POST-WAR UKRAINE: INNOVATIVE SPATIAL DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION

Abstract

The relevance of the study is determined by the need to find innovative approaches to the spatial development of Ukraine related to the substantiation of targeted reconstruction actions in the postwar period. The purpose of the article is to develop a basic innovative vision of Ukraine’s spatial development in the postwar period, aimed at creating an effective model of reconstructive organization of socio-economic activity. The novelty of the work is the definition of a conceptual approach that involves structuring spatial formations for the efficient use of available territorial resources, with a focus on overcoming the instability of economic systems. The research methods cover the field of system management inherent in European views on regional development, in particular, the regional economic approach; traditional urban ism; land use management, landscape approach, etc. Main conclusions. The article focuses on three key issues: the first one considers the factors influencing economic trends and structuring of economic systems; the second focuses on updating the interpretation of economic and social categories that allow tracking spatial and information flows that affect the overall development of territorial entities; the third is the interpretation of the reconstructive model of spatial development of Ukraine with regional differentiation. The model representations of the spatial organization of economic systems involve taking into account the specifics of creating effective territorial entities with long-term positive consequences. To ensure territorial unity and economic integration, the author proposes an enlarged association of regions that are considered key to economic revival and the formation of a welfare state. The importance of interregional ties through communication corridors that facilitate the unification of centers of economic activity is actualized. Such a structure facilitates adaptation to modern challenges, in particular those related to internal migration, territorial business mobility and new approaches to financial transactions with territorial assets. The author’s concept substantiates the expediency of differentiating Ukraine into specialized spatial zones with different modes of functioning, including “zones”, “gaps” and “enclaves”, which reflect regional development features. It is important to apply the principle of complementarity to the integration of economic processes, which contributes to the formation of a unified system (platform) for managing stakeholder interests with appropriate institutional support. The result of the work is a systematized vision of the differentiation of spatial formations, which is focused on the post-war reorganization of regional policy in the context of integration into the European community.

REFERENCES / ЛІТЕРАТУРА

1. Pokrovska, N. M. (2022). Conceptual principles of post-war reconstruction of Ukraine, economic aspects. Bulletin of the Volodymyr Dahl East Ukrainian National University, 4 (274), 41—47. https://doi.org/10.33216/1998-7927-2022-274-4-41-47

[Покровська, Н. М. (2022). Концептуальні засади післявоєнного відновлення України, економічні аспекти. Вісник Східноукраїнського національного університету імені Володимира Даля, 4 (274), 41—47].

2. Fifth International Conference on Reforms in Ukraine (2022). https://rdo.in.ua/en/announce/ukraine-recovery-conference-urc-2022

[П’ята Міжнародна конференція з питань реформ в Україні (2022). URC].

3. CEIC Data (2025). Ukraine. https://www.ceicdata.com/en/country/ukraine

4. Economic and Social Impacts and Policy Implications of the War in Ukraine (2022). OECD Economic Outlook. Interim Report. https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2022/03/oecd-economic-outlook-interim-report-march-2022_a2a53a99/4181d61b-en.pdf

5. Rebuilding Ukraine: Building a More Sustainable, Prosperous, and Resilient Economy (2022). OECD. https://uploads-ssl.webflow.com/625d81ec8313622a52e2f031/631985c8ab8fa2e9c1b1e3ba_UA%20 Economic%20Recovery_UKR.pdf

[Відновлення України: побудова більш сталої, процвітаючої та стійкої економіки (2022). OECD].

6. Shapoval, N., Fedoseyenko, M., Hrybanovskyi, O., & Tereshchenko, O. (2022). Post-war re construction of Ukraine. New markets and digital solutions. Policy Paper. https://kse.ua/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/Digital-instruments-in-Ukrainian-recovery.pdf

[Шаповал, Н., Федосеєнко, М., Грибановський, О., & Терещенко, О. (2022). Повоєнне відновлення України. Нові ринки та цифрові рішення].

7. Storonyanska, I. Z., & Zalutsky, I. R. (2023). Determination of the principles of regional policy in the context of modern challenges of spatial development in Ukraine. Economy of Ukraine, 10, 23—43. https://doi.org/10.15407/economyukr.2023.10.023

[Сторонянська, І. З., & Залуцький, І. Р. (2023). Детермінація засад регіональної політики в контексті сучасних викликів просторового розвитку в Україні. Економіка України, 10, 23—43].

8. Pidoricheva, I. Yu. (2023). Innovative communities and their opportunities in the revival of war-affected Ukrainian territories on the basis of resilience and sustainability. Economy of Ukraine, 10, 3—22. https://doi.org/10.15407/economyukr.2023.10.003

[Підоричева, І. Ю. (2023). Інноваційні спільноти та їх можливості у відродженні постраждалих від війни українських територій на засадах стійкості й сталості. Економіка України, 10, 3—22].

9. Smas, L., & Schmitt, P. (2020). Positioning regional planning across Europe. Regional Studies, 55(5), 778—790. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2020.1782879

10. Kunzmann, K. R. (2015). Urbanization in China: learning from Europe? A European perspective. International Journal of Urban Sciences, 19 (2), 119—135.

11. European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) (1999). Towards Balanced and Sustainable Development of the Territory of the European Union. European Commission. https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/a8abd557-e346-4531-a6efe81d3d95027f/language-en -

12. Guiding principles for sustainable spatial development of the European Continent (2000). European Conference Ministers responsible for Regional Planning (CEMAT). https://www.gov.si/assets/ministrstva/MOP/Dokumenti/Urbani-razvoj/02c3635714/Vodilna_nacela_za_trajnostni_prostorski_razvoj.pdf

13. Böhme, K. (2016). Territorial evidence supporting policy-making in Europe: How ESPON came, saw and conquered, disP-The Planning Review, 52 (2), 62—67. https://doi.org/:10.1080/02513625.2016.1195589

14. Territorial and spatial planning. A key instrument for development and good governance with a particular focus on countries in transition (2028). UN. New York. Geneva. https://unece.org/sites/default/files/2022-01/spatial_planning_e.pdf

[Просторове планування. Ключовий інструмент розвитку та ефективного управління з приділенням особливої уваги країнам із перехідною економікою (2008). ООН. Нью-Йорк. Женева].

15. Janin Rivolin, U. (2012). Planning systems as institutional technologies: a proposed con ceptualization and the implications for comparison. Planning Practice and Research, 27 (1), 63—85. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2012.661181

16. Dühr, S., Colomb, C., & Nadin, V. (2010). European Spatial Planning and Territorial Cooperation (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203895290

17. Jacobs, J. (2016). Spatial planning in cross-border regions: A systems-theoretical perspective. Planning Theory, 15 (1), 68—90. https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095214547149

18. Shaw, D., Nadin, V., & Westlake, T. (1995). The compendium of European spatial planning systems. European Planning Studies, 3 (3), 390—395. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654319508720313

19. Kahila-Tani, M., Broberg, A., Kyttä, M., & Tyger, T. (2015). Let the Citizens Map — Public Participation GIS as a Planning Support System in the Helsinki Master Plan Process. Planning Practice & Research, 31 (2), 195—214. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2015.1104203.

20. Pani, P. (2020). Land Degradation and Socio-Economic Development. Advances in Asian Human-Environmental Research. https://www.academia.edu/122648455/Land_Degradation_and_Socio_Economic_ Development

21. Rietveld, P., & Shefer, D. (Eds.). (2020). Regional development in an age of structural economic change. https://www.routledge.com/Regional-Development-in-an-Age-of-Struc turalEconomic-Change/Rietveld-Shefer/p/book/9781138337039?srsltid=AfmBOoqqHNi4Kz 1cI2C5MiCrTqSyiVUOHxEw_qBG7rYzGw7WzEe2evgT

22. Raynauld, A. (2017). Regional development in a federal state. Regional Economic Deve lopment. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Regional-Economic-DevelopmentEssays-in-Honour-of-Francois-Perroux/Higgins-Savoie/p/book/9781138102446?srsltid=AfmBOopeaHjj4q8QjpQV6mMgGb3U3qFUYaUM30ITuxLRCuh_LsWU9p14

23. Malizia, E., Feser, E. J., Renski, H., & Drucker, J. (2020). Understanding Local Economic Development: Second Edition. Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/UnderstandingLocal-Economic-Development-Second-Edition/Malizia-Feser-Renski-Drucker/p/book/9780367557393?srsltid=AfmBOoowGvAsYLQ6kW2EnVbs19QMTIWgULbsCNiNBOmiRr2uNFV71y3s