News

On November 16, 2022, the Institute for Market Economics (IME) presented the latest study "Regional Profiles: Development Indicators 2022" at the Bulgarian News Agency (BTA). The study includes an overview of the economic and social development of all 28 regions in Bulgaria, examined through 68 specific indicators. The state of the justice system by region is just one of the topics covered in the profiles, as it is of significant interest in the context of the current political crisis, the difficulties faced by parliamentary parties in forming a government, and the expressed ambitions of some of them to prioritize judicial reform.

The statistics on crimes against persons and property (assuming they are the basis for providing the public service of "justice") in recent years show a significant decline. The number of registered crimes is nearly half between 2010 and 2021 (from 17 per 1000 population to 9.8 per 1000). The number of crimes registered in the first year of the COVID-19 crisis remains at a very similar level in 2021.

Regionally, data on registered crimes against persons and property show significant differences, ranging from 13.6 per 1000 population in Montana to 4.5 per 1000 population in Smolyan. Higher crime rates are observed in some regions of northwestern Bulgaria, as well as in more densely populated and larger regions. The differences between individual regions are due to various factors, primarily social and economic development and demographics.

The clearance rate of crimes also varies between regions, with the highest rate in the Gabrovo region, where nearly 75% of all registered crimes are cleared, and the lowest rate in the capital, where only one-third of crimes are cleared in 2021. Once again, we see that clearance rates are relatively lower in larger regions, while in regions with lower crime rates, the overall clearance rate is higher. On average, 51.7% of registered crimes against persons and property were cleared in 2021.

The workload of criminal judges reflects the functioning of the judicial system. The decrease in workload between 2010 and 2021 is slight, with each judge handling an average of about 9-10 cases per month. During the COVID-19 crisis in 2020, the workload is slightly lower, but in 2021, it again reaches around 9 cases per month.

At the regional level, significant differences are observed again, with a four-fold difference between the most heavily loaded judges in Kyustendil and the least heavily loaded judges in Smolyan. Except for the Varna region, judges in smaller, less populated regions have relatively lower workloads. A high judge workload does not always imply limited access and low quality of justice, as a large number of cases per judge in the long term often correlates with higher qualifications, increased efficiency, and more in-depth judicial practice due to exposure to a greater variety of cases. However, the threshold beyond which the number of cases becomes excessive, and quantity adversely affects the quality of justice is the subject of further, more in-depth analysis.

In conclusion, we should note that the significant differences at the local level in the quantity and quality of services provided in the justice field also lead to varying perceptions among citizens regarding protection. Perhaps it is time for judicial reform plans to include, in addition to crucial provisions for the rule of law and fighting corruption, measures that are understandable to citizens and will improve freedom for people and businesses while enhancing protection and the quality of life in the regions.

The economies of the municipalities in Sofia (province) are closely linked to that of the capital city. While the city itself focuses on services, the peripheral municipalities specialize in various industrial and transportation activities. Significant differences in the levels of economic development are observed within the province, with the leading municipal economies being those of the Middle Mountains region and the industrial municipalities near Sofia. This combination leads to favorable conditions in the local labor markets, but significant demographic challenges are present, similar to almost the entire country.

• Diverse economies in Sofia

The municipalities within Sofia (province) have highly diverse levels of economic development, which is expected given its large geographic scope and different models. Broadly speaking, two centers emerge. One consists of the municipalities in immediate proximity to the capital city, such as Bozhurishte (21.5 thousand leva of value added per person in 2020), Elin Pelin (18.6 thousand leva/person), Kostinbrod (13.2 thousand leva/person), and Botevgrad (12 thousand leva/person), which have far surpassed the other municipalities in terms of economic development, with less than 5 thousand leva value added per person. The other center is the Srednogorie region. Although data on value added is lacking due to confidentiality, various other indicators (such as average salaries) indicate that Pirdop, Chelopech, and Mirkovo are among the most developed municipalities not only in the Sofia region but also in the country as a whole.

In contrast to the capital city, where services are the main driver of development, Sofia (province) owes its significant economic growth to a strong industry during the pre-crisis period. This is particularly true for Bozhurishte, where investments in the manufacturing industry have led to one of the fastest employment and income growth rates in recent years. A similar development model can be observed in Kostinbrod and the geographically more distant Botevgrad, where some of the leading industrial enterprises in the country operate. On the other hand, Elin Pelin concentrates a significant portion of logistics in Western Bulgaria, thanks to its proximity to both the highway and its excellent connection with Sofia city. Some of the municipalities closer to the capital city, such as Svoge, Ihtiman, and Slivnitsa, primarily serve as a source of labor force, as evident from the high daily labor migration. The clear division between the service-centered focus in Sofia and the strong industry in the surrounding municipalities and the Middle Mountains region demonstrates the need to think beyond the boundaries of provinces and municipalities towards integrated economic units.

• Focused investments

When examining the distribution of investments in the region, we encounter a lack of data on the leading economies of the Middle Mountains region. Otherwise, Chelopech, Pirdop, and Mirkovo would have ranked among the leaders in terms of foreign capital and expenditures on long-term assets. Outside of them, nominally, the leader in Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in the province is Elin Pelin, which had attracted a total of 414 million euros of foreign capital by the end of 2020, followed by Botevgrad with 256 million euros and Bozhurishte with 228 million euros. Apart from these three municipalities (and the Middle Mountains region), there is also a significant presence of foreign investments in Kostinbrod, where the volume reaches 86 million euros. As expected, most of the invesmtnet is concentrated in industrial production, and in Elin Pelin - also in transportation and logistics. Weighted by population, Bozhurishte is the leader in FDI in the province, with 23.6 thousand euros per capita, followed by Elin Pelin (17.7 thousand euros per capita), with both municipalities being among the top 10 in the country in this indicator. The year of Covid-19 is characterized by small changes in the volume of investments, with the exception of Kostinbrod, where a decrease of 16 million euros is observed.

From the perspective of current investment activities, the highest expenses for the acquisition of fixed assets in 2020 were realized in Botevgrad (165 million leva), Elin Pelin (154 million leva), and Bozhurishte (60 million leva). However, it is important to note that while the Botevgrad case represents a one-time large investment, in the other municipalities, the expense levels for machinery, land, and buildings are relatively constant and rhythmic. As for expenditures related to European funds, almost all municipalities in the periphery of the capital city are characterized by a low absorption rate. An exception is Kostinbrod, where from the beginning of European investments in the country until mid-2021, 5.4 thousand leva per capita have been spent - one of the highest amounts in the country, mainly due to the construction of waste treatment facilities.

• The uneven labor market

Just like with macroeconomic indicators, significant differences can be observed among the individual municipalities in the composition of Sofia (province) regarding the labor market. This is most evident in terms of the employed population aged 15 and above, which varies from an impressive 81% in Chelopech to a mere 11% in Anton. It is noteworthy that municipalities with high local employment are also those with active local economies and high investments - in Botevgrad, Bozhurishte, Pirdop, Elin Pelin, and Kostinbrod, the share of employed individuals exceeds 40% of the working-age population, while in the remaining municipalities, it is below 25%. It is important to note that this indicator does not include those who work in neighboring settlements, which means that the actual employment in areas closely connected to the capital is higher. In terms of dynamics, most municipalities experienced a contraction of their local labor markets in 2020, with more severe cases seeing a decline of around 3-4 percentage points in the employment rate. An exception is Bozhurishte, which continued to add new jobs even during the pandemic year.

The positive influence of Sofia on local labor markets, despite the significant differences in employment, is also reflected in the low unemployment rate in most of the province. In 2021, the unemployment rate according to the Employment Agency was below 5% in 10 municipalities, and only Dolna Banya and Pravets had rates above 10%, both showing a clear downward trend compared to the previous year. Almost all municipalities in the province (except for Bozhurishte, Botevgrad, Anton, and Chelopech) registered a decrease in unemployment compared to the pandemic year.

Sofia (province) includes municipalities that traditionally rank highest in the country in terms of wages. The traditional leader in this indicator is Chelopech, where the average gross monthly salary for employees exceeded 2,600 leva in 2020. Salaries are also high in Pirdop - over 1,900 leva, as well as in Elin Pelin (1,600 leva).

• Educational Achievements

Despite the fact that good students from Sofia (the capital region) often choose to attend leading schools in the capital instead of studying in smaller municipalities, most of them achieve relatively good results in school education. This is particularly evident when reviewing the data from the national external evaluation after seventh grade, where for the 2021/22 academic year, most municipalities (except Anton) scored above 40 out of 100 possible points in the Bulgarian language and literature exam. The results in mathematics are not as conclusive, as no municipality achieves an average score above 50 points. However, this significant difference between the Bulgarian language and mathematics is a widespread problem, typical for almost all municipalities in the country. In the state matriculation exams, most municipalities in the region achieve high results, with the exception of Ihtiman. At this stage of education, however, the competition from elite high schools in Sofia has an even greater effect in attracting the best students. It is also notable that the wealthy municipalities in the Srednogorie region manage to attract many teachers, and the teacher-student ratio there is one of the most favorable in the country.

• Demographic Challenges

Similarly to almost all municipalities in the country, those in Sofia (province) suffer from significant demographic problems. However, the pandemic has led to a significant influx of population into the municipalities surrounding the capital. In 2020, all parts of Sofia (province) experienced a significant positive mechanical growth, reaching up to 190‰ in Gorna Malina and 152‰ in Bozhurishte. The effect of the pandemic is rather temporary, as in 2021, almost all municipalities start losing population again due to migration processes. Chavdar and Chelopech are exceptions, maintaining significant positive mechanical growth last year as well. From the perspective of the natural population dynamics, all municipalities have a negative natural growth rate, and according to the latest data, only in Ihtiman and Pravets is the coefficient below 10‰, while in five municipalities it has exceeded 20‰. At the same time, municipalities along the border with Serbia have one of the most aged populations in the country.

Author: Adrian Nikolov

The presence of a school in each municipality is considered crucial for its existence. There are many reasons for this - we associate schools with children, future, and prospects, while their absence implies aging, stagnation, and lack of opportunities. Education is a key public service with a central role in municipal budgets, management, and life. However, data from the 2021 census show that over the past ten years, almost all municipalities in Bulgaria have experienced a decrease in population, with some seeing a decline of over 30%. This inevitably means a decrease in the number of children in their school years. How will this affect the provision of educational services?

In recent years, the number of municipalities with only one school has increased from 38 in the 2017/2018 academic year to 44 in the last academic year. These account for 17% of Bulgarian municipalities. Population decline is the main, although not the only, reason for the decrease in the number of schools in municipalities. Another significant reason is the financial model that incentivizes fuller classrooms and, consequently, fewer and larger schools. This, in itself, is not necessarily a bad thing - larger schools in Bulgaria can concentrate more resources, which can be directed towards achieving better results and improving the educational environment for children.

How are these municipalities distributed across Bulgaria?

The majority of municipalities with one school are located in the Sofia region, as well as in northwestern Bulgaria. The proximity to Sofia allows families with young children to move to the capital in search of better education, while in Northwest Bulgaria, the demographic crisis is most severe. We must note that a lot of these schools are part of the "protected schools" mechanism, which guarantees that they will not be closed if there is no other school nearby providing the same service. This means that municipalities with one school that is protected will keep it in the future.

If the demographic trend does not reverse, there will soon be municipalities in Bulgaria without any schools. Which ones are most at risk? According to our assessment, these are the municipalities of Novo Selo, Suhindol, and Alfatar. They have only one school each, all of which are unprotected and with fewer than 100 students. The schools in Suhindol (90 students) and Novo Selo (63 students) are average-sized, and during the last academic year, a total of 11 students completed their secondary education there. The school in Alfatar is primary, with 98 students. The future of these schools is at risk, especially if the municipalities do not have the financial capacity to support them. Considering that these are relatively small municipalities in terms of population - according to the latest census in 2021, there are respectively 2,000 people in Suhindol, 2,278 people in Alfatar, and 2,375 people in Novo Selo - we can assume that the municipality has limited ability to sustain a significant public service with its resources for an extended period.

In the next category, we have Bregovo, Kula, Vetrino, Hitrino, and Letnitsa - again, municipalities with one unprotected school, but with 100 to 200 students. For them, it will be crucial to how the school network develops in neighboring municipalities and whether they can attract students.

At the moment, this problem does not have a visible dimension or a clear solution, but it is important to consider the criteria that a self-governing community and territory should meet - as mentioned earlier, some municipalities do not meet the formal population criterion according to the law on the administrative-territorial organization. And soon, there may be municipalities that will not have anyone to provide their most essential public service.

Ruse is among the stronger economies in Northern Bulgaria, but there are significant differences in the levels of economic development among the various municipalities within the region. As the main driver of local economies is manufacturing, the impact of the crisis on them is relatively limited, including in terms of the labor market, where the increase in unemployment since 2020 has been quickly corrected after returning to growth the following year. At the same time, the region faces a serious challenge regarding large inequalities in the local education systems, as well as worsening demographic indicators.

Industrial Leaders

The economies of the municipalities in the Ruse region are characterized by uneven levels of economic development. Several of them have significantly higher than the national average levels of value added per capita in 2020, while the rest lag far behind. According to the latest data, the leading municipality is Slivo Pole, with BGN 9,800 per person per year, surpassing the regional center Ruse (BGN 9,306 per person) for the first time. The reason for this is the substantial growth compared to the previous year. While Slivo Pole recorded a 14% increase in value-added, Ruse municipality saw a mere 0.8% growth. The municipalities of Vetovo and Byala also have relatively well-developed economies with annual growth rates of over 10%, but the remaining municipalities - Ivanovo, Dve Mogili, Borovo, and Tsenovo - have less than BGN 3,500 value added per person. Nominally, the largest local economy, with a total volume of BGN 1.45 billion, belongs to Ruse municipality, followed by Slivo Pole with BGN 96 million and Vetovo with BGN 78 million.

The backbone of the local economy in Ruse and the surrounding municipalities is manufacturing, including leading companies in the chemical industry, automotive production, and mining. The market leader in postal services, "Econt," also operates in the region, but overall, the leading service companies are concentrated in Ruse municipality. The strong industry places the region as a whole among the leaders in the country in terms of gross domestic product (GDP), with BGN 12,600 per person in 2020, although there has been a slight decline compared to the previous year. This, in turn, results in relatively high salaries and low poverty rates in Ruse.

Focused Investments

The significant presence of international capital in Ruse positions the region as one of the best in the country in terms of foreign direct investment, exceeding EUR 2.1 billion per person by the end of 2020. However, foreign-owned firms are highly concentrated in the regional center, with Ruse municipality accounting for EUR 341 million out of a total of EUR 445 million. In other words, the volume of foreign investments in the regional center amounts to EUR 2,200 per person. Data for the other municipalities, except Byala (where they amount to a mere EUR 87 per person), are confidential.

For this reason, the data on current investment activity presented through expenditures on the acquisition of long-term assets by non-financial enterprises are more indicative. Over the past two years, the most visible investment activity has been in Vetovo municipality, where expenditures for long-term assets reach BGN 2.6 billion per person, compared to BGN 2.1 billion per person in Slivo Pole and BGN 2 billion per person in the regional center. However, all municipalities, except Slivo Pole, have experienced a decline in investment expenditures in 2020 due to deteriorating economic conditions and increased uncertainty caused by the pandemic and the state of emergency.

The municipalities in the Ruse region are not particularly successful in attracting European funds. The only municipality that has surpassed the threshold of BGN 2,000 per person in total funding since the beginning of EU programs in Bulgaria by mid-2022 is the regional center. Most other municipalities within the region attract between BGN 500-700 per person, which is significantly below the national average level.

The Resilient Labor Market

Thanks to the industrial profile of the region (and the relatively small role of services, particularly tourism), the labor market in its municipalities remains relatively unaffected by the sharp decline during the pandemic year. The most significant decrease is observed in the share of employed individuals among the population aged 15 and above in economically active municipalities: a decrease of 3.4 percentage points between 2019 and 2020 in Ruse, and 1.6 in Slivo Pole. There are also significant differences in employment rates among the different municipalities. The share of employed individuals varies between 32% of the population aged 15 and above in the regional center to just 5.5% in the municipality of Tsenovo. These differences reflect both the overall job availability in different municipalities and the significantly greater choice.

According to the unemployment data published by the Employment Agency, 2021 was a year of recovery for regional labor markets in Ruse. The share of unemployed individuals among the working-age population decreased in all municipalities except Tsenovo, with most experiencing relatively rapid declines of 2-3 percentage points within a year. However, significant differences are also observed here. While the unemployment rate in the regional center was only 3.2% in 2021, it exceeded 10% in most municipalities and even reached 20% in Tsenovo and Vetovo. This suggests that the labor market challenges in the small municipalities of Ruse are not so much related to the short-term shock of the COVID crisis but rather the result of long-standing lower levels of economic development.

Weak Education

The future development of the labor market in Ruse largely depends on the output of the local education system and the skills accessible to future investors. However, the achievements of students in most municipalities do not provide much reason for optimism. Looking at the results of external assessments after the seventh grade, it becomes clear that only students in the municipality of Ruse manage to score more than 30 points out of a possible 100 in Bulgarian language and literature. There are also significant differences, typical for most municipalities in the country, in the results for mathematics, which are generally much lower. A similar pattern is observed in the high school graduation exams - it is striking that there are significant gaps between the results of several elite schools in the regional center and all the others. Some of the smaller municipalities in Ruse also face significant problems with student dropout rates, with Borovo having a dropout rate of 18% among students before the seventh grade, and Dve Mogili - 6%. Early dropout implies significant difficulties in accessing the labor market in the future.

Demographic Challenge

Similarly to other regions in Northern Bulgaria (excluding Varna), Ruse is facing extremely serious demographic challenges due to aging, migration out of the region, and low birth rates. In terms of natural population growth, the regional center performs the best, with a difference of 14.7 ‰ between birth and death rates in 2021, while in the municipalities of Ivanovo and Tsenovo, the indicator exceeds 30‰. In the past year, there has been a significant deterioration in natural population growth throughout the region (only a 5-point decrease in the Ruse municipality itself), primarily due to the peak in mortality as a result of the pandemic. Like other major economic centers, there has been a population outflow from the regional center to peripheral municipalities in 2020, with the Ruse municipality losing 1.3% of its population, while the largest growth occurred in Ivanovo (12%) and Slivo Pole (7%). However, in 2021, migration processes normalized and calmed down, with the regional center once again showing a positive balance of people leaving and settling within its territory.

Author: Adrian Nikolov

Each of the top 10 cities in Bulgaria has been losing population over the past 10 years. This is evident from the final data from the 2021 population census. Until now, it was known that the population was decreasing by over 800,000 people, but the breakdown by specific locations was missing. The latest data provides an opportunity to examine the development of the major cities, which concentrate a significant portion of the country's economic and social energy, as well as nearly 40% of the population. In this case, we set aside the view of regions and municipalities and focus specifically on the data for the cities. For the first time in the history of censuses, all major cities are losing population. In the period from 2011 to 2021, the top 10 cities in the country have lost over 6% of their population.

The ranking of the top 10 cities in Bulgaria can be divided into four groups. These are 1) the capital Sofia, clearly the largest city in the country and the only one with a population over 1 million people – this threshold was crossed back in the 1980s; 2) Plovdiv and Varna, which go together and maintain populations over 300,000 people – also since the 1980s; 3) Burgas, Ruse, and Stara Zagora, which continue to have populations clearly above 100,000 people; and 4) Pleven, Sliven, Dobrich, and Pernik, which have populations below 100,000 people and complete the top ten. Let's take a closer look at each of these groups.

The population of Sofia remains around 1.2 million people.

The first place is clear, as the 2021 census records a population in Sofia of nearly 1.2 million people. However, the data for Sofia reveals a surprising trend, as the population of the capital city is not increasing and even slightly decreasing (by around 20,000 people). This development is triggered by at least three factors. The first is the aging population in Bulgaria, which is now exerting pressure on the population in the largest cities downwards – even if young and active people are attracted, as is the case with Sofia, natural processes in the aging population begin to prevail. The second factor is related to the fact that the scale of mechanical growth in the capital has already diminished, meaning that the influx of population is not at the levels observed at the beginning of the century. The third factor is the Pandemic, which not only worsened natural population growth – with a high mortality rate in 2020 and 2021 – but also reversed migration processes. The major cities (including Sofia) experienced a population outflow toward their peripheries just before the census. This is true only for 2020, but it will take years of positive migration to restore the effect of the one-time correction during the pandemic. Apart from that, the decline in Sofia's population is not unprecedented – it also occurred during the period 1992-2001 when the censuses again recorded a decrease in the capital's population, mainly as a result of opening borders.

Plovdiv maintains the second position ahead of Varna, but both cities are losing population.

One of the big questions in this census was whether Varna could surpass Plovdiv and take the position of the second-largest city. The difference between the two cities in 2011 was extremely small – only 3-4 thousand people, creating expectations for a possible change in the ranking. Interestingly, up until now, Varna was the only city that consistently increased its population with each census, while Plovdiv failed to grow its population in several consecutive censuses. However, the 2021 census showed that both cities are losing population, with a magnitude of 18-24 thousand people, and Plovdiv remains in second place with a population of nearly 320,000 people compared to around 311,000 people in Varna. Despite both cities also attracting young and active people over the past 10 years, sustained negative natural processes, as well as the effects of the pandemic, including the outflow of people to the periphery in 2020, ultimately lead to a decline in population.

Burgas falls below 200,000 people, while Ruse and Stara Zagora are now within the range of 120,000-125,000 people.

The top six of our largest cities traditionally include Burgas, Ruse, and Stara Zagora - these are the six cities with a population of over 100,000 people in the country. After the 2021 census, Pleven is officially outside this category after over 40 years of being a city with a population of over 100,000 people. In its peak year (1985), Bulgaria had 10 leading cities with populations over 100,000 people - now only the top six cities remain. Among the three cities that complete the trio, Burgas shows a different trend. Until 2011, it was increasing its population, reaching over 200,000 people. However, now it is experiencing a decline due to a combination of the factors previously mentioned, and the population of the second-largest coastal city has fallen below 190,000 people. Ruse and Stara Zagora, on the other hand, continue to lose population at a significant rate, with declines of 11% and 17% over the past 10 years, respectively. By 2021, the population of both cities is below 125,000 people, with Ruse experiencing a more significant decline in population since the 1990s. This is in line with the challenging demographic trends observed in all Danube cities.

The top 10 is completed by Pleven, Sliven, Dobrich, and Pernik.

Pleven remains in the traditional seventh position but is now outside the 100,000+ population club. The city's population in 2021 is 92,000 people. After Pleven, some cities are similar in scale and proximity to most regional centers - Sliven (80,000 people), Dobrich (74,000 people), and Pernik (68,000 people). Pernik returns to the top 10 after an absence of around 40 years, surpassing Shumen by about 300 people. Haskovo is also very close to the top 10. The commonality among these cities is not just a decrease in population but the significant rate at which it is happening, with a loss of approximately 10-15% of their population over ten years. These cities not only experience a clear natural decline but also a mechanical outflow of population. While the first six cities have different examples, the cities outside the top six consistently lose young and active people over the years.

Migration is the litmus test for urban development.

The census data confirm the observation that Bulgarian cities are experiencing a significant and widespread population decline. It is difficult to speak of genuine socio-economic progress in the regions when even the largest cities in the country are consistently losing population. While natural processes are to some extent responsible due to the deteriorating age structure, migration processes are the ones that most clearly determine how attractive a city is, as well as its potential for development - whether in education, the economy, or the broader social sphere. Sofia, Plovdiv, and Varna are the three cities that, overall, have managed to attract people over the last ten years, excluding the pandemic's effect on the population outflow to peripheral areas in 2020. For the other cities, this process is either unsustainable or, in some cases, non-existent.

On the eve of the new academic year, it is time to look back at the results from the previous one. In this article, we focus on the grades from the National External Evaluation, which is mandatory for all seventh graders and includes exams in Bulgarian Language and Literature as well as Mathematics.

The data for the results of the external evaluation are available on the Open Data Portal, where the average grade for Bulgarian language and literature, as well as mathematics, is published for each school in the country, along with the number of students who took each of the two exams. The average grade for the two mandatory subjects is calculated as the average of the schools in it, weighted by the number of participating students. In this way, for example, the average grade of a school with 50 seventh graders would have 10 times the weight in the overall average for the municipality under consideration compared to a school with five students.

In 2022, a total of 58,567 students took the National External Evaluation for Bulgarian Language and Literature, with an average score of 53.63 out of 100. For mathematics, slightly fewer students took the exam - 58,349 - although both exams are mandatory. The average grade here, as usual, is significantly lower at 35.32 points. It is important to note that these results also include students from abroad, 21 in total.

The municipalities with the highest scores in Bulgarian language and literature are Borino (70.5 points), Varna (67.88 points), Nedelino (66.47 points), Zlatograd (66.17 points), and the capital city municipality (65.31 points). Large regional centers rank relatively high, where the higher competition among schools and the availability of more resources contribute to higher quality education. Very small municipalities perform the best, partly because each student has a significant weight in the final average grade. However, there are also significant differences in achievements between individual years in these municipalities, precisely because of the significant influence of individual students. Thus, a few excellent performances could send a municipality to the top of the ranking, while a few very weak performances could place it at the bottom. The municipalities with the lowest scores in Bulgarian language and literature are Novo Selo (9.19), Makresh (10), Chuprene and Madzharovo (12.80), and Nevestino (16.23), which are among the municipalities with the fewest participating students.

The results in mathematics resemble those in the Bulgarian Language and Literature, with very small municipalities at the top and bottom of the ranking, while large regional centers perform relatively well. Once again, the municipality of Borino takes the first position with 64.03 points, followed by Banite (61.23), Zlatograd (54.24), Varna (50.08), and Tsenovo (49.21). The capital municipality ranks seventh with 47.33 points. At the bottom of the mathematics ranking are Georgi Damyanovo (9 points), Borovo (9.02), Yakimovo (9.96), Kovachevtsi (10), and Tran (10.97), with none of these municipalities having more than 30 students participating. Regarding clusters with relatively high mathematics scores, they can be observed in the municipalities of the Smolyan region, which is characterized by a well-developed educational system, as well as in the Srednogorie region.

In 2022, the trend persists in almost all municipalities in the country that the grades for Bulgarian language and literature are significantly higher than those for mathematics, with only 10 municipalities showing the opposite result, compared to 15 municipalities in the previous external evaluation. However, the average difference slightly widens, with a 15.7-point advantage for the Bulgarian language compared to a 14.1-point advantage the previous year. This mainly reflects the increase in the number of municipalities with extreme differences between the results of the two subjects - there are already 87 municipalities with a difference of over 20 points, compared to 58 municipalities in 2021. This dynamic is partly dictated by the differences in the content of the exams between individual years, which do not guarantee comparability and fully equivalent levels of difficulty.

The dynamics of the results compared to the previous year are diverse. Improvement in mathematics grades is observed in 116 municipalities, while in Bulgarian language and literature, improvement is seen in 81 municipalities. All municipalities with extreme differences - both positive and negative - are very small municipalities where the influence of individual students is significant. The results are relatively stable in the largest municipalities - there is no change in the average number of points for Bulgarian language and literature in the capital city, while there is a decrease of 3 points in mathematics. At the same time, Plovdiv registers a slight increase in Bulgarian Language and Literature results and a decrease in mathematics, while Varna experiences a decrease by one point on both exams.

Unlike previous years, in the 2021/22 academic year, there is no officially published scale for equating the scores of external assessments to the standard six-point grading system. However, if we use the newly introduced standard for assessing maturity exams after the 12th grade and external assessment after the fourth grade, students would need 30 points to achieve a grade of Average (3) and pass the external assessment successfully. The average score for the Bulgarian language and literature exam in 52 municipalities falls below this threshold, while in mathematics, the results in a total of 181 municipalities would not reach the passing grade. Such equating highlights the problem that in over two-thirds of the municipalities in the country, the preparation in mathematics is insufficient, and the average result of the participating students is not enough to achieve a grade higher than Weak (2). On the other hand, if we apply the scale from the previous external assessment, which sets a significantly lower criterion, only 4 municipalities would fall below the passing grade for the Bulgarian language and literature exam, but for mathematics, as many as 29 municipalities would fall below the passing grade.

The significant differences between individual schools are also striking. 32 schools achieved an average score of over 80 points in the Bulgarian language and literature exam, while 489 out of a total of 1736 schools participating in the external assessment scored below 30 points. It is noteworthy that among the top 10 schools ranked by performance in the Bulgarian language and literature exam, six have a mathematical or science-mathematical profile, confirming the conclusion about the overall higher quality of education in these types of schools. The inequality is even greater in mathematics, with only 16 schools achieving an average score above 80 points, while more than half of them, a total of 1035 schools, scored below 30 points.

These results are a cause for serious concern. They indicate a significant concentration of quality mathematics education (and exact sciences in general) in a very small number of elite schools that achieve very high results, not only on national exams but also in international Olympiads. However, outside of these schools, the quality drops sharply, leading to a decrease in the number of students who are subsequently able to pursue education in fields that require more serious preparation in mathematics. From an economic development perspective, this circumstance hinders the potential for the development of several industries, especially in the ICT sector and the higher segment of industrial production, which have been among the main drivers of growth in the country in the last decade. Overcoming these inequalities and improving the overall quality of mathematical education on a mass scale will be among the most important challenges for future governance.

Less than a month from now, the new academic year begins, and a few weeks later, the next parliamentary elections will take place. All of this will inevitably raise questions once again about the quality of our educational system and what it provides for children and society. Unfortunately, the current facts do not speak well for the system, and there are no noticeable actions for real change.

We have already commented on the latest data on the average success in the Bulgarian language and literature matriculation exams by subject areas, but what is happening in individual schools? For some of them, the state matriculation exams prove to be a challenging obstacle:

• Out of the 950 schools in Bulgaria where students took the mandatory Bulgarian language and literature exam at the end of the 2021/2022 academic year, 307 (almost one-third) had an average student success below "Average" 3.00.
• A total of 6,455 children, or about 15% of all high school graduates in Bulgaria, studied in these schools.
• Out of these 307 schools, 189 were vocational high schools, 102 were general high schools, 14 were sports schools, and 2 were spiritual schools.
• In 27 schools, the average matriculation success is exactly "Weak" 2.00. This means that no student in these schools has passed the matriculation exam successfully and will not receive a high school diploma.
• The distribution of these 27 schools by type shows that 13 of them are general high schools, 13 are vocational high schools, and 1 is a sports school. In practice, the type of school does not matter.
• The distribution of schools by regions is presented in the graph below, with three schools in the Burgas, Plovdiv, and Pleven regions, and two schools in the Kyustendil, Pazardzhik, and Stara Zagora regions.

These are not the only schools with students receiving a "Weak" grade on the matriculation exam. There are also such students in other schools, but in these 27 schools, not a single student has successfully passed the exam in their native language, and this is already a systemic problem. These schools, as well as the entire system, symbolize the failure of the state to provide any quality education for these children. If measures are to be taken, it is good to start with them, especially if this failure is not a one-time occurrence but repeats over time.

But what can be done?

The concept of education quality has been so overused in society that almost no one can come up with a meaningful idea of how to implement this concept in practice. Perhaps it should start with:

1) Setting clear, precise, and measurable goals for what we want to achieve. For example, to have no school like the 27 mentioned above, to achieve a certain average success for all students in the country, to minimize the overall proportion of weak grades, to achieve specific points in international educational assessments, and to minimize the dropout rate. The goals can be different, but they need to be based on public consensus. 

2) Measuring the results according to the set goals. Matriculation exams may not be a sufficient measure of quality. Maybe there is a need for more frequent or different forms of tracking? However, measurement is essential to identify the problem, and burying one's head in the sand certainly does not help.

3) It is also necessary to have a clear idea of the actions to be taken when there are signals of low quality. What will we do with schools that have weak results, and when can we afford to wait and for how long? Support mechanisms would work best when problems are identified as early as possible, and they can be diverse – support with teachers or other resources, specific funding, programs for training school management, staff, and students, and if necessary, individualized education and many others. There are enough educational experts in the country who can implement such programs in practice.

4) Funding based on results. This implicitly assumes that we will finance for "good" results, but politicians have conveniently overlooked the important fact of what to do if there are no such results at all. It often happens, and it is normal that significant resources need to be allocated for correction. In the case of, for example, the 27 schools mentioned above, it may turn out that we will invest more in low-quality schools. These are difficult questions with unclear answers, which should be discussed and resolved so as not to fail several more generations by promising them quality education in words alone.