Most European countries apply development policy solutions to help disadvantaged regions catch up and seek effective solutions for territorial cohesion. This endeavour has been strongly supported by the European Commission in both the 2013-2020 and 2021-27 programming periods and is likely to remain so in the period after 2028. This is an understandable and logical endeavour, as being 'left behind' in economic, social or geographical terms not only reinforces internal migration flows within the European Community and its Member States but also increases political discontent. A number of approaches have emerged in European countries to identify disadvantaged regions and address their problems. The differences stem partly from the different intervention intentions of individual countries and partly from their different spatial, state and public administration structures. Various development policy solutions have been devised to help disadvantaged regions catch up, taking these factors into account. In Hungary, development policy has placed greater emphasis on the catching up of regions and settlements lagging behind in terms of socio-economic development since the 1980s, but the importance of delimitation in development policy practice has increased since the country's accession to the EU, with the establishment of differentiated support resource allocation mechanisms and targeted support programmes. The methodology currently in use for designating beneficiary regions has been in place since 2014. The socioeconomic changes that have taken place since then have shifted the focus of both scientific and policy interest in recent years towards more location-specific regulatory mechanisms that measure development differences at a lower level and are more sensitive to functional links between settlements. To support efforts in the renewal of the Hungarian regional development toolkit, our study seeks to outline alternative options by analysing Italian and British development policy practices, in addition to presenting Hungarian beneficiary regions. The international examples examined, despite their limitations as presented in the study, provide examples of multi-level governance, development policies based on functional units, and methodologies for measuring development below the settlement level. Current legislation in Hungary allows for changes in this direction, but their incorporation into domestic practice is only possible after careful preparation.

Most European countries apply development policy solutions to help disadvantaged regions catch up and seek effective solutions for territorial cohesion. This endeavour has been strongly supported by the European Commission in both the 2013-2020 and 2021-27 programming periods and is likely to remain so in the period after 2028. This is an understandable and logical endeavour, as being 'left behind' in economic, social or geographical terms not only reinforces internal migration flows within the European Community and its Member States but also increases political discontent. A number of approaches have emerged in European countries to identify disadvantaged regions and address their problems. The differences stem partly from the different intervention intentions of individual countries and partly from their different spatial, state and public administration structures. Various development policy solutions have been devised to help disadvantaged regions catch up, taking these factors into account. In Hungary, development policy has placed greater emphasis on the catching up of regions and settlements lagging behind in terms of socio-economic development since the 1980s, but the importance of delimitation in development policy practice has increased since the country's accession to the EU, with the establishment of differentiated support resource allocation mechanisms and targeted support programmes. The methodology currently in use for designating beneficiary regions has been in place since 2014. The socioeconomic changes that have taken place since then have shifted the focus of both scientific and policy interest in recent years towards more location-specific regulatory mechanisms that measure development differences at a lower level and are more sensitive to functional links between settlements. To support efforts in the renewal of the Hungarian regional development toolkit, our study seeks to outline alternative options by analysing Italian and British development policy practices, in addition to presenting Hungarian beneficiary regions. The international examples examined, despite their limitations as presented in the study, provide examples of multi-level governance, development policies based on functional units, and methodologies for measuring development below the settlement level. Current legislation in Hungary allows for changes in this direction, but their incorporation into domestic practice is only possible after careful preparation.

Some of the literature on catchment areas offers valuable insights into spatial units defined by the various types and functions of urban centres. In addition, a range of functional urban region delineation methodologies contribute significantly to understanding citizens' commuting habits. However, while the former often lacks a complex, multifunctional perspective, the latter typically focuses on labour market areas linked to global megacities. As a result, smaller centres fulfilling a wide range of everyday functions are frequently omitted from regional maps, and they remain hidden in the catchment area of larger cities. This research aims to address these gaps by proposing a method for identifying urban centres on the basis of multidimensional selection criteria. This approach enables the general mapping of their multifunctional catchment areas and their wider functional urban zones. This analysis extends the range of statistics commonly used: in addition to labour market commuting, it includes commuting for general and vocational education, as well as accounting for the accessibility of everyday commercial centres and frequently used urban-level public services. Owing to differing spatial organizing principles, this research highlights that everyday centres take on varied structural forms – justifying a multidimensional mapping approach that is in addition to traditional labour market commuting analyses. Although this study is grounded in the Hungarian context, its multidimensional approach to mapping functional urban catchment areas offers valuable insights and a flexible framework for international research. By integrating a wide range of everyday spatial behaviour indicators, this analysis not only deepens our understanding of urban networks but also provides urban planning and regional development professionals with a robust tool for identifying gaps in public service provision. In doing so, it can help increase access to essential services, particularly for residents in rural areas far from major urban centres, which are typically the focus of the literature.