I was born in 1982 in Bulgaria, which was a communistic country at the time. In 1990, I was one of the millions of people on the streets who saw the collapse of the “red regime.” Although I was only eight years old, I still remember vividly these moments. The following years brought change, but not the type of change that most people expected—corruption, unemployment, social and economic inequality, hyperinflation, and even greater shortages marked the economic “progress.” My grandparents who always taught me to be prudent with my finances lost their life-savings within months. The streets that I used to play when I was a kid were not safe anymore. The western products were plenty, but only for a few. The worst part of all this was that for years living conditions only deteriorated. I was perplexed. Did capitalism fail?

These early experiences are what motivate my research. I was lucky enough to have an opportunity to come to the US and pursue my dreams. But there are many people around the world who don’t share the same fortune as I do. Many of these people are hard-working and creative individuals but live in countries with a set of institutional arrangements that do not allow them to reach their full potential. My research examines how these formal and informal social norms and rules affect the decisions that people make and ultimately influence their quality of life. In this sense, my research is influenced by the work of James Buchanan, Douglas North, Ronald Coase, and Ellinor Ostrom who all won the Nobel Prize in economics for their seminal work that later led to the development of the fields of Public Choice and New Institutional Economics.

Another important question that drives much of my research is what do we mean by well-being (or quality of life) and how do we measure it? Traditionally, economists have used more objective measures such as national (and personal) income, unemployment, and life expectancy. This objectivist approach to measuring well-being, however, has been challenged in recent years as research in psychology and behavioral economics has pointed out that there are large discrepancies between how people feel, what they value, and how they actually behave in real life. While I think that traditional indicators of economic performance are still the most important gauge of social progress, especially in the developing world, I also believe that subjective well-being data reveal important information about quality of life that can help us understand human behavior. Thus, many of my papers use alternative measures for quality of life such as the self-reported level of happiness, subjective health, or social trust.

Thus, my current research combines three trends, which I believe will play an important role in determining the future of economics, the global economy, and the advancement of liberty. The first trend is the massive growth of the public sector in the past century. With the recent financial crisis that has led to considerable increase in fiscal spending, and the large welfare promises of most governments around the world, it is most likely that the size and scope of the public sector will continue to expand well into the twenty first century.

The second trend that influences my research is redefining the meaning of social and economic progress. This trend is propelled by the tremendous economic development in the past century, which to a great extent is an outcome of a more open and liberal world. This new stage of socio-economic development comes with a new set of psychological needs that economists, politicians, and businesses will have to acknowledge. An increasing number of social scientists, for instance, are starting to develop and use alternative measures of social progress that incorporate complicated concepts such as sustainability, subjective well-being, and freedom. This presents an exciting opportunity for potential research that can have an enormous impact on the future of public and social policy.

The final trend that directs my research is related to the current economic crisis and the advancements in the field of behavioral economics, which have challenged the foundations of economics as a “rigorous” science. For example, while most economic models depend on the assumption that humans are rational and self-interested agents, a big part of psychology explores the irrational side of the mind, and much of the public relations (advertisement) industry thrives because consumers often make systematic mistakes and their tastes are not exogenous but influenced by policies, customs, or institutions which society provides. These irrational tendencies in human behavior are not only exploited by businesses, but also by politicians, and this relationship needs to be studied more carefully by public choice scholars.