Case Study Working Paper GYŐR

This project has been funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 730243

Case Study Working Paper GYŐR

Attila Katona (CEU)

Milestone 4.2

November, 2017

1

Case Study Working Paper GYŐR

2

Table of Contents Section 1 – Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 4

1.1 Profile of the city, urban sustainability challenges and NBS prominence Profile of the city and NBS

prominence ..................................................................................................................................................... 4

1.2 NBS interventions in focus ........................................................................................................................ 7

Section 2 – Methods ............................................................................................................................................ 8

Section 3 – Intervention 1 – Beekeeping in Audi Hungaria ............................................................................... 10

3.1 NBS intervention histories ....................................................................................................................... 10

3.2 Governance and structural conditions of NBS ........................................................................................ 17

3.3 Public participation in NBS ...................................................................................................................... 19

3.4 NBS impacts and implications ................................................................................................................. 20

3.5 Contradictions and contestation around NBS interventions .................................................................. 21

3.6 Innovation versus traditional approaches within and around NBS interventions .................................. 23

Section 4 – Intervention 2 – Moson-Danube Complex Project ......................................................................... 25







Section 5 – Intervention 3 – School gardens of Győr ........................................................................................ 36







Section 6 - Comparative Discussion .................................................................................................................. 49

Section 7 - Conclusions ...................................................................................................................................... 52

3

References ......................................................................................................................................................... 54

Appendix ............................................................................................................................................................ 56

Annex 1. List of identified nature-based solutions in Győr ........................................................................... 56

Annex 2. Research themes and research questions ...................................................................................... 59

Annex 3. Semi-structured interview key informants .................................................................................... 60

4

Section 1 – Introduction

1.1 Profile of the city, urban sustainability challenges and NBS prominence Profile of the city and

NBS prominence

Győr lies halfway between Vienna and Budapest, in the north-western corner of the Carpathian

Basin, on one of the most important traffic and logistics corridors of Central Europe. Since ancient

times, there has been vibrant city life here: mix of cultures, thriving agriculture, industry with great

traditions, the meeting point of multiple rivers and rich commerce has been making the settlement

called Arrabona in the Roman times attractive.

Today, Győr has ca. 129.500 residents, which makes is the 6th largest Hungarian city, with a

metropolitan area of ca. 357.000 people (KSH 2016). The city is also an administrative centre of the

Western Transdanubia Region, as well as Győr-Moson-Sopron County, which has the highest and

fastest growing GDP per capita area in Hungary outside of Budapest. Győr itself is an economic

powerhouse – commerce and industry has always been the key pillars of development, and the Győr

International Industrial Park hosts companies such as Audi Hungaria, the world’s largest car engine

factory, and Hungary’s largest factory altogether, directly employing over 11,000 people. Győr’s

downtown is a popular tourist attraction due to its characteristics, rich history, religious importance,

as well as buzzing intellectual and cultural life. The ancient core of the city is at the confluence of

three rivers: the Moson-Danube, Rába, and Rábca and the Danube is only a few kilometres away

which creates very unique settings and facilitates connection between the rivers and the urban fabric,

thus Győr is often called “the city of rivers”. Püspökerdő (Bishop’s forest), also known as the ‘green

lung of Győr” is a 250 hectare peri-urban forest that stretches into the city core, encompassed by the

Moson-Danube and its backwater with unique flora and fauna. Győr sits on the edge of an area that

used to be a vast wetland called Hanság to the West and the Szigetköz island plain to the Northwest

with rich wildlife in its labyrinth of side-branches of the Danube. The total green space within the

municipality of Győr (including parks, peri-urban areas, agricultural land, and other green areas)

amounts to 63 m2 per inhabitant, which is the 4th highest among the 19 Hungarian County capitals

(KSH 2006). However, the inner green space of Győr (i.e., excluding peri-urban forests and agricultural

land) amounts to much less, with no statistical data available.

5

There are several examples of NBS in Győr, many of which is the product of the past that still survives

(or even thrives) under modern urban development agendas, while others have been recently

introduced, and are on the rise, such as a green roofs. The most notable ten urban nature-based

solutions identified by local stakeholders are outlined in Annex 1.

The governance of the city is organized through a central office, the City Hall, and the area of the

municipality is administratively divided into 18 distinct parts with considerable socio-economic

differences between them, with the central areas having 20 to 50% more income per capita, and very

different population dynamics than some peripheries (GEOX 2015).

As reported by experts and interviewees, there is no comprehensive, city-level policy, master plan,

guideline, strategy or regulation to coordinate green and blue infrastructure development and

management in Győr. There is a new policy package in development, likely to be finalized by 2018,

called ‘Landscape Regulation’ that will provide guidance and incentives for green space development.

Generally, until now, planners had to comply with the National Urban Planning and Architecture

Requirements (OTÉK) that regulates public space and green space planning (e.g. minimum number

of trees per parking spot, minimum percentage of green space, differentiation of green space by

assigning ratings, stratification requirements), which the planners must follow to receive necessary

permits, usually by making sure that the minimal requirements are met. Recently, several key

elements of OTÉK that encouraged quality green space development were abolished in 2016. Over

recent years, several publicly funded, expert institutions that supported credible, science-based

decision making in Hungary were disbanded (e.g. VITUKI, Magyar Állami Földtani Intézet) and there

is a growing mistrust between expert environmental NGOs and public bodies (who often marginalize

and discredit external voices) at the national level. Although this level of mistrust is not as sharp in

smaller towns as in the capital, these trends do effect urban decision making dynamics and politics

on the ground.

The majority of large projects in the Győr are funded by the European Union or by the government,

in which cases cost-benefit analysis and environmental impact assessment is mandatory part of the

planning process. Compliance with regulations seems to be one of the main drivers behind decisions

on green and blue infrastructure. As concluded by a local expert: “The city mostly follows the direction

6

of funding from the EU or government – if there are funded calls and requirements for green space,

they adapt their strategy, and make sure requirements on minimal greenspace ratio and accessibility

are met, or at least some solar panels are included.” Such approach results in green and blue

infrastructure solutions being deployed rather sporadically, as another expert assessed: “…it

happens, but it happens absolutely ad-hoc, so it becomes a patchwork, rather than an integrated

development”.

Győr’s public spaces and green spaces are maintained by a municipal utility company ‘Győr-Szol’.

Győr-Szol, although declined to participate in the interview research or any of the NATURVATION

events, was described as “not proactive, but cooperative” by several actors, including interviewed

businesses, schools, NGOs and urban development experts. Local landscape planners and architects

who work on nature-based solutions reported that cooperation and communication with the city also

works well, in a “structured, but flexible way”, which often includes elements of negotiation over

alternative scenarios and budgets.

There are several contemporary challenges in Győr that are linked to nature-based solutions,

including social regeneration of several urban areas and their public spaces (e.g. Újváros), fostering

community development in and around the prefabricated residential complexes (e.g. Adyváros,

Marcalváros), managing water levels and floods in the river network, the preservation of the Bishop’s

Forest, utilizing abandoned industrial and brownfield areas (e.g. Gyárváros), or rehabilitation of lakes

and water reservoirs (e.g. Adyváros). The dominance of motorized traffic, and its implications (use of

public space, congestion, air pollution, health issues) emerged as a cross-cutting theme in the city.

High economic growth, spatial development, establishment of bedroom communities in Győr’s

outskirts, and general infrastructure development at a cost of natural or agricultural areas

contributes to these challenges.

7

1.2 NBS interventions in focus

In Győr, a group of ten NBS interventions were identified through brainstorming in a stakeholder

workshop with 20 participants (URIP meeting 1- 20.03.2017). A shortlist of three interventions were

selected through online voting and workshop discussion with 17 participants (URIP meeting 2 -

28.06.2017). While keeping the preferences and suggestions of URIP members in mind, our priority

was to select interventions with different governance mechanisms, financial models, scales that

tackle different challenges in different NBS domains. The research team also had to take into account

the willingness of local partners to engage. For example, the difficulty of engaging Győr-Szol, the

municipal utility company responsible for public space and green space maintenance, forced the

research team to abandon selecting an NBS that would significantly rely on their contributions and

cooperation, such as green space management and community gardening in residential areas. The

three NBS selected for analysis are ’Beekeeping at Audi Hungaria’ (NBS 1), ’Moson-Danube Complex

Project’ (NBS 2), and ’School Gardens of Győr’ (NBS 3).

NBS 1 is an intervention funded and orchestrated by Audi Hungaria’s plant in Győr, which is the

world’s largest car engine factory and Hungary’s largest factory, that has taken a leading role in the

implementation of several nature-based solutions, such as rain water reservoirs, vertical gardens,

green roofs, and a comprehensive flora and fauna protection plan covering its 5.2 km2 premises, 76%

of which is green space. The selected project is a privately funded, medium-scale intervention (100-

150.000 EUR) that contains a unique package of ecosystem management with native species,

bioindicator monitoring, immission research, awareness raising, and education for sustainability

through beekeeping. The intervention also sheds light on the decision making processes of an

industrial actor, and the role of businesses in leading NBS implementation.

As Győr is often nicknamed the “City of rivers”, NBS 2 was selected to focus on recent riverside

developments and blue infrastructure interventions in the densely populated urban core. The

Moson-Danube Complex Project is a large scale (ca. 20.4 million EUR), publicly funded, expert-driven,

top-down intervention that was a necessity due to persistently low water levels and damaging floods

on the Moson-Danube river. The main achievements of the project include river regeneration on 125

km, the reconstruction of urban riversides, ecosystem restoration of backwaters, freshwater habitats

and several islands, as well as decanalization, flood gate construction and strengthening the river

8

network of Győr. The case study only covers some contested developments in detail, such as urban

riverside reconstruction and riverside square redevelopment of the recent years.

NBS 3, ’School Gardens of Győr’ covers a set of interconnected grassroots initiatives that are

implemented by teaching and learning communities. Although earlier school gardens fell victim to

development and neglect in the 20th century, the modern school garden movement is rapidly

growing since 2013 due to its recognized value in current pedagogical movements, and potential role

in education for sustainability. School gardens are low-cost interventions (max. a few hundred EUR

total cost), have strong community-based, bottom-up, self-governance dynamics, and heavily rely on

volunteer work and community donations. The dynamics of three school gardens were studied in

Győr, one of which also plays a prominent role in the coordination of the school garden movement

at the national level.

Section 2 – Methods

Naturvation Work Package 4 involves a transdisciplinary comparative analysis of urban dynamics and

politics of NBS. It focuses on the conditions within which diverse urban nature-based innovations are

emerging, as well as on their trajectories, patterns of governance, social and economic implications,

exploring the factors, processes and mechanisms that contribute to their success and systemic

integration. Annex 2 contains the research themes and research questions used for this working

paper. The term ‘case-study’ or ‘case’ refers to a specific city where the research is conducted, while

the term ‘intervention’ refers to a particular NBS implemented in the city. In Győr, a group of ten NBS

interventions were identified through brainstorming in a stakeholder workshop with 20 participants

(URIP meeting 1- 20.03.2017). A shortlist of three interventions were selected through online voting

and workshop discussion (URIP meeting #2 - 28.06.2017). While keeping the preferences and

suggestions of URIP members in mind, our priority was to select interventions with different

governance mechanisms, financial models, scales that tackle different challenges in different NBS

domains. The extent to which the research questions were addresses varied according to the specific

nature of the studied NBS intervention.

9

The research took place over a period of 4 months (June-September 2017), including one month of

system analysis, and two months of field research, followed by data analysis and reporting. Data

was generated through the following, mixed methods approach:

Participatory workshops for brainstorming and scoping (URIP 1), selection of focus areas

(URIP 2) and discussion of some findings (URIP 3).

Review of relevant policy and project documents, media, and grey literature to provide

initial inputs and overview of timeline and processes

Site visits with 2-3 research participants to each NBS intervention (riversides, Audi Hungaria,

Audi Hungaria School, 3 school gardens) for in-situ analysis and knowledge generation

through encountering the interventions in its own context.

Participation in local events and site visits, thus capitalizing on unforeseen opportunities as

the context unfolded, while taking field notes

31 semi-structured key informant interviews with an average length of 1 hour as a primary

source of data to access specialist expertise from key actors and organizations involved in

NBS related processes. Annex 3 contains the list of interviewees. Selection of interviewees

was based on initial actor analysis and recommendations of URIP participants. The following

types of actors were covered:

● MUN: Municipal/city/metropolitan authorities;

● NGO: Non-governmental organizations, activist groups, community groups;

● URB: Urban (re)development, regeneration and planning agencies;

● UTI: Utilities (e.g. water, waste, public space maintenance);

● ENG: Engineering, urban development, design, architecture companies;

● BUS: Large corporations, SMEs, start-ups, local businesses;

● ACA: Academia, knowledge institutions and research groups; and

● PUB: Governmental institutions, non-municipal public services (e.g. schools)

17 audio recordings of key interviews were transcribed. Systematic coding of transcripts, URIP

meeting minutes and acquired documents supported the data analysis and reporting process, using

NVIVO software. Statements were coded according to the research themes and research questions

to create short summaries and extract key quotes into the Working Paper Template.

10

Section 3 – Intervention 1 – Beekeeping in Audi Hungaria

3.1 NBS intervention histories

Since 1993, Audi Hungaria has provided important impetus for the development of Győr. The factory

develops and manufactures engines for AUDI AG, and for other companies of the Volkswagen Group,

which makes it the world’s largest car engine factory, and Hungary’s largest factory altogether,

directly employing over 11.000 people, while its production accounts for 9% of the country’s export.

In 2013, the company inaugurated a new car manufacturing facility which covers the entire

production process. Further investments are in the pipeline to double this production capacity from

2019. Audi Hungaria is well-embedded in the city’s cultural and sport life as sponsors, supporting the

Győr Ballet Ensemble, the Győr Philharmonic Orchestra, the Jazz Terrace, the police forces, an

interactive scientific exhibition centre, the women’s handball team, various sport parks in the city,

and the Audi Aréna Győr, among others. The company is also active in intermediate and academic

education, cooperating with several colleges and faculties, and hosting 250 apprentices in the context

of the system of dual vocational training. They support the Audi Hungaria School, which is one of the

three German-accredited schools in Hungary. Moreover, in the area of university cooperation, Audi

Hungaria and the Széchenyi István University of Győr founded the Audi Hungaria Faculty for

Automotive Technology that, among others, hosts the environmental engineering department.

Audi Hungaria has also been committed towards environment since the beginning of their operation

in Győr – keeping environmental loads of manufacturing at the lowest possible level, and the careful

treatment of natural resources are part of the corporate philosophy (Audi Hungaria 2015), with clear

environmental protection guidelines and targets (Audi Hungaria 2017). Audi Hungaria built up and

had certified its environmental management system according to the Council Regulation of the

European Union (1836/93/EEC, 1221/2009) - it was the first company in Hungary to register its EMAS

system, followed by acquiring the international ISO 14001 standard. The environmental objectives

are continuously monitored and reviewed through integrated audits, which is communicated in the

annual Environmental Statement. Audi AG is open to invest in ’lighthouse’ projects that are

innovative, proactive, and generate societal or environmental added value. This principle is

embedded in company policy, thus each Audi factory complex, including Audi Hungaria, has to adopt

this approach and develop locally impactful, ’low-hanging fruit’ initiatives.

11

In the field of natural and environmental protection, Audi Hungaria implemented or is in the process

of implementing a series of interventions, including:

Building long-term co-operation with eco-schools in the country

Cooperation with the Audi Hungaria School to support environmental awareness raising

activities of children

Funding large-scale research projects, such as participation in the carbon dioxide-absorbing

oak forest project, funded by Audi Hungaria for 100 years

The wide-scale and pioneer use of geothermal heat in the factory

Planning and implementation of a wild flowery meadow of indigenous plants (such as

Pannonian Sandy Grasslands) and the related apiculture project at the factory side

Creating and implementing a comprehensive concept for increasing biodiversity within the

company’s premises

Regulating the use of chemicals (pesticides, fertilizer)

Implementing several green roofs and green walls

Rainwater storage lakes with high biodiversity, including several types of fish

Implementing a comprehensive bird program within company premises: assessing and

ringing nesting birds, nest monitoring, assessing swallow nests

Launch of a bio-indication study and bee conservation program

The factory in Győr has 5.167.366 m2 area, out of which 76% is green space (Environmental

Statement 2015), bordering brownfield areas and Natura 2000 territories. Audi has been addressing

the subject area of biodiversity since 2008 among its top priorities. The University of West Hungary

conducted a complex system analysis of Audi Hungaria’s soil, flora, fauna, species diversity and

climate implications, then proposed a range of alternative pathways on improving the biodiversity of

natural areas in the proximity of the engine factory. Out of these alternatives, the ’Eden’ concept was

selected, which largely focuses on indigenous species and stratification of the ecosystem to restore

and increase biodiversity.

Based on this science-based assessment, in the framework of the Eden 1 project, Audi Hungaria

planted 162 trees and 2800 shrubs and bushes in 2010. Starting in 2012, in the framework of the

Eden 2 project, this approach with the focus on supporting indigenous species and increasing

stratification was extended to the newly acquired factory areas as well: in 2013 and 2014, over 1200

12

trees and 1200 shrubs and bushes were planted. In 2014, a digital tree register was created for the

entire factory area. This was supplemented by a complex green space management plan, developed

by external experts (Tér-Team Kft, Border Associates), that covers the entire factory area. Since 2012,

the maintenance units have to fully comply with these ecological approaches and regulations. Fish

protection (monitoring the rain water reservoir ecosystems, including six species of fish) and bird

protection (building nesting areas, hiding places, installing glass surfaces that avoid bird collision,

involving staff in bird monitoring, matching maintenance schedules to birds’ needs) is also included

in the programme. To date, approximately two third of the original flora and fauna protection plan

was implemented. The Eden 2 project runs until 2018, and will likely get extended to 2025 (Eden 3).

The idea of beekeeping originates from AUDI AG, because the Ingolstadt factory implemented a

beekeeping program, and they intended to spread this good practice to other factories for awareness

raising and staff sensitization on this global biodiversity challenge. In 2015 spring, Audi Hungaria was

in the midst of implementing its flora and fauna protection plan, including the renewal of wild flowery

meadows and re-establishment of indigenous Pannonian Sandy Grasslands areas, thus the

beekeeping ideas was in line with ongoing developments, and the idea was quickly taken up by the

management. An indigenous Pannonian Sandy Grasslands area was located for beekeeping in July

2015, and 6 bee colonies with 270.000 bees were installed in 2015 September.

Audi Hungaria itself is a large polluter with 509 emission points, and very strict emission monitoring

system. However, they had no protocol transmission and immission monitoring, thus the company

decided to launch a 5-year project with the University of Sopron to utilize bees as bioindicators.

Researchers of the University of Sopron’s Forestry Faculty take samples 7 times a year, each month

from March to September since 2016 March. Samples from the honey, propolis, beeswax and

collected pollens shed light on how pollutants appear in the material cycles of these extremely

sensitive species that collect pollen in a 3km radius. This data complements emission monitoring,

transmission calculations, and can provide information on what kind of pollutants appear in the

environment directly near the factory complex. Control areas where samples are taken with similar

methods are located in a rural area and the Sopron Arboretum.

13

In order to reach out and sensitize staff, Audi Hungaria communicated important milestones and

news of all natural conservation activities, including the beekeeping project in the Audi Hungaria Info

newspaper. As the Environmental Management Unit considers awareness raising and sensitization

to be key aspects of the project, the beekeepers and research experts introduced their work to the

interested staff during open and family days and organized several interactive honey harvest

workshops. Often entire work units register for a site visit at the beehives. Building on the success of

these workshops and trainings, the project team launched a pilot project in cooperation with the

Audi Hungaria School in 2016. The factory welcomed the school’s 6th graders (3 classes) for a full

day, interactive programme with beehive opening, honey harvesting, tasting of 8-10 types of honey

and other honey products, as well as lectures, games and quizzes on topics such as healthy living,

health management, benefits of honey products, beekeeping health and safety requirements,

practical tips, etc. In 2017, this program was repeated and extended to the 4h graders as well (extra

3 classes), who received a shorter, half-day program with similar content. Visitors and school groups

are scheduled based on the availability of the Audi beekeeper and supporting crew. 1 colony is used

for sensitization and training activities, and 5 is left undisturbed for the purposes of the bioindicator

research.

The bee colonies produce 200-240 kilogram of honey each year, which is branded as Audi Hungaria

Premium Honey, and gifted to visitors, and purchasable in the gift shop in 250 g and 65 g packages.

The income is used for nature conservation programmes.

Although the project only started in 2015, there were several additions to the original idea to

actualize the intervention, and build on the core concept. The key steps and critical junctures in the

process were:

inspiration from Audi AG to develop beekeeping activities at Audi Hungaria,

acquiring approval and funding,

bringing together all relevant internal stakeholders to alleviate barriers,

hiring an Audi beekeeper,

connecting the idea with the bioindicator research of the University of Sopron

planning and implementation,

organizing internal trainings and visits,

involving the Audi School’s 6th and 4th grade classes,

14

external communication and branding the Audi Honey.

Figure 1. Natural habitats in Audi Hungaria factory premises (Source: www.audi.hu)

Figure 2. Pannonia sandy grasslands at Audi Hungaria (Source: Csanaki 2017)

http://www.audi.hu/

15

Figure 3. Biodiversity at Audi Hungaria (Source: Csanaki 2017)

Figure 4. Area around the beekeeper’s hut and the beehives at Audi Hungaria (Source: Csanaki 2017)

16

Figure 5. Sensitization of staff and Audi Hungaria School children (Source: Csanaki 2017)

Figure 6. Coverage of the beekeeper’s life in the Audi Hungaria newspaper (Source: Csanaki 2017)

17

Figure 7. Audi Hungaria Premium Honey (Source: http://www.automotor.hu)

3.2 Governance and structural conditions of NBS

Audi AG is open to invest in ’lighthouse’ projects that are innovative, proactive, and generate societal

or environmental added value. This principle is embedded in company policy, thus each Audi factory

complex, including Audi Hungaria, has to adopt this approach and develop locally impactful, ’low-

hanging fruit’ initiatives. Audi Hungaria’s Environmental Management Unit operates the

environmental management system of the factory complex, coordinates environmental projects, as

well as reviews and evaluates their progress (what was successful, and what wasn’t), in cooperation

with all relevant units (production, maintenance, etc.) and external experts, then reports to the Audi

AG governing board during a quarterly meeting in Ingolstadt, called ’Smart Factory Forum’. This

forum is the governance level where decisions are made regarding next steps (stopping, extending

or expanding a project, launching new projects). Approved projects are then put on the company’s

investment list and receive a schedule for implementation. For example, the extension of Eden 2

project to the 2018-2025 period (Eden 3) would need to go through this formal review and approval

procedure. The beekeeping project received the approval without long deliberation, because the idea

to focus on bees originated from the Ingolstadt factory, and the board intended to spread this good

practice to other factories. The Environmental Management Unit in Győr came up with a proposal,

which was well-embedded in the strategies of both Audi AG and Audi Hungaria, and were approved

http://www.automotor.hu/

18

by the Audi Hungaria CEO. Projects above the 500.000 EUR limit require the financial support of the

Smart Factory Forum, but smaller scale projects can be implemented from local budget, if the local

management is behind the idea. Several elements of the beekeeping project were implemented from

this local budget. The necessary infrastructural investments (e.g. solar powered beekeeper’s shack,

beehives, event tent, and beekeeping equipment) were budgeted under the Facility Management

Unit. The bioindicator research is estimated to cost approximately 12 million HUF (ca. 40.000 EUR)

for 5 years, financed by the Environmental Management Unit’s own budget. After the necessary

approvals, planning and implementation of the beekeeping project was entirely the domain and

responsibility of the Audi Hungaria Environmental Management Unit. The total budget of the project

was not disclosed by Audi Hungaria.

Maintenance and management of the beekeeper’s shack, the beehives, and nearby areas is

subcontracted to external companies. Although the Audi beekeeper is an employee of Audi, there is

a contract with him as well, because he is responsible for the bees, the hives, the honey harvest, to

support the bioindicator research with samples, and to organize regular demonstration activities (e.g.

hive opening and harvesting with visitors or school children). The 6 colonies produced over 240

kilograms of honey already in 2017, which is branded as ‘Audi Hungaria Premium Honey’, and serves

as gift to visitors, and can now also be purchased in the gift shop (250 g costs 1000 HUF (3.50 EUR)

for visitors and 600 HUF (2 EUR) for staff and guests), which income is recycled into nature

conservation programmes.

University of Sopron provides external infrastructure (analytical labs), where the honey, pollen,

beeswax and other samples are analysed with chromatography and evaluated.

Generally, Audi Hungaria’s Environmental Management Unit monitors and reviews the progress and

key performance indicators of its projects. Several elements of the flora and fauna protection plan

are, for example, currently under review. The beekeeping project and bioindicator research project

runs until 2020, when it will undergo internal auditing. There are annual reports on the progress of

the project, and on the outputs of the bioindicator research. There is one colleague in the

Environmental Management Unit working on nature conservation issues, while the rest of the Unit

(ca. 10 members) specialize on other areas, such as waste, water and energy in the factory.

Audi Hungaria communicated important milestones and news of the natural conservation activities,

and updates regarding the beekeeping project in the Audi Hungaria Info newspaper in order to reach

19

out to staff. As the Environmental Management Unit considers awareness raising and sensitization

to be key aspects of the project, the beekeepers and research experts introduced their work to the

interested staff during open and family days and organized several interactive honey harvest

workshops. Often entire work units register for a site visit at the beehives. During official factory site

visits, the visitors are also informed on the natural conservation and beekeeping efforts, and briefly

stop at the bee colonies. Audi Hungaria Honey can also be purchased in the gift shop since 2016, and

awareness raising flyers on the project’s background are being distributed. Nevertheless, several

external commentators did not find Audi Hungaria’s communication on nature conservation issues

adequate to the outside world, as such information is not widely available, and does not appear in

local media outlets either. These claims are supported by the fact that beyond those who were

involved in the beekeeping initiative or green space management (Audi Hungaria Environmental

Management Unit staff, Audi beekeeper, Audi Hungaria School teachers, landscape architects,

University of Sopron’s bioindicator researcher), none of the other 25 interviewees has heard of this

initiative before.

3.3 Public participation in NBS

After the approvals, planning and implementation of the beekeeping project was entirely the domain

and responsibility of the Audi Hungaria Environmental Management Unit. The beekeeping project

required the cooperation of several factory units, such as facility management, maintenance,

investments and finance, PR, HR, health and safety, as well as the external companies that maintain

the green space. In order to build up this cooperation, and find solutions to emerging issues that are

not yet covered in the company protocol, the Environmental Management Unit facilitated meetings

and discussions. The team insisted that, the Audi beekeeper should be an Audi Hungaria employee,

and managed to find a colleague at the maintenance unit who happened to be an agricultural

entrepreneur who maintains 15 bee colonies since 2009.

The university, responsible for the bioindicator research, was also involved in the early stage of

planning - they developed the research plan, and the criteria for selecting the location of beehives,

which was then narrowed down to the final location after several site visits. As reported, planning

was a very cooperative process and Audi was open to suggestions from the beekeeper and the

researchers from the University of Sopron during the visioning, planning, implementation and

maintenance phases.

20

The regular environmental education trainings that are mandatory for every staff provide a good

framework for introducing the natural protection and beekeeping efforts. Several unit supervisors

requested that there should be trainings with a specific focus on bees, beekeeping, and health and

safety aspects, which was catered for.

Parallel to implementing the beekeeping project, the factory started a cooperation on education for

sustainability at the Audi Hungaria School, and organized a full-day educational field trip to an oak

forest, which was connected to one of Audi Hungaria’s large research projects on carbon dioxide

absorption. Beekeeping was already part of the curriculum at the Audi Hungaria School, because one

of the teachers, a forestry and beekeeping expert, already introduced tools and equipment to

children in class to 3th and 4th graders, because it was considered to be an engaging topic for

students. When he learned about the establishment of bee colonies in the factory, he seized the

opportunity and helped co-organizing a pilot visit with the children to Audi Hungaria’s beehives, then

co-facilitated the activities on site, capitalizing on his own beekeeping experience.

All interviewed stakeholders consider Audi Hungaria beekeeping to be a very successful project, and

external landscape architects, who were involved in other natural habitat, nature conservation and

green roof projects of Audi also reported on very good cooperation with the company.

3.4 NBS impacts and implications

The Audi Hungaria Environmental Management Unit insisted that the beekeeping project should take

place within the city and the premises of Audi Hungaria, and not in an external natural area, claiming

that ”We are one of the most significant companies in Hungary, and the world’s largest engine

factory, we should do something of significance […] and show that industrial production can go hand-

in-hand with a biologically diverse atmosphere and protected flora and fauna”.

Audi’s nature-based interventions, such as ecological approach to green space management, green

walls, green roofs, lake management, and beekeeping have clear biophysical impacts, such as

creating new habitats, sequestering carbon dioxide, improving living conditions for native fauna, thus

increasing biodiversity. For example, in a 12.000 m2 patch of Pannon Sandy Grasslands around the

21

bee colonies, there are 143 herbaceous plants, out of which 43 is unique and indigenous. The

involved stakeholders considered the sensitization aspect to be more impactful than these

biophysical impacts, or agricultural yield. In their view, these initiatives demonstrate that small steps

can be taken to preserve biodiversity, and that anyone can be involved. In the case of the beekeeping

initiative, this aspect became especially dominant through the organization of sensitization events,

the regular involvement of staff, and of 10-12 year old children from the Audi Hungaria School. It has

been observed that through these activities, children can really experience what they have learnt in

the classroom, and apply their prior knowledge in practice through honey harvesting, honey tasting,

quizzes and other interactive programs in a dynamic environment (resulting in similar effects as

school gardens, discussed as the 3rd NBS in Győr).

3.5 Contradictions and contestation around NBS interventions

As the project unfolded, there were several infrastructural and compliance challenges, as well as new

tasks and responsibilities that had to be integrated into existing workflow and daily routines. For

example, there are several infrastructural and compliance requirements for beekeeping by the

National Food Safety Agency (NÉBIH) (e.g. build solar power to produce warm water and electricity

in the beekeeper’s wooden shack, acquire necessary permits for branding and selling food).

The way tasks and maintenance responsibilities are divided between different units and

subcontracted companies of Audi Hungaria also evolved during the process, and became more

convenient, as well as time- and cost-efficient for all parties involved. Audi considers the project a

learning experience, and tried to solve arising needs, tackle challenges and improve the ideas on the

go. “We didn’t see conflicts – we saw tasks that have to be solved”.

There were safety concerns about keeping bees near a busy work environment, because bees should

not disturb employees and work processes. This was overcome with careful communication and

spatial planning, and the final location was chosen with this important factor in mind.

Taking responsibility for the health and safety of dozens of 10-12 year old children during beekeeping

activities and other programs in a factory area was a primary concern. All activities were in

compliance with health and safety requirements, every parent signed the necessary declarations,

and all children received beekeeping suits and instructions on the protocol.

22

Although the beekeeping initiative is well-embedded in the strategies of both Audi AG and Audi

Hungaria, and the management fully supported this development, there was some lingering initial

skepticism about the beekeeping project, as some colleagues were wondering what do bees have to

do with factory operations, and why is it beneficial for them. Through transparent and consistent

communication of goals and achievements (through articles, 20 to 30 minute group trainings, visits,

educational videos, etc.), the majority of these doubts were alleviated. Nevertheless, reaching out to

the average staff and factory worker with environmental awareness initiatives, and communicating

direct and indirect benefits is still a challenge for the team.

According to the future masterplan of Audi Hungaria, there will be a contestation for space between

the planned expansions of the factory, and the preservation of natural habitats within the company

premises. Despite the nature conservation efforts, and that 76% of the area is green space, Audi

Hungaria is primarily a factory complex, and thus expanding production capacity (which is the highest

priority corporate decision) might force the beekeeping area to relocate, likely after the 5-year

research project is over in 2020.

External commentators reported on the historical conflict of Audi acquiring the factory premises

during the past extensions. The area, which currently hosts the car manufacturing capacity, used the

be an abandoned army shooting range, remediated using European Union funding, then classified as

Natura 2000 area right before Audi acquired the rights to purchase it. Interviewees were divided on

this issue, some claiming that Audi Hungaria should not be glorified for green space management

efforts “…considering their daily operations as a car factory, and that they destroyed natural land

with the new buildings”, adding that “it is of course a positive initiative, which of course everyone

supports, but it certainly doesn’t fall from the definition of greenwashing, all things considered”.

Other commentators and conservation experts claim that the current management of the area, from

the perspective of biodiversity and nature, is better than it was before Audi took over it, and that “…

development cannot be stopped. There was factory development, with its impacts and implications

almost a decade ago. It brings prosperity to the city. Then there was this initiative to improve the

situation. We have to see the value in it.”

23

3.6 Innovation versus traditional approaches within and around NBS interventions

While the original aspiration to do beekeeping and awareness raising originated from the

international Audi AG, the rest of the project elements – doing the beekeeping within company

premises instead of an external location, the bioindicator research, publications, immission

measurement, honey branding, the regular involvement of school children – were added by Audi

Hungaria. As emphasized by the stakeholders, the real innovation and uniqueness was this successful

mix of activities - connecting air quality issues with biodiversity, state-of-the art immission

monitoring, environmental education of children and awareness raising of staff, and production of

honey, all within the premises of the world’s largest engine manufacturer. ”As the original ideas were

implemented, new opportunities and ideas were born, new potential links appeared, and so on”

As the project unfolded, there were several infrastructural and compliance challenges (constructing

a solar-powered beekeeper’s hut, health and safety requirements, food safety requirements, etc.)

that did not fit into existing company protocols. There were also new tasks and responsibilities that

had to be integrated into existing workflow and daily routines. Thus several kinds of learning and

organizational innovation took place in the process, as the company structure, and responsible Units

evolved with the developments.

Audi is widely considered to be a pioneer in Hungary for utilizing the material cycles of bees as

bioindicators. This approach already sparked interest and started to spread to other companies. After

visiting Audi for knowledge exchange and peer-learning sessions, the German supermarket chain,

Aldi, also launched their own beekeeping bioindicator research in cooperation with the University of

Sopron across several locations in Hungary, primarily focusing on the impacts and pollutants of traffic

and logistics. Biomonitoring research with bees started at the University of Sopron, and their vision

is to attain systemic coverage in the country. To develop and improve the solution, they consider

Audi Hungaria as the perfect early adopter, because they were flexible in the process, had available

funding, and is a well-known brand for future reference. The university considers it a ‘lucky

constellation’ that they were linked up with Audi at the right time, and were able to connect the

beekeeping initiative with research. While the core concept of bioindicator bees was proven to be

successful, small, technical adjustments were required during the process, such as sample size, and

types of pollutants analysed.

24

There are now discussions of extending the opportunity to participating in the full-day beekeeping

programme at Audi Hungaria to other schools as well, and the factory is in cooperation with several

eco-schools, but this is considered to be a capacity issue.

Although the core inspiration came from the German parent company, Audi AG, the overall approach

to ecological greenspace management is considered to be very proactive and innovative in Hungary.

An external expert said that “other companies who attempted this became a laughing stock, because

the re-natured areas were soon just weedy and littered... only Audi followed through.” Another one

noted that “Entering Audi premises is like entering another city, really. Somehow even the grass seems

greener. The flowers are blooming. Indigenous plants are everywhere, and in this context even the

concrete and steel factory surfaces do not seem so bad after all. I haven’t seen any other company in

Hungary, except Lego in Nyíregyháza, to be anywhere near this level of awareness.”

25

Section 4 – Intervention 2 – Moson-Danube Complex Project


The ancient core of Győr is at the confluence of three rivers: the Moson-Danube, Rába, and Rábca.

The rivers unite in Győr, then flow into the Danube 10 kilometers downstream. In 2002, the record

floods on Danube pushed the water back to the Moson-Danube, resulting in the water flow changing

direction, extremely high water levels and damages to the infrastructure. Persistently low water

levels on the Moson-Danube, caused by the sinking of and loss of supportive effect from the Danube,

also started to cause severe problems in the last decades. Persistently low water levels make the

entire labyrinth of side-branches, anabranches and backwaters of the Szigetköz area drier, thus

damage freshwater and island ecosystems, turn traditional agricultural practices obsolete, obstruct

ship and boat traffic, and are aesthetically very unpleasing in the historical core of Győr, especially

after the fast-flowing Rába merges into the slower Moson-Danube and settles its sediment. This

persistent challenge and lingering risk of another record flood forced the municipality and the

Northern-Transdanubian Water Directorate (ÉDUVIZIG) to look for solutions.

ÉDUVIZIG experts believed that the area could be a pilot for the EU Water Framework Directive in

Hungary (ÉDUVIZIG 2010), as the country was approaching EU accession, and encouraged the

settlements to support the development of an integrated project proposal. The core idea was to

implement a water level regulator object (a flood gate system) on the estuary section of the Moson-

Danube delta, a complex river regeneration project on the entire Moson-Danube, as well as the

reconstruction of riversides in all 16 settlements, including Győr. This idea received theoretical

permission (“an unofficial green light”) from the government in 2006 with the condition that the two

main pillars (flood gate at the delta; reconstruction and regeneration of the river in the entire Moson-

Danube) are split into two smaller, consecutive projects.

Based on this theoretical permission (2006) ÉDUVIZIG applied for funding with the reconstruction

and regeneration proposal in 2008 January to the Environment and Energy Operative Program (KEOP-

7.2.2.1-2008-0002) and received funding approval in 2008 June, for a project cost of 6.306.025.943

HUF which is ca. 20.4 million EUR, out of which ca. one third was allocated for the riverside

reconstruction in Győr. Planning was done until 2010, followed by the implementation plan, then

implementation starting in 2012 October, finishing in 2015 November.

26

The main achievements of the project are the regeneration of 125 km of Moson-Danube; the

reconstruction of the urban riverside in an approximately 29 km long part of Moson-Danube in 16

settlements; and the reconstruction, ecosystem restoration and excavation of 4 backwaters, 5 water

habitats, and 13 anabranches that frame the islands of the river. In and around Győr, beyond the

restoration and reconstruction work, the dam of the Industrial Canal was demolished, connecting the

canal to the river network of Győr. Moreover, the flood gate of the backwater in Püspökerdő (Bishop

Forest) was reconstructed. The project reshaped the downtown city scape of Győr by creating a more

organized and aesthetically more appealing riverside. It also allowed new functions to appear in the

vacant riverbanks, dams and dikes, such as a new swimming complex, walking and leisure areas.

Győr also leveraged funds to redevelop the Dunakapu Square, the city’s only major square near

water, which used to be a car parking area. The reconstruction of the square, and the establishment

of an underground parking lot happened parallel to the timeline of riverside reconstruction. Although

two separate projects, many commentators considered the Moson-Danube Complex Project and

Dunakapu Square together when they shared insights and opinion, therefore they are also discussed

under one intervention.

The construction of the flood gate system at the Moson-Danube delta at Gönyű is the next step in

the blue infrastructure development of the region (OVF 2017). The flood gate system is currently in

the planning phase, scheduled to be implemented in the 2017-2020 period from the budget of 61.3

million EUR (funded by the European Union) plus 16.1 million EUR (funded by the government,

primarily for the development of the docks at Gönyű).


The project was implemented as part of the Environment and Energy Operative Programme funded

by the EU (KEOP-7.2.2.1-2008-0002) for the cost of 6.306.025.943 HUF which is ca. 20.4 million

EUR, out of which ca. one third was allocated for the work in Győr. There was additional funding

leveraged from the municipality for some sections of the riverside reconstruction and for

redeveloping Dunakapu Square.

27

The project is mentioned in the revision of the city's concept for urban development of 2008 and the

city's Local Agenda 21 (2010). In the initial phase of planning an environmental impact assessment

was prepared about the intervention, but the study did not reveal considerable negative impacts. As

a large scale development funded by the European Union, cost-benefit analysis was also mandatory.

No business planning or revenue from public-private partnerships were involved. For Dunakapu

Square, public sector institutions (e.g. museums) in the square received 100% of the necessary costs

for redevelopment, while private actors (restaurants, pubs, gift shops) only 50%. These private actors

were reportedly not used to such grant schemes, and were struggling with the administrative

requirements and the long implementation and refund timelines, often spanning several years.


ÉDUVIZIG coordinated the project, therefore they were responsible for the detailed planning of the

intervention. In the planning phase, they reached out to all 16 municipalities separately to inquire

about their plans for the urban riversides from urban planning and architectural point of view.

Following the EU Water Framework Directive, there were large scale community surveys and

community forums in each settlement to gather citizens’ needs and interests. At this time, Győr

reportedly had a lack of planning capacity and was occupied with political changes, as well as other

large scale redevelopment projects (such as Széchenyi Square, which is the city’s main, downtown

square). As reported by interviewees, the city launched a creative contest for architects to come up

with proposals for the downtown riverside area and Dunakapu Square, evaluated the creative

proposals, announced two winners, but eventually did not translate these ideas into actual plans due

to this lack of planning capacity. As the time for the planning period for ÉDUVIZIG ran out, and the

municipality did not submit any plans (unlike the other 15 settlements) ÉDUVIZIG had no choice but

to use an underdeveloped, placeholder concept that emerged back in 2006: narrow the riverbed by

14 meters and build footpaths on both sides of the river. After these plans were made publicly

available, there were articles, open letters and protests coming from civilian groups (detailed under

chapter 3.5). Despite the protests, there was no intention during the process to change the concept,

and the implementation plan was prepared without any further participatory elements.

During the interview discussions, local businesses and associations (e.g. fishing associations, rowing

clubs, public beach operator) reported adequate communication in the planning and implementation

28

phase, however their specific needs were not addressed. For example, they consider the access

points to the river for the fisherman to be too infrequent and uncomfortable. Due to the narrowing

of the riverbed, the boat houses are no longer on the riverside, which complicates logistics, security,

and daily operations. The mud dredging at the public beach was not implemented, despite popular

demand.

During the redevelopment of Dunakapu Square, local private actors were consulted and received an

50% subsidy for the renovation of their property from project costs.

Participation, however, was considered to be a weak aspect of the Dunakapu Square planning

process, with very little opportunity to influence the plans. “The municipality tries to cater to local

needs from the available budget with good intentions, but decision making on large scale

developments, such as Dunakapu Square happens behind the doors.” “There are no examples of

participatory planning in the last 10 years, and, sadly, people do not seem to care that this value was

lost”.

The contestations around Dunakapu Square also led to long-lasting conflicts, carried on to discourse

of other developments, such as Bishop’s Forest. Several NGO groups reported that since 2006, the

municipality started to seek loopholes to fulfil legal requirements for participation, and that there is

no proper interface (e.g. a website) to share invitations to community forums, or to provide feedback

on project plans. They claim that the mind-set of the municipality changed dramatically and that they

do not receive invitations or opportunities to participate in decision making anymore. ”Even official,

registered, expert NGO partners are actively tricked to avoid discussion...” The municipal experts

claim to follow all legal requirements of participation, and that they keep the interests of the

community at large in mind when they allocating funding or time, and when organizing development

processes.


The project had very explicit biophysical impact through the regeneration of 125 km of Moson-

Danube, the reconstruction of the urban riverside in an approximately 29 km long part of Moson-

Danube in 16 settlements, the reconstruction, ecosystem restoration and excavation of 4

backwaters, 5 water habitats, and 13 anabranches framing the islands of the river. In and around

29

Győr, beyond the restoration and reconstruction works, the dam of the Industrial Canal was

demolished, connecting it to the river network of Győr, and the flood gate of the backwater in

Püspökerdő (Bishop Forest) was reconstructed. Those who frequently use the river reported that the

water quality improved significantly in the last few years. However, as many concluded, “…the flood

gate would be needed to actually make sense of all these investments in the city.”

Besides reshaping the downtown city scape of Győr by creating an aesthetically appealing riverside,

the intervention allowed new functions to appear in the vacant riverbanks, dams and dikes, such as

a new swimming complex, walking and leisure areas. The key social impact was considered to be the

availability of public space and river sides. Further research would be needed to monitor how people

actually use these new public spaces, new functions and new services. The local residents who were

interviewed perceived this to be a successful development, and emphasized that they would like to

see further, quality improvements on the riversides that facilitate better connections with the river.

As one local commentator put it: “There was criticism that too much concrete was used at the

riversides - at least now it’s approachable! There are hundreds cycling, jogging and walking dogs… in

the evening, hundreds of young people spend time here – it’s full of life now”.


There were several large conflicts unfolding during the project planning and implementation phase.

Riverside redevelopment

The communication between ÉDUVIZIG and Győr municipality wasn’t fluent in the planning stage of

the intervention. As reported, ÉDUVIZIG inquired about the municipality’s plans for the urban

riversides from urban planning and architectural perspective, but unlike the other 15 settlements, no

plans were submitted in Győr likely due to the lack of planning capacity (speculated by interviewees),

and ÉDUVIZIG had no choice but to use an underdeveloped, placeholder concept that included the

narrowing of the riverbed, and the construction of footpaths on both sides. Back in 2006, this

placeholder idea was an attempt from ÉDUVIZIG to encourage the municipality to think outside the

box, but then ended up using this idea in the final plan, without utilizing the vast amount of new

space for anything except footpaths, because no other alternative was developed. Narrowing the

riverbed was a much contested idea even between ÉDUVIZIG experts. After then plans were

30

published there was a wave of articles, open letters and protests coming from civilian groups.

However, there was no intention to change the plans at this point, and delay the implementation,

but the scale of the narrowing was slightly decreased. The implementation plan was prepared

without any participatory elements. As someone who participated in the process noted:

“We just couldn’t get it removed from the plan. They filled in 14 meters everywhere with a steep,

paved shore, including in front of the boathouses, and ended up unintentionally destroyed rowing in

the city, because the waves reflected from the steep wall are too strong with kayaks and canoes.”

Some commentators think that since the water levels will be regulated by the floodgate, and the

persistently low levels will be solved, the narrowing of the riverbed was just not necessary from a

water management perspective: “…if the water level will be controlled by 2020, then the riverbed

narrowing, and the concrete wall seems pointless, because we will have enough water anyway.”

Community and NGO groups consider this aspect of the project to be a typical bad example of

spending large amount of public funding on hard infrastructure, in the interest of construction

companies, instead of using cheaper, friendlier, and more nature-based solutions:

“What they did on the riversides is the exact opposite of international tendencies of developing

resilience and climate adaptation measures.”

“Nobody behind the project seems to care about anything other than procedural and financial matters

of implementation, but we will have to live with this for a hundred years.”

“They shouldn’t have touched anything in Győr, just drain the mud, and wait for the higher water

levels”

“The only time people really feel close to the river in Győr, the ‘city of rivers’, is on the Radó Island.”

Local activists claim that approximately 300 trees were cut in the riverside redevelopment process in

Győr, and were not replanted in the area. On the other hand, according to the calculations of the

municipality, the green space area increased, and they started to actively follow-up on the project by

increasing grass coverage and planting trees. According to their reports, in 2016, trees were planted

on the northern side between Széchenyi Bridge, Kossuth Bridge, and Aranypart 1 public beach.

31

Despite these conflicts and contestations, most commentators think that the Moson-Danube

Complex Project was a success, especially because the outlined issues were only prominent in Győr.

“… [the project was] 99% successful. In the entire Moson-Danube line of 125 km, in 16 settlements,

there were no conflicts, no controversies, everyone did what they planned to do. We only had

problems in Győr.”

In Győr, most commentators only criticized one or two particular aspects of the blue infrastructure

intervention, while the rest was considered necessary and a welcome development.

“The developments are 80% great, but the public beach area, the Dunakapu Square, and the area

near the boat houses was a bad choice, and these are the areas where we had so many opportunities

to connect with the river.”

During the implementation phase, the steep, paved slope was proven to be hard to construct and

required much more investment and materials than planned, as reported by the construction

company, “almost twice as much stone [than planned], because everything was sinking in the mud”.

Since the structure was built on locally available materials (gravels and sand extracted from the river

channel, and willow wattle cover for stability) this considerably slowed down progress, and increased

costs. Moreover, the water levels during the implementation phase were inadequately high for

construction work for 1.5-2 years, including new record floods striking the area in 2013, which also

caused delays.

Flood gate

Some commentators think that the development will only make sense when the flood gate is

constructed and the water levels are higher. “They put the cart before the horse here. We [local

businesses] can’t develop or invest anything [on the public beach] until the water levels are finally

regulated.” “As soon as you know the water levels, you can think of boat tours, rowing, camping,

piers, and so on.” The idea of a large scale investment into a floodgate system, and the reconstruction

of the Moson-Danube delta is itself contested by environmental groups, interviewees think that

implementation is inevitable. The flood gate project is now in the planning phase and awaits

necessary approvals.

32

Dunakapu Square

The redevelopment of Dunakapu Square was a particular source of tension and conflict between a

group of NGOs/urbanists (Hungarian Climate Alliance, Reflex Environmental Protection Association,

Arrabona Urban Protection Group, etc.) and the municipality, because they did not support the plans

to turn the square into what it is today. An NGO attempted a ’whispering campaign’ in which they

asked friends, influential people, businessman, artists, opinion leaders, community organizers to take

their side during everyday discussions, especially when meeting other influential people, municipal

experts, decision makers, and share alternative opinion on the project. ”Instead of chaining ourselves

to trees, we built a network of support and pressure that seemed to work really well in the past, but

they ignored whatever we wrote or suggested for Dunakapu Square”.

According to the interviewees, the intention for Dunakapu Square was to bring car parking

underground and create Győr’s new square for holding larger events. This purposefulness justified

the complete lack of trees and vegetation in the square, but the acoustics of the area, due to the

proximity of water, turned out to be inadequate to hold these envisioned events.

“They sacrificed nature for these [events], and ironically it doesn’t work. However, as a public space,

it’s much better than it was before.”

Several interviewees think that building a steep concrete shore was logical choice in several sections,

but not everywhere. They think that in front of the boat houses and at Dunakapu Square, a flatter

slope with more natural surfaces, with more natural colors (non-white) could have been more

practical, cheaper and cost less to maintain (referring to several examples abroad, such as Innsbruck

and Passau).

“Győr had the historical opportunity to create a place and connection with the river at Dunakapu

Square… instead they built roads and concrete slopes”.

Despite these contestations and conflicts, and the non-nature based approach, the Dunakapu Square

is also considered to be a successful redevelopment by most residents and municipal experts,

because it is viewed as an improvement from being a car parking area.

“It could be worse, and it could be better. If you are not an urban development expert, all you see is

that it’s a huge leap forward [from being a car parking zone]. If you ask anyone, they will say that it’s

fantastic.”

33

“It is much, much better than before. Instead of car parking, we have underground parking, and an

actual square. Most citizens agree with this.”

In the eyes of several interviewees, this conflict was strongly intertwined with the conflict of car use

and traffic’s demand for public space.

“We have lots of rivers, and not enough bridges – the traffic that connects the city must go somewhere

after all.”


When the story began in 2003, it was considered to be a completely innovative approach from

ÉDUVIZIG, an authority, to consider the river part of the urban fabric, and attempt to foster

connections with it. The principles of integrated water resource management and of the EU Water

Framework Directive were used for the first time in Hungary in the Moson-Danube Complex Project,

even before it became mandatory due to the EU accession. It was a complex approach that aimed to

restore ecosystems, secure riverbanks, support irrigation, and enhance flood control. Although it was

not mandatory, the authority organized a large scale participatory process to ideate and survey

citizens’ needs and interests in all 16 settlements, which was also considered to be an innovative

approach, despite the fact that it got reportedly derailed at some point in Győr.

“In 15 settlements, which was 80% of the work, this innovative approach was successful.”

Research note: ÉDUVIZIG (project coordinator) and the Ministry for National Development (Nemzeti

Fejlesztési Minisztérium) (funding agency) refused to be available for an interview, and denied the

case study researchers to participate in the annual site visit of the project Monitoring Committee.

Nevertheless, among others, several involved companies, decision makers, blue infrastructure

experts, NGOs, the former director of ÉDUVIZIG, and two Monitoring Committee members were

interviewed for an accurate picture.

34

Figure 8. Dunakapu Square after the reconstruction (Source: 444.hu)

Figure 9. The riverbank between the two bridges and near Dunakapu Square (Source: Attila Katona)

35

Figure 10. The confluence of rivers in downtown Győr (Source: Attila Katona)

Figure 11. The confluence of rivers in downtown Győr (Source: kisalfold.hu)

36

Section 5 – Intervention 3 – School gardens of Győr


„Proper care on nature should be practiced. This is the most important new task of school gardens.”

- Gerhard Winkel

School gardens have a long and rich history in Győr, but most of them withered away during the

soviet era due to the introduction of new technologies and modern approaches to agriculture. After

some decades of decline, we can now observe a school garden renaissance in the city, mainly due to

their value for various pedagogical movements – most notably the interconnectivity with education

for sustainability, as they put the natural world at the students’ fingertips (Halbritter et al. 2016).

Recent scholarship shows that very significant sustainability learning can take place beyond the four

corners of the classroom, and that school gardens offer a cost-effective way to incorporate

sustainability into formal schooling. School gardens can be considered as community gardens in a

broad sense, because they are organized and maintained by teaching and learning communities

(teachers, students, and parents). There are approximately a dozen relevant and colorful school or

kindergarten gardens in Győr, such as Öveges Kálmán Gyakorló Általános Iskola, Bisinger József

Alapítványi Óvoda, Prohászka Ottokár Katolikus Oktatási Központ, Tulipános Általános Iskola, Radó

Tibor Általános Iskola, Széchenyi István University - Apáczai Csere János Kar, Ménfőcsanaki Petőfi

Sándor Általános Iskola. Out of this rich sample, three has been studied closely through site visits,

document review, discussions and interviews:

Széchenyi István University, Apáczai Csere János Faculty – ”Apáczai”

Öveges Kálmán Elementary School - “Öveges”

Tulipános Elementary School - “Tulipános”

In 1868, it became mandatory by law to educate all future teachers of Hungary on modern

agricultural practices and gardening – this is when Győr’s teacher training institution (now called

Széchenyi István University, Apáczai Csere János Faculty) established its school garden in their current

campus, thus creating one of the largest and most complex educational gardens of the country in the

heart of Győr on 5.238 m2 (Halbritter 2016). According to historical documents, the garden was

divided into several areas, such as vegetable gardens, fruit trees, beekeeping, silkworm breeding, and

other agricultural activities.

37

After the decline period, inspired by a field trip to Cuba, and recognizing the societal risks of this gap

in education, the Vice Dean of Apáczai reestablished the garden in 2013. In order to lead by example,

the new garden was created in three patches of the courtyard that used to be the school garden, but

is now used as a parking lot. The garden keeps expanding due to popular demand and positive

reception by the target audience. Apáczai’s new school garden trains university students on properly

organizing and maintaining the school garden with ecological methods in the format of an optional

credit course at the university. The university’s students, when graduated, will be primary and

secondary school teachers in Hungary, and can carry on with the good practice of school gardening.

The garden also frequently hosts the eco study groups of the nearby Öveges Kálmán Elementary

School, Bisinger József Kindergarten, as well as international exchange student groups. The

educational Vice Dean of Apáczai, who drives the Apáczai garden process and its integration into the

educational program, together with three other school garden leaders of Hungary, also co-founded

the Foundation for Hungarian School Gardens (Iskolakertekért Alapítvány) in 2015 in order to

understand the barriers, to seek opportunities and to increase the number of school gardens in

Hungary. The Foundation aims to unite schools, professional actors and companies (e.g. garden

furniture, agricultural businesses), spread best practices, organize meetings and conferences, run

workshops and trainings, offer free guidance, and build a network with free membership. The

foundation supported the establishment of several school gardens in Győr and beyond, using

Apáczai’s school garden for trainings. The school garden network is rapidly growing, and currently

has 140 institutions as members from every corner of the country.

Öveges is an elementary school for 400 children, aged 6 to 14, in the densely built downtown area of

Győr, and is an official ‘training school’ of Apáczai. In Öveges, the school garden was started by an

enthusiastic teacher (now school headmaster), who organized the eco-study group. In the framework

of the eco-study group, she organized environmental site visits, hiking and other outdoor activities,

then allocated some of the children’s time to work on a school garden (healing herb garden) in the

weedy, spacious backyard that used to belong to the neighborhood kindergarten before it was left

abandoned. When Apáczai re-established their educational garden in 2013 just a few hundred meters

away, they invited Öveges students to participate in a pilot workshop with Apáczai’s undergraduate

teachers. The event was so successful that it became a popular weekly activity, which now runs for

38

the 4th consecutive year. The elementary school student groups are responsible for the planting,

maintenance, harvesting, seed collection and other activities under the supervision of teachers and

practicing teachers in Apáczai’s garden. Children groups from Öveges visit the school garden of

Apáczai University on a weekly basis, they also work to redevelop their own school garden – they

created a plan and allocated areas in line with this vision, now seeking resources to get started with

the implementation phase.

The Tulipános Elementary School has 400 children, aged 6 to 14, and is located on the other side of

the Mosoni-Danube, but in a similarly densely populated neighborhood as Öveges and Apáczai. The

Tulipános school garden project was launched after they won the eco-school award for the second

time in 2015, and the eco-school coordinator participated in trainings where the concept of school

gardens was introduced by the newly established Foundation for Hungarian School Gardens. Inspired

by this input, the school made explicit commitments to establish a school garden in their subsequent

eco-school application. Using this written commitment, they requested and received support from

KLIK (centralized governmental agency responsible for every aspect of school maintenance) and the

Foundation for Hungarian School Gardens to purchase basic tools and equipment. First graders are

now intentionally growing up with the garden plots, while the 3rd-4th-5th graders and afternoon

daycare students, without much encouragement, became interested in gardening activities in their

free time. There are also seasonal activities that concern the entire student body: for example, as the

school’s name means ‘Tulips’ they launched a campaign called “Tulips for Tulipános”, and each class

brought 10-10 tulip bulbs, which then they planted together with the community (teachers,

headmaster, classes, and afternoon daycare students).

All three observed school gardens are perceived to be really successful interventions by stakeholders

and community members involved.

39

Figure 12. School gardening in Tulipános (Source: https://www.facebook.com/okoiskola.tulipanos/

Figure 13. The current status in one out of three patches of Apáczai's educational school garden (Source: Attila Katona)

40

Figure 14. Archive photo of Apáczai’s educational school garden (Source: iskolakertekert.hu)

Figure 15. Győr’s school gardens in the news (Source: Halbritter András)

41


As emphasized during the interviews, the Apáczai garden (funded by the university) purposefully

keeps the costs at a minimum to lead by example and convince visitors and teachers how minimal

financial resources does it actually take to start a school garden, to showcase handcrafted solutions,

and to convey the message that almost everything can be compensated with volunteer efforts,

motivation and creativity. None of the observed school gardens require paid workforce, but all can

access land, water and electricity of the schools without having to bear these extra utility costs. Tools,

seeds, construction materials and paint are upfront investments, but a school garden can be

reportedly launched from as little as 200 EUR. The community of parents were usually very

supportive in each school, and provided seed funding, tools, plants and other in-kind contributions

that allowed the school gardens to function and grow. Seeds are collected from the garden, and then

planted next year – it has been also emphasized that collecting seeds is an activity that children really

enjoy.

Tulipános used their written commitment of their application to the eco-school programme as

leverage to request support from KLIK (centralized governmental agency responsible for every aspect

of school maintenance) and received planks and soil to construct garden plots. The coordinator also

applied for 150 EUR funding with their school garden design ideas to the Foundation for Hungarian

School Gardens to purchase necessary equipment and received the grant.

There was no financial background of the project in Öveges. The gardening activities started entirely

on parents’ donations (tools, plants, seeds) and voluntary work of faculty and students.

None of the observed gardens produce goods for sale, or established a business plan to fund future

activities. Other school gardens have experimented with the possibility of selling harvested

vegetables, and then either re-invested the money into the garden, or spent it on the children as a

reward for their work. New institutional arrangements or radical change in the organizational

structure of the institutions was not required in either case.

According to interviewees, there are no laws that incentivize the development or maintenance of

school gardens, but such initiatives are mentioned and referred to in national development

strategies, in subchapters discussing community gardens. There is also an upcoming urban

agricultural strategy under development by the Ministry of Agriculture that discusses the topic from

42

the national food security point of view, and will have two key focus areas: community gardens and

school gardens, thus elevating the topic higher up in the policy agenda.

Győr municipality is informed on the school garden developments, but it’s not part of their strategy

or goal matrix, especially since operating schools became a centralized governmental responsibility

since 2013. The city’s public space maintenance company, Győr-Szol frequently reaches out to

schools with school gardens to seek their cooperation in greening urban areas (e.g. planting flowers

before large events), as reported by Tulipános. The children who took part in school gardening at

several schools were also involved in the establishment of community gardens in nursing homes of

Győr, working together with the elderly. While there is little follow-up on these activities, some

classes regularly visit these gardens.

In the case of Tulipános (public school), there is no real communication on the topic of school gardens

with any authority, but KLIK receives briefing on the progress of the school garden, because it is

embedded in the annual, mandatory eco-school report. The developments in the garden are well

documented in the school garden’s social media site (facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/okoiskola.tulipanos). POK (Pedagógiai Oktatási Központ – a regional

governmental agency responsible for quality of teaching, free trainings and educational services, etc.)

reportedly maintains a good relationship with Apáczai, and supports the Foundation for Hungarian

School Gardens by spreading the word through their well-established, official communication

channels (newsletters, conferences and workshops) which reach every school in the country.

The Foundation for Hungarian School Gardens shares expertise, organizes training and knowledge

exchange events, provides small grants to schools though idea competitions, and monitors the

progress of the member school gardens through its network. The Foundation and Apáczai organized

the National School Garden Network Meeting in 2016, and several high level supporters were

present, including the rector of the university, famous actors, and Bálint György (’Bálint gazda’), a

renowned multi-award winning agricultural expert, politician, public figure and journalist. Several

businesses and companies (agribusinesses, garden furniture, etc.) support the network, along with

high level institutional partners, such as the Hungarian Institute for Educational Research and

Development, Hungarian Network of Eco-Schools, „Biokultúra” Association for Organic Agriculture,

43

Office of Rural Development of the Dioecesis Vaciensis, Hungarian Society for Environmental

Education, and Hungarian Climate Alliance. Other modern pedagogical networks (eco-school

network, Waldorf private school network) also support and encourage the development of school

gardens.

School gardens greatly benefited from the ongoing discourse on sustainability, and especially

education for sustainability. Győr went through rapid industrialization when large part of the

population moved in from the countryside for better economic opportunities. These people

abandoned urban gardening activities due to abundance, but it can be observed that several families

restarted food gardening after the financial crisis in 2008. This goes in line with the renaissance of

the school gardens, through which children can learn how to maintain a food garden properly.


The school gardens of Győr have strong community-based, bottom-up, self-governance dynamics.

One passionate and determined teacher, who can initiate and coordinate the process, and does not

shy away from the observed challenges, was key element of success in all studied cases. Although

community demand seems to lag behind in the initiation phase, maintaining momentum requires a

supportive institutional management and a large community of volunteers, donors and other

supporters. There are unique cases in Győr (Ménfőcsanaki Petőfi Sándor Általános Iskola) where the

first spark came from children who used a broken chair-leg to dig a hole, then planted corn and wheat

to see what happens. As the plants started to grow, children continued experimenting with other

kinds of seeds, teachers began to support their work, and it became a flourishing, award-winning

school garden.

In Tulipános, interested students, teachers, staff, parents were all involved in the visioning, planning,

designing phase of the school gardens, and they contributed with ideas and materials. The

Foundation for Hungarian School Gardens shared expertise, organized insightful training and

knowledge exchange events, as well as provided a small grant to the school after the planning and

design phase. The school made the school garden implementation a memorable milestone in the

school’s life, and maintained momentum and interest with actions such as the “Tulips for Tulipános”

event – all of which is well documented in the school garden’s Facebook page.

44


Out of the three school gardens that constitute this case study, two (Apáczai and Öveges) is located

in downtown Győr, while Tulipános is located on the other side of the Mosoni-Danube, in a similarly

densely populated residential area.

School gardening in general engages students in a more dynamic environment for observation,

discovery, and experimentation, nurturing and learning. School gardens are essentially living

laboratories of a school, where interdisciplinary lessons can be drawn from children’s experiences,

who are active participants of the learning process. As one teacher emphasized, children “move from

a passive experience of nature to an active experience of working with nature”. The most dominant

environmental, social, economic and political impacts of the NBS, based on interview descriptions,

are outlined below:

As observed, education is more efficient if children actively spend time outside the classroom.

In fact, all teachers in the observed school gardens consider them to be the frontline of the

modern educational reform - teachers of Tulipános especially like to bring their classes down

to the school garden to break the monotony of the mandatory curricula.

Education for sustainability is embedded into Győr’s school gardening activities – it enables

children to act for themselves and their environment through regular and practical activities,

practice environmental stewardship, think responsibly on their surroundings, understand

systemic ecological processes, and consume consciously. Sometimes this learning process is

focused by the teacher, sometimes it emerges organically from the garden itself.

A school garden also enriches every elementary school subject area, as creatively

demonstrated by the teachers – from arts and visual culture to handcrafting classes,

mathematics (showing negative numbers on a thermometer, calculating area), biology

(plants, life cycle), geography (seasons, weather, climate), literature (discuss poems outside),

environmental studies (water, soil, composting, ecological processes, conscious

consumption), history (demonstrating ancient agricultural techniques). They also provide

meaningful ways to spend time during afternoon day-care hours in both Öveges and

Tulipános.

Education for healthy food and tackling childhood obesity: Students learn about healthy soil,

the way plants function, how to take care of them, how do fruits and vegetables grow,

45

therefore teachers assume that children have better nutrition knowledge and will likely make

healthier lifestyle decisions. One teacher especially found it important to focus on this aspect,

because “children should learn that tomatoes are not growing in Tesco…”

School gardening also contributes to social equity, because several student’s families own

unused land at home, thus children can learn the tricks of the trade and get better value out

of it. It has been documented that children are more receptive to learning new techniques,

use of plants, etc. This contributes to food security and self-sufficiency of the population.

Children learn work ethics – children are expected to invest time and energy, then taste the

fruits of their own labor during harvest. This was especially true in the cooperation between

Öveges and Apáczai. Commentators saw this as a potential for social impact, as gardening

mediates new social relations between students, as well as students and parents.

Gardening fosters high level pedagogical goals and competencies, such as teaching

cooperation in a group environment, focusing, taking responsibility, planning, scheduling and

patience.

It encourages career orientation towards agriculture (which is important in a welfare state

with aging farmer society)

Gardens offer unique community building opportunities, and beautify the school to instill

pride in the students and teachers.

There are observable biophysical impacts of the intervention, such as more lush vegetation, which

slightly improves the local microclimate (temperatures, humidity, shadows) and air quality (dust

control) around the school area, improves soil quality, and raises its organic matter content.

However, these impacts are not very significant on a city-level, because school gardens only

constitute a few hundred m2 in Győr. Nevertheless, the purpose of school gardening in Győr is

reportedly not the high agricultural yield, or the biophysical impacts, but on the activity itself -

outdoor, cooperative, understanding, community-based work. Thus, their real impact lies in

awareness raising, education and sensitization (e.g. creating the need for green space in children’s

life). As one teacher put it: “the last time urban children are exposed to nature for longer periods in

their life is likely in the school garden… we should not waste this opportunity”.

46


Overall, there were no disruptive conflicts within any of the school garden communities of Győr. The

majority of contestation and resistance incurred in the early stages of school garden development,

when stakeholders and community members didn’t yet understand the idea, or what it would mean

for them. This resistance was easily defused through open communication, such as a garden opening

ceremony where everything was explained by the school garden coordinator, thus alleviating

potential sources of conflict. Nevertheless, there are several identified, shared challenges for school

gardens in Győr:

Funding: although it has been emphasized that starting school gardens, especially on a smaller

scale, require extremely low investment due to the sheer amount of voluntary work involved,

the largest bottleneck was still perceived to be the lack of available funding, because there

are always more urgent and pressing matters on the school’s investment and maintenance

agenda. In Öveges, it has been reported that despite the intentions of the management, they

can’t allocate any funds for the development of the school garden. In Tulipános, the barrier

to start composting is the inability to invest in a composter box.

Space: the lack of available space or the quality of the soil (contaminated with construction

and demolition waste or chemicals) is also a challenge in Győr’s school gardens, but these can

also be overcome with careful planning and arrangements, such as insulated, elevated beds.

Summer maintenance: Summer maintenance was considered to be a challenge – the school

maintenance crew can do the regular watering, while volunteers (students, parents, and

teachers) are available for occasional work over the summer period. Moreover, there are

cheap alternatives to watering systems, such as using pet bottles, as demonstrated in several

of the observed gardens. Usually plants are chosen which require little to no maintenance

over the summer months, such as maize and sunflower.

Knowledge: initially, there can be a lack of knowledge on proper garden design and

maintenance, but the Foundation for Hungarian School Gardens provides consulting and

knowledge exchange services to help schools overcome this barrier.

Concerns of availability: as reported, teachers tend to be overburdened with their regular

duties and administrative tasks (especially since the centralized governmental reforms in

2013) thus taking on extra responsibilities can be difficult for them. In the initiation phase,

teachers are often concerned that a school garden will impose extra work and responsibility.

47

Children expectations: some children in Öveges had different initial expectations, as they

were hoping for unsupervised playing outside. These children either got interested in the

gardening activity, or switched to another study or sports group.

Parent’s attitudes: parents’ attitudes were reported to be extremely positive and supportive

in all schools, contributing to the school gardens with donations and in-kind support, however

the eco-study groups’ environmental awareness, gardening and handcraft skills are perceived

to develop less marketable competencies for the 21st century than, for example, the sports,

IT, natural science, music or other study groups that compete with student’s time and

attention. However, those parents that are on board with the idea are growing increasingly

supportive and flexible when they saw how much their children enjoys this activity, and start

to see the real value in the competencies that are developed.

Regulations: there has been no regulatory barrier reported, except for those school gardens,

not included in the study sample, that produce enough vegetables and fruits to sell, which is

strictly regulated (food regulations, taxation, etc.).


The renaissance of school gardens in Győr - among consulted stakeholders, urbanists and local

decision makers - is widely considered to be a successful and impactful social innovation that is in a

very early stage of development. It is also considered to be experimental – each school garden is

different in design, management, and maintenance and used low-tech solutions in their own way.

The prominent advocate of school gardens in the city (and nationally) is the Vice Dean of Apáczai -

his educational school garden and the Foundation for Hungarian School Gardens started uniting

schools, institutional actors and companies; started spreading best practices, organized meetings and

conferences, ran workshops and trainings, and regularly offers free guidance and consulting for those

that are just getting started. The foundation also builds a school garden network with free

membership, which is rapidly growing, and is in the early stage of the growth curve, with some

innovators and early adopters already on board, and approximately 1.5-2% of Hungarian schools as

member.

While the school garden movement does not have a clear policy mandate yet, and there are no laws

that incentivize school gardens, due to their rich history in Hungary, school gardens are referenced

in several high level development strategies, and the key actors in education (KLIK, POK) support it in

48

their own way, through their official channels. The school garden idea also fits neatly under the rubric

of the eco-school label movement, which is a more comprehensive and rapidly expanding network.

Developing a school garden is considered to be a learning process that is part of every school’s daily

life both by those who coordinate the gardens, and by the Foundation for Hungarian School Gardens

- as one school garden coordinator emphasized, “there are no mistakes in our garden - only

experiments”.

49

Section 6 - Comparative Discussion

Győr is a Central European city with an episode of socialism in its still not too distant past, which

context has not been widely analysed from the perspective of urban green and blue infrastructure,

and even less from the perspective of transition and innovation studies when compared with

Western European cities. Our case study research indicated that there are several examples of NBS

in Győr, many of which are legacies of the socialist centrally-planned era that still survives (or even

thrives) under the surface of modern urban development agendas, while others have been recently

introduced, and are on the rise, such as green roofs. However, the overall rate of NBS is relatively

low, their deployment is sporadic, and their visibility on policy and funding agendas is limited. Many

types of NBS have been known for a long time, and they are not seen as an innovation, thus not

considered attractive to deal with in a rapidly developing city. In practice, NBS is quite difficult to

accept as a mainstream agenda item, because modern urban development in such an industrial city

is associated with hard infrastructure, a city made of concrete and steel, rather than greenery. As a

local urbanist put it: “Most people think that development means more buildings, more pavement,

and more parking space… they do not seem to have a space for nature in this image […] planting

trees, for many, is not development.” This perception stands in contrast with a competing metaphor,

often communicated by the municipality, which mentions Győr as the “city of rivers”. Catering to car

traffic seemed to be the primary reason why traditional planning tools, approaches and methods are

still thriving in the city. As an urban development expert commented: “…everyone wants to travel

with cars, cars don’t run or park on grass, and nobody in Győr can address this conflict at the

moment”. Several local landscape architects, planners and civil society organizations confirmed that

the need for parking space is often at the heart of the conflict between green and grey infrastructure

solutions. Although inhabitants are in principle in favor of tree preservation, they are not always

siding with greenery in discussions when it comes with the reduction of space for motorized traffic

or parking. The municipality perceives it difficult to balance these mixed messages and diverging local

needs: “… thus we are walking on an extremely fine line, and the responsible local government should

try to cater to all”.

Also, nature in the city is not widely seen as a purposefully deployable 'solution' to any specific urban

problem. Over recent years, discussions on some aspects of urban nature intensified, perhaps as a

reaction to the level of degradation, or perhaps international trends made their way to Győr through

civil society and academic channels. For example, preservation of street trees and urban forests (such

50

as Bishop's Forest) became a constant source of conflict because community and civil society groups

oppose that municipal authorities in many cases allow their removal. In other cases, however, the

municipality champions tree planting and greening initiatives, or takes good care of old trees. This

contestation is aggravated by the fact that the city has no comprehensive, city-level policy, master

plan, guideline, strategy or regulation to coordinate green and blue infrastructure development and

management in Győr. For example, collaboration on green space management is poor, it is perceived

as a centralized task, and very few stakeholders are actively involved in this area.

It has been observed in Győr, and other Hungarian cities, that if the substantive involvement of

stakeholders in decision-making, planning and implementation is not a deeply-seated part of political

culture, municipal governments will most likely lack the capacity to connect across domains and

oversee complex, interdisciplinary processes due to compartmentalization, departmental siloing, or

projectification of funding. Creative and innovative solutions rarely flourish in top-down

administrative structures, therefore increasingly centralized policy making, coupled with pessimism

about collective endeavors, can hinder sustainable transitions, rational discussions about alternative

policy options, scaling up grassroots solutions, the bottom-up provision of services, or access to

utilizing urban public space in creative ways – all of which could be essential characteristics of

successful, sustainable NBS. The local public administration has separate departments with distinct

administrative specialization, different objectives, legal frameworks, responsibilities, and often

follow different strategies. This compartmentalization results in an inability to incorporate novelty,

and insufficient capacities to establish synergies across NBS-related domains, like food, education,

biodiversity, water management, public space use, transport, or air quality. Highlighting

inconsistencies between the current policies, and those necessary for the implementation of NBS,

and changing these legal frameworks to support NBS, would alleviate several of the existing barriers.

Currently, similar to other sustainable development initiatives, the main driver of interest towards

NBS can be associated with external pressures, especially the policies and funding opportunities of

the European Union, as Hungary is one of the largest beneficiary of EU funds.

We found that several NBS interventions depended on change agents, who act as mediators or

networkers across sectors (e.g. NGO-academia, academia-business, government-academia) as well

as between different domains, thus they are capable of speaking the 'language' of several types of

51

actors, and develop a more horizontal view that enables them to act on the existing synergies

between these actors and domains. These change agents are usually less powerful than decision

makers and stakeholders who represent mainstream, traditional, hard infrastructure solutions. In

Győr, people who promote the use of NBS, and other niche solutions (e.g. sustainable mobility) are

often on the margin of decision-making structures, and their ideas clash against regime actors. This

dependency on change agents to underpin the delivery of NBS (with often voluntary commitment,

and busy agendas), combined with increasingly centralized decision making can make the process of

mainstreaming various niche solutions, such as NBS, very fragile.

Innovation trajectories (ARTS 2016) can be identified and traced with regards to the development of

School Gardens, such as upscaling (growth in students involved and area covered in each school),

replication (involvement of new schools, rapid growth of the national network), partnering (getting

companies and governmental agencies on board to support the initiative) and, to some extent,

instrumentalizing (acquiring resources and capitalizing on opportunities to ensure continuity).

However, embedding (integrating into mainstream practices and policy, aligning with other transition

initiatives and the local or national level) remains a challenge. The role model of Apáczai and the

strategical network building work of the Foundation for Hungarian School Gardens seemed to play a

critical role in spreading best practices and mobilizing support.

The governance arrangements of the three studied initiatives are widely different (top-down,

corporate, and community-based), and the scale of interventions range from several million EUR to

few hundred EUR. All interventions have intertwined social, economic and environmental effects.

They range in complexity due to the different governance arrangements, scales and goals, thus the

extent to which they have been contested by various stakeholders. Linkages to nature vary in all three

studied interventions, but one commonality was the importance of collaboration. Multi-stakeholder

partnerships, private sector leadership, and citizen engagement supported the planning and

implementation of NBS, contributing to their role in introducing natural elements and processes to

various aspects of urban living.

52

Section 7 - Conclusions

The case study of Győr brought a divergent set of cases together in terms of their scale, governance

arrangements, participation, and addressed social, economical and environmental challenges.

The ’Moson-Danube Complex Project’ was selected to focus on recent riverside development and

blue infrastructure interventions in the densely populated urban core. It is a publicly funded, large

scale, expert-driven, top-down intervention that was a necessity due to persistently low water levels

and damaging floods on the Moson-Danube River. The main achievements of the project include river

regeneration on 125 km, the reconstruction of urban riversides, ecosystem restoration of

backwaters, freshwater habitats and several islands, as well as decanalization, flood gate

construction and strengthening the river network of Győr. The case study only covers some highly

contested developments in detail, such as urban riverside reconstruction and riverside square

redevelopment of the recent years.

The study on the ’School Gardens of Győr’ covers a set of interconnected grassroots initiatives that

are implemented by teaching and learning communities. Although earlier school gardens fell victim

to development and neglect in the 20th century, the modern school garden movement is rapidly

growing since 2013 due to its recognized value in current pedagogical movements, and potential role

in education for sustainability. School gardens are low-cost interventions (max. a few hundred EUR

total cost), have strong community-based, bottom-up, self-governance dynamics, and heavily rely on

volunteer work and community donations. The dynamics of three school gardens were studied in

Győr, one of which also plays a prominent role in the coordination of the school garden movement

at the national level.

The study on ’Beekeeping at Audi Hungaria’ was selected to demonstrate that while the private

sector can have negative impacts on biodiversity, it also has a potential role to play in offering

innovative solutions to protect it. Funded and orchestrated by Audi Hungaria’s plant in Győr, the

intervention contains a unique package of ecosystem management with native species, bioindicator

monitoring, immission research, awareness raising, and education for sustainability through

beekeeping. The intervention also sheds light on the decision making processes of an industrial actor,

and the role of businesses in leading NBS implementation. The study shows that businesses can

53

leverage financial resources and management experience, harness advanced research to deliver

solutions, and provide insights and perspectives that are complementary to those coming from

governments or civil society.

54

References

Audi Hungaria (2015): Environmental Statement. Accessed at:

https://audi.hu/en/profile/environmental-protection/environmental-statement/

Audi Hungaria (2017) Environmental Protection Guidelines and Targets. Accessed at:

https://audi.hu/en/profile/environmental-protection/measures

ARTS (2016) ARTS Conceptual Framework. Accessed at: www.pathways-

project.eu/sites/default/files/Item%204%20-%20Urban%20break-out%20-%20Egermann.pdf

Children & Nature Network (2010) Children's contact with the outdoors and nature: a focus on

educators and educational settings. Accessed at: https://www.childrenandnature.org

Csanaki, Zs. (2017) Power point presentation on flora and fauna protection measures at Audi

Hungaria. Naturvation URIP meeting 3, 07.11.2017.

Déri, L., Horváth, G. Tóth, J. (2015): Mosoni-Duna és Lajta folyó térségi vízgazdálkodási

rehabilitációja. Magyar Hidrológiai Társaság XXXIII. Országos Vándorgyűlés, Szombathely

ÉDUVIZIG (2010): A Víz Keretirányelv hazai megvalósítása - vízgyűjtő-gazdálkodási terv: Szigetköz

GEOX (2015) Demographic data on Győr’s urban areas. Accessed at:

http://www.geox.hu/hirek/telepulesreszek-es-varosreszek-elemzese/

Halbritter, A. A. (2016) Iskolakert a győri Apáczai Csere János Karon. Downloaded from:

http://ak.sze.hu/images/Szolgáltatások/Iskolakert/Iskolakert_az_Apaczai_Karon.pdf

Halbritter, A. A., Lampert, B., Gróz, A., et al. (2016) School gardens' reneissance: how to proceed

through some obstructive circumstances?

Moson-Danube Complex Project website and documents accessed at:

https://audi.hu/en/profile/environmental-protection/measures

http://ak.sze.hu/images/Szolgáltatások/Iskolakert/Iskolakert_az_Apaczai_Karon.pdf

55

http://www.keopmosoniduna.hu/a_projekt_leirasa.html

Moson-Danube Complex Project collection of processed media coverage accessed at:

http://www.keopmosoniduna.hu/16.html

OVF 2017: Mosoni-Duna torkolati szakaszának vízszint rehabilitációja (Moson-Danube delta water

level rehabilitation) website. Accessed at: http://www.ovf.hu/hu/futo-projektek/mosoni-duna-

torkolati-szakaszanak-vizszint-rehabilitacioja

http://www.keopmosoniduna.hu/a_projekt_leirasa.html

http://www.keopmosoniduna.hu/16.html

http://www.ovf.hu/hu/futo-projektek/mosoni-duna-torkolati-szakaszanak-vizszint-rehabilitacioja

http://www.ovf.hu/hu/futo-projektek/mosoni-duna-torkolati-szakaszanak-vizszint-rehabilitacioja

56

Appendix

Annex 1. List of identified nature-based solutions in Győr

Name and location General description Visuals

NBS 1 - Moson-

Danube Complex

Project

Riverside areas of the

City of Győr

As part of the intervention, the banks of the Moson-Danube and

Rába rivers were reconstructed, including narrowing of the

riverbed, improving flood protection and water level regulation,

demolishing the existing pavement and constructing new

footpaths close to the water. The intervention included the flood

gate reconstruction of the backwater in the Püspök Forest and

connecting the Industrial Canal to the river network of Győr.

Besides reshaping the city scape of Győr, the intervention allowed

new functions to appear in the vacant riverbanks, dams and dikes.

Photo credit: Attila Katona

NBS 2 - Bercsényi

grove and

surroundings

Újváros district;

City of Győr

30-40 parks and green public spaces were reconstructed and

received new functions in Győr. As part of the large scale social

urban regeneration project of Győr-Újváros, the 900 meter long

Bercsényi grove, located in the former riverbed of the Rábca river,

has also been renewed: the first section includes green

recreational areas and playgrounds, the second includes a sport

park, and the third is a simulated traffic park for children, creating

a popular meeting area for several generations.

Photo credit: Attila Katona

NBS 3 – Beekeeping at

Audi Hungaria

Gyárváros district;

City of Győr

Audi Hungaria, the world's largest car engine factory, and

Hungary's largest factory, has taken a leading role in the

implementation of several nature-based solutions, such as a

rain-water collection system, fishponds, ecosystem restoration

and research projects, vertical gardens, green roofs, and a

unique combination of beekeeping and immission research

within the company premises, among other environmental

protection measures.

Photo credit

NBS 4 - Green

infrastructure and

community gardens

around the old

residential complexes

Adyváros and

Marcalváros districts;

City of Győr

The surroundings of densely populated residential complexes of

prefabricated buildings, characteristic of the region, are well

covered with trees and other green infrastructure. Several

community gardens are maintained by groups of local residents

near the buildings through a unique, flexible scheme provided by

Győr-Szol, the public space maintenance utility company.

Photo credit: Google street view

http://totalcar.hu/magazin/hirek/2010/09/23/audi-bovites_1800_munkahely_vagy_natura_2000/

57

NBS 5 - Rehabilitation

of lakes near old

residential complexes,

the establishment of

recreational areas

Adyváros, Győr-

Szabadhegy,


City of Győr

Local lakes were rehabilitated in several neighborhoods

(Adyváros, Győr-Szabadhegy, Marcalváros). The rehabilitation of

a lake in the Adyváros neighborhood included the renewal of the

water reservoir, surrounding green areas, footpaths, and

vegetation, as well as the installation of a new street light system,

benches, trash cans, and unique street installations such as an

interactive message board. The interventions transformed the

lake and its surroundings into a popular recreational area,

frequented by locals.

Photo credit

NBS 6 - Nagy-Pándzsa

project

Kismegyer,


City of Győr

The main goal of the Nagy-Pándzsa project was to reduce flood

risk through the reconstruction of the waterways and the flood-

gate, as well as to reduce pollution and increase biodiversity

through the rehabilitation of a Natura 2000 area.

Photo credit

NBS 7 - Green roofs in

Győr

Different areas of the

City of Győr

Several green roofs were implemented in the city, partially

incentivized by a new municipal regulation on the required green

surface coverage. Green roofs have been constructed, among

others, on the new campus of the Széchenyi István University

(Révfalu), the Integrálház (Marcalváros), at Audi Hungaria, and

many private residential houses (such as in Pataháza). Moreover,

a parking lot with an innovative green roof is in the planning phase

(Kuopio Park, Adyváros).

Photo credit

NBS 8 - The

reconstruction of

Barátság park with

sport and recreational

facilities

Adyváros district;

City of Győr

The reconstruction of a ca. 29.000 m2 park in Adyváros into a

fitness park was funded by the Municipality and Audi Hungaria. As

part of the reconstruction, three football pitches, a street ball

court, a jogging track, an outdoor gym, a modern playground, a

recreational area for the elderly, and a service building was

constructed.

Photo credit

http://www.kisalfold.hu/gyori_hirek/nezze_meg_milyen_szep_lett_az_adyvarosi_to_es_kornyeke_-_video/2385940/

http://hirek.gyor.hu/cikk/eletre_kelt_a_nagy_pandzsa.html

http://zoldtetokft.hu/gyor-csaladi-haz

http://innovacio.gyor.hu/cikk/egyedulallo_1.html

58

NBS 9 - School

gardens

City of Győr

School gardens have a long history in Győr, and after some

decades of decline, we now experience a school garden

renaissance in the city, due to its value for various pedagogical

movements. Perhaps the most important pillar of this revival is

the interconnectivity with education for sustainability as they put

the natural world at the students’ fingertips. They can be

considered as community gardens, organized and maintained by

teaching and learning communities (teachers, students and

parents). There are approximately a dozen relevant and colourful

school gardens in Győr, out of which one is also responsible for

launching the movement for the revival of school gardening

nationwide.

Photo credit

NBS 10 - Püspökerdő

(Bishop Forest)

Metropolitan area of

the City of Győr

Püspökerdő, also known as the 'green lung of Győr', is a 250

hectare peri-urban forest stretching into the inner part of the city.

The forest, encompassed by the Mosoni-Danube and its

backwater, has interpretive trails, glades, an outdoor gym and a

playground. Interpretive trails provide information about the

flora and fauna of the forest in their natural environment. A new

adventure park also attracts those visitors who seek active

recreational opportunities in a unique setting.

Photo credit

https://www.facebook.com/okoiskola.tulipanos/

http://gyorikonyvtar.blogspot.hu/2015/01/kalandparkok-magyarorszagon.html

59

Annex 2. Research themes and research questions

Research Themes Research Questions

1. How are sustainability challenges framed within the city?

2. How, why and for whom are NBS regarded as important for addressing these sustainability challenges?

3. What are the logics and visions through which NBS are being promoted?

4. How is the success and failure of NBS imagined and evaluated?

1. How are NBS governed in the city, or which tools and techniques, e.g. regulation/policy, resource provision,

financial incentives, ways and channels of communication, networking, are important for governing NBS?

2. What are the institutional arrangements, partnerships and forms of citizen engagement or participation that have

supported the emergence and implementation of NBS in the city?

3. Which participatory methods were used? How was participation enabled or supported and what obstacles to

participation were encountered?

4. At what stages were citizens/community members involved, e.g. visioning, planning, designing, implementing,

evaluating? Who was included/excluded at which stages, why and with what impacts on outcomes?

1. How did the NBS intervention emerge, how was it supported, who were its protagonists and its envisioned users?

2. What institutional, organizational and infrastructural challenges has it encountered in its appraisal, design,

implementation and maintenance?

3. What were the critical junctures/decisions in its evolution and how far has the NBS intervention lived up to its

ambitions and promises?

4. What techniques, e.g. of calculation, assessment, mapping, and self-governing, have been important to actualise

the intervention?

1. What institutional arrangements, i.e. business models, partnerships, forms of finance or social entrepreneurship,

have been involved?

2. What other institutional factors, e.g. forms of training, education and communication, have been involved?

3. How critical to the nature and extent of the implementation of the NBS intervention have these been, and in which

ways have they hindered or enabled NBS interventions?

4. How have NBS benefited from ongoing processes of urban transformation and the emergence of new discourses

and ideas?

1. Where is the NBS situated? Which areas of the city have, or are expected to, benefit from the NBS?

2. What aspects of the design, implementation and maintenance of the NBS have contributed (and still contribute) to

its successful trajectory/existence?

3. What have been the environmental, social, economic and political impacts of the NBS intervention?

4. What have been the material effects of the NBS intervention – in terms of e.g. water, ecosystems, biodiversity, soil,

air quality?

1. What contradictions have emerged between the different visions for the NBS intervention and their multi-

functional promises – e.g. between economic, environmental and equity objectives?

2. How has the presence and implementation of the NBS intervention been contested or resisted, and have any

stakeholders and zones within the city been privileged or excluded?

3. To what extent has the NBS intervention contributed to social and environmental justice (or not)?

4. To what extent do different ideas concerning the kinds of ‘nature’ that should be included and excluded from the

city shape the NBS intervention?

1. In what sense has the NBS intervention involved innovation (technical, social, policy, cultural, financial), and has

this innovation been regarded as radical or transformative or more an incremental innovation and by whom?

2. Where did the innovations originate and how have they travelled, e.g. through policy networks, user/citizen

communities, firm involvement, intermediary organisations?

3. What, if anything, has been the most experimental about the NBS intervention?

4. What forms of learning have taken place within the NBS intervention, by whom, and to what extent is the

NBS intervention being replicated within and outside the city, and by whom?

1. What supports the mainstream system/solutions despite the option for NBS interventions?

2. What are the pressures on the city that help tip the scale towards NBS interventions in this competition?

3. How are NBS interventions similar to or different from other urban transition themes, such as mobility, sustainable

buildings, energy, and why?

4. How do NBS interventions and other urban transition themes influence each other?

Innovation within

and around NBS

interventions

NBS interventions

versus traditional

solutions

Challenges and

solutions and the

role of NBS

Governing NBS

and public

participation

NBS intervention

histories

Structural

conditions for NBS

Configuring NBS

interventions

Contradictions

and contestation

around NBS

interventions

60

Annex 3. Semi-structured interview key informants

Name of interviewee Position, affiliation Type

Ákos Radnóti Vice Mayor – City Hall of Győr MUN

János Gyertyás Head of Investment Department – City Hall of Győr MUN

György Szekeres Environmental Officer – City Hall of Győr MUN

Petra Szakonyi Strategic Planner – City Hall of Győr MUN

Iván Németh Previous Chief Architect (1987-2006) – City Hall of Győr; Consultant MUN

Csaba Lajtmann Executive Director – Hungarian Climate Alliance; Environmental Expert Győr – Reflex Environmental Protection Association

NGO

Adrienne Hajósy Expert in the ‘Monitoring Committee’ of Moson-Danube Complex Project delegated by the Hungarian Green Movement

NGO

Gyula Szabó President - Arrabona Urban Protection Group NGO

Péter Takács President – Regional Sports Fishing Alliance NGO

Péter Tóth President – Keret Association; Sociologist – Széchenyi István University NGO/ACA

András Halbritter Vice Dean for Education - Széchenyi István University, Apáczai Csere János Faculty; Co-founder – Foundation for Hungarian School Gardens

ACA/NGO

Eszter Jákli School garden researcher – Corvinus University ACA

Zoltán Kovács Researcher – University of Western Hungary Forestry Department (responsible for the Audi bioindicator research)

ACA

Mihály Lados Director – Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies, West Hungarian Research Department (MTA RKK); Associate Professor – Széchenyi István University

ACA/URB

László Jóna Urbanist, researcher – MTA RKK URB

Irén Sz. Kukorelli Urbanist – MTA RKK; Project Manager – Prehels Project (public space use) URB

Kinga R. Hutás Director - Öveges Kálmán Elementary School PUB

Terézia N. Fülöp Director – Pedagogical Educational Centre Győr (POK) PUB

Katalin Csizmadia Eco-school coordinator - Tulipános Elementary School PUB

Zsuzsanna H. Kárpáti Deputy Director – Tulipános Elementary School PUB

Györgyi Glanz Teacher (responsible for beekeeping study trips) – Audi Hungaria School PUB

Peter Rauchwarter Teacher (responsible for beekeeping study trips) – Audi Hungaria School PUB

Zoltán Kun Project coordinator (water, biodiversity) – VTK Innosystem Győr ENG/NGO

Helga Hencz Landscape Architect – several planned and implemented projects in Győr ENG

Bence Csányi Architect (green roofs, green design roundabout in Győr) – DIADEM LtD. ENG

Emil Janák Project coordinator (water) – VTK Innosystem Győr; Previous Director (during the planning phase of NBS 1) – Regional Water Management Directorate

UTI/ENG

Tibor Géza Sági Director – Győr-Szol public space maintenance utility (no research insights) UTI

Péter Csabina Executive Director – DIADEM LtD. (green roofs) BUS

Zoltán Szarvas Executive Director – Aranypart 23 LtD. (public beach & leisure area) BUS

Zsuzsa Csanaki Nature conservation - Environmental Management Unit, Audi Hungaria BUS

László Nagy Beekeeper – Audi Hungaria BUS

András Torma Environmental Management Unit – Audi Hungaria Head of Department, Associate Professor – Széchenyi István University, Department of Environmental Engineering

BUS/ACA

Documents

Case Study Working Paper GYŐR