Almost every Hungarian settlement has developed since 2014, but by no means at the same pace. According to the 2026 Settlement Index of the Equilibrium Institute, development paths are shaped by economic, social and infrastructural factors together. The presence of an educated population and the strength of the connection to the capital matter particularly. Pestszentlőrinc–Pestszentimre has clearly developed since 2014: its index score rose by 9 points. Its 18th position among the districts of Budapest, however, has not changed. What do these figures tell us about the development potential of District 18?

The Settlement Index, created by the Equilibrium Institute in 2024, compares the level of development of 3,154 Hungarian settlements and the 23 districts of Budapest. Drawing on more than 360,000 publicly available statistical data points and 53 indicators, the index examines both the current situation and the development trajectory of each settlement.

One important lesson of the 2026 results is that while almost every Hungarian settlement has developed since 2014, there are significant differences in the pace of change. When assessing a settlement or a district, therefore, it is worth looking not only at where it stands today, but also at the direction and the speed of its change.

Knowledge as a resource for urban development

According to the analysis behind the Settlement Index, the share of residents holding a higher education degree shows a particularly strong relationship with dynamic development: where the proportion of the educated population is higher, a more favourable development path typically emerges.

This is a significant finding from an urban development perspective. The competitiveness of a settlement does not depend solely on how much physical infrastructure it builds or how many investments it delivers. It matters at least as much whether it is able to retain and attract an educated, economically active population, and to create an environment in which knowledge, innovation, the local economy and a good quality of life reinforce one another.

The other important correlation identified by the research is proximity to Budapest. The concentration of economic, educational, labour market and service capacity in the capital can represent a considerable development advantage for the settlements closely linked to it.

At the same time, the differing performance of Budapest’s own districts shows that a favourable geographical position is not enough in itself.

Budapest does not develop evenly either

Based on the Settlement Index, the ranking of Budapest’s districts by level of development is led in 2026 by District 5, Belváros-Lipótváros, which is also the most dynamically developing part of the capital. It is followed in the ranking by District 6, Terézváros, with District 1 in third place.

In terms of the dynamics of development, District 8 and District 11 also stand out alongside District 5. In District 8, large-scale urban rehabilitation processes lie behind the significant changes of recent years, while in District 11 new residential and office developments are among the driving factors.

All of this draws attention to an important distinction:

the current level of development of a district and its development dynamics are not the same thing.

A district starting from a less favourable position can move onto a faster development path through deliberate and consistent interventions. From an urban development perspective, therefore, examining the direction and the speed of change is at least as important as the ranking itself.

A look at District 18: development, but an unchanged relative position

The 2026 Settlement Index also provides a concrete picture of the situation of Pestszentlőrinc–Pestszentimre.

In 2026, District 18 ranks 18th among the 23 districts of Budapest, with a Settlement Index score of 27.

The longer-term change, however, is more interesting than this:

compared with 2014, the index score of District 18 rose by 9 points, while its position in the ranking remained unchanged.

The two indicators are worth interpreting together. The change of +9 points shows that the district has developed over the past decade and more. This, however, has not been enough for Pestszentlőrinc–Pestszentimre to move up in the relative ranking of Budapest’s districts.

Development has therefore taken place, but so far it has not resulted in relative catching-up among the districts of Budapest.

From an urban development perspective, this is precisely one of the most interesting questions. The task is not simply to continue developing, but to identify the areas in which the pace of development can be accelerated, and the specific assets of District 18 from which a greater development advantage than today can be created.

1. Retaining the educated population is a strategic question

If, according to the Settlement Index, the share of graduates is one of the most important factors in the development dynamics of settlements, this has direct consequences for District 18 as well.

It is not enough for an educated and economically active population to live in the district while their work, their consumption of services, their cultural life and their social connections are predominantly tied to other parts of Budapest.

The long-term goal can be a district that offers not only a place to live but also a high-quality urban life: locally available services, cultural and community opportunities, meeting points, attractive public spaces, economic opportunities and a strong local identity.

From this perspective, retaining human capital is not merely an educational or a demographic question. It is also a question of urban development.

2. From peripheral position to gateway role

One of the most important characteristics of District 18 is that it is at once an outer district of Budapest and one of the capital’s defining international gateway areas.

Budapest Liszt Ferenc International Airport and the economic zone linked to it constitute an asset that most districts of Budapest do not have. The development documents of District 18 also identify the economic potential of the airport area, and the use of the district’s gateway role, as strategic opportunities.

This connects well with one of the key lessons of the Settlement Index: geographical position becomes a real development advantage only when a settlement is able to convert it into economic, social and urban value.

The presence of the airport does not in itself guarantee faster development for the district. The real question is how much of the economic activity, the jobs, the knowledge, the services and the innovation generated by the area Pestszentlőrinc–Pestszentimre is able to retain and put to use locally.

In this approach, a peripheral location is not necessarily a disadvantage. With the right development strategy it can be turned into a gateway role and a competitive advantage.

3. From residential district to multifunctional urban space

The next question is how the locally available urban functions of District 18 can be further strengthened.

A garden-city style, good-quality residential environment is a considerable asset. A district that is to remain competitive in the long run, however, also needs adequate service, economic, cultural and community functions.

This increases the value of the deliberate development of the district’s sub-centres and its important urban axes, of improving the quality of public spaces, and of examining how residential, economic, service and community functions can be better connected.

The question, therefore, is not simply how Pestszentlőrinc–Pestszentimre can become an even better place to live, but also how it can become a more self-sufficient, multifunctional urban space within Budapest.

4. Development is not enough on its own – it also has to be measured

One of the most important methodological lessons of the Settlement Index is the data-driven approach itself.

The effectiveness of urban development is not shown solely by how many projects have been completed, how much investment has been delivered, or how many square metres of public space have been renewed.

The more important question is:

what has made the district better, and by how much?

Has quality of life improved? Has the local economy grown stronger? Is the district better able to retain its educated population? Have locally available services improved? Have the district’s centres become more attractive? Has accessibility improved? Have local communities grown stronger?

The current data already provide a good example of this. The +9 point development is a positive trend, yet the unchanged 18th place indicates that absolute improvement does not necessarily amount to catching up.

For the developments of the coming period, it is therefore worth tracking not only the delivery of individual projects but also their measurable social, economic and urban impact.

The ranking is not a verdict, but a diagnosis

District 18’s 18th place is therefore not worth interpreting in isolation.

The Settlement Index raises a far more interesting question: how can the development visible since 2014 be accelerated so that, in time, it is also reflected in the district’s relative position within the capital?

Answering this requires addressing several interconnected questions.

How can we retain and attract an educated population locally? How can we build a stronger local economy? How can we make better use of the opportunities offered by the airport and the gateway area? How can we strengthen the district’s sub-centres? What services and urban functions are needed? How can we improve the quality of public spaces? And how can we involve local communities in all of this?

In UrbanLab’s approach, a ranking is not a verdict but a diagnosis.

The data help us understand where we start from, in what direction we are moving and where the most important points of intervention lie. The task of urban development is then to define where we want to get to, by what means we can achieve it, and with what data we can demonstrate that we have genuinely moved closer to the goal.

The +9 point development of District 18 over the past decade shows that there is something to build on. The next challenge is to turn development into catching up.

Sources

Equilibrium Institute: Settlement Index 2026 – comparative analysis of 3,154 Hungarian settlements and the 23 districts of Budapest; data for District 18: 18th place, 27 points, +9 point change compared with 2014, unchanged ranking position.

Telex: Emília Madzin: Itt vannak az ország legfejlettebb települései (These are the country’s most developed settlements), 3 September 2026.

Municipality of Budapest District 18, Pestszentlőrinc–Pestszentimre: the settlement development and integrated settlement development strategy documents of the district.