HUMAN DEVELOPMENT REPORT ! BULGARIA 1996
48
The socio-economic stratification of
the municipalities has two clear-cut poles.
The first consists of the top five munici-
palities, which have very high values of their
integral evaluations. The second pole in-
cludes the three bottom municipalities
whose integral evaluations are far below
from the standard. The difference between
the evaluations of the top and the bottom
municipality in the overall classification is
3.4:1. When these two extreme values are
eliminated, the differentiation is reduced
significantly.
The conclusion drawn is that the socio-
economic state of the municipalities in Bul-
garia is quite similar. Eight out of each 10
municipalities
have the development stan-
dard below what is the average for the coun-
try, which in turn has quite unfavourable
characteristics. This makes it extremely dif-
ficult to determine which municipalities are
at a really critical state.
4.2. The group of the most
developed municipalities
The first group is the smallest in num-
ber. This is an illustration of the regional
aspect of the overall critical socio-economic
situation in the country. However, some
44.7 per cent of the whole population live
in the municipalities of this group.
There are considerable differences be-
tween the top and the bottom municipali-
ties in this group. For instance, Devnya
focusses a high economic potential, which
is put to comparatively good use. The mu-
nicipality of Montana is evenly removed
from the standard by most of the features
studied. Included in the group are munici-
palities having major industrial agglomera-
tions of national importance as Devnya,
Pirdop, Radnevo, Bourgas, Kozlodoui. As
a rule, they are characterized by a good
economic potential, whose utilization de-
fines the positive parameters in the state
of most of the territorial units of this group.
The economic potential of some of them
has been the result of the concentration of
great capacities in municipalities of fewer
inhabitants, attracting manpower from
neighbouring regions. They can thereby be
used as pillars of regional development.
The place
occupied by other munici-
palities in this group (Breznik) is mostly
determined by the dynamics of their socio-
economic development during the last few
years. In the rest of municipalities, the
changes in the socio-economic parameters
monitored do not manifest any consider-
able dynamism. The top group includes all
municipalities (with the exception of
Classification of the municipalities according to the integral
assessment of their socio-economic state (1994)
Figure 4.1.
First group of municipalities according to the degree
of their socio-economic development
¹ in the
Municipality
¹ in the
Municipality
classification
classification
1
Devnya
36
Zlatitsa
2
Mirkovo
37
Gorna Oryahovitsa
3
Pirdop
38
Razgrad
4
Radnevo
39
Lyaskovets
5
Chelopech
40
Kazanluk
6
Bourgas
41
Dobrich
42
Montana
Table 4.2.
.....
49
SOCIO-ECONOMIC DIFFERENTIATION OF MUNICIPALITIES
Haskovo) with cities which are centres of
regions. Nearly one-third of the municipali-
ties includes towns, which had formerly
been district centres. By virtue of a policy
pursued until not very long ago, they fo-
cussed a considerable portion of the
countrys economic potential. This comes
to show that the
potential of a big part of
the largest municipalities and cities has not
been exhausted by the economic crisis.
They have capacities to adapt to the new
conditions.
The good economic state of the mu-
nicipalities classifed in the first group de-
termines a comparatively high degree of
their financial independence. In these terri-
torial units the share of their own revenues
in the local budgets is above the average
for the country as a rule. Some of them
(Devnya, Radnevo, Mirkovo, Bourgas,
Gulubovo, Kozlodoui) almost do not rely
on subsidies provided by the budget.
The demographic characteristics of
most municipalities in this group are above
the average for the country. The share of
the population under and in working age
goes as high as 85 per cent.
This implies a smaller demographic
load, a low degree of economic dependence
of the generations under or above the work-
ing age and a potential of human capital.
In most of the leading municipalities
the unemployment is around or under the
average figure for the country. The indi-
vidual cases, where it is higher, can be ex-
plained by the close-down of production
lines (Madan), or by the employment of
labour from the neighbouring municipali-
ties (Devnya) in the local economy. The
higher than average incomes per capita in
most municipalities of this group (the dif-
ference in some cases is over 4 times the
average for the country) have been the re-
sult of their economic state. This fact illus-
trates the indubitable link between the eco-
nomic and social development. It proves
that the solution of the local and the na-
tional social problems crucially depends on
the manner in which the economic and
social reforms have been tied up.
The social infrastructure back-up of the
population in terms of quantity in most
municipalities is around the average for the
country. Due to the restrictive budgetary
policy, the maintenance of the available fa-
cilities is insufficient, however. The social
services offered are rather limited in vol-
ume and unsatisfactory in quality. The low
investment activity in the social sphere lim-
its its reproduction. In the bigger cities it is
incapable of coping with the growing de-
mand for services
resulting from the con-
tinuing urbanization. These conditions do
not favour the preservation and increase
of the human capital, and most of all the
development of the younger generations.
The most developed municipalities are
evenly located
in the northern and south-
ern half of the country (See Fig. 4.2.). Six
territorial concentrations of this type of
municipalities take shape.
The first one is located in the north-
eastern part of the country along the coast
(Varna, Devnya, Dobrich, Aksakovo,
Balchik, Beloslav). The structure of this
region, which includes branches of the
chemical industry, the machine-building in-
dustry, the light and food processing in-
dustries, and tourism, may be defined as
complex. Its relations and role have re-
gional, national and international charac-
ter. One of the fundamental problems of
this and other developed regions is the en-
vironmental one. The boundary of endur-
able loading of the regional eco-systems
has been crossed, which is contrary to the
paradigm of sustainable development.
The second concentration is in the cen-
tral eastern part of the country - Bourgas,
Nessebar and Kameno. The economic
structure in terms of sectors of this region
is diverse, too. It includes oil refineries, met-
allurgy, machine-building industry, light
and food processing industries, agriculture
and tourism. The largest Bulgarian oil re-
finery, one of
the metallurgical centres of
the country, a ship-building enterprise, a
The big municipalities
manage to adapt to the
new conditions
The most developed
municipalities are
located in six territorial
concentrations