Zweynert, J. 2008. Russian Economic Ideas Since Perestroika: Between Path Dependence and Paradigm Shift. 50(1): 122.
Vachkov, D. and Ivanov, M. 2008. Bulgaria’s Foreign Debt 19441989. In . Sofia: Siela (in Bulgarian)
Vucheva, H. 2001. Sofia: Stopanstvo (in Bulgarian).
Wagener, H. J. 2002. Demand and Supply of Economic Knowledge in Transition Countries. http://www.cee-socialscience.net/archive/economics/review1.html.
Wagener, H. J. 1998. Between Conformity and Reform. Economics under State Socialism and its Transformation. In . London: Routledge: 132.
Wagener, H. J. 1997. Second Thoughts? Economics and Economists under Socialism. 50(2): 165187.
Yakimova, I., V. Gargov, S. Koeva and D. Kanev 2001. 45 years “Economic Thought” Journal: Statements. 4: 923, (in Bulgarian).
Yotzov, V. 2000. Macroeconomic Models of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank (Analysis of Theoretical Approaches and Evaluation of their Effective Implementation in Bulgaria). Bulgarian National Bank, Discussion Paper 14.
1) 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 paper was prepared during my stay in ICER during the summerautumn of 2009. I would especially like to mention Michalis Psalidopoulos’ thoughtful and instructive letter wherein he emphasized the harmful and self-defeating 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. Although this made me reconsider a number of my judgements, I decided to retain my primary conclusions because 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).
2) Hans-Jürgen Wagener uses this metaphor of demand and supply with respect to the demand and supply of economic knowledge in Eastern Europe. Within the frame of his reasoning, it was interpreted that the events in Eastern Europe negatively impacted supply and positively impacted demand, which led to the emergence of different types of balancing mechanisms (Wagener, 2002).
3) With a few exceptions such as Dimitrov (2002), who presented an overview of the major trends in economic education in Bulgaria after 1990; see also the discussion at the Varna University of Economics (Mavrov, 2007). For a general overview of the post-communist period, see, for example, Wagener (1997, 1998, and 2002) as well as Evans and Aligica (2009) and Evans (2010) on the topic of liberal school of thought.
4) The ideas of Perestroika had seized the attention of a few progressive economists because the Soviet press was rather popular; this was evidenced from the boom in number of Russian newspaper and magazine subscriptions.
5) Lyuben Berov was an internationally recognized economic historian who studied different issues regarding the capitalist development in Bulgaria (industry, banks, foreign capital, income distribution, etc.) using extensive statistical applications and his own comprehensive empirical investigations (see for example, Berov, 1964, 1989). Evgeni Mateev was a founder of Bulgarian cybernetics; he proposed an original model of flexible automatized system of macro management, and subsequently a global systemic model of the economy as part of an ecological system (Mateev, 1987). To these contributions, I could also add the mathematical model of the socialist economy (in the spirit of the theory of disequilibrium) that was