REGIONAL PROFILES INDICATORS OF DEVELOPMENT 2016 This publication is financed by the America for Bulgaria Foundation and is part of a three-year project. The purpose of the edition is to present objective information and in-depth analysis of the economic and social development of Bulgaria’s districts. © Desislava Nikolova, Ph.D., Alexander Tsvetkov, Ph.D., Petar Ganev, Yavor Aleksiev, Zornitsa Slavova, authors, 2016 © Yordan Kalchev, Ass. Prof., Ph.D., scientific editor, 2016 © Ralitza Muharska, translator, 2016 © Vesela Dobrinova, Konstantin Jekov, cover and layout, 2016 © Institute for Market Economics, 2016 ISBN 978-954-8624-49-7 Table of Contents Preface 5 Blagoevgrad District 17 Burgas District 21 Regional Profiles 2016: Summary 6 Dobrich District 25 Gabrovo District 29 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 6 Haskovo District 33 Income and Living Conditions 6 Kardzhali District 37 Kyustendil District 41 Labor Market 6 Lovech District 45 Investment 7 Montana District 49 Infrastructure 8 Pazardzhik District 53 Pernik District 57 Taxes and Fees 8 Pleven District 61 Administration 8 Plovdiv District 65 Razgrad District 69 SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT 9 Ruse District 73 Demography 9 Shumen District 77 Silistra District 81 Education 9 Sliven District 85 Healthcare 10 Smolyan District 89 Security and Justice 10 Sofia (Capital City) 93 Sofia District 97 Environment 11 Stara Zagora District 101 Culture 11 Targovishte District 105 Varna District 109 Types of Regional Profiles 2016 12 Veliko Tarnovo District 113 TYPES OF REGIONAL PROFILES 12 Vidin District 117 Vratsa District 121 CONCLUSIONS 15 Yambol District 125 Methodology 129 Categories of Indicators 132 Appendix 144 Table of Contents 3 Abbreviations Used AIP Foundation Access to Information Programme Foundation APIA Access to Public Information Act EU European Union FDI Foreign Direct Investment FTA Fixed Tangible Assets GDP Gross Domestic Product MES Ministry of Education and Science MI Ministry of the Interior MpHAT Multi-profile Hospital for Active Treatment NCPHA National Centre of Public Health and Analyses NHIF National Health Insurance Fund NRA National Revenue Agency NSI National Statistical Institute NSSI National Social Security Institute OP Operational Programme pp percentage point/percentage points WWTP wastewater treatment plants 4 Regional Profiles 2016 Preface his is the fifth annual edition of the Regional Profiles: Indicators of Development periodical study of so- cio-economic development in Bulgarian regions, the only one of this type and scale, prepared by the TInstitute for Market Economics (IME). Analysis is based on 63 indicators arranged in two general sections: “Economic Development” and “Social Development”. Its aim is to offer a picture, as concise and accurate as possible, of the current state and development trends in Bulgaria’s 28 districts. This edition is not exclusively the result of EMI’s effort. We consider it integral to the wider societal processes of growing awareness on how important regional specificity is for the overall development of the country. The study reflects as much as possible advice and criticism we have received at workshops in the capital and across the country. We have also made an attempt to answer various questions asked by politi- cians, journalists, and students. The Regional Profiles study responds to the public awareness of its social necessity, which implies a responsible approach to both choice of indicators as well as their systematization and analysis. Dividing district profiles into two sections (economic and social development, respectively) has allowed for maintaining a better content balance. At the same time, by reconsidering the indicators used every year, we have tried to constantly improve the quality of the finished product. Every single methodological deci- sion has been made in order to enhance the informative value of the Regional Profiles and their usefulness for local administrations, businesses, and citizens. This edition would not have been possible without the financial and general support of the America for Bulgaria Foundation. We are also grateful to our colleagues from the National Statistical Institute who never failed to respond to our information requests, and helped us comprehend some of the specific methodologi- cal subtleties in preparing and interpreting data. With each subsequent edition, the number of Bulgarian municipalities’ administrations that responded to our information requests, as stipulated in the Access to Public Information Law, has been increasing. This year, again, Prof. Yordan Kalchev took responsibility for the scientific editing, whereas Polis Publishers, our reliable partners and friends, invested laudable effort in designing and printing a book of exceptional quality. Our work on the Regional Profiles: Indicators of Development does not end with the coming out of the an- nual report. The IME team keeps monitoring the ongoing processes in the regions throughout the year, and prepares timely comprehensive analyses on topical issues such as the labor market, income and household wealth, EU fund utilization, investment, and many others. All that information, as well as the total data used in preparing the present edition can be found at the project website www.regionalprofiles.bg. Enjoy reading our study! The IME team Preface 5 Regional Profiles 2016: Summary ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Income and Living Conditions In 2016 Bulgaria’s economy finally managed to overcome In that part of the country, however, the district of the consequences of the economic crisis. Aggregate pro- Plovdiv makes an exception. Thanks to considerable duction (in real terms) surpassed its pre-crisis level. How- investment during the last few years the real gross ever, in most Bulgarian districts and regions recovery production in the district of Plovdiv is already higher from the crisis is yet to come. than it was in 2008 by 8.5 %. In 19 districts the real GDP (that is, adjusted for price fluc- The Southwestern and Southeastern regions have also tuations) has not reached its pre-crisis (2008) levels yet. started to show real production which exceeds its pre- These districts are located all over the country’s territory, crisis levels by 2 to 3%. The economies that form the pos- in all its regions. The only region where all districts with- itive trends in the two regions are those of Sofia (capital out exception have not yet recovered from the crisis is city) and the greater Sofia district in the Southwestern that of Northwestern Bulgaria. It includes the districts of region as well as those of Stara Zagora and Yambol in the Vidin, Vratsa, Montana, Pleven, and Lovech. southwest. The North-central and Northeastern regions are also in the process of recovery, but close to their pre-crisis levels of production. The districts whose economies Labor Market have already recovered from the consequences of the Economic recovery became more and more visible in crisis are those of Veliko Tarnovo and Razgrad in the 2015, judging by processes on the labor markets and North Central region, and Varna and Dobrich in the income dynamics. That year was particularly buoyant Northeastern region, respectively. In the south, the for labor markets in most regions, hence, for salaries South Central region was still “in deep water” in 2014. and household incomes too. Figure 1: Real GDP in Bulgarian districts in 2014 (2010 constant prices) Still, 8 districts failed to join in the process of job creation and em- ployment rates fell there in 2015. Among them are some whose lo- cal economies have very serious problems, such as Vratsa, Montana and Silistra, where employment has been stagnating and even go- ing down in the last few years. In those districts processes of recov- ery have either not started at all or have been insignificant. Employ- ment remains exceptionally low in Silistra, with less than half the population of working age in em- ployment. The district of Sofia is also among the stagnating labor markets, while the districts of Do- brich and Kardzhali report a drop in employment rate after a rise in previous years. In 2015 unemployment fell in Districts which in 2014 had reached or Districts which in 2014 had not reached surpassed their 2008 gross production their 2008 gross production level all districts without exception. level in real terms in real terms However, a more careful consid- eration of the figures shows that Source: NSI, IME calculations 6 Regional Profiles 2016 person in a household (3,393 BGN). person inahousehold(3,393 BGN). per district income withthelowest asthe Silistra 2015 Kardzhali replaced In sources. other from incomes falling the andto activity, economic holds’ ofhouse intensity andlow ployment em thelimited 2015 -duebothto orfallenin stagnated have comes In districtssome vary. dynamics in everywhere,ily income household stead grown salaries have Though est ones(Vidin). as theoneindistrict withthelow abouttwice ashigh capital) remained district withthehighestsalaries (the inthe ofremuneration thelevel Still, in 2014. example) for Razgrad, (like 10%insomedistricts over but itwent rise isabout6%, countryThe average rise insalariesa steady inalldistricts. hasledto thresholds mum insurance salaryof theminimum andthemini rise withthecontinuing combined oflabormarkets inmostdistricts, stablerecovery The Kardzhali. Sofia, and Plovdiv, include thedistricts ofBlagoevgrad, ofthiskind examples More aslump. activity into went economic that thesolereason butfor halfitssize to fell kind the district is unemployment of Montana,