Mezei István: Urban development in Slovakia (Pécs-Somorja, 2010)
6. Towns along the Hungarian and Slovak border
Towns along the Hungarian and Slovak border Table 40. The main figures of borderland districts and small regions District/Small region Population % Agriculture % Industry %Services “/»Percentage of the employed %Secondary education %Higher education %Number of people under 16 Hungarian % %Gypsy “/•Slovak Sencc 51.825 3.99 18.58 77.43 53.15 25.19 7.85 18.34 20.36 0.08 76.79 Dunajská Streda 112.384 8.48 23.92 67.60 52.10 21.16 4.91 18.68 83.34 0.95 14.01 Galanta 94.533 5.92 26.69 67.38 51.21 22.09 4.52 18.95 38.63 0.74 59.46 Komárno 108.556 10.85 26.17 62.98 50.94 22.07 5.15 17.34 69.07 1.12 27.71 Šaľa 54.000 6.31 33.12 60.57 52.18 23.00 5.31 18.95 35.71 1.00 61.92 Nitra 163.540 4.82 26.89 68.29 50.91 25.41 9.89 18.91 6.70 0.35 91.15 Nové Zámky 149.594 7.94 25.02 67.04 50.57 24.15 5.43 17.61 38.28 0.64 59.53 Levice 120.021 9.33 26.54 64.13 49.39 23.90 5.85 18.47 27.93 1.03 69.15 Veľký Krtiš 46.741 15.35 23.43 61.23 46.63 21.49 4.09 19.90 27.43 1.82 68.03 Lučenec 72.837 6.27 26.50 67.24 48.99 27.34 8.89 19.18 27.56 2.82 67.64 Revúca 40.918 7.54 32.47 59.99 50.31 20.86 4.61 21.36 21.98 6.84 69.44 Rimavská Sobota 83.124 11.05 21.84 67.12 48.45 21.89 4.45 20.96 41.29 4.65 52.32 Rožňava 61.887 8.27 24.57 67.16 54.23 24.09 4.81 20.57 30.63 4.70 62.96 Košice -okolie 106.999 7.45 24.06 68.49 51.12 21.59 3.28 23.21 13.22 5.04 79.30 Trebišov 103.779 9.16 16.61 74.23 51.71 23.53 4.58 21.96 29.32 4.45 64.75 Michalovce 109.121 7.71 27.87 64.42 50.99 25.77 6.34 21.89 11.75 4.03 81.70 16 districts 1.479.859 7.96 25.10 66.94 50.82 23.48 5.79 19.62 33.06 2.24 62.81 Mosonmagyaróvári 72.525 8.07 44.80 47.14 42.51 17.43 6.13 19.52 95.90 0.16 0.06 Győri 175,076 2.85 38.15 59.00 43.52 22.89 11.62 18.51 95.78 0.44 0.05 Komáromi 41.346 10.45 42.32 47.23 42.54 18.77 6.42 19.46 97.38 0.36 0.13 Tatai 39.784 5.86 34.64 59.50 40.63 19.95 9.24 18.90 94.30 0.42 1.40 Esztergomi 55.594 1.82 48.30 49.88 38.81 20.51 8.59 19.73 93.98 1.73 1.25 Szobi 13,632 6.50 28.40 65.09 32.49 17.21 5.16 18.79 93.01 1.68 0.67 Balassagyarmati 43.424 4.07 38.87 57.06 35.03 18.42 6.19 19.38 96.84 3.07 1.38 Szécsényi 20.477 3.62 48.26 48.12 29.67 13.86 3.55 20.81 94.71 6.35 0.13 Salgótarjáni 68.833 1.45 39.00 59.54 33.01 19.92 7.96 18.83 94.37 4.11 0.23 Ózdi 75.720 1.88 44.08 54.04 24.36 14.98 4.26 23.02 95.55 8.93 0.13 Kazincbarcikai 65.231 1.00 46.62 52.38 28.01 17.59 5.49 21.81 96.54 2.79 0.16 Edelényi 36.584 5.59 31.77 62.64 21.97 11.50 3.57 24.52 97.63 17.91 0.09 Encsi 35,163 10.32 23.74 65.94 20.83 10.85 3.67 26.47 98.27 15.89 0.18 Sátoraljaújhelyi 43.953 4.14 43.11 52.75 26.93 14.06 4.95 23.45 97.01 8.38 1.30 14 small regions 787.342 4.10 40 53 55.27 34.89 18.26 7 25 20 52 95.84 4.11)0.41 Source: Census, 2001. KSH, Štatistický úrad SR. In the small regions along the Danube on the Hungarian side, the percentage of those employed is much higher than to the east of the river Ipeľ, and so is that of the people employed in agriculture or industry. Of the eastern small regions, especially the small region of Encs stands out with its low industrial indicators. Apart from this, the proportions are just the opposite to those in the southern Slovak districts along the border, because on the Hungarian side the percentage of the people working in agriculture is much lower than the national average, while, as for the industry, there are much higher proportions than the national average, especially in the small regions in the west. Thus, regarding the percentages of the people employed, there are similarities between the more developed western districts/small regions 145
