Suchergebnisse

Engl. Zsfassungen

In the implementation of two EU co-financed 5-year programs in the period 2009-2020, it was confirmed that oral vaccination against rabies with vaccine baits was successful in eliminating the virus in terrestrial wildlife, both in foxes, jackals and raccoon dogs. In most EU countries, It has been confirmed that oral vaccination against rabies using vaccine baits containing live attenuated virus has been successful in reducing and eliminating cases of rabies the disease has already been successfully eradicated, but in some countries further efforts are needed, especially in areas near the EU's eastern borders. The purpose of this opinion is to assess the need for Bulgaria to continue the implementation of a long-term program for oral vaccination of foxes and wild canids against rabies within the next period of implementation of the national Program for prevention, surveillance, control and eradication of rabies in Bulgaria in 2022-2024. This national program is part of the European Union's (EU) policy on the eradication of rabies in wild animals. To this end, the European Commission (EC) has co-financed fox vaccination programs for many years to eliminate the risk of spreading the rabies virus to humans and other domestic animals. The results obtained so far unequivocally show that oral vaccination of foxes in Bulgaria has a very good effect, and that the medium-term goal of reducing rabies cases has been achieved. However, the rabies virus is still circulating through its sylvatic (forest) cycle in Eastern Europe and Bulgaria's neighboring and near far way countries - Russia, Ukraine, Romania, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Anatolian Turkey. To this end, it is necessary to ensure, through EU co-financed programs, a longer-term strategy, persistence and continuity of vaccination campaigns in the application of oral fox vaccination and unconditional cross-border cooperation with the Balkan countries and their competent veterinary services to achieve the ultimate goal - eradication of rabies from the territory of ...

Introduction: Disasters caused by natural phenomena or human activity often occur in Bulgaria. Social and economic consequences of these have a significant adverse effect on its development and economic growth. Given the complexity and scope of disaster situations, it is necessary to unite the efforts of all responsible institutions and actively involve them in activities to limit human, social, economic and natural damage and losses.Aim: To study the current state of the system for protection of the population in emergency situations in Bulgaria.Materials and methods: Descriptive analysis of scientific publications and normative documents concerning the management, organization and mechanisms for protection of the population in emergency situations in Bulgaria have been used.Results: Results of the analysis of key regulatory documents in Bulgaria on the management and organization of the population protection in disaster situations are presented. The main structures and institutions in the Republic of Bulgaria, responsible and related to the protection of the population in disaster situations are indicated.Conclusion: The system of protection of the population in emergency situations in Bulgaria is strictly regulated and synchronized with the European Union policy in this respect. The state policy for protection of the population together with the developed National Programs of the Council of Ministers outline the main directions for the establishment of an effective, resourceful and technically secure national system for prevention, protection and action in disaster situations.

The article attempts to reconstruct some of the political stakes in the conceptual and methodological debates among two groups of literary critics during the 1960ies and the 1970ies in Bulgaria: the structuralists and their opponents, the so-called "Imperssionist critics". This debate seems to be a pertinent context for addressing the emergence of poststructuralism since it was the intellectual ferment, in which Julia Kristeva formed her conceptual background, before later becoming among the first poststructuralist critics of structuralism in France. Before, emigrating, Kristeva was part of the group of the "impressionist critics", who were developing ways of resisting official Marxist doctrine while retaining claims for Marxists legitimacy. They were very critical of the structuralists, who also were attempting to gain legitimacy, though by aligning with Marxism as a materialist science, a stance the "impressionists" viewed as contributing to alienation. ; Статья пытается восстановить поли- тический залог в концептуальных и методологических дискуссиях между двумя группами литературо- ведов в 1960-х и 1970-х годах в Болга- рии – между структуралистами и их противниками, так называемыми «импрессионистскими критика- ми». Эта дискуссия, по-видимому, является важным контекстом воз- никновения постструктурализма, поскольку она представляет собой интеллектуальную среду, в кото- рой Юлия Кристева первоначально сформировала свои идеи, перед тем как впоследствии стала одним из первых критиков структурализма во Франции. До эмиграции Кристева является членом группы импрес- сионистских критиков, которые пытаются разработать стратегии противостояния официальной марк- систской доктрине, не отказываясь от поиска марксистской легитим- ности. Они критикуют структура- листов, которые также стремятся к легитимности, но основываясь на настойчивости марксизма как материалистической науки – пози- ция, в которой «импрессионистские критики» видят фактор, способству- ющий отчуждению.