proposed by Antonov (1989).
6) Compare with Ratjczak (2009), Poland.
7) To the extent of my knowledge, no Bulgarian economists have ever been cited by any of the world’s great economists except for Ivan Gueschow who was cited in a footnote (however, the context remains unclear) by Vilfredo Paretto in his Corso di economia politica, Paretto (2009 , 355). In his study, Paretto cited a speech that was delivered by Ivan Gueschow in the late 1895, where the latter gave a quantitative example of agio, i.e., of a positive correlation between the increase of agio on gold and an increase in number of silver coins in circulation (it is unclear, to me at least, whether this refers to Argentina or to Bulgaria). However, the name of Ivan Gueschow is not included in the name index of this Corso.
8) For details, see Natan et al. (1973) as well as Sazdov (2005, particularly 176, 180).
9) The indicated scheme of the two major channels apparently reveal a few similarities with the familiar Marxian concept regarding the dialectics of the base (production or economic relationships) and the superstructure (economic theory is considered to be a part of the superstructure), where the base plays the leading role and the superstructure possesses a certain degree of autonomy, etc. A number of studies on economic thought especially emphasize “the role of economic environment on economists” in a different manner (Gide and Rist (2000 ), 9), or in the opposite direction of influence (for example, Keynes), or offer a complex perspective regarding this topic, for example, Schumpeter (1983 ).
10) See for example Avramov and Antonov (1994), Dimitrov et al. (1999), and Nenovsky (2009).
11) Bukharin 1989 .
12) In my opinion, Leonidov’s (2000) rare theoretical contributions include the promotion of the ordoliberal interpretation and ordoliberal economic policy; he also introduced some evolutionary ideas occasionally.
13) See a similar discussion for Russia in Sutela (2009) and Zaostrovtsev (2009).
14) Essentially, Mitko Dimitrov (born in 1950) highlighted that the most capable and enterprising economists have established their own businesses, and those who continued to pursue economic research may be classified as the most incapable economists (Dimitrov, 2002). A few “idealistically” inclined scholars may also be added to the latter group.
15) The following economists from the academia were a part of the BNB (Central bank) managing board during different periods of time: Emil Hursev (born in 1961), Milleti Mladenov (born in 1944), Gancho Ganchev (born in 1953), Lena Roussenova, Georgi Petrov (born in 1929), Garabed Minassyan (born in 1944), Roumen Avramov (born in 1953), Stati Statev (born in 1955), Nikolay Nenovsky (born in 1963), etc. The following Ministers of Finance (with a few exceptions, such as Muravey Radev, Dimiter Kostov, Svetoslav Gavriisky, and Milen Velchev) were/are a part of the academia: Ivan Kostov (born in 1949), Stoyan Alexandrov (born in 1949), Hristina Vucheva, Plamen Oresharsky (born in 1960), and Simeon Djankov (born 1970).
16) The following examples of Russian creativity may be mentioned: “the theory of institutional matrices” developed by Svetlana Kirdina (2003) and “the theory of institutional trap” developed by Victor Polterovich (2008). My explanation of a lack of creativity demonstrated by Bulgarian economists is primarily linked to the historically established conformist and imitative behaviour of Bulgarian people and of Bulgarian elites owing to long periods of foreign domination and dependencies (Ottoman Empire, Soviets domination, etc.).
17) Hayek’s principal philosophical and political sciences books were translated in mid-1990s.
18) See the material regarding Hayek that was published by the Bulgarian National Bank (Nenovsky, 1999).
19) Of course, within the paradigm of socialism, scholars like Georgi Petrov (born in 1929) and Jack Aroyo (born in 1921) may be regarded as violators of the status quo, although to