Series: The History of Economic Thought in Transitional Countries〈 3〉 Bulgarian Economic Thought since 1989: A Personal Perspective＊

Nikolay Nenovsky

Abstract: The profundity and timing of the collapse of the socialist economies took the econo- mists on both sides of the Iron Curtain by surprise. There were no theories that could explain or analyze the nature of such systemic social events and processes. The sovi- et-style Marxist political economy, neoclassical theory, and Keynesian interpretations were unable to anticipate, explain, or offer solutions to the real problems. This paper, explores the intellectual reactions of the Bulgarian economic commu- nity to the collapse of the planned economy and to the practical and theoretical chal- lenges of the post-communist period. The following are the three primary objectives of this study: First is a methodological objective, i.e., for explaining the dissemination of economic knowledge, determining its channels, as well as explaining the basic transmission mechanisms of economic theory in Bulgaria after the disintegration of the socialist bloc. Second is a purely informational objective, i.e., to present the major topics and issues studied during the period 1989-2009 and the findings of the econo- mists working on them. Finally, the third objective and parallel task is to theoretically interpret the development, characteristics, and specificities of the Bulgarian economic thought during that period. The main conclusion of this study is that although a few interesting studies re- garding the Bulgarian economic science have been published, they fail to offer inde- pendent and original ideas. The Bulgarian economic perspectives closely follow the trends of western economic science, which itself is currently at crossroads and is en- countering numerous challenges. JEL classifications numbers: B 20, B 41, P 50.

＊ I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to Kiichiro Yagi, Zoya Mladenova, Stephan Kolev, Roumen Andreev, Nikola Kobarsky, and Giovanni Pavanelli for their discussions and helpful suggestions. This pa- per was prepared during my stay in ICER, the summer-autumn of 2009. I would especially like to mention Michalis Psalidopoulos’ thoughtful and instructive letter wherein he emphasized the harmful and self-de- feating effects of my claim regarding a lack of originality of the studies conducted by Bulgarian scholars and the relativity regarding which studies genuinely constitute economic theory and those that do not. Al- though this made me reconsider a number of my judgments, I decided to retain my primary conclusions be- cause they were arrived at on the basis of my impressions of the Bulgarian economy and its scholars when I had written the article（ summer 2009）. The History of Economic Thought, Vol. 52, No. 2, 2011. Ⓒ The Japanese Society for the History of Eco- nomic Thought. 2 経済学史研究 52 巻 2 号

cialist past within the Council for Mutual I Introduction Economic Assistance（ COMECON） struc- A number of benefits may be derived from ture was characterized as one of the most in- the studies on economic thought in Bulgaria tegrated and dependent USSR and post 1989. First, the disintegration of the So- COMECON economies and possessed the viet bloc not only shocked the ordinary peo- typical planned-economy features; these fea- ple and the politicians, i.e., a shock to the tures do not need to be discussed in detail in economic practice, but was also marked by this study（ see Dobrinsky 2000）. Moreover, profound intellectual drama, which presented the Bulgarian economy lacked political and a challenge for a majority of the social re- intellectual opposition during the communist searchers including economists in these period and was characterized by sporadic countries. In this sense, it was a shock to eco- dissident activities that hardly compared nomic theory1） as well. Therefore, it is inter- with those of the other former socialist coun- esting to understand how economists reacted tries. Even Gorbachev’s Perestroika was met to this crisis, and the manner in which they in an extremely original manner by the then readjusted their research efforts and theoreti- Bulgarian state leader comrade, Todor cal postures. We understand that every crisis Zhivkov, who stated with a smile that our stimulates new ideas and new economic best strategy would be to “stay low until it’s knowledge. Second, such studies enhance over［ da se snishim］,” although on another our overall understanding of the manner in occasion he claimed that Bulgaria had intro- which economic knowledge originates and duced Perestroika before Gorbachev and had disseminates in general and in peripheral even carried it through. The absence of Per- countries in particular, the extent of its pecu- estroika and of open debate in Bulgaria until liarities, its original topics and approaches, 1989 negatively impacted the subsequent de- the extent to which it imitates the basic eco- velopment of economic thought, which had nomic theories, the manner in which the top- to make up for the lost time; therefore, its ics of study are determined, etc. Finally, such detrimental impact on economic science was studies are useful for ensuring the systemati- even more significant.3） Moreover, as indi- zation of themes, authors, and publications, cated by Sutela and Mau（ 1998, 35, 36）, the which facilitates further investigations. As Perestroika period is, by itself, extremely im- for Bulgaria, a research of this kind has rare- portant as it undermined the system as well ly been undertaken before, and is, unfortu- as the erstwhile political economies of nately, of almost no interest to the general planned economies. In 1990, since it was public or specialists.2） perceived that economic science did not to The persisting economic problems of reflect reality, USSR experienced the emer- transition and the specific characteristics of gence of purely empirical and applied economic and social thought in Bulgaria re- schools of thought （such as Tatyana flect the specifics and characteristics of the Zaslavskaya, Abel Aganbegyan, etc.）. Subse- country’s historical development. Although quently, these schools of thought established for a relatively short period, Bulgaria’s so- the appropriate conditions and foundations Nenovsky: Bulgarian Economic Thought since 1989 3

for the emergence of applied economics. been translated into foreign languages even During the period of socialism, Bulgaria if it was published abroad. The following is a did not offer any innovative economic prac- list of a few such economists: the follower of tices（ their claim to paternity over the “new the Austrian School and disciple of Carl economic mechanism” or over the concept of Menger, Simeon Demostenov（ 1886-1968）, “dividing ownership from control” was an the economic historians Ivan Kinkel（ 1883- overstatement-these practices were in fact 1945） and Ivan Sakazov （1895-1939）, common to all socialist countries）. More- Naum Dolinski （1890-1968） from Varna, over, the country did not produce any origi- the statistician Cyril Popov （1870-1927）, nal economists and none of their economists the erudite Assen Christophorov（ 1910-70）, made any research contributions of interna- the practician-intellectual Stoyan Bochev tional merit, except perhaps for Lyuben （1881-1968）, the theoretical economists as Berov （1925-2006） and Evgeni Mateev Georgi Danailov （1872-1939）, Dimitar （1920-97）; the word “perhaps” has been Mishaikov（ 1883-1945）, Alexander Tsank- used since the nature of such judgment is ov （1879-1959）, Georgi Svrakov （1901- highly subjective.4） If we were to also con- 85）, and Ivan Stephanov（ 1899-1980）. Es- sider the lack of prominent Bulgarian immi- pecially noteworthy was the statistical school grant economists, the situation becomes in Bulgaria, which was established by Oskar completely different from that in Central Eu- Anderson（ see Radilov 2002）. Among the rope, and even Romania and Serbia.5） immigrants from Russia, Simeon Demosten- Certainly, as compared to the pre-World ov, Naum Dolinski, Ivan Kinkel, and Oskar War II（ WWII） period, the situation in Bul- Anderson stand out as perhaps the most eru- garia now appears to be worse. Then Bulgar- dite economists of the period.7） ian researchers were integrated in the world

scientific exchanges and a number of Bul- II Transmission Mechanisms of Economic Theory in Bulgaria garian economists gained, to one degree or another, international recognition （Oscar How do Bulgarian economists select their Anderson （1887-1960）, Slavcho Zagorov research topics and corresponding research （1898-1965））. Oscar Anderson（ it is impor- methods, and on what basis could their tant to note that he was an immigrant from achievements be assessed? How can we Russia）, for example, was cited in Schum- group the channels of influence to Bulgarian peter’s History of Economic Thought twice economic thought? In other words, on one as a one of the few researchers with creative hand this study determines the factors under- proposals regarding the quantitative theory lying the preferences of Bulgarian econo- of money（ Anderson and Schumpeter were mists, and on the other hand it determines the acquaintances and co-founders of the Inter- factors defining the constraints in terms of national Econometric Society, see Fisher selecting topics, methodology, etc.? 1941, 187, 188）.6） I consider a few other According to me, it is rational to distin- economists exceptionally erudite and origi- guish between the following two basic, figu- nal within certain limits; their work has not ratively speaking, inward information chan- 4 経済学史研究 52 巻 2 号

nels: The first one could be termed the chan- tween the external（ exogenous） interpreta- nel of the socio-economic reality and prob- tion, i.e., economic thought from the perspec- lems, which is external to scientific thought. tive of environment, and internal （endog- The second could be termed a cognitive enous） history, i.e., economic thought from channel, which relates to the evolution and the perspective of theory itself. Both these transmission of economic thought itself. In perspectives on economic thought possess a the first case, economic theory either pre- few weaknesses. With the first perspective, empts or responds to the requirements of a one could fall into relativism and chronology historical period, economic problems, or of authors and topics, while with the second, tasks. In the latter case, economic theory is a one could be misled into judging authors self-regulating system with its own internal outside the concrete historical setting（ Fauc- diffusion and evolutionary mechanisms, or is ci 2000）. related to the formation and dissemination of Initially, the environment in which the knowledge.8） Using the cognitive channel, Bulgarian economic scholars worked was we can differentiate between the following considered. With respect to the economic two sub-channels that shape the Bulgarian and social dynamics of the Bulgarian econo- economic thought; first is the information my after 1989, it possesses, regardless of its obtained from the past, i.e., from the inertia specifics and the “the variety of transition,” of economic knowledge and theories of the all the characteristic features that are pos- past（ the socialist period）, and the second is sessed by a majority of the post-communist the information obtained from external countries.9） sources, i.e., from the existing theories and Overall, we must note that neither the models of economic thought in the West disintegration of the socialist bloc nor the （neo-classical, Keynesian, monetarist, Aus- subsequent transition period could be ana- trian, etc.）. lyzed either within the neoclassical approach, The above-mentioned differentiation or within the existing variants of Marxist po- bears similarities with the methodological litical economy. Under the neoclassical mod- interpretation of Riccardo Faucci’s History of el, a transition from one market equilibrium Economic Thought; he distinguished be- to another occurs as a single act, rapidly and relatively smoothly; besides, the methodo- Bulgarian Economic Thought logical grounds were not suitable for analyz- since 1989 ing the changes in a system, especially in case of transitions from non-market to mar- ket economies. On the other hand, the politi- External Internal cal economy of the Soviet type of socialism socio-economic cognitive channel was completely unfit for analyzing the environmental from the past, events for ideological（ the possibility of so- channel from abroad cialist failure did not exist） as well as techni- Figure 1 The information channels that consti- cal reasons（ lack of availability of instru- tute Bulgarian economic thought. ments）. Essentially, it must be noted that un- Nenovsky: Bulgarian Economic Thought since 1989 5

like the Marxist interpretation of capitalism, like forceful redistribution of wealth and which may be regarded as a consistent and ownership based on corruption, theft, and generally recognized theoretical system, no banditries （Vucheva 2001）. This led the other system was considered to be as consist- country into a serious financial crisis from ent and generally accepted with regard to so- 1995-97, which ended with the introduction cialism; instead, there only exist countless of a particularly conservative monetary re- scholastic and dogmatic verbal interpreta- gime-a currency board, thereby abolishing tions of socialism. the monetary policy altogether（ Berlemann It is interesting to note that Marxist vari- and Nenovsky 2004）. After 1997, the econo- ants of transition period analyses did exist; my of Bulgaria continued to follow a posi- however, these considered the transitions to tive trajectory with high rates of growth, bal- communism. Moreover, it must be noted that anced public finances, growing foreign re- Nikolay Bukharin’s famous book, Economics serves, etc. The political decision for the en- of the Transition Period, which released in largement of the European Union （EU） 1920,10） possessed obvious drawbacks; how- followed the introduction of a Currency ever, it is the only book, when examined board, and started to play the role of a second thoroughly, that offers a few interesting ideas anchor for encouraging reforms （Ialnazov that may be relevant even today. For exam- 2003）. After the country’s accession to the ple, it may be observed that a transition to a EU on January 1, 2007, it was observed that new state of economy or toward a new ob- the external constraints over reforms were jective both in the past as well as the present loosened; this slackening of external con- （“present” refers to the market economy straints coupled with the outburst of the glo- whereas “past” refers to the communist soci- bal crisis in 2008 adversely affected Bulgar- ety） was viewed as a simple jump, i.e., a ia’s economic performances （Ialnazov and transition that was relatively short although Nenovsky, 2009）. painful. In both the cases, the Lenin- Understandably, Bulgarian economists Bukharin’s version of the Marxist theory and have increasingly been focusing on crucial the present neoclassical theory are identical. events in Bulgaria. These events served as These theories indicate that a change from focal points of analysis, or in more complex one system to another is not a slow, evolu- terms as cognitive anchors, which attracted tionary open-ended process, but a jump. the attention and efforts of researchers. In Bukharin’s book and a few other interesting this context, the notable events included studies from the early communist era were price liberalization, restructuring of state eventually forgotten by socialist scholars.11） ownership, foreign debt restructuring in Consequently, a theoretical vacuum fol- 1994, problems of bad loans, financial crisis, lowed, which obviously resulted in the emer- systemic risk and currency board, efficiency gence of new theories and ideas. of the banking sector, the issue of the con- The transition in Bulgaria was character- version of external debt in 2002, integration ized by a definite delay in the formation of a of the euro area and EU convergence, public market economy, which permitted processes finance and flat tax, the global financial cri- 6 経済学史研究 52 巻 2 号 sis, etc. Subsequently, the following research few of these scholars（ mainly concentrated subjects emerged: the role of institutions, in the Institute of Economics at the Bulgari- corruption and shadow economy, the role of an Academy of Sciences） promptly emerged the judicial system, and economic history, as the leading economists of transition, and and the long-run trends of the country’s eco- as such, a majority of them participated in nomic development. the country’s governance. A number of suc- The issue of economic environment is cessful private entrepreneurs, bankers, etc., closely related to the sociology of economic also emerged from this group.13） Generally, scholars, i.e., the sociology of economic sci- these scholars embraced the neoclassical ence in Bulgaria. Undoubtedly, irrespective economy more readily just as the economists of the personal fates and life histories of in- who had previously-during the communist dividual scholars, their interests and values period-specialized in the field of mathe- are rather crucial or often the only factors matical modelling and planning found it eas- that determine their choice of research top- ier to understand. ics, positions, ideological biases, and behav- In contrast, a majority of the scholars iour not only in science, but in life as well. who had previously specialized in the politi- At an individual level, a scholar’s choice and cal economy of socialism generally remained behaviour depends on the formation of their leftists and allied with the left political forc- preferences and values, and their resources- es. As a rule, these scholars lacked the com- material, mental, social, etc.12） petence and knowledge required to adapt to Essentially, a productive classification of the new environment owing to the fact that the economists may be to determine the ex- the political economy of socialism was a tent to which they belonged to one or to the dogmatic and senseless play of words that other familiar subdivisions of the communist served as a facade for the pretentiousness of economic theory, i.e., to “the political econo- constructing a theoretical system. A majority my of socialism” or to “the political economy of the scholars lacked mathematical training of capitalism.” and the only foreign language that they could The scholars who specialized in research- use was Russian. Initially, these scholars ing the issues of the Western economies dur- adapted the old theory to transition and ex- ing the socialist era, i.e., the political econo- plored the “forgotten” and “valuable” aspects my of capitalism and the historians of eco- of the classical Marxist theories in order to nomic thought, and those who had to lived subsequently establish themselves in niche up to the dogmas （they had to battle the areas such as Keynesianism, institutional “vulgar” interpretations and apologetics of economics, etc. A number of these scholars Western economists）, had better language also became successful businessmen and abilities as well as considerably greater theo- politicians either of remarkable integrity or retical and practical knowledge of the emerg- of no integrity at all. ing market economy. Moreover, they pos- Another aspect that necessitates attention sessed the potential aptitude for understand- is the lack of ability of a majority of the ing the subsequent changes in the theory. A scholars for conducting empirical, statistical, Nenovsky: Bulgarian Economic Thought since 1989 7 and econometric researches, which, as a mat- Forecasting（ AEAF） was established, where ter of fact, prevents researchers even today Bulgaria’s economic policy was created en- from investigating real problems. Interest- tirely by economic scholars（ Ventsislav An- ingly, sociologists were generally more suc- tonov, Roumen Avramov, and Lyubomir cessful in studying the complexities of the Christov）. This connection between eco- economy and in constructing theoretical nomic scholars and political authority is typ- models（ for example, the original model of ical of communist countries owing to inertia the second social network applied to transi- from the past; traditionally, political activity tion; Tchalakov and Bundjulov 2008）. were considered to be superior to economics. Moreover, sociologists have also come closer Evidently, this relationship also displays an to reality as compared to economists. In ad- opposite direction of causality since eco- dition, the achievements of investigative eco- nomic interests seemingly dominated politi- nomic journalism are noteworthy. Investiga- cal decisions. Generally, the close associa- tive journalists have easier access to the tion between economic scholars and political foregoing transition practices adopted by power is not a characteristic of communist bandits and is in fact the only way to extri- countries alone: for example, this has long cate truthful information regarding the actual been observed in Italy, although to a lesser processes for cases where statistical data is degree（ Faucci 2000）, which in turn con- unavailable, unable to reflect actual process- trasts with the relative independence of es, or is predominantly misleading. scholars in the Anglo-Saxon countries and In addition, it is important to note that France（ the economists were either primarily throughout the transition period, almost all associated with private businesses or were the Bulgarian economists were connected in independent intellectuals）. An interesting one way or another, to the government, polit- explanation of the economic scholars’ in- ical parties, and political power in general. volvement with the government during the Power, politics, and government were the initial years of transition was given by the main fields of realization for the economic Polish politician, Leshek Balcerowicz, who scholars and their interests since there were believes that non-standard situations or peri- no independent intellectuals. At least three ods bring to the fore non-standard politicians Prime Ministers were economic scholars- or non-political politicians who understand the economic historian Lyuben Berov（ for the so-called extraordinary politics（ Balcero- the period 1992-94）, Reneta Indzhova（ for wicz 1995）. the period 1994-95）, the economist-mathe- Now, let us examine the cognitive chan- matician Ivan Kostov （for the period nel for the formation of economic thought in 1997-2001）, and the first Managing Board Bulgaria, or which, under certain condition- of the Bulgarian National Bank（ BNB） that ality, Faucci would have termed internal his- was led by Todor Valchev（ for the period tory of economic thought. The cognitive 1991-96）14） was almost entirely composed channel refers to the internal history of eco- of representatives of the academia; in 1991 nomic thought or the manner in which the the Agency for Economic Analyses and models of economic thought are created. Ev- 8 経済学史研究 52 巻 2 号 idently, this cognitive channel is closely as- political discussions were curiously epito- sociated with the sociology of scholars and mized with soft and acceptable liberalism although we have briefly discussed this ear- （Keynesianism） and extreme liberalism lier, we will augment that information here. （monetarism）. The cognitive channel may be subdivided During the initial years of transition, lib- into the following two sub-channels: the first eral economic ideas were not popular among one deals with the past knowledge and theo- the Bulgarian scholars （see Evans 2010）. ries, and the second deals with modern Although they bear a rather limited influence knowledge that is obtained from outside the over the public sphere and the debates on country, i.e., from the theories that exist transition, a few references to Joseph Schum- around the world. peter, to Max Weber（ who became a favour- As mentioned earlier, the collapse of the ite of Bulgarian sociologists）, and subse- planned economy created a knowledge vacu- quently to the Austrian School in general and um that required to be filled up, which could Friedrich Hayek16） in particular, who gained logically be effected either by adapting old popularity only in the mid-1990s primarily theories, or by borrowing those of other during the currency board’s initial years of countries. operation,17） may be considered. In Bulgaria, unlike Russia, for example, The transmission of knowledge from the the propensity to develop new theories is and past has been examined in this study. In this was always low.15） Overall, there was a con- case, we can establish a certain form of de- tinuous debate between the following two al- pendence on the past （path dependence）. ternatives:（ i） adapting the communist ideas Virtually all economists in 1989 were associ- and their new interpretations（ for example, a ated with the past paradigm and even today a new reading of the Marxists classics, i.e., a few of them continue, to one degree or an- few of their co-operative and non-bureau- other, to be dependent on the dominant theo- cratic models of socialism, etc.）, or a return ry from the communist period. to the pre-communist economic thought, to a Bulgaria not only lacked renowned econ- few concepts regarding the specifics of the omists within the Soviet bloc but unlike al- Bulgarian economic development, and （ii） most all other Soviet bloc countries, it also adapting and in a majority of the cases, re- lacked local dissident economists18） as well telling the existing economic paradigms of as prominent immigrant scholars. It is also the West-the neoclassical economics, Key- an established fact that the political opposi- nesianism, or monetarism. Essentially, in tion in Bulgaria was essentially created and Bulgaria, although the neoclassical econom- institutionalized by the communist party and ics was considered the only possible school in fact all of its founders were former Com- of thought in microeconomics, Keynesianism munist party members, which significantly and monetarism were considered to be the deterred the country’s development at least two main competing schools of thought in during the initial 7-8 years of transition. macroeconomics. Indeed, the two latter mod- These processes naturally fuse with a lack of els that were actively used in economic and overall geostrategic identification of Bulgar- Nenovsky: Bulgarian Economic Thought since 1989 9

ia and its oscillation between the Western start from scratch.20） model of development and that of Rus- In my own way I define the level of the sia’s-a process that was relatively resolved Bulgarian economic sciences as approximate in favour of the Western model of develop- zero knowledge about the functioning of ment in the late 1990s with the decision to market economy and about the western theo- enlarge the EU. Abdelal（ 2001） effectively ries. Other researchers, primarily from the represented the processes and consequences older generations, defined a zero point in a of such oscillation for the Ukrainian case. different manner and believed that Bulgaria Under Wagener’s editorship（ 1998）, the is not at a zero point.21） One variant of this book regarding the history of economic non-zero position was to consider a new in- thought in Central and Eastern Europe does terpretation of the Marxist classics during not feature or even mention Bulgaria.19） Per- the initial 2-3 years after 1989（ a kind of a sonally, I cannot definitively explain why late Bulgarian “Perestroika”）; although such Bulgaria lacked prominent economists out- attempts were made by a few Marxist schol- side its national boundaries during that peri- ars, the dynamics of the changes were so od, given the similarity between its repres- rapid that they rendered any such efforts fu- sive regime and those in the other countries, tile. and the fact that the economic paradigm, The next logical cognitive step was to economic education, etc. in the socialist bloc extend this research further back in time, i.e., were largely equally sterile and hermetized to before 1944, which was the period prior to （cf. Romania; Aligica 2002）. My opinions the communist era, when, as mentioned ear- do not completely correspond with that of lier, there existed a normal European eco- Wagener（ 2002）; he believed that the eco- nomic theory and teaching in Bulgaria that nomic science conditions in Hungary, Po- could play the role of an anchor for the wa- land, and Slovakia, on one hand, differed vering Bulgarian economic scholars; at the from those in Czechoslovakia, GDR, USSR, time, a few lecturers even made attempts to Bulgaria, and Romania, on the other, to such emphasize this. In fact, during that period, an extent that they could be divided into two the textbook on political economy and theory large groups of countries, i.e., the former of money by Simeon Demostenov had be- group comprised those countries that were come rather popular（ although for a short open to receiving knowledge from abroad period of time）; a phototypic edition of the and the latter comprised countries that were three volumes of this book was reissued by considered to be closed. St. Clement Ohridski, Sofia University in Irrespective of the extent to which the 1991. Roumen Avramov made efforts in this reasons for a lack of original economic sci- direction for restoring the popularity of the ence during the socialist period may be de- forgotten and original Bulgarian economist liberated, the fact of the matter remains that Stoyan Bochev（ Avramov 1998）. Unfortu- when the planned economy disintegrated, nately, these efforts were promptly swept Bulgarian economic science was unprepared over by the wave of economic knowledge and was lagging behind and therefore, had to and publications from abroad, primarily 10 経済学史研究 52 巻 2 号

American textbooks, International Monetary of state and state power became evident with Fund（ IMF） and World Bank publications, the collapse of the power of the state in prin- and to a limited extent by European text- ciple（ Black 1943, 520）; their views inevita- books.22） bly contradicted the need for administration A few interesting similarities may and governance of state affairs. Therefore, emerge by comparing the dilemmas of Bul- for example, in 1982, Konstantin Stoilov garian economic science after 1989 with （1853-1901） stated, “ . . . Bulgarian people those of the period after Bulgaria gained its had evolved political habits under Ottoman independence from the Ottoman Empire in rule which made the application of a demo- 1878. Both the cases refer to a departure cratic form of government very difficult. For from two empires, i.e., “the Soviet empire” in several generations a spirit of disregard for first case and the Ottoman empire in the sec- government and revolt against the govern- ond case. In the first case, the “bondage” last- ment had prevailed”（ Black 1943, 519）. ed for 45 years, and in the second, for five A similar explanation may also be pro- centuries （1393-1878）.23） As is evident, vided for the emergence of extremely liberal these periods are incomparable. However, outlooks, which however did not appear in- this study evaluates the impact of these stantly, but in the mid-1990s as a response to events on Bulgarian economic science. the slow reforms and totalitarian past （a First, both these events adversely affect- number of publications of the Institute for ed the development of Bulgarian science, in Market Economy, a few members of the Bul- particular, and education, in general, either garian Hayek Society, etc. deserve a mention suppressing or simplifying them ad infini- here）, which gradually disappeared and gave tum. Second, tracing past events has its pecu- way to a period of pragmatism that eventual- liarities. The attempts to identify the achieve- ly led to the emergence of populism and na- ments of the pre-Ottoman period, the illustri- tionalism as seen today（ see Krastev 2007）. ous past of the Balkan countries while em- Therefore, much like Bulgarian history, phasizing the great achievements of Bulgaria past knowledge was an unrealized, impossi- resulted in problems and confusion rather ble, and under certain circumstances, a detri- than any real progress owing to the distance mental anchor for the formation of economic in time of the events under consideration knowledge in Bulgaria after 1989. As a re- （Stavrianos 2000）. A return to the pre-com- sult, the channel of knowledge obtained from munist achievements owing to the closeness overseas was the only other channel of infor- in time would have resulted in a few benefits mation and therefore became the basic chan- （especially when dealing with practical is- nel. sues）; however, unfortunately, this was not In the past, i.e., after liberation, concepts realized. Third, both these periods signifi- essentially found their way into the country cantly impacted the emergence of extreme only after the collapse of the “empires.” De- anti-state, liberal, and even anarchistic out- spite some penetration of European concepts looks.24） This is explained with the help of into the Balkan states within the Ottoman the fact that the defeat the Ottoman system empire in the 19th century, the economic and Nenovsky: Bulgarian Economic Thought since 1989 11

social knowledge of the Balkan countries ous forms and from different sources, which stood somewhat in isolation and lacked any allowed numerous Bulgarians to specialize significant achievements, and it is only after and study in Europe, USA, and Japan（ see these countries were liberated that any devel- Dimitrov 2002）. A number of Bulgarian opments were noticed （Psalidopoulos and scholars seized the opportunity to study Theocarakis 2009; Black 1943）. With re- overseas, which enabled a number of current spect to the socialist period, hardly any Bulgarian scholars to realize their dreams of Western concepts could make their way into studying in Western universities（ a few such these countries owing to censorship and par- scholars include Iliyan Mihov, Simeon ty control. Unlike their Polish, Hungarian, or Djankov, Neven Valev, Nikolay Gospodinov, Czech counterparts, the possibilities of Bul- Pavlina Cherneva, Yvailo Izvorsky, Kiril To- garian scholars receiving Western grants or chkov, and Dimitar Ialnazov）.26） A few for- travelling and communicating with their eign trained economists returned from West- Western counterparts were rather limited ern countries in order to form the economic （see Ford Foundation, Wagener 1998, 20）. team in the cabinet of Simeon Saxe-Coburg- The few Bulgarian scholars who did get such Gotha（ 2001-05）. During their initial years opportunities were considered to be the most in Bulgaria, various training and retraining loyal and ideologized party members; subse- programmes were conducted by Western quently when the secret archives were professors, a majority of which were Ameri- opened, most of these members appeared to can,（ for example, the programmes organ- have been collaborating with the Communist ized through the Open Society Institute）27） secret services. and a number of textbooks were translated. The economic knowledge and models of Although a majority of the economic thought obtained from overseas sources ac- views that were obtained from overseas were quired almost monopolist significance in of applied and practical orientation and pos- both teaching and research, as well as in the sessed the characteristics of the eclectic par- conduct of economic policy. The basic in- adigm, they were partially dominated by struments of this influence were the interna- Keynesian macroeconomics （primarily tional financial institutions（ primarily IMF through the World Bank） and partially by and World Bank）,25） which as Wagener has monetarism（ through the IMF）. These eco- appropriately articulated are the “monsters of nomic views, from the standpoint of eco- conditionality.” In reality, foreign debt serv- nomic teaching, were standard neoclassical icing and requirements in terms of new fi- with respect to microeconomics, and from nancing, technical assistance, etc. became my perspective, primarily Keynesian with important conditions for penetrating eco- respect to macroeconomic theory. In Bulgar- nomic thought through a number of national ia’s case, combining the various theories into and supranational banks, investment funds, one eclectic had and continues to have detri- governments, non-governmental organiza- mental consequences; this is because it cre- tions（ NGOs） etc. During in the initial years, ated the impression of a monolithic and numerous grants were extended under vari- complete economic theory in the West-al- 12 経済学史研究 52 巻 2 号

most “a supreme and ultimate phase of eco- policy, etc. In my opinion, the Bulgarian de- nomic science”-while fundamental discus- bate on the philosophy and strategy of re- sions were practically regarded as non-exist- forms did not possess any specific traits; ent. Although in the recent years, efforts rather the Bulgarian economists either emu- have been made to rectify this falsehood lated other countries, or followed the IMF （transaction costs economics, institutional recommendations, and, from my point of economics）, it will take some time before al- view, with a definite delay too.29） Despite a ternatives for economic teaching and think- few more radical reform programmes（ the ing, in general, are created. A few alterna- Rahn-Utt Plan of 1990）,30） Bulgaria adopted tives, at least partially, may be found along a slow and tentative changes approach that the following trends: the concepts of flat tax logically resulted in deceleration of reforms （IME and Georgi Angelov）, a few concepts and led to the 1996/1997 crisis. However, it regarding free banking（ Nikolay Nenovsky）, is possible to distinguish between the follow- the series of papers on economic history and ing two significant approaches to reforms: culture（ Roumen Avramov, Martin Ivanov, slow reforms, the theoretical grounds of Daniel Vachkov, and Ninel Kioseva）, and which to me personally remains unclear, and especially, the reporting of institutions（ Ga- fast reforms. With respect to slow reforms, rabed Minassyan and Georgi Ganev）. we can refer to the annual report that was prepared by a team that was headed by Ivan III Research Topics Achievements , , Angelov （born in 1934） and comprised and Authors scholars from the Institute of Economics at This section considers the achievements in the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, a few the history of economic thought by review- scholars from the University of National and ing the major topics, styles, ideology, etc., World Economy（ UNWE）（ Stoyadin Savov and the work of a few authors. As empha- （born in 1931）, Kamen Mirkovich（ born in sized earlier, the topics that were investigated 1939）, Roumen Getchev（ born in 1956））, by Bulgarian economists were determined and the economist-philosopher Vassil Pro- on the basis of the major issues and events in danov（ born in 1946）; this report was first the latest economic history of Bulgaria. published in 1992 and henceforth, was pub- First, the general and conceptual issues lished annually（ see, for example, Angelov of transition （transformation）, were rarely 1992, also Angelov 1990）. On the other researched in original way. In case these hand, with respect to faster and more deci- were studied, the research was limited to the sive reforms, the research work of econo- framework of standard discussions regarding mists at the newly established the Agency the speed of reforms（ whether a gradual or a for Economic Analysis and Forecasting shock approach）,28） the steps of reforms; lib- （AEAF）, which subsequently became the eralization of prices, privatization of state- hub of modern economic research studies owned enterprises and banks, types of ex- （see Avramov and Antonov 1994）, may be change rate regimes, fiscal versus monetary referred to. policy mix, foreign debt restructuring and Of particular interest is the research re- Nenovsky: Bulgarian Economic Thought since 1989 13 garding the issues of monetary policy, mone- （Nenovsky and Chobanov 2004）;（ v） a the- tary regime and particularly the operation of oretical comparison of the currency board the currency board, as well as financial cri- and the gold standard（ Desquilbet and Nen- ses.31） These issues gained significance with ovsky 2005）;（ vi） foreign debt management the introduction of the currency board in （Minassian 2007）;（ vii） the 1996/1997 cri- mid-1997 following the intensification of the sis（ Ignatiev 2005）, etc.33） financial crisis and the period of hyperinfla- The monetary regimes are closely associ- tion（ Berlemann and Nenovsky 2004）. The ated with the discussion regarding the adop- reasons and conditions for the introduction tion of the euro in Bulgaria and the compati- and operation of a Currency Board, etc., were bility of the currency board with the ERM2 studied and the financial crises were ana- mechanisms and the euro area. The book, lyzed. In a majority of the cases, the specific From Lev to Euro: Which is the Best Way? features of the financial crisis and the cur- by Nenovsky et al（. 2001）,34） was one of the rency board in Bulgaria were emphasized first books in Eastern Europe（ cited in Ital- and the studies were of purely applied char- ian newspaper, Il Sole 24 ore, avril 19, 2000）, acter; however, in a few cases the research which after an in-depth comparative analysis was of comparative and general theoretical introduces the benefits of unilateral euroiza- character. A majority of these studies were tion both as a theory and with calculations initially conducted in the Agency for Eco- for Bulgaria. The remainder of the European nomic Analysis and Forecasting （AEAF）; problematics including various convergence however, subsequently, the studies were con- issues, potential to absorb eurofunds, institu- ducted in the BNB Research and Analyses tional adaptation, etc., were also included Division, where a number of interesting within the scope of this analysis; however, analyses were conducted and published in overall, the research lacked original contri- the Discussion Papers series32） predominant- butions and was largely of applied character ly after 1997. （see, for example, the Economic Reports for According to me, the following research- the President of the Republic, 2005, 2006, es are of special significance:（ i） theoretical 2007, and a few AEAF research papers）. and empirical approaches for evaluating the At the second stage, research papers be- automatic mechanisms of the currency board gan considering the institutional features of such as the existence of a co-integration be- the economic development and used the eco- tween the monetary base and foreign re- nomic history of Bulgaria for capturing the serves（ Nenovsky et al. 2001; Nenovsky and long-run trends and specific peculiarities of Hristov 2002）;（ ii） a composite analysis of the Bulgarian economic development.35） In the behavior of the currency in circulation this context, the studies conducted by the fol- and its relationship with the shadow econo- lowing authors were clearly original: Rou- my（ Nenovsky and Hristov 2000） and banks men Avramov’s study on the economic his- reserves（ Petrov 2000）;（ iii） the analysis of tory of Bulgaria during the 20th century. credit （Hristov and Mihailov 2002; Nen- （Avramov 2007）, Marin Ivanov （born in ovsky et al. 2003）;（ iv） the money market 1970） and Daniel Vachkov’s（ born in 1963） 14 経済学史研究 52 巻 2 号

study on the issues of Bulgaria’s external Angelov, in particular）; although initially debt （Ivanov 2002; Vachkov and Ivanov flat tax was met with extreme hostility, even- 2008）, Martin Ivanov’s study regarding the tually it was successfully realized during the efforts to expand the calculations of the term of office of the leftist cabinet that was country’s gross domestic product（ GDP） and led by Sergey Stanishev（ 10% income tax as balance of payments from a historical per- of January 1, 2008）. Although evidently this spective （Ivanov and Tooze 2007; Ivanov was a result of analogous ideas and interests, 2006）, and Ninel Kioseva’s study on mone- the introduction of the flat tax was a symbol- tary crises in the newly liberated Bulgaria ic moment in Bulgaria’s recent economic （Kioseva 2000）. Recently, there has been history. Owing to the global character of growing interest in the analysis of the coun- economic science, the remarkable achieve- try’s socialist period within the scope of the ments of the Bulgarian economists working working paper series that has been issued by abroad, who have played an important role in the Institute for Studies of the Recent Past.36） the overall development of economic sci- The institutional aspects of economic de- ence, deserve a mention. In this context, Ilian velopment were also analyzed at a subse- Mihov （INSEAD, Singapore） is the most quent stage of the development of the Bul- significant example; he is a former Ph.D. stu- garian economic thought. Here, in addition to dent of Ben Bernanke. In this sense, if these the previously mentioned study of economic scholars are viewed as Bulgarian economists, culture（ Avramov 2007）, we could also em- then Bulgaria may be considered to be at phasize the publications by Garabed Minas- least partially integrated into the global sian（ 2002） and the concept of the currency stream of economic science （in numerous board as a radical institutional change（ Nen- respects, this is similar to the position of Bul- ovsky and Rizopoulos 2003; 2004）.37） The garians during the period between the two Centre for the Study of Democracy38） and the World Wars）. Institute for Market Economy39） identified Although on the basis of Ricardo Fauc- topics such as corruption, shadow economy, ci’s division of economists into visionaries and the administrative obstacles to business and system-builders, i.e., pragmatists, Bul- as objects of analysis; these were primarily garian economists can definitely be catego- applied character analyses. rized under the latter group, a majority of Evidently, there existed numerous tradi- them present inadequate methodological and tional economic topics regarding economic theoretical debates40）; an example of an ex- growth, labour market, and social issues; the ception in regard may be that of Roumen object of analysis was established by the In- Avramov’s research on the fundamental stitute of Economics at BAS and the univer- characteristics and historical determinants of sities in a majority of the cases and these will Bulgaria’s economic history. Roumen not be discussed in this study. However, I Avramov believes that communal, statist, would only like to mention the concept of and anti-capitalist conceptions of economy flat tax that was introduced by the Institute have always prevailed in Bulgaria and there for Market Economics（ IME）（ by Georgi appears to be no way out of this situation, i.e., Nenovsky: Bulgarian Economic Thought since 1989 15

we will continue to perceive the future pessi- of course on a different occasion, but relating mistically.41） The studies of Ludjev（ 2005）, nevertheless to the assessment that we give Daskalov（ 2005）, and Prodanov（ 2003）42） to every economist. Einaudi believes that it may be mentioned with regard to this meth- is not important to ascertain which group the odological line of research, as well as the scholars belong to, but to ascertain their con- historically and socially embedded economy. tribution to economic theory. In this context, If we attempt to systematize the recent he stated “I stand behind my assertion that an studies on the basis of their outlook with re- author should be judged on their own ac- spect to the world and its ideologies, it is count for their contribution to science: Adam possible to distinguish between those econo- Smith not as the head of the Liberal School, mists who primarily hold a liberal outlook but for his contribution to this theory; Ricar- and those who are in favour of a greater de- do not as a classic, but as the propounder of gree of state interference in the economy the theory of incomes, production costs, and （over time, the Marxist ideology, at least lin- paper money; Cantillon not as a forerunner guistically, has almost disappeared）. The of Physiocrats or of Liberals, but as the fa- first group comprises the economists from ther of the entrepreneur doctrine or of the IME, the Centre of Liberal Strategies（ Rou- doctrine of the gradual and increasing influ- men Avramov and Georgi Ganev）, from the ence, over time and space, of gold produc- Hayek Society, a few of the economists from tion”（ Einaudi 1956, 34）. the Centre for the Study of Democracy, and Here, a few notes regarding the economic a majority of the researchers at the BNB（ at periodicals in Bulgaria have been presented. least for the period immediately following The collapse of the old system had an ex- the introduction of the currency board ar- tremely adverse impact on the economic pe- rangement）. The second group comprised riodicals; the intellectual standards of the old the scholars at the Institute of Economics at journals in Bulgaria deteriorated, and subse- the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences and a quently, these journals disappeared altogeth- majority of the university lecturers.43） It is er, which was in contrast to the situation of interesting to note that the standpoint in journals in other countries. Moreover, no terms of being “in favour of or against” the new journals were published. Economic currency board or the flat tax has become the Thought was the only major economic jour- basis of distinction between the rightist and nal in Bulgaria that continued to be pub- the leftist economic views. lished as a single annual edition in English. Moreover, owing to the eclectic character The other economic journal, Economic Stud- of the perspectives and the obvious difficul- ies, which was conceptually more theoretical, ties in defining the various paradigmal encountered a few problems; however, since frameworks of economic thought, it is ex- 2001, its structure and procedures are com- tremely challenging to identify and group in- parable to that of a modern referenced jour- dividual scholars. A consolation, to me at nal.44） According to me, although these jour- least, is the position of the great scholar of nals gradually attained a relatively satisfac- economic thought, Luigi Einaudi, expressed tory level, they hardly offered any inventive 16 経済学史研究 52 巻 2 号

theoretical studies of true merit（ This im- this does not offer any major novelties, it vir- plies studying economic issues outside Bul- tually demonstrates a reasonable standard for garia）. In contrast, Sociological Issues, both theoretical and empirical as well as for which is a sociologist journal published in statistical and econometric research. In re- Bulgaria, features significantly more interest- cent years, a number of theses of theoretical ing and original economic research papers. and applied character such as those by Silvia University journals（ Economic Alternatives, Trifonova, Svetoslav Petkov, Peter Choba- UNWE; National Economic Archive（ Acad- nov, Guergana Mihailova, Darina Koleva, emy of Economics, Svishtov）） continue to Irina Kazandzhieva, Ralitsa Ganeva, Kaloyan be published. All eminent Universities issued Ganev, Peter Ignatiev, Roumen Andreev, their year-books and collections of studies, Stella Raleva, etc.,47） have been defended. which also featured theoretical articles.45） I IV Concluding Remarks would like to emphasize the merits of the electronic interdisciplinary journal, Dialogue What conclusions may be derived on the ba- （Svishtov）, which was launched in 2001; it sis of this study? The following three con- publishes a number of original articles and cluding remarks are presented, which are of translations of classical authors from the course, debatable. The first, second, and third Austrian School primarily on the initiative of concluding remarks are associated with neg- Ivan Vurbanov.46） ative, positive, and neutral inferences, respec- With respect to translated books, a tively. number of classic books have been translated First, the negative inference is that Bul- by authors such as John Maynard Keynes, garia, just as the other Eastern European Milton Friedman, Joseph Schumpeter, Fried- countries, produced nothing new or original. rich Hayek, Douglass North, Kenneth Gal- No new theories were developed in order to braith, and Frederic Bastiat. Moreover, the reflect the collapse of the system in the traditional textbooks of micro and macroeco- former planned economies or in the world nomics, and the more specialized economic economic thought. Despite the obvious pre- disciplines such as the textbook on the theo- requisites and demand for new theories that ry of money and monetary policy by Freder- could consider the collapse of the planned ic Mishkin, investment by Zvi Bodie, etc., economy, no pertinent theories emerged and were also translated overall, however, the there was almost no theoretical contribution translations do not follow any systematic of economic science to transition. Original pattern and the basis on which the titles and research in purely theoretical and conceptual authors were chosen remains unclear; clear- terms was completely absent. Nevertheless, ly, the number of translated books in Bulgar- we understand that in the past, every crisis in ia are lesser than those of other former so- the economic system led to fundamental cialist countries. changes in economic theory; the marginal Moreover, it would be educational to utility revolution in the 1870s or the appear- note that the quality of doctoral theses have ance of Keynesianism or monetarism are slowly yet steadily been improving; although some such events. This, of course, applies to Nenovsky: Bulgarian Economic Thought since 1989 17 economic science both globally and region- est to anybody a few years from now. In this ally with Bulgaria being a very relevant ex- sense, the crisis of the Bulgarian post-com- ample. Unlike large countries（ such as Rus- munist thought is a clear illustration of the sia48） or even Romania）, Bulgaria does not general crisis of economic science or rather, discuss traditional, or rather fundamental, a prominent example of futility and obscurity topics such as whether to follow the univer- as well as pretentiousness and wastefulness. sal development path, or to study something The current global crisis is new eloquent more specific instead, such as investigating prove of economic sciences systemic failure. the proportion between theory and history or And third, the neutral inference. Some- apriority and empirical verification, etc. Al- thing is going to change, new theories will ternatively, if this is happening, it can be said emerge; however, when this will happen is that then these traditional topics are so insig- unclear. On the basis of this, we may believe nificant that they can simply be disregarded. that economic science has entered its most Second, the positive inference is that significant and ultimate phase （following Bulgaria and the others former socialist Lenin’s metaphor of imperialism）, i.e., a courtiers are not the only “unproductive” re- phase characterized by general crisis, which gions. This may be ascribed to the modern would inevitably generate something new or Western economic science, which has been will at least create competition and plural- in a serious crisis for decades; it has been at- ism, thereby generating new ideas. One ex- tempting to recover by physically moving ample in support of this inference is that, re- into the intellectual space of the former so- cently, numerous petitions were filed by dif- cialist countries, which has been facilitated ferent groups of economists regarding plu- by the IMF and numerous academic and ralism in economic science and teaching. grant programmes. The fact that Western However, owing to the resistance from the economic thought in its existing form was mainstream as well as the entire academia, it absolutely unsuitable and even detrimental is unclear when these changes will actually for evaluating and explaining the transforma- occur. Moreover, owing to the mainstream tion encouraged the development of new academia’s strong association with political theories. A futile scheme-the political authority and economic interests, as well as economy of socialism-was substituted by their ability to engulf and re-cast all novel- an ineffective and “decaying” economic par- ties, I do not envisage a prompt change in the adigm of the developed countries; the vari- situation. ous schools in economics were attempting to Nikolay Nenovsky: University of National and identify a field of expression and space to World Economy（ Sofia）, University of Orleans conquer; therefore, in general the basic para- （LEO, LE STUDIUM） digm of the neo-Keynesian synthesis pre- vailed, which in my view was the most ster- Notes ile of all combinations. As a result of this 1） Hans-Jürgen Wagener uses this metaphor substitution and choice of mix, numerous of demand and supply with respect to the de- studies emerged, which will be of little inter- mand and supply of economic knowledge in 18 経済学史研究 52 巻 2 号

Eastern Europe. Within the frame of his rea- for Ivan Gueschow who was cited in a foot- soning, it was interpreted that the events in note（ however, the context remains unclear） Eastern Europe negatively impacted supply by Vilfredo Paretto in his Corso di economia and positively impacted demand, which led politica, Paretto（ 2009［ 1905］, 355）. In his to the emergence of different types of bal- study, Paretto cited a speech that was deliv- ancing mechanisms（ Wagener 2002）. ered by Ivan Gueschow in the late 1895, 2） With a few exceptions such as Dimitrov where the latter gave a quantitative example （2002）, who presented an overview of the of agio, i.e., of a positive correlation between major trends in economic education in Bul- the increase of agio on gold and an increase garia after 1990; see also the discussion at in number of silver coins in circulation（ it is the Varna University of Economics（ Mavrov unclear, to me at least, whether this refers to 2007）. For a general overview of the post- Argentina or to Bulgaria）. However, the communist period, see, for example, Wagen- name of Ivan Gueschow is not included in er（ 1997, 1998, and 2002） as well as Evans the name index of this Corso. and Aligica（ 2009） and Evans（ 2010） on 7） For details, see Natan et al（. 1973） as well the topic of liberal school of thought. as Sazdov（ 2005, particularly 176, 180）. 3） The ideas of Perestroika had seized the 8） The indicated scheme of the two major attention of a few progressive economists channels apparently reveal a few similarities because the Soviet press was rather popular; with the familiar Marxian concept regarding this was evidenced from the boom in number the dialectics of the base（ production or eco- of Russian newspaper and magazine sub- nomic relationships） and the superstructure scriptions. （economic theory is considered to be a part 4） Lyuben Berov was an internationally rec- of the superstructure）, where the base plays ognized economic historian who studied dif- the leading role and the superstructure pos- ferent issues regarding the capitalist develop- sesses a certain degree of autonomy, etc. A ment in Bulgaria（ industry, banks, foreign number of studies on economic thought es- capital, income distribution, etc.） using ex- pecially emphasize “the role of economic en- tensive statistical applications and his own vironment on economists” in a different comprehensive empirical investigations（ see manner（ Gide and Rist［ 1944］ 2000, 9）, or for example, Berov, 1961, 1989）. Evgeni in the opposite direction of influence（ for Mateev was a founder of Bulgarian cyber- example, Keynes）, or offer a complex per- netics; he proposed an original model of spective regarding this topic, for example, flexible automatized system of macro man- Schumpeter（ ［1954］ 1983）. agement, and subsequently a global systemic 9） See for example Avramov and Antonov model of the economy as part of an ecologi- （1994）, Dimitrov et al.（ 1999）, and Nen- cal system（ Mateev 1987）. To these contri- ovsky（ 2009）. butions, I could also add the mathematical 10） Bukharin［ 1920］ 1989. model of the socialist economy（ in the spirit 11） In my opinion, Leonidov’s （2000） rare of the theory of disequilibrium） that was theoretical contributions include the promo- proposed by Antonov（ 1989）. tion of the ordoliberal interpretation and or- 5） Compare with Ratajczak（ 2009）, Poland. doliberal economic policy; he also intro- 6） To the extent of my knowledge, no Bul- duced some evolutionary ideas occasionally. garian economists have ever been cited by 12） See a similar discussion for Russia in any of the world’s great economists except Sutela（ 2009） and Zaostrovtsev（ 2009）. Nenovsky: Bulgarian Economic Thought since 1989 19

13） Essentially, Mitko Dimitrov （born in published by the Bulgarian National Bank 1950） highlighted that the most capable and （Nenovsky 1999）. enterprising economists have established 18） Of course, within the paradigm of social- their own businesses, and those who contin- ism, scholars like Georgi Petrov （born in ued to pursue economic research may be 1929） and Jack Aroyo（ born in 1921） may classified as the most incapable economists be regarded as violators of the status quo, al- （Dimitrov 2002）. A few “idealistically” in- though to different degrees and in different clined scholars may also be added to the lat- ways, and attempted to defend “necessity,” ter group. “commodity-money relationships,” and the 14） The following economists from the acade- “law of value［ cennost］”（ which could alter- mia were a part of the BNB（ Central bank） natively be termed “the law of cost［ stoy- managing board during different periods of most］”） under socialism from the recognized time: Emil Hursev（ born in 1961）, Milleti as well as traditional economists; for fur- Mladenov（ born in 1944）, Gancho Ganchev ther information, see Petrov（ 1969; 1990） （born in 1953）, Lena Roussenova, Georgi and Aroyo（ 1986）. Petrov（ born in 1929）, Garabed Minassyan 19） The fact that Romania is not featured in （born in 1944）, Roumen Avramov（ born in Wagener’s book offers some “solace.” How- 1953）, Stati Statev（ born in 1955）, Nikolay ever, it is a fact that unlike Bulgaria, Roma- Nenovsky（ born in 1963）, etc. The follow- nia has economists-immigrants from the ing Ministers of Finance（ with a few excep- West-who continue to be popular in Roma- tions, such as Muravey Radev, Dimiter Kos- nia even today, such as Nicholas Georgescu tov, Svetoslav Gavriisky, and Milen Roegen and Nicolas Spulber, or the protec- Velchev） were/are a part of the academia: tionist Mihail Manoilescu who is, even to- Ivan Kostov（ born in 1949）, Stoyan Alexan- day, respected in Latin America for his de- drov（ born in 1949）, Hristina Vucheva, Pla- velopment economics and agriculture con- men Oresharsky（ born in 1960）, and Simeon cepts（ see Aligica 2002）. Djankov（ born 1970）. 20） There exists regularity, on the basis of 15） The following examples of Russian crea- which Peter Meusburger said, “The earlier tivity may be mentioned: “the theory of insti- the knowledge, experience, and networks tutional matrices” developed by Svetlana needed in the 1990s for a successful adjust- Kirdina（ 2003） and “the theory of institu- ment and adaptation to the market economy tional trap” developed by Victor Polterovich had been acquired, the more successful was （2008）. My explanation of a lack of creativ- the transformation process”（ Wagener 2002, ity demonstrated by Bulgarian economists is 5）. I personally do not agree with this state- primarily linked to the historically estab- ment for the simple reason that the transition lished conformist and imitative behaviour of was not a transition per se, rather it was a Bulgarian people and of Bulgarian elites ow- transformation, i.e., a process with an open ing to long periods of foreign domination end, and these processes were not under- and dependencies（ Ottoman empire, Soviets pinned by knowledge. However, I do agree domination, etc.）. with the fact that the better one understands 16） Hayek’s principal philosophical and polit- the mechanisms of the market economy, the ical sciences books were translated in mid- easier it is to make a decision in new and un- 1990s. familiar circumstances. 17） See the material regarding Hayek that was 21） This group comprised practically all 20 経済学史研究 52 巻 2 号

economists who worked on the political mentioned Leonidov（ 2000）. economy of socialism and were involved in 29） For a general understanding of transition, the policy making and in the communist par- see the books by Savov（ 1999）, Prodanov ty decision-making. （1999）, and Manov（ 2000）. 22） Recently, on BNB’s initiative, a decision 30） The Rhan-Utt Plan（ after the names of was taken under the Bulgarian Economic Richard Rhan and Ronald Utt, the National Heritage Series for reissuing the major stud- Chamber Foundation, the U.S.） was realized ies of the distinguished traditional Bulgarian at the invitation of Prime Minister Andrey economists. Lukanov during the period March-August 23） Bulgaria emerged as a state in 681 and 1990. This project envisaged radical and from 1018 to 1186 it was under the Byzan- shock reforms in all spheres of the country, tine rule. This was followed by a period of including the introduction of a currency autonomy until it came under the Ottoman board. rule（ 1393-1878）. Subsequently, there was a 31） I would also like to mention the book on period of independence once again; however, monetary theory by Mladenov （2009）, in 1944/1945 Bulgaria joined the socialist which has been reprinted numerous times. countries bloc, which was actually dominat- 32） http://www.bnb.bg/bnb/home.nsf/fs ed by USSR. The Soviet bloc collapsed in 33） One of the most original books on the late 1989 and Bulgaria became a member of pure theory of money is Harsev （1991）, the European Union in 2007. which analyzes the evolution of money from 24） The liberal views were shared by Bulgari- both logical and historical perspectives. an revolutionaries and early politicians 34） An article by the same authors was fea- such as Georgi Sava Rakovski（ 1821-67）, tured in the economic weekly journal, Capi- Christo Botev（ 1848-76）（ with anarchistic tal, on February 11, 2000, which initiated a elements）, Petko Slaveykov （1827-95）, discussion regarding the advantages of uni- the early Stephan Stambolov（ 1854-95） etc. lateral euroization in the（ same） daily peri- （see Black 1943）. odical（ see for example, Roumen Avramov）, 25） See Yotzov（ 2000）. and the critique of the euroization idea in 26） A few Bulgarian academic economists at- Kostov and Kostova（ 2002）. See also Mi- tained high positions in International Finan- nassian（ 2005）. cial Institutions（ IFIs）, for example, Kristali- 35） This was also facilitated by the publica- na Gueorgieva at the World Bank （Vice tion of the five volumes of archived docu- President）. A few Bulgarian economists are ments of the BNB, the establishment of the employed at the Federal Reserve research BNB Committee on History as well as the units（ Dobrislav Dobrev and Ekaterina Pe- Balkan Monetary and Financial History Net- neva）, the European Central Bank（ ECB）, work in 2000 on the initiative of the BNB and other central and commercial banks. and the Bank of Greece and its regular meet- 27） For example, Sofia University realized a ings（ see for example, Oesterreichische Na- joint programme with the University of Del- tionalbank, 2007）. Among the historical aware, USA, and a few American academics studies, that of Rositsa Rangelova （2006） and published interesting studies regarding deserves a mention. Here, we must also note Bulgaria; Koford（ 2000）, Koford and Miller that the presentation of the psychological （2006）, Miller and Petranov（ 2001）. theory of exchange rates by Albert Aftalion 28） With the exception of the previously （1874-1956; he is a French economist of Nenovsky: Bulgarian Economic Thought since 1989 21

Bulgarian origin） and its empirical illustra- search could offer useful knowledge. tion of the currency stabilisation between the 43） Recently, for example, Ilia Balabanov two wars in France and in Bulgaria（ Neno- （2008） from the Bulgarian Academy of Sci- vsky 2005）. Moreover, a few studies on the ences published noteworthy papers regarding Austrian School by Stefka Koeva （2002; Marxist methodology. 2003）, and Kolev（ 2009） were conducted on 44） For more, see Yakimova et al（. 2001）. the basis of the inter-war economic discus- 45） http://unwe.acad.bg/yearbook/ sions in Bulgaria. The publications of Metodi 46） http://www.uni-svishtov.bg/dialog/I-Mag Kanev（ Academy of Economics, Svishtov） Bg.htm are considered to be rather insightful and 47） A number of other Bulgarians who de- emphasize the methodological and conceptu- fended doctoral theses abroad have not been al issues of some of the forgotten Bulgarian mentioned here. authors. 48） See Andryushin（ 2003）, Kirdina（ 2003）. 36） http://minaloto.org/ 37） In Nenovsky（ 2007）, a systemic attempt Bibliography has been made for expanding the theory of Abdelal, R. 2001. National Purpose in the World the monetary order by integrating the dimen- Economy. In Post-soviet States in Compara- sions of power, force, interests, conflicts, etc. tive Perspective. Ithaca, NY and London: 38） http://www.csd.bg/ Cornell Univ. Press. 39） http://www.ime-bg.org/ Aligica, P. 2002. Economics-Romania. http:// 40） This is largely explained with the help of www.cee-socialscience.net/archive/econom the fact that the debates of general theoreti- ics/romania/report1.html cal nature are considered to be sterile, and Andryushin, C. 2003. Beginning of the Road: perhaps mechanically follow the sterility of The Origins of Russia’s Economic Thought. the theoretical discussions during socialism. In Essays on the History of Russia’s Eco- 41） The work of Kamen Mirkovich, which is nomic Thought, edited by L. Abalkin. Mos- an attempt at a new synthesis of value and cow: 62-83（ in Russian）. utility（ Mirkovich 2005）, claims fundamen- Angelov, I. 1990. The Scope of the Bulgarian tal originality. I am not able to judge the ex- Economic Reform. In Economic Reforms in tent to which these claims are justified. the European Centrally Planned Economies. 42） Dimiter Ludjev（ political scientist） pre- New York: United Nations. sented an interdisciplinary study of the social -. 1992. Economic Outlook of Bulgaria by groups and their evolution in Bulgarian cities 1995. Editions of the Bulgarian Academy of in the mid-20th century（ when the socialist Sciences（ in Bulgarian）. era began）. In his monumental two-volume Antonov, V. 1989. Disequilibrium and Econom- book, Roumen Daskalov（ political scientist） ic Growth: Model of Cyclical Growth Under presented the evolution of the Bulgarian so- Persistent Structural Disequilibria. Economic ciety after independence in terms of its eco- Thought 5:82-95（ in Bulgarian）. nomic, political, legal, and cultural aspects. Aroyo, J. 1986. Law of Value Under Socialism. Vasil Prodanov（ philosopher） presented his Sofia: Nauka i izkustvo（ in Bulgarian）. perception regarding the Bulgaria’s position Avramov, R. 1998. The Capitalism in Bulgaria. in the global world. Although these three au- Selected Economic Writings（ 1911-1935） thors considered the economy as an integral by Stefan Bochev. Fondazia: Bulgarska Nau- part of the society, only interdisciplinary re- ka i Kultura（ in Bulgarian）. 22 経済学史研究 52 巻 2 号

-. 2007. Communal Capitalism. Reflections Desquilbert, J.-B. and N. Nenovsky. 2005. Con- on the Bulgarian Economic Past, 3 vols. fiance et ajustement dans les régimes de Fondazia: Bulgarska Nauka i Kultura i Cen- caisse d’émission. Monde en développement tur za Liberalni Strategii（ in Bulgarian）. 2（ 130）: 77-95. Avramov, R. and V. Antonov. 1994. Economic Dimitrov, M. 2002. Economics-Bulgaria. Transition in Bulgaria. Sofia: AEAF （in http://www.cee-socialscience.net/archive/ Bulgarian）. economics/bulgaria/report1.html Balabanov, I. 2008. Global Problems of Modern Dimitrov, M., W. Andreff, and L. Csaba, eds. Times and the Methodology of K. Marx 1999. Economies in Transition and the Vari- （Part one）. Economic Thought 5:4-34;（ Part ety of Capitalisms: Features, Changes, and two）. Economic Thought 6:3-34（ in Bulgar- Convergence. Sofia: Gorex Press. ian）. Dobrinsky, R. 2000. Transition Crisis in Bulgar- Balcerowicz, L. 1995. Socialism, Capitalism, ia. Cambridge Journal of Economics 24（5）: and Transformation. Budapest and London: 581-602. CEU Press. Einaudi, L. 1956, “Charles Rist,” Necrologie di Berlemann, M. and N. Nenovsky. 2004. Lending soci defunti nel decennio dicembre 1945- of First versus Lending of Last Resort: The dicembre 1955. Rome: Accademia Nazionale Bulgarian Financial Crisis of 1996/1997. dei Lincei. Comparative Economic Studies 46 （2）: Evans, A. 2010. Austrian Economics Behind the 245-71. Iron Curtain: The Rebirth of an Intellectual Berov, L. 1961. The Capital Profit in Bulgaria Tradition. Review of Austrian Economics. before 1944. Sofia: Nauka i Izkustvo （in Online First, www.springerlink.com/index/ Bulgarian）. n96652qj72121617.pdf -. 1989. The Development of Bulgarian In- Evans, A. and D. Aligica. 2009. The Neoliberal dustry during 1884-1947. Sofia: Nauka i Iz- Revolution in Eastern Europe: Economic kustvo（ in Bulgarian）. Ideas in the Transition from Communism. Black, C. 1943. The Influence of Western Politi- Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. cal Thought in Bulgaria, 1850-85. American Faucci, R. 2000. L’economia politica in Italia. Historical Review 48（ 3）: 507-20. Dal cinquecento ai nostri giorni. Torino: Brown, C., ed. 1996. Imperial Legacy. In The UTET Libreria. Ottoman Imprint on the Balkans and the Figuet, J. M. and N. Nenovsky. 2006. Conver- Middle East. New York: Columbia Univ. gence and Shocks in the Road to EU: Em- Press. pirical Investigations for Bulgaria and Ro- Bukharin, N.［ 1920］ 1989. Economics of the mania. William Davidson Institute, Working Transition Period. In Problems of Theory Paper 810. and Practice of Socialism. Moskva: Po- Fisher, I. 1941. Mathematical Method in Social liticheskoi literaturoi: 94-176（ in Russian）. Sciences. Econometrica 9（ 3-4）: 185-97. Bulgakov, S［. 1919］ 2007. History of Economic Gershenkron, A. 1978. Samuelson in Soviet and Social Sciences. Moscow: Astrel （in Russia: A Report. Journal of Economic Lit- Russian）. erature 16（ June）: 560-73. Daskalov, R. 2005. Bulgarian Society. Volume 1: Getchev, R. 2005. Sustainable Development: State, Politics, and Economy. Volume 2: Economic Aspects. Indianapolis: Univ. of In- People, Communities, and Culture. Sofia: dianapolis Press. Gutenberg（ in Bulgarian）. Gide, Ch. and Ch. Rist.［ 1944］ 2000. Histoire Nenovsky: Bulgarian Economic Thought since 1989 23

des doctrines économiques depuis les physi- Koeva, S. 2002. Market as a Spontaneous Or- ocrates jusqu’à nos jours. Paris: Dalloz. der: Hayek’s Contribution. Varna: Steno（ in Harsev, E. 1991. The Evolution of Money. Sofia: Bulgarian）. Nauka i Izkustvo（ in Bulgarian）. -. 2003. Austrian Economic School. Varna: Hristov, K. and M. Mihailov. 2002. Credit Ac- Steno（ in Bulgarian） tivity of the Commercial Banks and Credit Koford, K. 2000. Citizen Restraints on “Levia- Rationing in Bulgaria. Bulgarian National than” government: Transition Politics in Bank, Discussions Paper 23 (in Bulgarian). Bulgaria. European Journal of Political Ialnazov, D. 2003. Can a Country Extricate It- Economy 16:307-38. self from its Post-Socialist Trajectory?: The Koford, K. and J. Miller. 2006. Contract En- Role of External Anchors in Bulgaria. Com- forcement in the Early Transition of an Un- parative Economic Studies 10:85-103. stable Economy. Economic Systems 30（ 1）: Ialnazov, D. and N. Nenovsky. 2009. The Evolu- 1-23. tion of Post-Communists Countries: An In- Kolev, B. 2002. Economic culture. Sofia: Sto- terpretation from the Perspectives of Coop- panstvo（ in Bulgarian）. eration. Sociological Problems（ 3-4）:156- Kolev, S. 2009. The Great Depression in the 73（ in Bulgarian）. Eyes of Bulgaria’s Inter-war Economists. Ignatiev, P. 2005. Banking Crisis in Bulgaria Bulgarian National Bank, Discussion Paper 1996-97. Sofia: Siela（ in Bulgarian）. 79（ in Bulgarian）. Institute for Market Economy. 2004. Anatomy of Kostov, I and J. Kostova. 2002. Regarding the a Transition. Sofia（ in Bulgarian）. Unilateral Euroization of Bulgaria. Bulgari- Ivanov, M. 2002. Political Games with the Ex- an National Bank, Discussion Paper 26（ in ternal Debt. In Bulgarian Plots of Economic Bulgarian）. Crises and the Rise. Sofia: Sv. Kliment Krastev, I. 2007. The Strange Death of the Lib- Ohridski（ in Bulgarian）. eral Consensus. Journal of Democracy 18 -. 2004. Balance of Payments of the King- （4）: 56-63. dom of Bulgaria in 1911. Bulgarian National Lampe, J. 1975. Varieties of Unsuccessful In- Bank, Discussion Paper 43（ in Bulgarian）. dustrialization: The Balkan States before -. 2006. Bulgaria’s National Income, 1914. Journal of Economic History 35（ 1）: 1892-1924. Bulgarian National Bank, Dis- 56-85. cussion Paper 54（ in Bulgarian）. Leonidov, A. 2000. Ordoliberalism, Social Mar- Ivanov, M. and A. Tooze. 2007. Convergence or ket Economy, Transformation. Sofia: Lik（ in Decline on Europe’s South-Eastern Periph- Bulgarian）. ery? Agriculture, Population, and GNP in Ludjev, D. 2005. City at the Two Epochs. In Bulgaria, 1892-1945, Journal of Economic History of Social Groups in Bulgarian Cities History 67（ 3）: 672-703. at the Middle of the 20th Century. Sofia: Sv. Kioseva, N. 2000. History of Monetary Crises in Kliment Ohridski（ in Bulgarian）. Bulgaria, 1879-1912. Sofia: Stopanstvo（ in MacDermott, M. 1962. A History of Bulgaria, Bulgarian）. 1393-1885. London: Allen and Unwin. Kirdina, S. 2003. Continuity in Russia’s Eco- Manov, V. 2000. Reforms in the Post-Socialist nomic Thought: From Pososhkov to Institu- Society: The Experience of Bulgaria. Mos- tionalism. In Lectures on History of Russian cow: Economica（ in Russian）. Economic Thought, edited by L. Abalkin. Mateev, E. 1987. Structure and Management of Moscow: Nauka: 84-115（ in Russian）. Economic System. Sofia: Nauka i Izkustvo 24 経済学史研究 52 巻 2 号

（in Bulgarian）. 11:31-58. Mavrov, Ch. 2007. Political Economy: Past or Nenovsky, N. and P. Chobanov. 2004. Money Future of the Economic Theory, Materials Market Liquidity under Currency Board- from Conference in Varna, May 2007. Eco- Empirical Investigations for Bulgaria. Wil- nomic Thought 4:120-29（ in Bulgarian）. liam Davidson Institute, Working Paper 617. Miller, J. and S. Petranov. 2001. The Financial Nenovsky, N. and K. Hristov. 2000. Currency in System in the Bulgarian Economy. Bulgari- Circulation after Currency Board Introduc- an National Bank, Discussion Paper 19（ in tion in Bulgaria (transaction demand, hoard- Bulgarian）. ing and shadow economy). Bulgarian Na- Minassian, G. 2002. Financial Stabilization and tional Bank, Discussions Paper 13 （in Economic Growth. Sofia: Marin Drinov（ in Bulgarian）. Bulgarian）. -. 2002. New Currency Boards and Discre- -. 2005. The Way to the Euro: Experience of tion: The Empirical Evidence from Bulgaria. Eastern European Countries with Currency Economic Systems 26（ 1）: 55-72. Boards. Sofia: Marin Drinov（ in Bulgarian）. Nenovsky, N., K. Hristov, and M. Mihailov. -. 2007. External Debt, Theory, Practice, 2001. Comparing Currency Board Automat- Management. Sofia: Siela（ in Bulgarian）. ic Mechanism in Bulgaria, Estonia, and Mirkovich, K. 2005. Utility and Value. Plovdiv: Lithuania. Journal des Economistes et des M-Thrace（ in Bulgarian）. Etudes Humaines 11（ 4）: 575-616. Mladenov, M. 2009. Money, Banking, Credit. Nenovsky, N., K. Hristov, and B. Petrov. 2001. Plovdiv: M-Thrace（ in Bulgarian）. From Lev to Euro: Which is the Best Way? Natan, J., K. Grigorov, L. Berov, S. Mechev, and In Scenarios for Bulgaria Integration to T. Trendafilov. 1973. History of the Eco- EMU. Sofia: Siela（ in Bulgarian）. nomic Thought in Bulgaria. Sofia: Nauka i Nenovsky, N., G. Pavanelli, and K. Dimitrova. Izkustvo（ in Bulgarian）. 2007. Exchange Rate Control in Italy and Nenovsky, N. 1999. Hayek’s, Economic Philoso- Bulgaria in the Interwar Period: History and phy（ 100th Anniversary of the Birth of F. A. Perspectives. In The Experience of Exchange Hayek）. Bulgarian National Bank, Discus- Rate Regimes in South-Eastern Europe in a sion Paper 8（ in Bulgarian）. Historical and Comparative Perspective. -. 2001. Free Money. In The Questions of Oesterreichische Nationalbank: 80-117. Economic Theory. Sofia: Marin Drinov（ in Nenovsky, N., E. Peev, and T. Yalamov. 2003. Bulgarian）. Banks-Firms Nexus under the Currency -. 2005. Exchange Rate Inflation: France and Board: Empirical Evidence from Bulgaria. Bulgaria in the Inter-war Period. The Contri- William Davidson Institute, Working Paper bution of Albert Aftalion（ 1874-1956）. Edi- 555. tion of Bulgarian National Bank. Nenovsky, N. and Y. Rizopoulos. 2003. Extreme -. 2007. Monetary Order. In Critics of Mon- Monetary Regime Change. Evidence from etary Theory. Sofia: Siela（ in Bulgarian）. Currency Board Introduction in Bulgaria. -. 2009. Monetary Regimes in Post-commu- Journal of Economic Issues 37（ 4）: 909-41. nist Countries: Some Long-Term Reflec- -. 2004. Peut-on mesurer le changement in- tions. In Transformations Monétaires et Fin- stitutionnel du régime monétaire? Revue anciers dans les pays d’Europe Centrale et d’Economie Financière 75:17-36. Orientale, Les Cahiers de Recherché de Oesterreichische Nationalbank 2007. The Expe- ESCE, edited by K. Ralf and A. Socic. rience of Exchange Rate Regimes in South- Nenovsky: Bulgarian Economic Thought since 1989 25

Eastern Europe in a Historical and Com- rope. Economic Journal 53（ 210/211）: 202- parative Perspective. Vienna. 11. Pamuk, S. 2000. A Monetary History of Otto- Sagoroff, S.（ 1960）. Nachruf fur Oskar Ander- man Empire. In Cambridge Studies in Islam- son, Obituary. Metrika 3:89-94. ic Civilization. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Savov, S. 1999. Economics of Transition. Sofia: Univ. Press. Stopanstvo（ in Bulgarian）. Pareto, V［. 1905］ 2009. Corso di economia po- -. 2005. Academic Jacques Nathan-A litica, Mondadori. Torino: I Classici di Pen- Great Scholar of Economic Thought in Our siero. Country. UNWE Yearbook 181-96（ in Bul- Petrov, B. 2000. Banks Reserves Dynamics un- garian）. der Currency Board Arrangement for Bul- Sazdov, D. 2005. Economic History in Universi- garia. Bulgarian National Bank, Discussion ty Economics. UNWE Yearbook 166-80（ in Papers 15. Bulgarian）. Petrov, G. 1969. Good Relations and Price For- Schumpeter, J.［ 1954］ 1983. Histoire de l’ana- mation under Socialism. Sofia: Nauka i Iz- lyse économique. In L’age classique. Paris: kustvo（ in Bulgarian）. Gallimard. -. 1990. The Crash of Totalitarian Economy. Stavrianos, L. 2000. The Balkans Since 1453. Sofia: Nauka i Izkustvo（ in Bulgarian）. New York: New York Univ. Press. Polterovich, V. 2008. Institutional Trap. The Sutela, P. 2009. Soviet Economics after Stalin: New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics. Between Orthodoxy and Reform. In Eco- Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. nomics in Russia: Studies in Intellectual Prodanov, V. 1999. Global Issues and the Fate History, edited by V. Barnett and J. Zwey- of Bulgaria. Sofia: Hristo Botev（ in Bulgari- nert. Burlington: Ashgate: 157-72. an）. Sutela, P. and V. Mau. 1998. Economics under -. 2003. Violence in the Modern Age. Sofia: Socialism. In Economic Thought in Commu- Zahari Stoyanov（ in Bulgarian）. nist and Post-Communist Europe, edited by Psalidopoulos, M. and N. Theocarakis. 2009. H. J. Wagener. London: Routledge: 33-79. The Dissemination of Economic Thought Tchalakov, I. and A. Bundjulov, eds. 2008. Net- and the Rise of Nationalism in South-East- works of Transition. In What Really Hap- ern Europe in the 19th Century. Paper for pened in Bulgaria after 1989. Sofia: East- ESHET/JSHET Conference, Kyoto, 21-24 West（ in Bulgarian）. March. Vachkov, D. and M. Ivanov. 2008. Bulgaria’s Radilov, D. 2002. Life and Scientific Records of Foreign Debt 1944-89. In Bankruptcy of the Prof. Oskar Anderson. Economic Thought Communist Economy. Sofia: Siela（ in Bul- 5:94-104（ in Bulgarian）. garian）. Rangelova, R. 2006. Bulgaria and Europe: Eco- Vucheva, H. 2001. Economic Policy in Bulgaria nomic Growth During the XX Century. So- during 1991-2000. Sofia: Stopanstvo （in fia: Marin Drinov（ in Bulgarian）. Bulgarian）. Ratajczak, M. 2009. Polish Economics and Wagener, H. J. 1997. Second Thoughts?: Eco- Polish Economy: A Study for the Twentieth nomics and Economists under Socialism. Anniversary of Transition in Poland. History Kyklos 50（ 2）: 165-87. of Economic Thought 51（ 2）: 1-17. -. 1998. Between Conformity and Reform. Rosenstein-Rodan, P. 1943. Problems of Indus- Economics under State Socialism and its trialization of Eastern and South-eastern Eu- Transformation. In Economic Thought in 26 経済学史研究 52 巻 2 号

Communist and Post-Communist Europe, Bank（ Analysis of Theoretical Approaches edited by H. J. Wagener. London: Routledge: and Evaluation of their Effective Implemen- 1-32. tation in Bulgaria）. Bulgarian National -. 2002. Demand and Supply of Economic Bank, Discussion Paper 14. Knowledge in Transition Countries. Collec- Zaostrovtsev, A. 2009. From Marxist Economics tive Review. http://www.cee-socialscience. to Post-Soviet Nationalism. In Economics in net/archive/economics/review1.html Russia: Studies in Intellectual History, edit- Yakimova, I., V. Gargov, S. Koeva, and D. ed by J. Zweynert. Burlington: Ashgate: Kanev. 2001. 45 Years “Economic Thought” 173-85. Journal: Statements. Economic Thoughts Zweynert, J. 2008. Russian Economic Ideas 4:9-23（ in Bulgarian）. Since Perestroika: Between Path Depend- Yotzov, V. 2000. Macroeconomic Models of the ence and Paradigm Shift. History of Eco- International Monetary Fund and the World nomic Thought 50（ 1）: 1-22.