skip to main content


Vol.5, Issue 2, 2019, pp.323-349 Full text

Crossmark logo

Web of Science: 000512305100010

Zhivko Minkov

Affiliation: New Bulgarian University, Sofia, Bulgaria

This research is an attempt to examine the developmental relationship between democracy and the socioeconomic conditions in Bulgaria. The assumption is that one of the factors contributing to the negative attitude towards democracy in Bulgaria is the high level of social inequality. After discussing the relevance of studying democracy and socioeconomic conditions from a developmental perspective, the paper traces the socioeconomic development of Bulgaria from 1989 to date and examines public perceptions of social inequality in the country. The research has not revealed any overall negative public attitude towards democracy in Bulgaria. However, the findings have demonstrated a clear tendency for the public support for democracy to decline reflecting the growth of social inequality.

Keywords: democracy, attitude, Bulgaria, socioeconomic conditions, inequality, poverty

Article history:
Submitted: 17 September 2019;
Reviewed: 18 November 2019;
Revised: 4 December 2019;
Accepted: 20 December 2019;
Published: 30 December 2019

Citation (APA):
Minkov, Z. (2019). Attitudes towards Democracy in Bulgaria: The Importance of Social Inequalities. English Studies at NBU, 5(2), 323-349.

Copyright © 2019 Zhivko Minkov

This open access article is published and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. If you want to use the work commercially, you must first get the authors' permission.

The research is based partly on the information from several representative polls, conducted by the sociological agencies Mediana and Sova-Harris for the period 2010–2014. The polls were ordered from the Project: "Quality of democracy in Bulgaria: democratic consent and civil participation" carried out by the department of Political Sciences at New Bulgarian University and financed by the National Science Fund (NSF) of the Ministry of Education and Science, Bulgaria, Grant number: ДТК 02/17/16.12.2009

Agentsiya za ikonomicheski analizi i prognozi (2005). Ikonomikata na Balgariya prez 2004 g. (godishen doklad). Ministerstvo na finansite na republika Balgariya. [Agency for economic analyses and forecasts (2004). The Economy of Bulgaria in 2004 (annual report). Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Bulgaria]. Sofia.

Alfa Risarch (2010). Obsthtestvenoto mnenie za bednostta I sotsialnoto izkljuchvane v Balgaria. ['Alfa Research (2010). The public's perception towards poverty and social exclusion in Bulgaria']. Sofia.

Bühlman, M., Merkel W. & Müller, L. (2007). The Quality of Democracy: Democracy Barometer for Established Democracies. Working Paper 10. National Centre of Competence in Research (NCCR). Challenges to Democracy in the 21st Century. NCCR Democracy, Zurich.

Collier, D. & Levitsky, S. (1996). Democracy "with adjectives". Conceptual innovation in comparative research. Working Paper 230, Kellogg Institute.

Dahl, R. (1971). Polyarchy: Participation and Opposition. Yale University Press.

Erdmann, G. & Kneuer, M. (2011). Introduction. In Erdmann, G. & Kneuer, M. (Eds.), Regression of Democracy? Comparative governance and politics. Special Issue 1. VS Verlag, Wiesbaden, 9-20.

Eurostat, (2019). GDP per capita in PPS. Eurostat. (last visited on Sept. 13. 2019).

Eurostat, (2019). Gini coefficient of equivalised disposable income - EU-SILC survey. Eurostat, , (last visited on Sept. 13. 2019).

Eurostat, (2019). S80/S20 income quintile share ratio by sex and selected age group - EU-SILC and ECHP surveys. Eurostat, , (last visited on Sept. 13. 2019).

Eurostat, (2019). Europe 2020 indicators/ Main Tables/Poverty and social exclusion. Eurostat, , (last visited on Sept. 13. 2019).

Eurostat (2019). People at risk of poverty or social exclusion by age and sex. Eurostat, (last visited on Sept. 3.09.2019).

Friedman, S. (2002). Democracy, Inequality and the Reconstitution of Politics. In Tulchin, J.S. & Brown, A. (Eds.), Democratic governance and social inequality, (pp. 13-40). Lynne Rienner Publishers.

Hadenius, A. (1992). Democracy and Development. Cambridge University Press.

Held, D. (1996). Models of Democracy. Cambridge University Press.

Heller, H. (1934). Staatslehre. Herausgegeben von Gerhart Niemeyer.

Heller, H. (1971). Gesammelte Schriften. A.W. Sijthoffs Uitgeversmaatschappij N.V.

Hristov, T. (2007). Bulgaria. Deliverable 2. Desk Research. EUREQUAL. Social Inequality and Why It Matters for the Economic and Democratic Development of Europe and Its Citizens: Post-Communist Central and Eastern Europe in Comparative Perspective. University of Oxford.

Huntington, S. (1991). Democracy, s third wave. Journal of Democracy, 2(2), 12-34.

Institut Otvoreno Obsthtestvo (2012). Obsthestveno mnenie I sotsialni naglasi v Balgaria prez may 2012 g. [Open Society Institute (2012). Public's opinion and social attitudes in Bulgaria in May 2012]. Sofia.

Institut Otvoreno Obsthtestvo (2019). Demokratsiya I grazhdansko uchastie: Obsthestvenite naglasi kam demokratsiyata, varhovenstvoto na pravoto I osnovnite prava na choveka prez 2018 g. [Open Society Institute (2019). Democracy and civil participation: Public's attitudes towards democracy, rule of law and the basic human rights in 2018]. Sofia.

Lauth, H. J. (2004). Demokratie und Demokratiemessung. Eine konzeptionelle Grundlegung für den interkulturellen Vergleich. VS Verlag für Sozialwissneschaften.

Lauth, H. J., Pickel, G. & Welzel, C. (2000). Grundfragen, Probleme und Perspektiven der Demokratiemessung. In Lauth H.J., Pickel G. & Welzel C. (eds.). Demokratiemessung. Konzepte und Befunde im internationalen Vergleich (pp. 7-26). Westdeutscher Verlag.

Lipset, S. M. (1981). Political man. The social bases of politics. The John Hopkins University Press.

Merkel, W. (2004). Embedded and defective Democracies. Democratization, 11(5), 33-58.

Morlino, L. (2004). "Good" and "bad" democracies: how to conduct research into the quality of democracy. Journal of communist studies and transition politics, 20(1), 5-27.

O'Donnell, G. (1998). Horizontal Accountability in New Democracies. Journal of Democracy, 3(9), 112-126.

O'Donnell, G., Gullel, J. V. & Lazzetta, M. O. (2004). The quality of democracy: Theory and Applications. Helen Kellogg Institute for International Studies. University of Notre Dame Press.

Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of Justice. Harvard University Press.

Roberts, A. (2010). The quality of democracy in Eastern Europe. Public Preferences and Policy Reforms. Cambridge University Press.

Rueschemeyer, D. (2004). Addressing Inequality. Journal of Democracy, 15(4), 76-90.

Sen, A. (1979). Equality of what? The Tanner lecture of human values. Stanford University.

Sen, A. (1996). On the status of equality. Political Theory 24(3), 394-400.

Schumpeter, J. (1943). Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. Routledge.


Reviewer's name: Undisclosed
Review content: Undisclosed

Reviewer's name: Undisclosed
Review content: Undisclosed

Review Verified on Publons

Handling Editor: Stan Bogdanov
Verified Editor Record on Publons

Article Metrics