Part I — Situation overview

On Wednesday, 14 October 2026, István Láng resigned as head of the General Directorate of Water Management (OVF), the central body of the state water management service. László Gajdos, the minister responsible for the living environment, justified the change of leadership in a Facebook post quoted by Portfolio by saying that Láng’s career of nearly forty years had been tied primarily to drainage and flood protection. The ministry’s emerging strategy, by contrast, puts the emphasis on water retention. The ministry will continue to count on his flood-protection experience. According to the minister, “some seven Lake Balatons’ worth of water is missing” from the country’s water resources. Within a few days the ministry will issue a call for applications for the post of director general, and is looking for a leader who regards water retention as one of the most important priorities of water management. According to HVG’s information, the reason for the resignation was that the water authorities had not been prepared for the extremely dry situation. On the same day the Danube stood at −106 centimetres at Paks (Telex). Attila Bencsik, vice-president of the Hungarian Shipping Association, told RTL Híradó that so far the transport of some 1.5 million tonnes of goods, roughly 60,000 truckloads, had been cancelled. Szabolcs Bóna, Minister of Agriculture and Food Economy, announced two new Water Premium (Vízprémium) calls (Portfolio).

The drought has thus become a system-level risk. According to HVG, at the beginning of August three of the four units of the Paks nuclear power plant had to be shut down completely. The bed sill built in the summer — a stone weir placed in the riverbed that backs up the water level — raises the local water level by roughly 60 centimetres, and according to the OVF the situation would still be critical without it. According to HVG, the Middle Tisza District Water Directorate (KÖTIVIZIG) passed on the water arriving in Lake Tisza to secure the drinking water supply of some one hundred thousand people in the Szolnok area, which is why the lake has almost dried up. According to Portfolio, the average sunflower yield fell some 20 per cent short of the five-year average. MIAK wrote about the water balance on 2 August, about the institutional system of water science on 4 August, about the order of water allocation on 9 August, about the numerical water-retention target of the climate law on 4 October, and about the rules for emergency-based riverbed interventions on 8 October.

The new element now is the personnel decision: the government has signalled the shift in water-management thinking with a change of leader. MIAK’s reading is that this is a necessary but not sufficient step. The functioning of an institution of several thousand people, organised for decades around flood protection and drainage, is determined not by the name of its leader but by its daily operating regime. And water retention will not be decided next summer, but in the next five months: winter and early-spring precipitation can be kept in the landscape now.

Part II — Grounding in the literature

Three authors provide the interpretive framework. In Essence of Decision, Graham Allison, an American political scientist and founding dean of Harvard University’s school of government, and Philip Zelikow, an American historian and former government official, describe an organisational behaviour model. According to it, large organisations operate according to standard procedures. Leaders cannot rewrite these overnight, but they can decide which organisational unit should carry out which programme. Peter F. Drucker (Austrian-American management thinker, founder of the methodology of measuring organisational effectiveness) argues in The Effective Executive that the effective executive starts from the results expected of him, and selects his staff on the basis of their strengths, not their weaknesses. Nicholas Stern (British economist, former chief economist of the World Bank, author of the British government report on the economics of climate change) defines the need for seasonal water storage in The Stern Review as the volume of water that has to be transferred from the wet months to the dry months. Together the three ideas say: a change of leader is worth something if it is tied to measurable targets, and if the institution’s operating regime also changes, before the current wet season. The detailed treatment of the literature — author by author, with quotations — is in section 6.4 Literature in detail.

Part III — MIAK’s concrete proposal

MIAK proposes three measurable measures. The first concerns leader selection, the second the winter operating regime of the district water directorates, and the third the scheduling of water-retention support for farmers. MIAK maintains its earlier proposals (a national water-balance dashboard, an order of water allocation, a numerical water-retention target in the climate law) and does not repeat them here.

3.1 A results-based, public call for the head of the OVF and a public mandate programme (call published by 31 October, programme within 60 days of appointment)

According to the minister, the new head is expected to be committed to the shift in thinking. That is an intention, not a measurable expectation. MIAK proposes that the call for applications contain three things. First: the results expected of the head, in numbers, with at least three indicators. Examples are the annual volume of water retained in the landscape in million cubic metres, the fill level of reservoirs managed by the water authorities at the end of March, and the number of water-retention interventions per river basin. Second: the composition of the selection committee, with an external expert member (for example from the HUN-REN research network or a university faculty of water engineering). Third: that the professional concept of the successful applicant will be made public after the appointment. Within 60 days, the appointed head should publish a mandate programme: what he keeps from today’s operations, what he stops and what he launches, with deadlines. According to Drucker’s selection logic (see 6.4.2), one must build on strengths. Therefore, alongside water-retention expertise, flood-protection expertise must also be retained institutionally, for example with a deputy post for flood protection. This year was a year of extreme drought, but next spring may also bring floods. The proposal applies programme points KI7 on the selection of civil servants and KI8 on Drucker-style effectiveness measurement to a specific leadership post.

3.2 A public winter water-retention operating regime at every district water directorate (publication by 30 November, implementation report by 30 April 2027)

The most important period for water retention is the months between November and March. Evaporation is low then, so the water from precipitation and snowmelt has a good chance of reaching the soil and the watercourses. This is when it is decided how much water remains in the landscape for the next growing season. MIAK proposes that the regional district water directorates publish a winter water-retention operating regime by 30 November. It should list, facility by facility, which sluices, canal sections and reservoirs are switched to water retention, and with what target volume. It should also lay down at what water level water must nevertheless be released, so that inland excess water does not endanger settlements and roads. A good model for this is the practice of KÖTIVIZIG, which, according to HVG, publicly announced that if the upstream water level of the Kisköre barrage reaches 610 centimetres, further measures become justified to secure the drinking water supply. The same kind of pre-announced levels must also be set for winter retention. By 30 April 2027, every directorate should report how much water it retained compared with the target. According to the Allison–Zelikow organisational model (see 6.4.1), leaders can change things quickly by assigning organisational programmes. The winter operating regime is exactly such a programme assignment. And according to Stern’s seasonal storage logic (see 6.4.3), the water of the wet months must be carried over to the dry months. The proposal extends programme point K1 on measurable climate targets to water retention, and, in line with the common-resource framework of G28, also involves local stakeholders in setting the threshold levels.

3.3 Bringing forward the Water Premium calls and making them measurable (public consultation by 30 November, applications from 1 March 2027)

According to Portfolio, two new Water Premium calls have been added to the updated call schedule of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), the EU’s system of agricultural subsidies. One encourages water replenishment for ecological purposes, the other keeping surplus water from precipitation and inland excess water on site. However, the public consultation is expected only by the end of the year, and the submission of applications can start only in the second quarter of 2027. By then most of the winter and early-spring precipitation will already have run off, so in the first year farmers would miss the most important period. MIAK proposes that the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Economy put the two calls out to public consultation by 30 November, and that applications open on 1 March 2027. Part of the support should be tied to the water actually retained, in estimated or measured cubic metres per hectare. Scoring should favour areas where the groundwater has sunk the deepest, or where inland excess water regularly returns. Payment data should be public, broken down by municipality, on the MG2 agricultural data platform. Joint applications by neighbouring farms should receive extra points, as proposed by the MG5 programme point on community resource management. If CAP rules make bringing the calls forward impossible, the ministry should explain this publicly and indicate from which domestic source a transitional spring programme could start.

The three proposals are linked by one principle: the shift in thinking becomes real if leader selection, the institutional operating regime and the scheduling of support all point in the same direction, and all three are measurable. According to Allison and Zelikow, major organisational change typically follows a crisis. This year’s drought is that crisis. The next five months will show whether the change also reaches the institution’s daily operations, or stops at the level of the leadership post.

Part IV — Expected effects and risks

Dimension Expected effect Risk
Public administration The new head starts with measurable targets; both the ministry and the public can hold him to account Setting numerical targets may slow down the call; with overly narrow indicators the head may concentrate only on measurable tasks
Environment and water resources A larger share of winter precipitation stays in the landscape; groundwater and reservoirs start the 2027 growing season in better condition In a wet winter, retention may cause an inland excess water risk; this is why pre-announced release levels are needed
Agriculture Farmers can already retain the spring 2027 precipitation; support is tied to the water retained EU agricultural subsidy rules may restrict bringing the calls forward; measurement in cubic metres means an administrative burden
Transport and energy A better state of the river basins may mitigate low-water periods in the longer term The Danube’s flow regime is mainly determined by precipitation in the upper basin; domestic retention will not solve the loss of shipping in the short term
Territorial dimension Scoring favours the most severely affected areas of the Great Plain If the public data are incomplete, targeting may favour farms with better application capacity

The main dilemma is the order of priority between drinking water, nature and farming. This year’s release of Lake Tisza shows that, under the law on water management, water use for subsistence drinking water, public health and disaster management takes precedence over every other need. This is the right order. The very purpose of water retention is to make such decisions necessary less often. The second dilemma is time. The winter operating regime has to be prepared in six weeks, before the new head is appointed. Therefore, the acting leadership and the ministry are temporarily responsible for proposal 3.2. The proposal tips over to the risk side if the retained water causes inland flood damage. This is handled by the pre-announced release levels and by informing municipalities in advance.

Part V — Measurability and summary

5.1 What is worth following? (suggested KPIs)

MIAK suggests the following key performance indicators (KPIs). These are suggested indicators, not government commitments.

  • The content of the call. Target: the call published by 31 October 2026 contains at least three numerical results targets, and the composition of the selection committee is public. It is worth following whether the mandate programme appears within 60 days of the appointment.
  • Winter water retention. Target: by 30 November every regional district water directorate publishes its facility-by-facility operating regime and target volume; by 30 April 2027 the implementation report on the volume of water retained appears, in million cubic metres. It is also worth following the state of groundwater levels and reservoirs at the end of March compared with the previous year.
  • The scheduling of the Water Premium. Target: applications open on 1 March 2027. It is worth following the number of supported hectares, the estimated volume of water retained, and whether payments are public broken down by municipality.
  • System-level exposure. It is worth following the number of days lost in Danube shipping and the water level at Paks in summer 2027. These are not direct results of the proposal, but they show how large a risk has to be reckoned with.

5.2 Summary

MIAK’s request to the ministry responsible for the living environment is twofold. The call for the head of the OVF should contain numerical results targets, and the winter water-retention operating regime should appear by 30 November. From the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Economy, it asks that Water Premium applications can be submitted as early as spring 2027. The change of leader is a good sign, but water will stay or flow away in the next five months, and this will be decided not by the call but by the operating regime of the sluices.

Of MIAK’s foundational values, data-drivenness and accountability are at stake here. Data-drivenness requires that the “shift in thinking” be measurable in cubic metres, not only in announcements. Accountability requires that the new head, the district water directorates and the support system all report, against public targets, on how much water the country has retained.

Part VI — Reasoning and further sources

6.1 Press framing by spectrum

In the left-liberal segment, HVG linked two threads. In its article on Danube freight transport, besides the loss of shipping it also covered the Paks shutdowns, the attention of the EU environment commissioner to the bed sill, and the director general’s resignation. Citing its own information, it named unpreparedness as the reason for the resignation. Its photo report on the dried-up Lake Tisza also presented the legal side: the water directorate’s statement and the order of priority in the law on water management. Telex focused on the economic damage in a short news item drawing on the RTL Híradó report. 444.hu launched a separate, regular column titled “Vízhíradó” (Water News). According to its introduction, water management has become a central topic of public debate, and the outlet undertakes to provide expert explanation and to filter out misleading claims (the article was not publicly downloadable, only its introduction). Even before the resignation, HVG’s late-September podcast raised the feasibility of the water-retention plan and the need to rewrite the law on water management (only the episode’s description was available).

In the public-affairs segment, Index chose the frame “the bed sill saved Paks”. It foregrounded the success of the intervention and the Prime Minister’s announcements, and only then wrote about the collapse of freight transport. In the economic segment, Portfolio relayed the ministry’s narrative: the minister’s justification for the change of leadership, the Water Premium calls and the decline of the sunflower harvest. It noted that the water-strategy goals are not new; the August action plan already contained them. In the conservative segment, MIAK’s press monitor did not record any relevant article from Magyar Nemzet or Mandiner on that day. The common blind spot of the segments is that none of the outlets asked what the yardstick will be: what numerical target the new head will receive, and what will change in the daily operations of water management in the coming months.

6.2 Facts and data

Item Value Source
Danube water level at Paks, 14 October 2026 −106 cm Telex (based on RTL Híradó)
Local water-level-raising effect of the bed sill approx. 60 cm (according to HVG, more than 60 cm) Telex, Index, HVG
Cancelled Danube freight transport approx. 1.5 million tonnes, approx. 60,000 truckloads (export, import and transit combined) Hungarian Shipping Association, based on RTL Híradó: Telex, HVG, Index
Paks units at the beginning of August three out of four shut down completely, the fourth at reduced capacity HVG
Shortfall in domestic water resources approx. seven Lake Balatons László Gajdos, Portfolio
People affected by the Szolnok-area drinking water supply approx. 100,000 people KÖTIVIZIG, HVG
Further restrictions in the Middle Tisza area from 17 August 2026 KÖTIVIZIG, HVG
Warning level of the upstream water level at Kisköre 610 cm (further measures to secure the drinking water supply) KÖTIVIZIG, HVG
Precipitation in the Middle Tisza basin the lowest since measurements began; on the Upper Tisza the second lowest since 1985 KÖTIVIZIG, HVG
Sunflower sown area / average yield approx. 810,000 ha; below 2 t/ha, approx. 20% below the five-year average; approx. 1.2 million tonnes Portfolio
Water Premium calls 2 new calls; public consultation by the end of the year; applications from Q2 2027 Szabolcs Bóna, Portfolio

The sources described the timing of the Paks shutdowns differently: HVG writes about the beginning of August and three units shut down completely, while Index writes about a shutdown on 29 July and says that from 2 August only two turbines of one unit were operating at full capacity. The blog uses HVG’s summary figure; this does not affect the proposals. Portfolio refers to the August government plan as the Sustainable Water Management Action Plan, HVG as the Sustainable Water Management Plan.

6.3 Policy dimensions

  • Environment and climate (programme points) — the winter water-retention operating regime extends measurable climate targets (K1) to water retention; the cooling-water exposure of Paks is a question of resilience to energy-market shocks (K7);
  • Public administration and e-government (programme points) — the OVF call is a test of civil-servant selection (KI7) and of Drucker-style effectiveness measurement (KI8); the resetting of organisational routines could be the subject of an organisational behaviour audit (KI11);
  • Agriculture (programme points) — the publicity of Water Premium payments is a task for the agricultural data platform (MG2); joint water retention by neighbouring farms falls within the framework of community resource management (MG5);
  • Economy (programme points) — water as a common resource, involving local stakeholders in setting threshold levels (G28);
  • Transport and infrastructure (background material) — the loss of Danube freight transport and the capacity of rail substitution; data-driven prioritisation of railway development (KO4);
  • Territorial inequality and rural policy (programme points) — Water Premium scoring could target the most severely affected areas, compared against the data of the small-region development index (TE1).

6.4 Literature in detail

6.4.1 Graham Allison and Philip Zelikow: Essence of Decision

Allison and Zelikow’s second model describes government action as organisational output. Large organisations work according to pre-established programmes and standard procedures, and these continue to operate in new situations as well. On both the Soviet and the American side of the Cuban missile crisis, the authors show that old programmes often cause unexpected difficulties in a new environment. Leaders’ attempts to force the organisation to act against its existing goals create further complications. According to the authors’ finding, small modifications of organisational routines happen continuously, but major organisational changes typically follow severe crises rather than precede them. At the same time, the political leaders at the head of organisations can indeed make important decisions about which organisation should carry out which programme, and where. This often means applying existing programmes in a new environment or new combinations of the routines of several organisations, and less often the rapid rewriting of programmes. For Hungarian water management this means two things. On the one hand, this year’s drought is the crisis after which major organisational change can be expected. On the other hand, the change depends not on the person of the leader but on the assignment of programmes. A canal and sluice system tuned for decades to drain water quickly will keep draining in winter even if the strategy already proclaims retention, unless someone assigns the new programme facility by facility. This is what the winter operating regime under proposal 3.2 does.

📖 Source: Graham Allison and Philip Zelikow: Essence of Decision — Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis (2nd edition, Longman, 1999)

6.4.2 Peter F. Drucker: The Effective Executive

According to Drucker, the effective executive starts from the question of what results are expected of him, not from what work he has to do and with what techniques. The executive who focuses on contribution turns away from his own specialty and department and looks at the performance of the whole organisation, at results outside the organisation. Using the example of an American government science agency, Drucker shows that even a professionally more brilliant successor can fail if he does not provide the contribution the organisation needs. In his chapter on selection he writes that the effective executive asks what a candidate can do, not what he cannot do. Selection built on strengths is a condition of the effectiveness of both the organisation and the individual. Translated to the OVF call: the call must lay down what results the ministry expects from the new head, not only what mindset. The strength-based logic also means that it is not enough to mention the outgoing leadership’s flood-protection expertise in the minister’s announcement; it has to be retained in institutional form. This is why proposal 3.1 asks for numerical targets and a deputy post for flood protection.

📖 Source: Peter F. Drucker: The Effective Executive — The Definitive Guide to Getting the Right Things Done (HarperCollins, 2006 edition)

6.4.3 Nicholas Stern: The Economics of Climate Change — The Stern Review

In the part on water infrastructure in developing countries, Stern defines the seasonal storage index as follows:

“The seasonal storage index (SSI) indicates the volume of storage needed to satisfy annual water demand based on the average seasonal rainfall cycle (calculated as the volume needed to transfer water from wet months to dry months).”

In other words, the index indicates the storage volume needed to meet annual water demand under the average seasonal rainfall cycle, that is, the volume of water that has to be carried over from the wet months to the dry months. Stern regards the development of both surface reservoirs and groundwater resources as means of storage. On adaptation in general, he writes that part of it happens by itself, in response to market and environmental changes, whereas major infrastructure decisions require foresight and planning. Hungary is not a developing country, and the building of large reservoirs is not the question now either. The logic is nevertheless directly applicable. Winter water retained in the landscape, the soil, the canals and the oxbow lakes plays the same role as a reservoir: it carries the water of the wet months over to the dry months. This transfer works only if the decision is made before the wet season begins. This is why proposal 3.2 proposes a deadline of 30 November.

📖 Source: Nicholas Stern: The Economics of Climate Change — The Stern Review (Cambridge University Press, 2007)

6.5 International comparison

The best-known parallel is the Netherlands. Since 2000, Dutch water policy has followed a three-step order: water must first be retained, then stored, and only finally drained. This order became a basic principle of water-management planning and was also built into the operating regime of the water boards. After the 2018 drought, the Dutch government set up a separate drought task force, which made proposals to improve the order of water allocation and winter–spring water retention. The Dutch experience shows that a shift in thinking becomes lasting when it is laid down as an order of priority and an operating regime, not only as a strategic goal. The Hungarian situation differs in that the country lies on the lower reaches of large rivers, so much of the flow regime of the Danube and the Tisza depends on precipitation beyond the borders. Domestic retention can therefore mainly improve the water balance of small watercourses, groundwater and areas prone to inland excess water, and less so the low water of the large rivers. This is why it is important that the targets of proposal 3.2 be set per river basin and per facility.

Environment and climate

  • K1 — Measurable climate targets
  • K7 — Resilience to energy-market shocks

Public administration and e-government

  • KI7 — Civil-servant selection and rotation system
  • KI8 — Drucker-style effectiveness measurement in public administration
  • KI11 — Organisational behaviour audit — Allison framework

Agriculture

  • MG2 — Agricultural data platform
  • MG5 — Community resource management framework (commons 2.0)

Economy

  • G28 — Framework for community resource management (Ostrom CPR)

Transport and infrastructure

  • KO4 — Railway development with data-driven prioritisation

Territorial inequality and rural policy

  • TE1 — Small-region development index

Proposed new programme point: Seasonal water-retention operating regime: every year by 30 November, the district water directorates publish a public, facility-by-facility retention plan with target volumes and pre-announced release levels, and by 30 April they report on the volume of water retained — for the Environment and climate area.

6.7 List of sources

Press sources (MIAK press monitor, 15 October 2026 — topic 2):

Knowledge-base references (books):

  • 📖 Graham Allison and Philip Zelikow: Essence of Decision — Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis
  • 📖 Peter F. Drucker: The Effective Executive
  • 📖 Nicholas Stern: The Economics of Climate Change — The Stern Review

MIAK internal materials:

  • MIAK policy area: Environment and climate (programme points; programme point ID: K1, K7)
  • MIAK policy area: Public administration and e-government (programme points; programme point ID: KI7, KI8, KI11)
  • MIAK policy area: Agriculture (programme points; programme point ID: MG2, MG5)
  • MIAK policy area: Economy (programme points; programme point ID: G28)
  • MIAK policy area: Transport and infrastructure (background material; programme point ID: KO4)
  • MIAK policy area: Territorial inequality and rural policy (programme points; programme point ID: TE1)
  • MIAK press monitor, 15 October 2026 — topic 2, score: 93/100

Supplementary public data sources (if used):

  • Suggested data sources for follow-up: the water-level database of the General Directorate of Water Management (hydroinfo.hu), the drought monitoring of the HUN-REN Centre for Agricultural Research, the harvest data of the Hungarian Central Statistical Office (KSH), the data of the Hungarian Shipping Association, the Copernicus European Drought Observatory

Generation metadata