Published since September 1958

№ 8/2020

Ekon Ukr. 2020 (8): 58–75https://doi.org/10.15407/economyukr.2020.08.058

PROBLEMS OF REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND DECENTRALIZATION

УДК 330.837:332.13(477)

JEL:

¹Chernihiv Polytechnic National University, Research ID : http://www.researcherid.com/rid/I-3869-2016
OrcID ID : https://orcid.org/https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8628-9444
²Chernihiv Polytechnic National University, Research ID : http://www.researcherid.com/rid/I-3869-2016
OrcID ID : https://orcid.org/https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6181-548X

INSTITUTIONAL PRINCIPLES OF MODERNIZATION OF THE PRODUCTIVE FORCES OF THE REGIONS OF UKRAINE IN THE CONDITIONS OF MANAGEMENT DECENTRALIZATION

The attention of the scientific community, authorities, local governments is drawn to the need to strengthen the institutional framework for the modernization of the productive forces of the regions of Ukraine in terms of decentralization. The essence of the influence of the institutional environment on the modernization of the productive forces of the regions of Ukraine is outlined, the synchronization of actions of public administration bodies of all levels is indicated for the domestic economy to gain competitive advantages in modern conditions.
From the standpoint of new regionalism it is proposed by institutionalism to understand a system of social relations that is based on humanocentrism and smart-specialization harmonizing the modernization of the productive forces of the conscious use of economic laws and effective public administration for sustainable spatial development, implementation of spatial competitive advantage in terms of limited resources and strengthening integration processes.
Economic revival in the spatial dimension should be based on the intensification of activities primarily in the manufacturing sector, because it is here that gross value added is created, and hence its budget component.
It is argued that in the conditions of decentralization of management the character of subject-object relations concerning the role of territorial communities and regions in the processes of modernization of productive forces changes.
It is shown that at the present stage of social development it should be objectively recognized that territorial communities are not able to independently ensure the classical evolutionary correspondence of productive forces to the nature of production relations, and budgetary determinism forms only consumer sentiments in the whole system of local self-government. In particular, they emphasized the objective weakening of the impact of budget decentralization and the need to create preconditions for the localization of the economic space through the creation of new jobs, the effective functioning of the socio-humanitarian sphere and the rational use of nature.
A system of descriptors that form institutional challenges and threats in the field of public administration in modern conditions is proposed.

Keywords:institute; institution (organization); productive forces; localization; socio-humanitarian space; greening; subject-object relations; managed development; inclusiveness; immanence; empathy; descriptors

Article original in Ukrainian (pp. 58 - 75)

Download

Downloads :145

The article was received by the Editorial staff on May 12 , 2020

References
1. Butko M. Bifurcation state of Ukraine's state-building core under conditions of implementation of the European integration course. Economy of Ukraine, No. 10, 2017, pp. 49-64 [in Ukrainian].

2. North D. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Kyiv, Osnovy, 2000 [in Ukrainian].

3. Butko M. Institutional mechanisms of enhancing the performance of decentralization of authentic authorities. Public Administration: Research and Development, No. 1 (3), 2017, pp. 7-12 [in Ukrainian].

4. Siryi Ye. Institutional principles of research of transformation processes in the aspect of market-entrepreneurial segment of modern Ukrainian society, available at: www.socd.univ.kiev.ua/sites/default/files/library/elopen/actprob14_39.pdf [in Ukrainian].

5. Chukhno A. Institutionalism: theory, methodology, significance. Economy of Ukraine, No. 6, 2008, pp. 4-13 [in Ukrainian].

6. Mantsurov I. Institutional Planning in the System of State Regulation of the Economy. Kyiv, Research Economic Institute, 2011 [in Ukrainian].

7. Zveryakov M., Grymalyuk A. Economic theory, state policy and public administration. Economy of Ukraine, No. 11-12, 2019, pp. 3-33 (doi: doi.org/10.15407/economyukr.2019.11.003) [in Ukrainian].
doi.org/10.15407/economyukr.2019.11.003
8. Butko M. Modernization of institutional environment as the basis of formation of regional competitive edge. Public Administration: Research and Development, No. 1, 2016, pp. 7-18, available at: nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/pandr_2016_1_3 [in Ukrainian].

9. Smentyna N., Fialkovska A. Benchmarking in the economic development management system of the amalgamated territorial communities. Economy of Ukraine, No. 11-12, 2019, pp. 49-59 (doi: doi.org/10.15407/economyukr.2019.11.049) [in Ukrainian].
doi.org/10.15407/economyukr.2019.11.049

10. Institutional Architectonics and Dynamics of Economic Transformation. A.A. Grytsenko (Ed.). Kharkiv, Fort, 2008 [in Russian].

11. Keating M. The New Regionalism in Western Europe. Logos, No. 6 (40), 2003, pp. 67-116, available at: www.pavroz.ru/files/keatingnewregionalism.pdf [in Russian].

12. Balcerowicz L., Rzońca A. Puzzles of Economic Growth. A.V. Kudryaev (Ed.). Moscow, Mysl, 2012 [in Russian].

13. Butko M., Revko A. Peculiarities of functioning of the socio-humanitarian space under conditions of decentralized management: Poland's experience and lessons for Ukraine. Economy of Ukraine, No. 7-8, 2019, pp. 71-88 (doi.org/10.15407/economyukr.2019.07.071) [in Ukrainian].
doi.org/10.15407/economyukr.2019.07.071