Radostin Vazov<\/strong><\/p>\n University of National and World Economy<\/em><\/p>\n https:\/\/doi.org\/10.53656\/his2025-6s-1-fai<\/a><\/p>\n Abstract. <\/strong>This article analyzes how Mount Athos became a durable economic actor in the Middle Byzantine period (9th\u201312th centuries). Building on translated monastic foundation documents and Athonite acts alongside recent economic and institutional historiography, I examine (a) imperial patronage and fiscal immunities; (b) land acquisition and the metochia network; (c) resource management, labor, and market integration. Methodologically, the study combines documentary analysis (typika, chrysobulls, praktika) with an institutional lens on property rights and exemptions (exkousiai), situating the Athonite koinon at the intersection of Orthodox canon law and imperial governance. The findings clarify a post\u2011Iconoclastic trajectory: from state protection to endowed, tax\u2011privileged estates that sustained large cenobitic houses (Lavra, Iviron, Vatopedi). Athonite monasteries consolidated land by donation and purchase, administered dependent peasants with comparatively mild dues, and regularly exchanged surpluses (grain, wine, oil, timber) with regional markets, especially Thessalonica, while importing non\u2011produced essentials. Far from a contradiction, Athos\u2019 \u201csacred economy\u201d was a corporate, rule\u2011bound system that reconciled ascetic ideals with prudent resource management. The article refines our understanding of Athos as a fiscally semi\u2011autonomous enclave whose endurance depended on secure rights, exempt status, and diversified estates rather than isolation.<\/p>\n Keywords:<\/em> Byzantine monastic economy; Mount Athos; metochia; tax exemptions; Middle Byzantine period.<\/p>\n SEE MORE<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Pencho D. Penchev,<\/strong><\/p>\n Yanko Hristozov<\/strong><\/p>\n University of National and World Economy<\/em><\/p>\n https:\/\/doi.org\/10.53656\/his2025-6s-2-fai<\/a><\/p>\n Abstract. <\/strong>The article analyzes the weaknesses of organized agricultural credit in Bulgaria through the history of the Bulgarian Agricultural Bank. It traces its transformation from the Ottoman public benefit funds into a state institution entrusted with the mission to modernize agriculture and limit usury. Despite the good intentions, the bank proved to be dependent on political influence, heavily bureaucratized, and with limited access for smallholders, which led to abuses, non-performing loans, and a slowdown in modernization. The aim of the study is to highlight these shortcomings and draw lessons from the past regarding the risks of excessive specialization, lack of regulation, and politicization of state credit institutions.<\/p>\n Keywords:<\/em> Bulgarian Agricultural Bank; public benefit funds; crediting; agriculture<\/p>\n SEE MORE<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Svetla Boneva<\/strong> https:\/\/doi.org\/10.53656\/his2025-6s-3-ret<\/a><\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong>Abstract<\/strong>. <\/strong>The aim of this study is to analyze the development, functions, and socio-economic significance of convertible currency retail stores in the socialist countries, with a special focus on the \u201cCorecom\u201d retail chain in Bulgaria and its counterparts in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE): \u201cTuzex\u201d, \u201cIntershop\u201d, \u201cBaltona\u201d, \u201cPewex\u201d, \u201cIntertourist\u201d, and \u201cComturist\u201d.<\/p>\n The research methodology combines historical-economic and comparative analysis based on a synthesis of existing scholarly and archival literature. Primary archival sources were utilized alongside secondary studies in the fields of economic history and cultural studies. A content analysis was applied, as well as a comparative review of the names of various socialist retail chains.<\/p>\n The research results show that convertible currency retail chains performed a dual function, both economic and social. Attention is given to the relationship between the state\u2019s economic objectives and citizens\u2019 everyday lives, illustrating how access to goods in exchange for hard currency became a symbol of social privilege and prestige. These retail chains are examined not only as an economic phenomenon but also as a cultural marker of socialism in Central and Eastern Europe.<\/p>\n \u00a0<\/strong>Keywords:<\/em> hard currency stores; \u201cCorecom\u201d chain; trade in convertible currency<\/p>\n SEE MORE<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Paskal Zhelev<\/strong><\/p>\n University of National and World Economy<\/em><\/p>\n Bratislava University of Economics and Business<\/em><\/p>\n Monika Moraliyska,\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n Ivet Tileva<\/strong><\/p>\n University of National and World Economy<\/em><\/p>\n https:\/\/doi.org\/10.53656\/his2025-6s-4-glo<\/a><\/p>\n Abstract.<\/strong> This article examines the European Union\u2019s trajectory as a pillar of globalization in historical perspective, focusing on the interplay between structural openness and uneven development since 1970. Globalization has advanced in cyclical waves marked by episodes of slowdown and retrenchment, yet the EU has consistently maintained an outward orientation. Using trade as a share of GDP as the primary indicator, the paper traces long-term trends in European openness and highlights three critical inflection points: the stagflation era of the 1970s \u2013 1980s, the global financial and eurozone crises of 2008\u20132013, and the pandemic-driven polycrisis of 2020 \u2013 2024. Institutional analysis shows that each disruption was met with innovations\u2013from the Single European Act and the euro to the European Stability Mechanism and NextGenerationEU \u2013 that reinforced openness. At the same time, the benefits of integration have been unevenly distributed: peripheral economies in Southern and Eastern Europe bore disproportionate adjustment costs unless compensated by supranational instruments. The EU\u2019s historical experience thus illustrates both the resilience of globalization through regional integration and the enduring challenge of asymmetry within it.<\/p>\n Keywords:<\/em> European Union; Globalization; Deglobalization; Regional integration; Trade openness; Core-periphery asymmetries; Uneven development<\/p>\n SEE MORE<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Mihaela Misheva<\/strong><\/p>\n University of National and World Economy (Bulgaria)<\/em><\/p>\n https:\/\/doi.org\/10.53656\/his2025-6s-5-fre<\/a><\/p>\n Abstract<\/strong>. This article reinterprets Bulgaria\u2019s historical backwardness through Amartya Sen\u2019s concept of development as the expansion of substantive freedoms. The study integrates Sen\u2019s capability framework with historical accounts of Bulgarian Orthodoxy and economic culture. Drawing on Amartya Sen, Martha Nussbaum, Daniela Kalkandjieva, Blagoy Kolev, and Venelin Makrides, as well as Max Weber\u2019s classical thesis, the article examines how Orthodox cultural and institutional legacies have shaped freedoms in education, political participation, entrepreneurship, transparency, and security. The methodology combines conceptual analysis with historical-institutional reconstruction. Results indicate that Bulgarian backwardness is best understood as a long-term deficit in freedoms, rather than as a mere lag in industrialization. The novelty of the article lies in connecting Sen\u2019s capability approach with the specificities of Bulgarian Orthodoxy and economic culture, thereby reframing the religion\u2013economy debate beyond Weberian binaries.<\/p>\n Keywords:<\/em> Amartya Sen; capabilities; Bulgaria; Orthodoxy; economic culture; backwardness; Max Weber<\/p>\n SEE MORE<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Ralitsa Veleva<\/strong><\/p>\n University of National and World Economy<\/em><\/p>\n https:\/\/doi.org\/10.53656\/his2025-6s-6-sta<\/a><\/p>\n Abstract.<\/strong> In the framework of this study, the issue of Bulgaria’s state capacity is viewed as a long-term process of institutional consolidation, administrative professionalisation, and economic modernisation. The main objective is to rebuild the historical interdependence between bureaucratic impartiality, regime stability, and development performance from 1878 to 2024. The analysis argues that state capabilities are not only an administrative attribute, but also a strategic determinant of sustainable growth and institutional resilience. The methodological approach is descriptive and historical, combining empirical indicators with interpretative analysis. Data are extracted from internationally recognised sources, including Varieties of Democracy (V-Dem), Political Economy IV, and Gapminder, and supplemented by national statistics and historical documents. The conceptual model incorporates three analytical dimensions: administrative competence, political stability, and economic sustainability, representing real income per capita. This concept allows the identification of structural dependencies and cyclical patterns in the co-evolution of governance quality and economic development. The novelty of this study lies in the interdisciplinarity of economic history, political economy, and public administration theory. By integrating quantitative data with historical narrative, it reveals how Bulgaria’s administrative capacity has evolved through successive systemic transformations, from constitutional monarchy and socialist centralisation to the democratic and Europeanized governance model of the contemporary era. Empirical findings show that periods of administrative consolidation and bureaucratic competence coincide with periods of economic expansion and democratic predictability, while political instability, authoritarian centralisation, and frequent cabinet turnover undermine institutional effectiveness and political coherence. Evidence supports the conclusion that Bulgaria’s development path depends less on formal regime types and more on the administrative capacity to ensure predictable, impartial, and statutory governance. Finally, the study establishes that the convergence of democratic accountability, bureaucratic professionalism, and economic adaptability is a structural mechanism that underpins Bulgaria’s modernisation and sustainable development.<\/p>\n Keywords:<\/em> Public administration; state capacity; political stability; institutional quality; economic development<\/p>\n SEE MORE<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Sabrina Kalinkova<\/strong><\/p>\n University of National and World Economy <\/em><\/p>\n https:\/\/doi.org\/10.53656\/his2025-6s-7-fro<\/a><\/p>\n Abstract<\/strong>. The article analyzes the strategic planning process in Bulgaria through the prism of feedforward logic \u2013 an approach that includes predicting future scenarios, analyzing early signals and adapting before crises occur. Over 300 strategic documents (2007\u20132025) were studied using an interdisciplinary methodology grounded in systems theory, cybernetics, and strategic planning. The results show a predominant dependence on feedback logic \u2013 management through reporting and post-factum correction. National strategies are short-term, fragmented and often subordinated to external (mostly European) frameworks. Feedforward elements are found in areas such as climate and digitalization, but remain isolated. Recommendations are offered for institutionalizing foresight functions, introducing scenario thinking and expanding time horizons, to transition to future-oriented management.<\/p>\n Keywords:<\/em> strategic planning; feedforward logic; anticipatory governance; systems theory; cybernetics; scenario planning; policy design; national strategies<\/p>\n SEE MORE<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Kalin Boyanov<\/strong><\/p>\n University of National and World Economy <\/em><\/p>\n https:\/\/doi.org\/10.53656\/his2025-6s-8-con<\/a><\/p>\n Abstract<\/strong>. This article explores the evolution of contradictions in public administration from antiquity to the digital era, arguing that these tensions are not malfunctions but structural forces driving institutional change. It identifies key categories of administrative contradictions \u2013 structural, functional, politico-administrative, cultural, ethical, and technological and examines how they manifest historically and theoretically. The analysis integrates classical frameworks (Weber\u2019s rational bureaucracy, Simon\u2019s bounded rationality) with contemporary paradigms such as New Public Management<\/em>, Public Value<\/em>, and New Public Governance<\/em>. Particular attention is devoted to the Bulgarian context, where Europeanization interacts with post-socialist legacies, revealing tensions between legal reform and cultural inertia, professionalism and politicization, and digitalization and bureaucratic culture.<\/p>\n Keywords:<\/em> Public administration; governance contradictions; institutional change; New Public Governance; Bulgarian public sector<\/p>\n SEE MORE<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Borislav Borissov<\/strong><\/p>\n University of National and World Economy<\/em><\/p>\n https:\/\/doi.org\/10.53656\/his2025-6s-9-how<\/a><\/p>\n Abstract<\/strong>.<\/strong> The practice of developing state and municipal budgets in Bulgaria began immediately after the Liberation and reflects both the fiscal traditions of the Ottoman Empire and the desire for modernization and Europeanization of Bulgarian financial policy. Historically, various financial decisions have determined the degree of financial decentralization and the financial powers of local authorities, the role of internal control, the functions of financial specialists, tax policy, budget expenditure priorities, and more. Some of these decisions remain valid today, while others have been abandoned as unsuitable. The article provides a historical review of the budgetary practices of the Third Bulgarian Tsardom and a study of stakeholder attitudes towards key elements of modern budgetary policy. The aim of the article is to use the experience of the past to rethink certain decisions for the improvement of municipal budgetary policy. Questions are raised such as whether municipal councilors should receive remuneration for their work, whether financial decentralization should be expanded and deepened, whether it is necessary to introduce program budgeting at the municipal level, what the main sources of investment funds in municipal budgets should be, and others. The results of the survey show that there are old budget practices that are accepted as appropriate for our times, as well as those that are rejected. The opinions of the of mayors and municipal financial specialists and the review of past practices provide an opportunity to seek suitable solutions for improving the budget process in Bulgarian municipalities.<\/p>\n Keywords<\/em>:<\/strong> historical overview; municipalities; budget practices; financial decentralization; local self-government<\/p>\n SEE MORE<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Nikolay Sterev<\/strong><\/p>\n University of National and World Economy<\/em><\/p>\n Veneta Hristova<\/strong><\/p>\n University of Veliko Tarnovo<\/em><\/p>\n https:\/\/doi.org\/10.53656\/his2025-6s-10-the<\/a><\/p>\n Abstract<\/strong>. Entrepreneurial activity manifests across diverse domains, encompassing both economic and broader societal spheres. In recent years, the significance of one particular form\u2014social entrepreneurship \u2013 has increasingly come to the forefront, as its role and contributions to society have gained new and tangible dimensions. Although the term itself is relatively recent, the practices it reflects have existed for centuries. The social dimension of entrepreneurship has shaped entrepreneurial behavior since antiquity: Aristotle famously stated, \u201cNoble is he who gives, not he who accumulates wealth.\u201d However, a considerable part of entrepreneurial responsibility and contributions to society and local communities has remained overlooked and gradually forgotten. This article traces the development of social enterprise and social entrepreneurship in more recent history by examining the activities of the first \u201cspontaneous\u201d entrepreneurs in the Ottoman Empire, progressing to the contemporary era, where social enterprises represent not merely economic entities but platforms for innovation, cooperation, and societal transformation. In a time of global challenges, social enterprises are becoming engines of change\u2014spaces where academia and practice converge to generate sustainable solutions.<\/p>\n Keywords:<\/em> entrepreneurship; entrepreneurial attitudes; history of entrepreneurship; social enterprise; social economy<\/p>\n SEE MORE<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Rumen Andreev<\/strong><\/p>\n University of National and World Economy<\/em><\/p>\n https:\/\/doi.org\/10.53656\/his2025-6s-11-bul<\/a><\/p>\n Abstract.<\/strong> Germany experienced significant economic successes and political and military defeats in the 20th<\/sup> century. It initiated and lost two world wars, leading to severe consequences for its economy. This paper presents analyses by Bulgarian economists who were contemporaries of the Third Reich. During this period, the Bulgarian economy was closely linked to the German economy and followed its state-regulatory policy. The study focuses on publications in the journal of the Bulgarian Economic Society, the most authoritative economic publication at that time. Many prominent economists in Bulgaria were members of the society and published in its journal. From these publications, it is evident that there was sufficient empirical data on the economics and politics of Germany and Bulgaria during this period. The study is limited to analyses by Bulgarian economists of Germany and its economic relations with Bulgaria, without delving into theoretical interpretations of socialism versus capitalism or of planned versus unplanned economies. In Nazi Germany, there were no five-year plans, and private property existed.<\/p>\n Keywords:<\/em> German economy; Third Reich; Bulgaria; Bulgarian \u0435conomists; clearing trade; compensation deals; price control<\/p>\n SEE MORE<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n Neli Radeva<\/strong><\/p>\n University of National and World Economy<\/em><\/p>\n https:\/\/doi.org\/10.53656\/his2025-6s-12-leg<\/a><\/p>\n Abstract. <\/strong>The electrification of Bulgaria represents one of the fundamental processes in the country\u2019s modernization following the Liberation, reflecting the state\u2019s aspiration for economic and technological renewal. The construction of Bulgaria\u2019s energy infrastructure was undertaken to provide electricity not only for the population but also for all branches of the national economy. In the early years after the Liberation, the emergence of electrification in Bulgaria was associated not only with the modernization ideas of the founders of the young state but also with the technological progress of Western Europe.<\/p>\n This study aims to examine the legislative initiatives in the field of energy that clearly outline a consistent policy for the establishment of a national energy system. Through a series of legislative acts \u2013 from the Law on the Encouragement of Local Industry and Trade of 1905 to the Decree-Law on Electrification of 1935 \u2013 a comprehensive normative framework was created, laying the foundations of national energy policy. Overall, electrification in Bulgaria developed primarily through strong state protectionism, reflected in the gradual establishment of a comprehensive normative and institutional framework and the centralized management of electricity production, transmission, and distribution. Private initiative was present in the early stages, but its role diminished progressively over time.<\/p>\n The study’s methodology includes a historical approach, through which the gradual development of electrification and the related legislative framework are traced. A legal-analytical approach is applied for a detailed review of the content, objectives and mechanisms of action of key regulatory acts. A comparative law method is also used to identify the evolution of state intervention at different stages. Through institutional analysis, the role and interaction of the competent state bodies involved in energy policy are clarified.<\/p>\n Despite certain shortcomings, Bulgarian legislation in the field of electrification emerged as one of the most significant features of state policy aimed at economic and social renewal during the period from the Liberation to the Second World War.<\/p>\n A novel contribution of this study is the systematization of the legislative acts regulating the electrification of Bulgaria in the period 1879 \u2013 1939, tracing their evolution and internal coherence. The research provides an in-depth analysis of the role of each normative act. It traces the establishment of a coherent state policy that laid the foundations for a national energy system. The study outlines the institutional interactions and conflicts between state structures, offering a deeper understanding of the mechanisms through which the national electrification program was implemented. It traces the transformation from local, private, and municipal electricity sources to the concept of a centralized national electricity supply system under state control, thereby revealing the connection between electrification and the country\u2019s modernization. It further contributes a critical assessment of the weaknesses and limited economic resources that influenced the pace of electrification, thus providing a balanced scholarly evaluation of the process.<\/p>\n Keywords:<\/em> electrification; modernization; Law on Water Syndicates; Decree-Law on the Electrification of Bulgaria<\/p>\n SEE MORE<\/a><\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\n <\/p>\nDeficiencies and Weaknesses of Organized Agricultural Credit in Bulgaria<\/h3>\n
Retail Chains for Trade in Convertible Currencies in the Socialist Countries of Central and Eastern Europe in the Period 1946 \u2013 1992<\/h3>\n
\nUniversity of National and World Economy<\/em><\/p>\nThe European Union as a Pillar of Globalization: Openness and Uneven Development in Historical Perspective<\/h3>\n
Freedom, Faith and Development: Revisiting Bulgaria\u2019s Historical Backwardness Through Amartya Sen\u2019s Capability Approach<\/h3>\n
State Capacity and Economic Development in Bulgaria (1878 \u2013 2024): A Historical Perspective on Institutional Modernization<\/h3>\n
From Anticipation to Adaptation: The Missing Feedforward Logic in Bulgaria\u2019s Economic Governance<\/h3>\n
Contradictions in Public Administration in Historical Context<\/h3>\n
How Modernity Perceives History. Historical Overview of the Municipal Budgetary Practices of the Bulgarian State<\/h3>\n
The Historical Development of the Social Enterprise: From Early \u201cSpontaneous\u201d Entrepreneurs in the Ottoman Empire to Contemporary Centres of Excellence and Academic Entrepreneurship<\/h3>\n
Bulgarian Economists in the 1930s on the Economy of the Third Reich<\/h3>\n
The Legal Framework of Energy Infrastructure in Bulgaria \u2013 an Attempt at Modernization Under Economic Chalenges (1879 \u2013 1939)<\/h3>\n
The Discursive Construction of Bulgaria\u2019s Image in Margaret Thatcher\u2019s Public Statements<\/h3>\n