Liszka József (szerk.): Az Etnológiai Központ Évkönyve 2011 - Acta Ethnologica Danubiana 13. (Dunaszerdahely-Komárno, 2011)

Könyvismertetések

Austria, Stadtgemeinde Hainburg an der Donau). Newcomers have full support by authorities, children (not just Slovaks) learn in school Slovak. Researching one phenomenon not taking into account both countries is not complete. Although this goes behind the frames of the research, we suggest three countries (over)view on the phenomenon. Growth of population, suburbanisation and below mentioned Centrope goals poses a question: will we in 20 years speak about small middleeuropean version of blue banana; e.g. red apple? Taking into accout mainly environment and urban planning, austrian authorities are very careful and strict, what about Slovak and hungarian?

Zuzana Mészárosová-Lamlpová study offers us statistical data. There are differences between suburbanization in Žitný ostrov and Hungary, but for this purpose we can take average. Majority of imigrants have middle or high education, 81% of them are Slovaks, 41 is average age, 43% of men and 57% of women, 2/3 are married, 74% have children. Most of them work in private sector, public sector follows. Before moving 62% of respondents had their own appartments in Bratislava, now 77% possess their own house. Majority of them commute every day to Bratislava for work, with car, they found new neighbours and local population very helpful, quality of live has changed positively. Respondents find living together with other nation almost without any problem, they have diffulcities with quality and accessibility of medical assistance, services and shops. Those living in Hungary give their children mainly to kindergadens and primary schools in Hungary, those in Slovakia tend to drive them to local school. Generally they don’t intend to involve into community social live although they have enough information about programs. 31% in Hungary and 42% of respondents in Slovakia don’t speak hungarian at all or don’t learn it. More than 95% feel here like at home. A lot of them have permanent residence still in previous housing. One qestion poses us here: was questionnaire (Project Agglonet) made just for the purpouse of this research or was allready used in any of above mentioned european cases, and as such giving a chance for comparison with them. If not, we recommend to do so in further research to find common things and better understand phenomenon of border regions from comparable perspective. How Bratislava city authorities look on the phenomenon? We suppose they are indifferent (taxes are still payed in Slovakia). Were the credits taken at Slovak or hungarian banks (meaning in Slovakia or Hungary)?

Edit Somlyódyné Pfeil writes about opportunities and legislative challenges of institutionalised cooperation of suburban autonomies. Similar Zoltán Csizmadia tries to show the process of building cross-border networking of public services. Three settlements on each side of the border took part in the project. István Prileszky points on the problems of public transport (mainly because of financial sources) in cross-border agglomeration. European examples of good cooperation on border regions are mentioned. Gábor Lelkes writes about economy situation in Wien - Bratislava - Budapest triangle. He listed all successful companies, one think important however is not included: Centrope initiative. It encompass Slovakia, Hungary, Austria and Czech Republic and has its geographic centre in the research region. With an enormous density of universities, research facilities and technology-oriented companies, cross-border co-operation in science and innovation is destined to become one of the top hallmarks of the Central European Region as stated in one of the newsletters (Centrope project) Contribution by Gabriella Baj focuses on conversion of estate use; from agricultural land to building estate. Andrienn Reisinger deals with challenges hungarian schools in Hungary and Slovakia are facing with due to suburbanisation, and state of medical assistance.

Borders deviding Europe before 1989 could be described as barriers. To overcome european east-west devide, help to each other, exchange experiences, because of the common goal ‘return back to Europe’, Visegrad group was founded. Countries cared about their partial

309