Evolution of Institutes and Mechanisms of Spatial Development of the Economy
Abstract
This article summarizes the arguments and counterarguments within the scientific discussion on issues of evolution of institutes and mechanisms of spatial development of the economy as the main factor in ensuring the competitiveness of the territory in the conditions of the newest trends of networking, intellectualization and digitalization of social and economic processes. The relevance of solving this scientific problem is that due to an ineffective spatial organization Ukraine loses 2-3 % of GDP annually; the World Bank Report declares to take into account the spatial factor in economic development; territorial socio-economic integration and spatial development are chosen as one of the key goals of the State Strategy for Regional Development for the period up to 2020.
The systematization of literary sources and approaches on the subject of research has shown that each country includes a variety of regions, each of which has a specific ecosystem of science and innovation, a unique economic context and industrial infrastructure. Under such conditions, a key tool in ensuring balanced spatial development, in particular to determine the territory of the localization of the growth poles, is smart specialization strategy. The research examines the issues of changing the paradigm of implementing regional policy on the basis of specialization from the period of the operation of the council of national economy to the creation of clusters at the current stage of development of the Ukrainian economy. As the globalization of productions, communities and knowledge networks, increasing the number of network communications leads to the fact that a high level of cooperation becomes one of the key conditions of the country’s competitiveness, the research examines the evolution of cooperative models for key stakeholders (from single helix to quintuple helix) and spatial development institutes.
Prospects for further research in this area are the development of recommendations on the coordination of the interests of key stakeholders of the cooperative models in order to ensure the harmonious economic development of Ukrainian territories.
Downloads
References
Worldbank.org. (2018). World Bank Ukraine Economic Update. [online] Available at: http://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/684631523347829626/Ukraine-Economic-Update-April-2018-Eng.pdf [Accessed 15 Nov. 2018].
Bavyko, O. (2012). Typology of spatial development of regions in the conditions of network economy formation [“Typologia prostorovogo rozvytku regioniv v umovakh formuvannia merezhevoi ekonomiky”]. Economy and the state, 10, pp. 16‒19.
Williamson, O. (2013). The Transaction Cost Economics Project: The Theory and Practice of the Governance of Contractual Relations. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Pub.
Year in Review: 2017 in 12 Charts. [online] Available at: http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/ /feature/2017/12/15/year-in-review-2017-in-12-charts [Accessed 8 Nov. 2018].
Chuzhykov, B. (2016). Regional Policy of the European Union [“Regionalna polityka Evropeiskogo Souzu”]. Kyiv.
The state strategy of regional development for the period till 2020. [online] Available at: http://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/385-2014-%D0%BF#n11 [Accessed 07 Nov. 2018].
Rodchenko, V. and Prus, Yu. (2018). Global benchmarks for spatial development in modern conditions : challenges for Ukraine [“Globalni orientyry prostorovongo rozvytku v suchasnykh umovakh: vyklyky dla Ukrainy”]. Social Economics, 1, pp. 50‒61.
Midtkandal, I. and Sorvik, J. (2012). What is smart specialization? [online] Available at: http://www.nordregio.se/en/Metameny/Nordregio-News/2012/Smart-Specialisation/Context [Accessed 12 Nov. 2018].
Smart Specialization – a strategy in the field of sustainable development. [online] Available at: http://www.unece.org/index.php?id=35927 [Accessed 15 Nov. 2018].
Borysuk, N. and Ermakova, Zh. (2015). From economic councils to clusters. Part 3. Formation of the new economic system in Russia [“Ot sovnarhozov do klasterov. Chast 3. Stanovlenie novoi sistemy khoziaistvovania v Rossii”]. Bulletin of Samara State University, 8(130), pp. 42‒48.
Lanovik, B., Matysiakevych, Z. and Mateiko, R. (1999). Economic History of Ukraine and the World [“Ekonomichna istoriia Ukrainy i svitu”]. Kyiv.
Lytvyn, V., Geits, V. etc. (2011). Economic history of Ukraine : historical and economic research [“Ekonomichna istoriia Ukrainy : Istoryko-ekonomichne doslidzhennia”]. Kyiv: Nika-Tsentr.
Etzkowitz, H. and Leydesdorff, L. (1998). Triple helix of innovation: Introduction. Science and Public Policy, 25(6), pp. 358‒364.
Brännback, M., Carsrud, A. and Krueger, N. (2018). Challenging the triple helix model of regional innovation systems: a venture-centric model. International Journal of Technoentrepreneurship, 1(3), pp. 257‒277.
Razak, A. and White, G. (2015). The Triple Helix model for innovation: A holistic exploration of barriers and enablers. International Journal of Business Performance and Supply Chain Modelling, 7(3), pp. 278‒291.
The Triple Helix Model – Role of different entities. [online] Available at: http://www.scienceportal.org.by/upload/2015/June/Inconet%20EaP%20-%20Presentation/ /4%20Spinoglio _Triple%20Helix.pdf [Accessed 05 Nov. 2018].
Etzkowitz, H. (2007). University-Industry-Government: The Triple Helix Model of Innovation. [online] Available at : https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c737/7b7a3c21d78caff9357560da79064ea 197b5.pdf [Accessed 10 Nov. 2018].
Leydesdorff, L. and Ivanova, I. (2016). “Open Innovation” and “Triple Helix” Models of Innovation: Can Synergy in Innovation Systems Be Measured? Journal of Open Innovations: Technology, Market and Complexity, 2(1), pp. 1‒12.
Quadruple helix. [online] Available at: http://cs.ufh.ac.za/coe/overview [Accessed 13 Nov. 2018].
Grundel, I. and Dahlstrom, M. (2016). A Quadruple and Quintuple Helix Approach to Regional Innovation Systems in the Transformation to a Forestry-Based Bioeconomy. J Knowl Econ, pp. 98‒109.
Karaiannic, E. (2016). The four-tiered spiral of innovation and “smart specialization”: the production of knowledge and national competitiveness [“Chetyrekhzvennaia spiral innovatsii i “umnaia specializastiia”: proizvodstvo znanii i natsionalnaia konkurentosposobnost”]. Forsyth, 10(1), pp. 31‒42.
Tkachenko, O. (2018). Potential of spatial integration of business in ensuring social and economic development of the region [“Potencial prostorovoi integratsii biznesu u zabezpechenni sotsialno-ekonomichsnogo rozvytku region”]. Lviv.
Egorov, I. (2018). Formation of state scientific, technical and innovation policy on the basis of the extended model of «triple spiral» (state-science-industry) [“Formuvannia derzhavnoi naukovo-tekhnichnoi ta innovatsiynoi polityky na osnovi rozshyrenoi modeli “potriynoi spirali” (derzhava-nauka-promyslovist’)”]. Science and Innovation, 1, pp. 86‒89.
Garayannis, E., Evangelos, G., Campbell, D. etc. (2018). The ecosystem as helix: an exploratory theory‐building study of regional co‐opetitive entrepreneurial ecosystems as Quadruple/Quintuple Helix Innovation Models. R&D management, 48, pp. 148‒162.
Geits, V., Danylenko, A., Libanova, E. and Grystenko, A. (2015). Innovative Ukraine 2020: National Report [“Innovatsiina Ukraina : natsionalna dopovid”]. Kyiv.
Smorodynska, N. (2015). Globalized economy: from hierarchies to network [“Globalizirovannaia ekonomika: ot ierarkhii k setevomu ukladu”]. Moskow: IE RAN.
