B I Las - The public administration of exogenous and endogenous risks of regional development in post-crisis period - страница 101
Чтобы понять ситуацию в национальной экономике, которая возникла в Латвии и других странах после 2008 года, необходимо четко знать и понимать главные причины. Как нам представляется, их следует разделить на внешние и внутренние.
К внешним причинам следует отнести:
- ипотечный кризис в США, который серьезно повлиял на банковскую систему и экономику стран в целом;
- появление новых индустриальных сверхдержав как Китай, Индия, Бразилия и других, которые создают сильную конкуренцию даже таким ведущим государствам как США, Япония или Германия. У этих государств также появились проблемы снижения темпов роста. Однако они быстрее приспособились к новой ситуации и стали ориентироваться на большие рынки новыхстран, которые не так насыщены как рынки в Западных странах. Кроме того в экономику были влиты крупные государственные средства, как в Китае.
Внутренние причины в основном обусловлены быстрым ростом внутреннего потребления. В Латвии он был связан, в первую очередь, с притоком внешних финансовых средств из фондов ЕС, а также с легким доступом к ипотечному и потребительскому кредиту. Доступ к денежным средствам позволил государству и предпринимателям платить заработную плату, которая в ряде случаев не была обусловлена ростом производительности. Но предприниматель был вынужден платить, ибо работник мог уйти работать в другую сферу или уехать из страны.
В результате, как нам представляется, перед государствами и их политиками стоит очень серьезная и непопулярная
- объяснить народу, что не следует ждать быстрого роста экономики и соответственно материального благосостояния с учетом наших ресурсов,
- для стабилизации и развития экономики необходима консолидация всех социальных и национальных групп, проживающих в стране,
- возможность экономического роста зависит от тенденций развития в мире как на Западе, так на Востоке,
- необходимо помнить, что при общих тенденциях развития каждая страна имеет ряд специфических особенностей, которые невозможно повторить или перенести.
Перспективы развития национальной экономики зависят от того, насколько правильно оценят ситуацию как политики, так и сам народ. Только на основе понимания новой ситуации можно совершенствовать структуру народного хозяйства. При этом в Латвии необходимо уделить большее внимание оптимальному и эффективному использованию наших национальных ресурсов (земля, лес, вода и др.). Также необходимо более эффективно использовать наше выгодное географическое положение, не забывая, что нужна заинтересованность всех сторон. Таким образом, для создания стратегии развития национальной экономики Латвии в современных условиях необходимо учесть три основных фактора: общие тенденции развития мировой экономики, тенденции развития ЕС и способность политиков Латвии сплотить все социальные и национальные группы для решения вопросов устойчивого развития национальной экономики.
Выводы. Вопрос устойчивого развития национальных экономик является актуальным для всех стран. Особенно остро этот вопрос стоит перед малыми странами с ограниченными ресурсами, с недостаточным уровнем экономического и материального благосостояния по сравнению с развитыми странами независимо от их величины, как например США или Люксембург. Каждая малая страна имеет свою историю и свой исторический опыт развития, который нельзя перенести, в том числе и положительный. Как следует из анализа, сегодня часто забываются как положительные, так и отрицательные моменты исторического пути развития, которые необходимо учитывать. Положительный результат развития национальной экономики достигается, если интересы всех социальных групп и национальностей государства учитываются, хотя не всегда это реализуется чисто демократическими путями, как например в Южной Корее, Тайване или Сингапуре. Реализм современного мира в определенной форме затрудняет решение этого вопроса, так как необходимо согласие на национальном и межгосударственном уровнях. Если такого соглашения государства не смогут достичь, то вопрос будет решен сильными сверхдержавами в своих интересах, как это было на всем пути цивилизации.
1. Statistical Yearbook of Latvia 2010.-Riga.-2010.- 600 p.
2. Latvijas zeme, daba un tauta! Rakstu krajums 3.sej. Latvijas tauta.- RIgа-1937.-680.lpp.
3. Statistical Yearbook of Latvia 1998.-Riga.-1998.- 348 p.
4. Pensiju naudai jakalpo Latvijai. Ekspresintervija.-Diena, 01.07.2011. -3.lpp.
5. The Global Competitiveness Report 2010-2011. Klaus Schwab, World Economic Forum. -Geneva.- Switzerland.-2010.
6. Br.Snowdon., Globalisation, Development and Transition.-2007., p.577
Научная статья посвящена современным проблемам развития национальных экономик. Рассматриваются внешние и внутренние факторы, влияющие на формирование национальных экономик в период глобализации мирового хозяйства. На примере Латвии рассмотрены конкретные этапы развития экономики за последние 150 лет. Определены основные предпосылки и факторы, которые необходимо учесть при разработке стратегии развития национальной экономики в современных условиях. Ключевые слова: национальная экономика, развитие, конкурентоспособность, глобализация.
Наукова стаття присвячена сучасним проблемам розвитку національних економік. Розглядаються зовнішні й внутрішні фактори, що впливають на формування національних економік у період глобалізації світового господарства. На прикладі Латвії розглянуті конкретні етапи розвитку економіки за останні 150 років. Визначено основні передумови й факторів, які необхідно врахувати при розробці стратегії розвитку національної економіки в сучасних умовах. Ключові слова: національна економіка, розвиток, з, глобалізація.
The article is devoted to the nowadays problems of development of national economies. Internal and external factors that influence formation of national economies in the period of globalization have been analyzed. Particular stages of Latvia's economic development during previous 150 years are considered and the main factors and conditions that have been taking into account for the planning of national development strategic are stressed.
Keywords: national economy, development, competitiveness, globalization.
METHODOLOGICAL PROBLEMS OF REGIONAL INNOVATIVE SYSTEMS AND CLUSTERS ANALYSIS
Kozak Y.G., doctor of economic sciences, professor of Economic relations department of Odessa state economic university Baranovska M.I., candidate of economic sciences, Economic relations department of Odessa state economic university
Unconventional directions in economic regionalistics folded in 70-80* of ХХ century (M. Amendola, Y. Yaffard, D. Becattini and other) have opened new direction in development of spatial development. Generalizing and investigating vast empiric material, regionalists, is "evolutionists"  gave the realistic explaining to the economic phenomenon of appearance in the separate regions of Italy, France and Switzerland of "oases" of economic prosperity in the situation of deep cutback of economic activity of 1979th. Giving up the traditional
© Kozak Y.G.> Baranovska M.I., 2О11
theory of allocation of production factors, evolutionists based on the approach pawned the idea of technical progress evolution. Its meaning is in confession of innovations as a result of difficult co-operation of managing subjects, its mutual educating, gradual accumulation of preparation and doing business. Firstly in economic science this process was noticed and described by Adam Smith, and later by Alfred Marshall in the categories of "industrial district" . It flows within the framework of theory that is not necessarily coincided with the borders of economic - or policy-economic education. Sometimes such an association is formed by centuries, and now days this process in the separate corners of planet accumulated new maintenance, as managing subjects within its limits of the geographical environment create relations, combining a competition with a mutual collaboration, expressed by formulas of learning lei doing, learning lei using, learning lei interacting. Such an association has got dissemination for the evolutionists of the "territorial-production system".
Idea of evolutionists got wide confession among the regionalists. It was noticed by Group of European researches of innovative environment functioning by European Union aegis .
Supporters of neoclassical school, accepted conclusions of evolutionists in relation to meaningfulness of internal institutional factors in regional development, and at the same time they specified on an underestimation by evolutionists of exogenous factors being outside of the regions. Alluding to the experience of creation and functioning of technopolicies (Silicon Valley in the USA etc.), they assert that without permanent and massed support from outsourcing development of innovative environment of regions is impossible. These sources within the framework of "global corporate network" are under control of Transnational Corporations. Region can not attract external investments and public in a necessary volume of innovative production distribution without participating in this network. Therefore, it considers "plugged the basic sign of regional cluster in the global corporate network" . The presence of this sign presents possibility to managing region becoming a full-fledged member and network society and to participate in creation and appropriation of highly "technological cost" during great while. On the contrary, M. Castels considers, "firms and organizations without accepting of network rules of game (in the field of business, mass-media or policy), leave a competition, 'cause it is not ready to application of new model of management" . Decisions about accepting (or not accepting) these "rules", dart out in financial centres and headquarters of corporations . In Castels opinion strengthens a tendency to polarization of social structures both into countries (including the most developed) and in an international scale.
However, not all regionalists accede to such a pessimistic interpretation of spatial development. Swedish regionalists B. Asheim and L. Coenen within the investigating European experience offer the vision of scenarios of revivifying of innovative development, creating and grounding its own typology. They are work out methodology of clusters identification based on differentiation (distinction) of separate types of the regional innovative systems depending on the types of the knowledge applied in the concrete areas of economic activity . Two terms are used today in economic regionalistics to denote the modern globalizing economy. First one has been offered by Lundvall in 1992d "learning economy" , and second one is a "knowledge economy" usually applied by the officials of Organization of Economic Collaboration and Development (OECD). Swedish economists take up these distinctions as not semantic and rich in content. Its follow from taxonomy i.e. differentiations (confessed OECD) between the types of knowledge finding application in industries of production of low, medium and high-tech industries. Really the "charmed" results contemplation of higher level of technologies (for example, an informatics or pharmaceutics sphere) is becoming to ignore an exclusive character of application and wont be able to be equated (as it is sometimes done by some regionalists) to distribution of "learning economy".
That is not the only difference of the first kind from the second one. The first type ("learning economy") means the continuous process of introduction in the production of the technologies based on the already before knowledge gained. It is the dynamic process of the mutual educating and collaboration of suppliers and consumers, based on the new combinations of this knowledge. This process engrained in an environment socially and territorial and accompanied by the receipt of income during a process. Its participants do not ignore wide distribution of ordinary (conservative) skills and "informal" (not "coded") knowledge. Such type of knowledge finds application in industries and regions with the middle and subzero level of "closeness" of satiation regional research centres supplying with the newest ("radical") innovations. Distinctive quality of "learning economy" is a "shocking capacity" for application of profitable innovations by the presence of the "grabbing educating" . The national economy of Denmark and other North European countries can exemplify such economies. They are distinguished by high capacity for absorption and distribution of knowledge, although potencies of radical (ultramodern) innovations creation and their application are expressed much weaker for them . In a long-term prospect, certainly, increasing difficulties influencing on reproduction and height of "learning economy" can appear, because innovations in imitation form will not be able to provide convincing competitive edges in globalization economic system. Addition of such type of knowledge the process by the "learning economy" becomes to inevitable. However, quickness and efficiency of such educating determined by efficiency of "learning economy". There is a permanent necessity to pay an attention to both the process of creation of fundamentally new knowledge and in an equal degree to the process of educating and competence to those, who uses it in a dynamically developing and quickly changing modern globalization economy.
The second type of knowledge mainly consists of the newest achievements of scientific thought, opening new ways in technology, carries more static character. This knowledge exist as the "supply" accumulated, mainly by scientific centres, and these supplies can not always find quick and wide application. The level of such knowledge is usually formally measured by the amount of university centres, research institutes in a region. Scientists-professionals ("analysts") are busy there. The results of their activity are not measured by the amount of the received income. Therefore B.Asheim and Z.Coenen (after S.Laestadins)  determine this type of knowledge as "analytical" unlike the first, adopted by "synthetic". From the philosophical point of view of knowledge of the second kind("analytical") obtained on advantage on the basis of general scientific principles an analytical way while the first kind - by an accumulation and study of empiric material and on the basis of synthesis of the conclusions and data received. Swedish regionalists made a table demonstrating distinctions of these types of knowledge that facilitates authentication and classification of different types of the innovative systems (table 1).
Distinction of types of knowledge
Innovation by application of combination existent knowledge
Large value of distribution, problem of a connection and combining of knowledge (technological), mostly by an inductive way
Interactive educating with participation suppliers and clients
Predominance unofficial knowledge, touching more concrete know-how, ability and practical art
In advantage there are innovations that bringing return
More radical innovations
Source: Asheim and Gertler, 2005 
Thus, the analytical type of knowledge more corresponds to the necessities of those industries where the newest achievements of science have an especially important value, where the knowledge "production" on advantage is based on "cleanly" research processes informally institualising establishments. Genetics, biotechnology and informatics can exemplify it. Both of knowledge types break through a road in spheres most receptive to one or another type of knowledge. Corporations have their own research subdivisions usually, however, they simultaneously in an innovative process widely does not draw on scientific accomplishments of universities and other research centres. A "consumption" and "producible" knowledge of this kind have "coded" character mostly. Informal knowledge and skills find application also, however its use is inferior to the major task: to the process of innovations production. "Coding" of knowledge takes place for a number
of reasons: the consumption of knowledge and ideas is based mostly on a revision and selection of already conducted kinds of researches, the process of knowledge receipt and their application is organized more formally (it is documented in lectures, in the files of computers, envisaged and protected by patent bureaus). Knowledge using takes form of new products or processes. Here are produced more radical innovations than in the conditions of predominance of the first kind of skills.
Unlike analytical, the synthetic type of knowledge takes greater application in those sectors of production, where innovations come forward as an application of already existent knowledge or as a new combination of such knowledge. Often it takes place when a necessity to decide specific production-technique problem exists. A machine-tool construction, special engineer and shipbuilding can exemplify that. Such cases products carry piece's character or produced by maximal series. Research subdivisions play a less considerable role here then the first kind. The collaboration of enterprises takes place with universities, but it takes place mainly as drawing on the separate results of scientific researches, however here goes about the results of not basic researches, but back side. The process of knowledge production flows by induction, but not deduction, i.e. as testing, experimentation, computer images or verification of conclusions a practical way. Sometimes knowledge finds application as a decision of complete technical problems and confirmed by patents often. Certainly, skills, ability and informal knowledge have more considerable role to this kind, than to analytical one. In a number of cases synthetic knowledge is the result of the experience purchased in the workplace in the process of the interactive educating. This kind by comparison to the first one contains more concrete know-how that is necessary to production and transmission of knowledge. Such transmission comes true by professional and technical schools and training on workplaces. This type of innovative process is orientated on the increase of efficiency and search of new production-technique decisions or on the improvement of consumer properties of products. All of this is accompanied by the receipt of additional income from the innovations directed to modification of existent foods and processes in advantage.
In the real life this type of knowledge exists in the regional innovative systems (RIS) that consisting on institutional infrastructure supporting innovation and productive structure of region. Putting "dichotomy" of knowledge in basis, B.Asheim classified the innovative systems dividing them into three types.
First type on a name of the "territorial engrained innovative system" is used by synthetic type of knowledge mainly. Innovations arise up on the limited space by the process of experience exchange and professional knowledge with nearby firms on the basis of geographical closeness and productive "likeness" mostly without the direct co-operating with knowledge generating establishments. On the properties this type is nearest to the "path to RIS" named by Cooke. The networks of small enterprises of the Italian area as Amelia-Romania can serve the most prime example of such system.
Second RIS type is adopted by the "regional network system". Firms and organizations here are also engrained in the region specific and differ in capacities for the mutual educating and collaboration on the basis of geographical and productively-sale closeness. But all of it is complemented by the institutional infrastructure specially created in a region including research centres, training-centres and other local institutes engaging in introduction in the firms of innovations, and also designing and stimulant a collaboration between firms and public organizations (for example, with the chambers of commerce, business-centres). Network-making system is often named on "RIS ideal type": it is the regional cluster of firms, surrounded by regional "supporting" institutional infrastructure. Network approach is typical for Germany, Austria and Scandinavian countries.
Third type of RIS is named on "regionalized national system". It has a low of differences from two enumerated types. Firstly, considerable part of industrial production and institutional infrastructure is functionally integrated in the national and international innovative systems, i.e. innovative activity flows in advantage with participation factors being outside a region. Exogenous factors play a considerable role of this model of development. This type could be named like "guided RIS". The "closeness" of scientific centres of large universities, another scientific establishments and research subdivisions of corporations is very high here. These are base for generating of more radical (advanced) innovations based on the scientifically-analytical method of researches with scientists-regionalists engaging in this process from different countries and world regions. "Clusterization" of laboratories and research departments of large firms andZor state research institutes in the created "scientific parks" and technopolicies placed usually in "family" universities and technical colleges is the evident example of the national innovative system regionalizing. However, as experience testifies, all of them have the limited connections with local industry. Scientific parks exemplify the specially created innovative institutes including firms with the high level of providing the resources of knowledge and competent skilled composition, but these firms are deprived capacity for a fruitful collaboration with the environment. Technopolicies of the developed countries (France, Japan, Taiwan) is characterized by the low level of innovative collaboration between local firms and "knowledge generators". In those rare cases, when scientific parks "become" overgrown with the innovative systems, that is the result of purposeful activity of public institutes at national level.
This circumstance specifies on importance of endogenous factors, reflecting the socially engrained capacity for self-realization and to plugging in the process of borrowing and application in economic activity of useful knowledge once again.
First results to the stated we mark following. "Dichotomy" of different types of knowledge allows more clearly and pragmatic description of the clusters type. It opens possibility not only to the scientific classification of functioning clusters but also can serve as an instrument of the strategic regional planning with the acceptance of the weighed decisions that is able to define ways of spatial development. Methodology of the innovative systems using is versified by application to the study of the North European clusters specific.
Summing up to the stated, we will mark the following. The idea of different types of knowledge "dichotomy" is fruitful in theoretical aspect. It allowed to describe the types of the innovative systems and corresponding to them types of clusters more relief and pragmatic. It is set that the most successful is the "regional network system", leaning on advantages of the "synthetic" type of knowledge, organically related to the endogenous factors of development. Application of "analytical" type of knowledge on the region level brings success only with the active position of the state based on realization of the national science-innovative programs. The role of international financial centres and Transnational Corporations in realization of these programs European regionalists can not find.
At the same time these researches on the examples of the Scandinavian clusters demonstrate the value of the use of ordinary ("conservative") knowledge potency in the interactive educating and business collaboration process, support its role in a conquest and maintenance of competitive edges. This way judgments that "full-fledged" members of network society opens application only of "exclusive" (radical) innovations is refute.
Розкрито два існуючих види сучасної глобалізованої економіки: «економіка, що навчається» та «економіка знань»ю Розглянуто три типи інноваційних систем: «інноваційна система, що територіально вкоренилась», «регіональна мережева система» та «регіоналізована національна система». Під час оцінки підходів та методів аналізу РІС та кластерів виокремлено найбільш плідну в теоретичному відношенні ідею «дихотомії» різних видів знань.
Ключові слова: регіональні інноваційні системи, регіональний кластер, «економіка знань», «навчальна економіка».
Раскрыты два существующих вида современной глобализированной экономики: «обучающаяся экономика» и «экономика знаний». Рассмотрены три типа инновационных систем: «территориально укорененная инновационная система», «региональная сетевая система» и «регионализированная национальная система». В ходе оценки подходов и методов анализа РИС и кластеров выделена наиболее плодотворная в теоретическом отношении идея «дихотомии» различных видов знаний.
Ключевые слова: региональные инновационные системы, региональный кластер, «экономика знаний», «обучающая экономика».
Two terms of the modern globalizing economy ("learning economy" and "knowledge economy")are described. Three types of innovative systems ("territorial engrained innovative system", "regional network system", "regionalized national system") are shown. The idea of different types of knowledge "dichotomy" was highlighted within the methods analysing RIS and clusters appraisal like the most fruitful in theoretical aspect.
Keywords: regional innovative systems, regional cluster, "learning economy", "knowledge economy".
1. Amendola M, Yaffard Y. La dynamique de innovation. Paris: Economica, 1988
2. Marshall A. Principles of political economy. Moscow: Progress, 1993
3. Воронова Е.В. Европейский выбор и формирование региональной политики Украины. Odessa: Astroprint, 2002
4. Krumbllein W. (Hrsg.) Oekonomische und palitische Nefzwerke in der Region - Reitrage aus der infernationalen Debatten. - Munehen
5. Castels M. Innovation technologies, Globalization, Social development. - In a book: Економіка знань: Виклики глобалізації та Україна. |/Гальчинський А., Льовочкин С., Семиноженко В., Kyiv, 2004. 86-104.
6. Asheim B.T., Coenen Z. Knowledge bases and regional innovation systems: Comparing Nordic cluster. - http//www.sciencedirect.com 25.10.2006
7. Lundvall B.A. (Ed.) National Systems of Innovation: Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London, Pinter 1992.
8. Hall P. and Soskiee D. Varieties of Capitalism: The Institutional Foundations of Comparative Advantage. Oxford: University Press, 2001
9. Laestadins S. Technology level, knowledge formation and industrial competence in paper manufacturing. In: Eliasson G. et al. (Editor). Micro Foundations of Economic Growth. Ann Arlour. The University of Michigan Press, 1998, p.212-226.
10. Asheim B.T. and Gertler M.S. The geography of innovation: regional innovation systems. In: The Oxford Handbook of Innovation.
Oxford University Press, 2005, p.291-317.
11. Cooke P. and Morgan K. The Associational Economy: Firms, Regions and Innovations. Oxford University Press, 1998.
GREEN ECONOMY -POLITICAL BALANCING TRICKS OR PREDETERMINATION Zahariev E., Rh.D. Assoc. Prof.6 Deputy Head of «Management» Department D. A. Tsenov Academy of Economics - Svishtov
The Green Economy is one that is good for the environment. Instead of „green economy" we can use the terms "ecological economics"("ecology - economy") and "sustainable economy". Each of these terms has its own specifics, but the common between them is the recognition of the need for prompt and decisive actions to eradicate the harmful effects of human activities on the environment.
To be called green, an economy should meet certain social and ecological criteria (see Figure 1):
Large-scale investments in the public sphere and human resources promoting the development of envi ran mentally friendly activities, production ^^^^^^^^^ and consumption ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Reihicnon in military ding until total elimination
Social пші ecological criteria for green economy
Reduction nncl elimination of capital investments, which although increasing the living standard of people, cause damages to their health ліні the environment
Increase in costs with a direct contribution to rhe
protection of life nncl biodiversity on the planet
Transition to renewable energy sources to achieve complete independence from fossil fuels and nuclear Dower
Break with neoliberalisin and implementation of new type of Keynesian policy
Figure І. Social and ecological criteria for green economy
© Zahariev E., 2011
The predetermination of social and ecological criteria for the green economy is hardly disputable, although their ranking is a matter of priority from a strategic point of view. Furthermore, I believe that the idea of "a new type of Keynesian policy" determined as macroeconomic policy stabilizing aggregate demand, rather than stimulating it (as in traditional Keynesianism), deserves attention. Moreover, a self-sufficient economy with zero growth would solve the problems with the depletion of natural resources. In this sense, the current crisis and slowdown in economic growth provide a unique opportunity for transition from economy always eager to growth with devastating impacts on the environment and human health to environmentally friendly economic system. Such a transition is a radical one and can be carried out only in a radical way with radical measures:
• Elimination of all capital investments and sectors, which create instability and threaten the environment, human health, including nuclear energy, war industry and all productions exacerbating the problems of waste and greenhouse gases emissions;
• The State as a supreme sovereign to take over management of the process of building a green economy and all costs associated with it, as the environment and human health are the highest form of public interest.
Traditional Keynesian theories cannot ensure the long-term sustainable development. To survive life on Earth, contemporary capitalist economy promoting social inequality and wasting natural resources must be replaced by a steady green economy. Of course, this must be done globally by achieving consensus among all countries in the world, as well as mutual respect toward their interests. There are many possible ways for Bulgaria's integration into the European and world economy, but most reasonable, from the economic point of view, would be building a green economy.
There is no logical alternative to green economy in our country. Definitely, there are many possible ways for development, but with regard to the economic logic and price effectiveness, it would be recommended that the Republic of Bulgaria should choose an environmentally friendly economic and business model. Unfortunately, when talking about the economic value of preserved environment the logic has no place in our country. The relatively preserved environment in Bulgaria has a high economic value, because of the country's natural conditions that provide opportunities for the production of green products.
"Green" is only the production that contributes to increasing the sustainability of human existence on Earth. The green products demand grows internationally and their prices are high. The internal market for green products has also good prospects: potential customers are local population, tourists and potential environmental migrants from overurbanizated economies to peripheral part of Bulgaria.
The country's potential to create a green economy can be measured through analytical and statistical concept called "Demographic Pressure". It measures the pressure exerted by people on the environment because of their number, consumption and mainly because of their economic activity, which underlies the function "Power of Activity". As a basis is used the concept of natural region - a part of the biosphere historically formed by the interaction of anthropogenic and natural factors. Something similar called "historical district" is set in the UN development programs; the German ethnologist Leo Frobenius in the early XX century called it "Paideuma": the natural aspect of human economic culture; the Russian Academician Berg uses the term "horonomical" (from Greek x™P0?, room) in order to explain the principle, on which the form of human habitation has been built.
The "Demographic Pressure" is the ratio of GDP (value added) generated in a natural region, the area of this territory, adjusted by degrees of population density, its economic activity, the pace of urbanization and the analytical coefficient of natural degradation (e.g. deforestation). It is determined as the humans' impact as a result of their economic activities - entrepreneurship and consumption - on a region with certain characteristics of resources and specific environment. Regarding this indicator, Bulgaria has a unique location: the demographic pressure here is among the lowest in Europe according to a research carried out in 50 key countries. Demographic pressure in Bulgaria is 50% lower than in Romania, 40% lower in comparison with Turkey (despite the vast territories in Asia Minor, where the GDP is negligible) and nearly two times lower than in Greece. Demographic pressure in Bulgaria is also significantly lower compared to the countries, which joined the EU in 2004. Just for information, the countries with the highest demographic pressure in the world are the following: Republic of Korea, the Netherlands, Japan, Germany, Switzerland, Italy.
From the above stated can be concluded that our country has a competitive advantage - low economic pressure, respectively low pressure on the environment as a result of human activities, which is evaluated by the market and there is a specific demand of preserved nature on behalf of individuals and price. The demand of preserved nature leads to counter-supply.
In the absence of government regulation the overvalue of the pure nature is fully distributed among the first buyers of the preserved plots of land, which then form the secondary market. If the State allows the overvalue of the preserved environment to be fully distributed according to the market principles, this overvalue will be lost and the government will have to restore it using public funds. EU membership provides good opportunities for our country to trade in green products in and through the EU. The low degree of urbanization and the abundance of fertile soils can make Bulgaria one of Europe's leading manufacturers of expensive organic foods (plant-growing without chemicals and „humane animal husbandry") and an expensive, but a favorite place for soft tourism and recreation. In our country, not only make we no attempts in this direction, but also erase the rudiments of entrepreneurial farming, from where the "pure" stock-breeding production comes. This opportunity can only be used in case of firmly demonstrated commitment and result-oriented policy on behalf of the State. Currently such are missing. The utilization of EU funds for agriculture and rural development is difficult; there are protests of farmers, and the trade in plant products is governed by suspicious groups under the indifferent gaze of state institutions.
The preserved environment provides our country unique ecological advantages over the overurbanizated West, which unfortunately we do not use. One of the major macroeconomic problems of Bulgaria is the huge foreign trade deficit. This problem can be solved by building a green economy that favors the export of significant quantities of green products at high prices. Bulgaria has a huge budget surplus, but the nation's resources are not invested in major environmental projects.
To build a green economy specific actions on behalf of the State are needed for protection and restoration of the environment using budget funds, i.e. resources of the nation. Of course, only budget financing would not be enough to build a green economy, but it is a crucial need, because it will show businesses that the State finally takes its inherent duties and responsibilities for conservation and restoration of the
national resources. Budget financing of the environment projects can be supplemented by funds from the Operational Program "Environment", as well as private financing.
Bank loans have a key role in building a "green" economy. In recent years, the aggressive bank lending has had a negative impact on the Bulgarian nature, which makes us a nation of consumers that do not even think about the fact they have to repay their liabilities one day. Interest and principal are paid primarily with natural resources in their most accessible form - with plots of land, and funds from loans are invested mainly in non-productive assets. Oversupply of property and indiscriminate construction endangers the environment and destroys the economic value (profit), which could be derived from the nature in case of a sustainable management. In support of the above is the statement that „New constructions are not only harmful like an area flooded with concrete, but they also disfigure the landscape, as well as the ethnosphere in the small rural areas. Shortsightedness is only one possible explanation for the bad model of economic development in Bulgaria. The other are: fear, laziness and corruption - at the highest levels of political authority".