677 0
1,712,677
100.0
525.2
3,261
Szabolcs-Szatmár-
0
1 0 18 271,672 314,486
586,158 46.4 5,936.5
99
Bereg
POLAND
Krakowsko-Tarnowski 0
1
5 25 528,098 873,475
1,401,573 37.7 7,385.0
190
Nowosądecki 0
0
5
18
362,103
750,618
1,112,721 32.5 7,478.0
149
City of Kraków
1
0
0
0
733,439
0
733,439
100.0
327.0
2,243
Rzeszowsko-
0
1 4 18 534,284 624,715
1,158,999 46.1 7,512.0
154
Tarnobrzeski
Krośnieńsko-
0 0
5
17
339,939
608,848
948,787
35.8
10,332.0 92
Przemyski
Częstochowski
0 1 1 6 332,986
203,748
536,734 62.0 3,047.0
176
Bielsko-Bialski
0 1 3 6 340,732 304,595
645,327 52.8 2,352.0
274
Centralny Śląski
0
9 16 17
2,678,780
188,308
2,867,088 93.4 5,578.0
514
Świętokrzyski 0
1
5
24
614,477
680,988 1,295,465
47.4 11,708.0
111
Rybnicko-Jastrzębski
0 2 5 4 528,349
114,951
643,300
82.1
1,354.0 475
ROMANIA
Alba
0 0 5 6 224,036
161,478
385,514 58.1 6,242.0
62
Arad
0 1 0 7 233,341
228,403
461,744
50.5
7,754.0 60
Arges
0 1 3 3 315,198
335,304
650,502 48.5 6,826.0
95
Carpathian Settlement Structure.
In: Socio-Economic Analysis of the Carpathian Area.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2008. 45-60. p. Discussion Papers, Special
48
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE CARPATHIAN AREA
Count. Table 13
Administrative unit
Urban settlements
Urban
Rural
Total
Urbaniza-
Area
Population
population population population tion index
(km2)
density
above 100,000 – 20,000 – below
(%)
(inh./km2)
500,000 499,999 99,999 20,000
inhab. inhab.
inhab. inhab.
Bacău 0
1
4
3
339,377
385,628
725,005
46.8
6,621.0
110
Bistriţa-Năsăud 0
0
1
3
115,686
203,404
319,090
36.3
5,355.0
60
Brasov 0
1
4
5
448,470
147,307
595,777
75.3
5,363.0
111
Buzău 0
1
1
3
206,846
291,239
498,085
41.5
6,103.0
82
Caraş-Severin 0
0
2
6
188,800
145,060
333,860
56.6
8,520.0
39
Cluj-Napoka 0
1
4
1
435,722
230,661 684,383 66.3 6,674.0
103
Covasna 0
0
2
3
114,368
110,554
224,922
50.8
3,710.0
61
Dambovita 0
0
2
5
169,158
370,164 539,322 31.4 4,054.0
133
Gorj 0
0
2
5
163,905
222,985
386,890
42.4
5,602.0
69
Harghita 0
0
3
6
145,693
183,651
329,344
44.2
6,639.0
50
Hunedoara 0
0
7
7
377,365
112,507 489,872 77.0 7,063.0
69
Ilfov 0
0
2
2
73,423
203,441
276,864
26.5
1,583.0
175
City of Bucureşti 1 0
0
0
1,929,615 0
1,929,615
100.0
238.0
8,178
Maramureş 0
1
2
10
305,389
213,668
519,057
58.8
6,304.0
82
Mehedinţi 0
1
0
4
148,422
158,866
307,288
48.3
4,933.0
62
Mureş 0
1
3
7
313,827
272,163
585,990
53.6
6,714.0
87
Neamţ 0
1
2
2
223,144
349,111
572,255
39.0
5,896.0
97
Prahova 0
1
1
12
425,381
407,177 832,558 51.1 4,716.0
177
Satu Mare
0
1
1
3
173,012
199,921 372,933 46.4 4,418.0
85
Sălaj 0
0
1
3
101,784
147,410
249,194
40.8
3,864.0
64
Suceava 0
1
3
11
293,792
411,755
705,547
41.6
8,553.0
82
Timiş 0
1
1
7
414,273
246,898
661,171
62.7
8,697.0 76
Carpathian Settlement Structure.
In: Socio-Economic Analysis of the Carpathian Area.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2008. 45-60. p. Discussion Papers, Special
CARPATHIAN SETTLEMENT STRUCTURE
49
Count. Table 13
Administrative unit
Urban settlements
Urban
Rural
Total
Urbaniza-
Area
Population
population population population tion index
(km2)
density
above 100,000 – 20,000 – below
(%)
(inh./km2)
500,000 499,999 99,999 20,000
inhab. inhab.
inhab. inhab.
Valcea
0 1 1 9 188,486
229,977 418,463 45.0 5,765.0
73
Vrancea
0 1 0 4 150,395
244,935
395,330 38.0
4,857.0 81
SERBIA
Borski
Okrug
0 0 1 5 80,556
65,985
146,541 55.0
3,507.0 42
SLOVAKIA
Bratislavský
kraj 0 1 1 5 501,970 101,729 603,699 83.1 2,052.6
294
Trnavský kraj
0
0
5
11
272,355 282,720 555,075 49.1 4,147.2
134
Trencianský
kraj
0
0 7 11 342634
257,213
599,847 57.1
4,501.9 133
Nitrianský
kraj
0 0 6 9 335,426
373,072
708,498 47.3
6,343.4 112
Zilinský
kraj
0
0 5 13 355,024
339,739
694,763 51.1
6,808.4 102
Banskobystrický kraj
0
0
5
19
356,158 300,961 657,119 54.2 9,454.8
70
Presovský
kraj
0
0 7 16 400,895
397,701
798,596 50.2
8,974.5
89
Kosický kraj
0
1
2
14
432,290 339,657 771,947 56.0 6,751.9
114
UKRAINE
Chernivtsi Oblast
0
1
0
18
386,625 518,819 905,444 42.7 8,100.0
112
Ivano-Frankivsk
0
1 4 34 596,480
787,464
1,383,944 43.1
13,900.0 100
Oblast
Lviv
Oblast
1
0 12 64
1,554,232
1,010,508 2,564,740
60.6 21,800.0
118
Zakarpattia Oblast
0
1
4
27
462,383 780,582
1,242,965 37.2 12,800.0
97
Source: Author’s construction.
with population above 20,000 inh. located along the main transport corridors
leading westwards to Linz and southwards to Graz. A few hundreds villages and
small towns belong to the rural settlements. Villages and small towns are more
evenly distributed in the Northern part of the territory, on plains, whereas in the
south they are concentrated along alpine valleys. Moreover the city of Sopron, the
historic centre of Burgenland with its population of more than 50,000 inh. is now
in Hungary.
One should note, however, that this territory covers mainly plains along the
River Danube and around Neusiedler Lake as well as parts of Alps and it has little
to do with the Carpathians, as a mountain range. Only a small hilly area between
the Danube and the Leitha rivers belongs to the Carpathian Mountains. Adminis-
tratively it is the district (Bezirk) Bruck an der Leitha. This small area covers
494.9 km2 and it is inhabited by about 40,000 people. 3 small towns and 17 vil-
lages constitute its settlement network. As the very name indicates the adminis-
Carpathian Settlement Structure.
In: Socio-Economic Analysis of the Carpathian Area.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2008. 45-60. p. Discussion Papers, Special
50
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE CARPATHIAN AREA
trative centre Bruck an der Leitha with its more than 7000 inh. is situated in the
valley of Leitha. The second largest town, Hainburg an der Donau (above 5000
inh.) is located on the right bank of the Danube. The third and the smallest town,
Mannersdorf am Leithagebirge is located further to south-west. Villages are lo-
cated mainly along valleys of small streams. So, settlement in Austrian Carpathi-
ans has predominantly rural character (urbanization index 41,7%). A relatively
low share of forests in the total area of the district (23%) also reflects its agricul-
tural character.
5.2 Czech Republic
There are 4 regions in the Czech Republic belonging to the Carpathian Mountain
range. They are located in the east of country and form a compact area, bordering
Poland I North, Slovakia on the East and Austria I South. These administrative
regions (looking from North to South) are: Olomoucký kraj with capital in Olo-
mouc, Moravskoslezský kraj with capital in Ostrava, Zlinsky kraj- concentrated
around Zlin (former Gottwaldov) and most to South – Jihomoravský kraj with its
main city- Brno. Carpathian range, as it is occupies the eastern parts of the above
regions the only exception is Zlinsky kraj which is located almost in whole Car-
pathian Mountains. Valleys of the upper Odra in the North and Morava in the
South separate Czech Carpathians from other mountains and uplands of Czech
Republic and constitute a transport corridor of international importance between
Northern and Southern Europe.
The most urbanized area among above is Moravskoslezský kraj with the high-
est population density (230 inh./km2) and highest urbanization index (75,1%).
Due to the largest amount of towns and cities (12 with population over 20,000 and
21 with population below 20,000) it has also the greatest urban population which
fluctuates about near 1 million inhabitants. It is caused by the presence of hard
coal deposits in the area and all the heavy industry connected to it. An opportunity
of work it offers is the factor that attracts people to the cities and towns of the
region. The settlement network develops mostly in lower parts of
Moravskoslezský kraj in the valleys of the rivers Odra and Morávka. They are
located in the 2nd largest agglomeration in the Czech Republic, in Ostrava. It is
simultaneously the biggest agglomeration in the Czech part of the project area.
Apart from the very city of Ostrava it consists of many cities and towns of the
coal mining area extending eastwards to the Polish border. Havirov, Petrvald,
Orlova and Karvina are secondary urban centres of the agglomeration. Along with
the increase of height decreases the number of settlements and their population
(harder climate conditions, poorer soils, less possibilities of production or crea-
tion- it all leads to one conclusion: less available workplaces).
Carpathian Settlement Structure.
In: Socio-Economic Analysis of the Carpathian Area.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2008. 45-60. p. Discussion Papers, Special
CARPATHIAN SETTLEMENT STRUCTURE
51
Although Moravskoslezský kraj is the most urbanized area, it is not the most
populated one. Jihomoravský kraj has the largest population (1.3 million inh.) and
also the greatest area (7,196 km2). Its population density is on level much ap-
proximately ont he same level as the rest of area (about 150 inh./km2). This simi-
larity refers also to the urbanization index, which amounts, for remaining three
areas, to about 55–50%. Besides, a greater balance between urban and rural (with
a slight advantage to urban) population is to observe. Over the half of the urban
population of this region is gained due to the city of Brno (it is famous for its
university: the 2nd largest in the whole Czech Republic) which has over 300,000
inhabitants. Jihomoravský kraj has the lowest location among the considered re-
gions but there are considerably less cities than in Moravskoslezský kraj. Most
small settlements are concentrated in the Southern part of the region, larger cities
are located around capital Brno, in a circle that stretches out to the borders of the
region.
Zlinsky kraj and Olomoucký kraj are similar when it comes to the characteris-
tics, such as urban-rural population and urbanization index. Concerning their area
the differencies are more noticeable (Olomoucký kraj has about 5,200 km2
whereas Zlinsky kraj is nearly 1,300 km2 smaller). This fact affects, of course, the
population density which is greater in Zlinsky kraj. This area has also a better
developed network of towns with a population below 20,000 inh., however, there
is no city greater than 100,000. Most of the largest cities like, Prostějov or Přerov
in Olomoucký kraj, are concentrated towards the neighborhood of Olomouc and
crossing it railways. Smaller settlements are spreading rather north. Zlinsky kraj is
similar; large cities (Uherské Hradiště, Kroměříž) are situated near the regional
center of the city of Zlin and in the direct neighborhood of railways in the valley
of river Morava. Towns and villages are specific to the high located areas of the
Carpathian Mountains, their majos part is to be found in Zlinsky kraj.
5.3 Hungary
The part of Carpathians situated in Hungary constitutes about 4.3% of the total
area of the Carpathians. Concerning the Carpathian development region only 4
Northern Hungarian counties have some of the Carpathian Mountain ranges on
theirs areas (Pest, Nógrád, Heves and Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén). All of them are
part of the Inner-Western Carpathians. The other counties are mostly situated on
Hungarian Great Plain and have little to do with Carpathians in geographic sense.
The main Hungarian city situated in the CDR is of course Budapest capital of
the country, which is an administrative district in its own right. Budapest is lo-
cated on both sides of River Danube that is one of the main transport routes, not
only for Hungary. There are more than 1,700 thousand inh. living in Budapest on
Carpathian Settlement Structure.
In: Socio-Economic Analysis of the Carpathian Area.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2008. 45-60. p. Discussion Papers, Special
52
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE CARPATHIAN AREA
525.16 km2 that gives more than 3.2 thousand inh./km2. Budapest is not only a
large centre of industry, science and trade and financial business, but it is also a
great tourist and cultural site with excellent communication and accessibility.
Furthermore, there are 5 cities with a population above 100 thousand inh. in
the Hungarian part of the CDR (Debrecen, Miskolc, Szeged, Győr and Nyíregy-
háza), but only Miskolc is located in the Carpathian area in geographic meaning.
The city is situated on Eastern side of Bükk Mountain, in the valleys of 3 rivers.
Mikolc is the third (after Budapest and Debrecen) industrial city in Hungary. The
city has also many higher education institutions and is a health resort with the
famous cave bath place in Miskolctapolca district.
There are 36 towns situated in the CDR in the third populate range (20–99
thousand inh.). Nearly half of them is located in counties belonging to the Carpa-
thians (11 in Pest, 3 in Heves, 2 in Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén and 1 in Nógrád).
Talking about smaller towns (below 20 thousand inh.) 39 of them are situated in
Carpathian counties (16 in Pest, 14 in Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén, 4 in Heves and 5
in Nógrád).
Pest that surrounds the capital of Hungary is also the county with the highest
(besides Budapest) population (more than 1 million inh.) and population density
(that is 167 pers./km2). The lowest amount of inhabitants per km2 is in county
Békés, in the Hungarian Great Plain next to the border with Romania.
Taking the amount of urban and rural population into consideration, urbaniza-
tion index had been analyzed. The highest index (besides Budapest) is in Hajdú-
Bihar and Csongrad that are situated on Great Hungarian Lowland. If we are
talking about mountainous region, only Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén has an index
above 50%; in the other 3 counties 43–47% of the people live in urban areas.
Generally, the Hungarian part of the CDR is occupied by more than 7 million
inhabitants. 60.6% of them lives in some urban areas. There are 149 cities and
towns and more than 1.4 thousand villages in the Hungarian part of CDR. The
settlement density is the highest in Nógrad and Borsod-Abaúj-Zemplén, next to
the Slovakian border (about 5 settl./100 km2). The lowest figures (about
1,3 settl./100 km2) are observed in Eastern Hungary near to Romania (counties
Hajdú-Bihar, Békés, Csongrád).
5.4 Poland
This section concerns the southern part of Poland which is located in the Carpa-
thian development region. This region covers ten subregions on the level NUTS3;
Krakowsko-Tarnowski, Nowosądecki, City of Kraków, Rzeszowsko-
Tarnobrzeski, Krośnieńsko-Przemyski, Częstochowski, Bielsko-Bialski, Cen-
tralny Śląski, Świętokrzyski and Rybnicko-Jastrzębski. It has to be pointed out
Carpathian Settlement Structure.
In: Socio-Economic Analysis of the Carpathian Area.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2008. 45-60. p. Discussion Papers, Special
CARPATHIAN SETTLEMENT STRUCTURE
53
that the real Carpathians cover only part of the region mentioned above. It covers
three subregions; Nowosądecki, Krośnieńsko-Przemyski, Bielsko-Bialski and
parts of three others; Krakowsko-Tarnowski, City of Kraków, Rzeszowsko-Tar-
nobrzeski.
Among the subregions which are located in the real Carpathians, Krośnieńsko-
Przemyski subregion has the biggest territory (10,332 km²) and has the lowest
population density (91.8 inh/km²). The highest population density is in Bielsko-
Bialski subregion (274.4 inh/km²) which is the smallest one (2,352 km²). This
subregion is the only one among those, located in the real Carpathian area with a
city that has a population above 100,000 inh. (city of Bielsko-Biała – 176 987
inh.). On the other hand it has the lowest number of cities (10) comparing to
Nowosądecki subregion (23) and Krośnieńsko-Przemyski subregion (22). Biel-
sko-Bialski subregion has the highest urbanization index: 52.8% of population is
living in cities, comparing to 32.5% in Nowosądecki subregion and 35.8% in
Krośnieńsko-Przemyski subregion. The last one has the highest number of vil-
lages: 988 compared to 240 in Bielsko-Bialski subregion.
Subregions which are partly located in Carpathians have a higher population
density: from 154.3 inh./km2 in Rzeszowsko-Tarnobrzeski to 2242.9 inh,/km2 in
City of Kraków. All those subregions which have population above 100,000 inh.
have one big city. The biggest and most populated city in the Polish part of the
Carpathian development region is the City of Kraków (734,510 inh.). Two other
cities are: Rzeszów in Rzeszowsko-Tarnobrzeski subregion (157,702 inh.) and
Tarnów in Krakowsko-Tarnowski subregion (116,487 inh.). The city of Kraków
has the highest urbanization index: 100% of population is living in city, compared
to 37.7% in Krakowsko-Tarnowski subregion and 46.1% in Rzeszowsko-Tar-
nobrzeski subregion. The number of villages is growing from Rzeszowsko-
Tarnobrzeski subregion (829) to Krakowsko-Tarnowski subregion (1,445).
Out of the remaining subregions located in the Carpathian development region
the most populated is Centralny Śląski (2,867,088 inh.) with a population density
of 514 inh./km2. Comparable population density is in Rybnicko-Jastrzębski
subregion (475.1 inh./km2), population density is mucl lower in Świętokrzyski
subregion (110.7 inh./km2) and in Częstochowski subregion (176.2 inh/km2).
Centralny Śląski subregion has the utmost number of big cities with population
above 100,000 inh. (9) and cities with population between 20,000 and 99,000 inh.
(16). The most populated city is Katowice (313,219 inh.). This subregion has also
the highest level of urbanization: 93.4% of its population living in cities. On the
other hand Świętokrzyski subregion has the utmost number of small cities (24)
and villages (2,202).
The main result of the analysis carried out on the population in Polish part of
the Carpathian development region is that utmost numbers of cities are located at
the edge of the Carpathian area (Krakowsko-Tarnowski and Centralny Śląski
Carpathian Settlement Structure.
In: Socio-Economic Analysis of the Carpathian Area.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2008. 45-60. p. Discussion Papers, Special
54
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE CARPATHIAN AREA
subregion). In mountain areas, because of natural conditions, the number of cities,
inhabitants and population density decreases as elevation increases. What is more,
the number of inhabitants and population density decline in SE direction. This is
due to historical conditions like world wars, destructions and resettlements.
The highest population density is in the city of Kraków (2,242.9 inh/km2) and
Centralny Śląski subregion (514 inh/km2). On the other side, there is Krośnień-
sko-Przemyski subregion (111.7 inh/km2) and Świętokrzyski subregion (110.7
inh/km2).
There is a comparable number of cities with population below 100,000 inh. in
subregions partly located in Carpathian area (Krakowsko-Tarnowski and
Rzeszowsko-Tarnobrzeski – 52 cities all together) and those located in real Car-
pathian area (Bielsko-Bialski, Nowosądecki and Krośnieńsko-Przemyski – 54
cities altogether).
The highest level of urban population is in the city of Kraków (100%), Cen-
tralny Śląski subregion (93.4%) and Rybnicko-Jastrzębski subregion (82.1%). On
the other hand the highest level of rural population is in Nowosądecki subregion
(32.5%), Krośnieńsko-Przemyski subregion (35.8%) and Krakowsko-Tarnowski
subregion (37.7%).
5.5 Romania
Approximately 55% of all Carpathians is in Romania: more than the half of the
Eastern Carpathians and all the Southern and West-Romanian Carpathians. Be-
cause of the fact that Romanian Carpathians are curved, majority of Romanian
counties are covered by some mountainous ranges.
Analyzing the settlement structure in the Romanian part of the Carpathian de-
velopment region it is necessary to mention that some of the cities, towns or vil-
lages situated in the CDR have much more in common with Carpathians in the
geographic sense than others (for example on one side: Braşov – the big city lo-
cated between the Inner-Eastern Carpathians and the Southern Carpathians and on
the other side: Bucaresti – the capital and largest city of Romania situated on Ro-
manian (Valahian) Lowland, on both sides of the River Dambovita). Moreover,
some settlements are located ont he River Danube near the Iron Gate (e.g.
Drobeta-Turnu Severin, Orsova, Berzasca, Moldova Veche). However, the analy-
sis is based on administrative units. That is why the analysis of Romanian settle-
ment structure concerns not only the mountainous parts of counties but also the
rest of their areas.
The main Romanian city, which is also an administrative unit in its own right,
is Bucaresti – capital of Romania. There are nearly 2 million inhabitants living in
Bucaresti on 238 km2 that gives more than 8 thousand inh./km2. Bucaresti is not
Carpathian Settlement Structure.
In: Socio-Economic Analysis of the Carpathian Area.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2008. 45-60. p. Discussion Papers, Special
CARPATHIAN SETTLEMENT STRUCTURE
55
only one single city which fits the range above 500 thousand inh. living in, but it
is also the most important industrial (processing industry) and business centre of
Romania. Furthermore there are 18 cities with population above 100 thousand
inh. in the Romanian part of the CDR. Many of them are very important as indus-
trial and as transport centres (e.g. Arad, Braşov, Ploieşti, Piteşti, Sibiu, Ramnicu
Valcea). Timişoara and Cluj-Napoca are also university centers. Hunedoara –
situated in Western Romania (Transylvania) – is the county with the highest
amount (7) of towns included to the third populate range (20–99 thousand inh.).
However, Prahova, Suceava and Maramureş are the counties with 10 and more
small towns (below 20 thousand inh.) located in.
Moreover Prahova is the county with the highest (besides Bucaresti) popula-
tion (more than 800 thousand inh.) and population density (that is 176.5 inh./
km2). It is quite understandable, because of the fact that it is near to the Romanian
capital. Ilfov, in which Bucaresti is the administrative centre, has also very high
population density (174.9 inh./km2). The lowest amount of inhabitants per km2 is
in Caras Severin the county located in the Southern Carpathians next to the border
with Serbia.
Analyzing the populations division to urban and rural, urbanization index has
been counted (besides administrative unit Bucaresti that has 100% urban popula-
tion). The highest index is in Hunedoara (77.03%) and Braşov (75.28%). More-
over almost all Transylvania (exempt of North-West Romania – counties: Satu
Mare, Bihor and Salaj) has an urbanization index of higher than 50%. The coun-
ties belonging to Banat, Valahia (exempt Prahova and Bucaresti) and Moldovia
have indexes lower than 50%. The least urban population is in Ilfov that sur-
rounds Bucaresti (26.5%). There are rather small villages located along roads
running to Piteşti, Ploieşti or Buzău. There are also many interesting, in the eth-
nographic context long villages, located in the wide valleys (called “cimpulung”)
in the Eastern Carpathians.
Romanian settlements are mostly inhabited by Romanian people. However
there are places where majority of the inhabitants speaks Hungarian. For example,
in Harghita (county located in the middle of Romanian part of Eastern Carpathi-
ans) more than 80% inhabitants speak this language. More than 90% of inhabi-
tants speak Hungarian in the smallest town of Romania – Baile Tusnad. Hungari-
ans are the biggest national minority in Romania settled especially in Transylva-
nia.
Generally, the Romanian part of the CDR is occupied by nearly 15.5 million
inhabitants. Romania has a very differentiated settlement structure. People live
rather in or near the centers of industry than in mountainous villages or on Roma-
nian edges. The highest settlement density is in Northern county Maramureş and
in Central Romania – county Prahova and small subregion the surrounding indus-
trial town of Medias. Towns and villages are mostly located along the main roads
Carpathian Settlement Structure.
In: Socio-Economic Analysis of the Carpathian Area.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2008. 45-60. p. Discussion Papers, Special
56
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE CARPATHIAN AREA
or around industrial centers. Concerning the CDR more than the half of Romani-
ans live in urban areas. 12.5% of the total amount of inhabitants living in the Ro-
manian part of the CDR lives in Bucaresti.
5.6 Serbia
Borders of Carpathian development region (CDR) adopted for the purpose of this
project cover significant part of Serbia extending far behind what is usually
defined as Carpathian Mountains. Ten NUTS3 units, called in Serbian okrug, and
districts either names are included in the project area. These are: North Banat
District; Central Banat District; South Banat District; City of Belgrade; Po-
dunavski District; Branicevski District; Pomoravski District; Borski District; Za-
jecarski District; Nisavski District. This way outlined project area is inhabited by
almost half of Serbia’s population. It includes also the capital city of Belgrade
with more than 1.5 million people. Secondary urban centres of this territory are:
Nis, Smederevo, Pancevo and Zrenjanin.
As regards the Serbian part of the Carpathian Mountains it stretches southward
from the Iron Gate Danube bent in the eastern part of the country. Morphological
structure of the mountain range fits relatively well the administrative boundaries
of Borski district. So the settlement pattern of this district reflects well the char-
acteristics of the Serbian Carpathian settlements.
Borski district is relatively sparsely populated – 42 inh./km2. Settlement net-
work consists of 6 urban settlements and 84 villages. The majority of people lives
in urban areas (55%). The principal city of the districts has 39 thousand inhabi-
tants. It is significantly bigger than other towns of the district due to the fact that it
has been developing since the beginning of 20th century as copper mining centre.
The remaining 5 towns are of small with population below 20 thousand. Among
them Majdanpek is another mining town in the district.
Rural settlement networks in Borski district consists of 84 villages. They are
situated along the Danube valley which is simultaneously the border between
Serbia and Romania. Similarly valleys of small rivers are also places where vil-
lages have developed using the wider, more flat parts of the valleys with rela-
tively better conditions for agriculture.
5.7 Slovakia
Slovakia is the only country included as a whole into the Carpathian development
region. Moreover mountains and hills of the Carpathian range cover the country
Carpathian Settlement Structure.
In: Socio-Economic Analysis of the Carpathian Area.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2008. 45-60. p. Discussion Papers, Special
CARPATHIAN SETTLEMENT STRUCTURE
57
except for plains in the very south and south east. The settlement network of this
country consists of 138 cities and towns and 2,753 villages. The following
characteristic of Slovakian settlement network is based on data for 8 NUTS3 ter-
ritorial units called in Slovalk kraj, including Bratislavský kraj, which encom-
passes only the capital city of Bratislava with its vicinity. Leaving aside the capi-
tal, the density of population which goes in pair with settlement density spans
from 70 inh./km2 in Banskobystrický kraj to 134 inh./km2 in Trnavský kraj. The
level of urbanization is differentiated as urbanization index varies from 47% in
Nitrianský kraj to 57% in Trencianský kraj. Certainly Bratislavský kraj is the
most densely populated (294 inh./km2) and the most urbanized (urbanization in-
dex 83%).
As far as urban settlements are concerned, there are two big cities in the coun-
try: the capital city of Bratislava with population of 425,000 and the regional
centre of eastern Slovakia Košice, with population of 235,000. All other cities in
Slovakia have less than 100,000 inhabitants. The number of cities with a popula-
tion between 20,000 and 100,000 inh. varies from 1 in Bratislavský kraj to 7 in
Trencianský kraj and in Presovsky kraj. Towns below 20,000 inh. are more nu-
merous and their number spans from 5 in Bratislavský kraj to 19 in
Banskobystrický kraj. The overall number of urban settlements (excluding
Bratislavský kraj which consists mainly of the capital) spans from 15 in
Nitrianský kraj to 24 in Banskobystrický kraj.
Rural settlements are almost equally important as cities and towns as they pro-
vide home for 44% of Slovaks. For obvious reasons it plays only a marginal role
in Bratislavský kraj where 66 villages are located around the city of Bratislava. In
other regions, the number of villages varies from 235 in Trnavský kraj to 643 in
Presovsky kraj. The density of rural settlements counted as number of villages per
100 km2 varies from 3.2 in Bratislavský kraj and 4.4 in Zilinský kraj to 7.2 Pres-
ovsky kraj. Bearing in mind that in the neighboring Kosicky kraj it is 6.3 it is
evident that the density of rural settlement is significantly higher in eastern Slo-
vakia than in other parts of the country. Slovak villages have usually compact
shape with a few single farmsteads scattered far from the main built-up area. It
results from cultural tradition as well as from the fact that the collectivization of
farming during the communist period prevented the sprawl of farming settle-
ments.
Slovakia is a typical mountainous country. Therefore relief to high extent de-
termines spatial pattern of settlements. Two major urban centers (Bratislava and
Košice) and several cities of secondary importance (e.g. Trnava, Nitra,
Michalovce) are located at the foothill of the mountains. Except for small, flat
areas in the south and south-east of the country rural and urban settlements are
concentrated along valleys of the main rivers. River valleys provided favorable
conditions for rural settlements due to their fertile soils as well as for urban set-
Carpathian Settlement Structure.
In: Socio-Economic Analysis of the Carpathian Area.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2008. 45-60. p. Discussion Papers, Special
58
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE CARPATHIAN AREA
tlements as natural transport corridors. Initially it was mainly rafting transport and
later also road and railway transport. The longest chain of settlements has devel-
oped along the Vah valley with the following cities: Liptovský Mikuláš,
Ružomberok, Žilina, Považská Bystrica, Dubnica nad Váhom, Trenčín, Nove
Mesto nad Vahom, Piest’any. Similar but shorter are chains of settlements along
other rivers e.g. Hron – with the cities of Brezno, Banská Bystrica and Zvolen;
Poprad – with Poprad, Kežmarok, Stará Ľubovňa, Plavec (downstream it contin-
ues in Poland with Muszyna, Piwniczna and Stary Sącz). Important urban centers
have often developed in merging points of two or more river valleys e.g. city of
Žilina has developed the point where two tributaries (Kysuca, Rajcanka) join Vah
River. Due to their suitability for settlement development bowl shaped valleys are
usually densely built-up and the density of population reaches there extremely
high values – sometimes about 600 people per sq. km.
By contrast mountains are sparsely populated and there are no permanent set-
tlements in the highest parts of the mountains. Human activity on this hight has
been limited to seasonal grazing and to the construction of tourism facilities.
5.8 Ukraine
Ukrainian Carpathians that are the part of Eastern Carpathians occupy more than
14% of the area of all Carpathian Mountains. They are situated in the territory of
4 regions (oblasts): Zakarpattia, Lviv, Ivano-Frankivsk and Chernivtsi Oblast.
The settlement structure in the Ukrainian part of the Carpathian development
region is very differentiated. Firstly, it is necessary to say that there are not only
districts, cities, towns and villages as the main types of settlements, but there are
also other urban settlements like e.g. town type villages. For the purpose of this
analysis, inhabitants living in each urban type settlement were included to the
final amount of urban population.
The main Ukrainian city in the CDR is Lviv – the biggest city of Western
Ukraine, very important historic and cultural centre of Eastern Europe. There are
more than 730 thousand inh. living in Lviv. Furthermore there are 3 cities with a
population above 100 thousand inh. in the Ukrainian part of the CDR (Cernivci,
Ivano-Frankivsk and Uzhorod). Cernivci is the most populated city among them
(242.25 thousand inh.) and the only one in Chernivitsi Oblast with more than 20
thousand inh. Ivano-Frankivsk (situated in Ivano-Frankivsk Oblast) is also a big
city with more than 200 thousand inh. It is developed especially in light industry.
In Zakarpattia Oblast there is also one city with more than 100 thousand inhabi-
tants – Uzhorod. Very important international railway connecting Lviv with Bu-
dapest runs through the city (so called The First Hungar-Galician Iron Railway).
Carpathian Settlement Structure.
In: Socio-Economic Analysis of the Carpathian Area.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2008. 45-60. p. Discussion Papers, Special
CARPATHIAN SETTLEMENT STRUCTURE
59
Lviv Oblast – situated in Western Ukraine – is not only the region with the
highest amount (12) of towns belonging to the third populates range (20–99 thou-
sand inh.), but it has also the highest amount of small towns (below 20 thousand
inh.) – 64. Moreover Lviv Oblast is the region with the highest population (more
than 2.5 million inh.) and population density (that is 117.6 inh./ km2) in the CDR.
The amount of inhabitants is the lowest in Chernivtsi Oblast (905,4 thousand of
inh.) but the lowest population density can be observed in Zakarpattia Oblast
(97.2 inh./km2).
Furthermore, if we are talking about population’s division into urban and rural
cathegories, the highest urbanization index is in Lviv Oblast (60.6%). The rest of
Oblasts situated in the CDR have the index lower than 50%.
The highest number of villages is in Lviv Oblast (1,850 villages). If we add it
to the amount of towns and cities we will achieve 1,927 settlements that will give
us more than 8 settlements per 100 km2. This is the highest index of settlement
density in the CDR’s oblasts. The lowest settlement density is in Zakarpattia
Oblast that is the most mountainous region in the Ukrainian part of the CDR.
Generally, the Ukrainian part of the CDR is occupied by more than 6 million
inhabitants. Lviv Oblast is the most populated region with the densiest settlement
structure. Zakarpattia, as the main mountainous oblast, has the lowest index of
population and settlement density. Beside high mountain ranges, towns and vil-
lages are rather evenly located. Concerning the CDR about 46% of the Ukrainians
live in urban areas. Approximately 12% of the CDR’s Ukrainian inhabitants live
in Lviv.
5.9 Conclusions
Having researched the characteristics of settlements in each country in Carpathian
development region, it is a time to present, in the following chapter, our findings
concerning the whole project area.
The very first of them and the most evident one seems to be the difference
between settlements of Carpathian Mountains and settlements located either at the
foothills of mountains or completely outside Carpathian mountain range on plains
or in other mountain groups (Alps, Balkans). Namely all metropolises and the
vast majority of big cities (100,000–500,000 inhabitants) included into Carpathian
development region belong to the latter category. E.g. Budapest, Bratislava,
Krakow at the foothills and Belgrade, Lviv, Bucharest and Vienna located com-
pletely outside Carpathians. So settlement network of Carpathian Mountains con-
sists predominantly of medium sized cities towns and villages.
The next feature of the settlements to point out is a relatively low level of ur-
banisation in the whole Carpathian range. Values of the urbanisation index quoted
Carpathian Settlement Structure.
In: Socio-Economic Analysis of the Carpathian Area.
Pécs: Centre for Regional Studies, 2008. 45-60. p. Discussion Papers, Special
60
SOCIO-ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE CARPATHIAN AREA
in the table below usually fluctuate around 50% with significant parts of Romania
and Ukraine as well as eastern part of Polish Carpathians where it is below 50%.
However, if we exclude the above mentioned urban centres located outside Car-
pathians it would be much lower and probably the Czech Carpathians would also
turn out predominantly rural. Mining regions are an exemption from this rule and
they are always highly urbanised regardless of their location in the mountains e.g.
Bor copper mining region in Serbia or outside the mountain range e.g. Ostrava
and Upper Silesia coal mining region in Czech Republic and in Poland.
As regards the number of urban settlements below 100,000 inhabitants there is
a visible difference between the Western Carpathians on one hand and the Eastern
and Southern Carpathians on the other. The number of cities and towns of this
size is significantly higher in Czech Republic, Poland, Slovakia and Hungary than
in Romania. The highest numbers in Ukraine result mainly from the fact that
Ukrainian NUTS3 units (oblast) are much larger so more settlements fall within
their borders.
The influence of natural environmental features namely the network of navi-
gable rivers and the relief on the spatial structure of human settlements in the
project area. Danube river links four capital cities in the project area: Vienna,
Bratislava, Budapest and Belgrade. Other rivers which constituted axis for settle-
ment development are Vah, Morava (in Czech Republic), Mureş. The mountain-
ous relief of Carpathians cause the concentration of human settlements (urban as
well as rural) in valleys of rivers and streams where land is more suitable for con-
struction and for agriculture. Together with an irregular rainfall pattern it leads to
the fact that floods endanger many settlements across the project area.
Traditional trade routes which had greatly contributed for centuries to the
settlement development and to the development of economic links between cities
(which often took form of market chains) are now less noticeable in the current
spatial structure of settlements. Indeed they are visible only where modern trans-
port corridors (railways and roads) developed along ancient routes. One of the
best examples of this sort of settlement concentration is an almost continuous belt
of rural and urban settlements between Krakow and Lviv along foothills of the
Carpathians.
As rural settlements in many areas of the Carpathians (especially in Romania)
provide home for more than the half of the population they are equally important
as urban ones. They differ very much in terms of spatial patterns pending on cul-
tural traditions and effects of collectivisation processes as well as in terms of size,
economic prosperity and quality of life. Therefore special attention should be paid
to multifunctional development of rural settlements while formulating final con-
clusions, recommendations and policy guidelines in the end of the project.