At the Közgazdász-vándorgyűlés panel titled “Artificial Intelligence — control or loss of control,” experts examined Hungary’s current position in AI development, its chances on the international market, and ways to mitigate associated risks. The session was moderated by Zsakó Enikő, chair of the Audit Section of the Hungarian Economic Association.
Key speakers and their assessments
-
Fehér Péter, deputy state secretary, argued that achieving productivity gains that would also boost GDP requires detailed practical work: successful use cases and intensive involvement of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).
-
Sándorné Kriszt Éva, university professor at the Budapest Business School (BGE), cited research indicating that 74% of AI’s usefulness is realized by 20% of companies, suggesting there is room to reduce concentration.
-
Keleti Arthur, cybersecurity expert and futurologist, warned that criminals do not care about statistics. He assessed that Hungary performs well in drafting strategies and regulation but poorly in implementing ideas and in practical cyberdefence.
-
Szertics Gergely, founder-CEO of AI Partners, noted that since 2020 many developments were planned to be executed from the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), but a large share of these never materialized, leaving several regional countries far ahead of Hungary.
The international AI market and strategic choices for Hungary
Panelists emphasized that the international AI market is dominated by two major players, the United States and China. Entering global value chains as a newcomer is extremely difficult, and creating a European equivalent of ChatGPT was described as unrealistic. Fehér Péter added that Hungary does not necessarily need to chase global leaders; instead it could focus on robotic or healthcare solutions that can be practically deployed domestically.
Keleti Arthur contrasted approaches in Asia, where he argued there are fewer individual inventors but far more people working simultaneously toward the same objectives, often with inter-company knowledge sharing that would be unimaginable in the U.S. context.
Szertics Gergely stressed that Hungary lags primarily in practical usability: companies and institutions often fail to pose the right, sufficiently targeted questions to apply AI effectively.
Education and cooperation as a way forward
As a positive development, the panel highlighted a joint master’s programme launched by eight universities that attracted 1,100 applicants. This example suggests that coordinated education and shared resources can help advance competence without each university needing its own full hardware park.
Conclusion: strong on strategy, weak on execution
Panel participants broadly concluded that Hungary is competent at strategy writing and regulatory work but falls short on turning ideas into practice and on operational cyberdefence. Progress will depend on involving SMEs, creating targeted, usable AI projects, and strengthening cooperation between education and research institutions.
