Transformation of state regulation mechanisms for economic security amid modern hybrid threats: European experience and Ukrainian realities
Abstract
This article examines the theoretical-methodological foundations and practical aspects of transforming state economic security regulation mechanisms in the context of modern hybrid threats. Through systematic analysis, four key methodological approaches to ensuring state economic security are identified and critically analyzed: neoclassical, institutional, network-based, and proactive. The study reveals their distinct characteristics, advantages, and limitations in countering hybrid threats. The research analyzes European experience in transforming economic security mechanisms, particularly examining practices from leading EU countries in developing resilient security frameworks and innovative response mechanisms to hybrid challenges. The findings indicate a trend toward comprehensively integrating various methodological approaches and tools, ranging from classical market and institutional mechanisms to innovative network-based and foresight instruments. Based on comparative analysis of European experience and Ukrainian realities, the paper establishes conceptual foundations for modernizing Ukraine’s state economic security regulatory system. The study proposes a regulatory mechanism transformation matrix that accounts for current conditions and defines priority directions for change within each methodological approach. The research argues for phased implementation of proposed mechanisms, considering available resources and state institutional capacity. Special attention is given to digital transformation and public-private partnerships as key drivers for modernizing the economic security system, with particular focus on developing resilient institutional frameworks and adaptive response capabilities. The article outlines prospects for further research, particularly regarding development of comprehensive methodology for evaluating regulatory mechanism effectiveness and adapting European practices to Ukrainian post-war recovery realities, emphasizing the importance of building sustainable and resilient security architectures in the face of evolving hybrid threats.
Downloads
References
Vlasiuk, O. S., & Kononenko, S. V. (2017). Kremlin aggression against Ukraine: Reflections in the context of war. Economy of Ukraine, (9), 3-18. https://doi.org/10.15407/economyukr.2017.09.003 [in Ukrainian].
Hromov, S. O. (2024). Modern essence and composition of the public regulation mechanism for corporatization of large state enterprises in transport infrastructure. Theory and Practice of Public Administration, 1(78), 136-154. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26565/1727-6667-2024-1-08 [in Ukrainian].
Dunaiev, I., & Hromov, S. (2024). Achievements and problems of using market approaches in modern public governance for reforming Ukrainian state corporations. Actual Problems of Public Administration, 1(64), 6-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26565/1684-8489-2024-1-01 [in Ukrainian].
Horbulin, V. P. (Ed.). (2017). World hybrid war: Ukrainian front. National Institute for Strategic Studies [in Ukrainian].
Bazilian, M., Goldthau, A., & Westphal, K. (2019). Model or ally? How Europe can lead on energy and climate. https://surl.li/gktfvv
Casimir Pulaski Foundation. (2021). How to defend against hybrid threats. URL: https://pulaski.pl/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/FOB16_EN.pdf
DefencesCoop. (2024). NATO seeks to confront the growing ‘pressure of hybrid war’. URL: https://defensescoop.com/2024/07/16/nato-confront-growing-pressure-hybrid-war-russia-china/
e-Estonia. (n.d.). We have built a digital society and so can you. URL: https://e-estonia.com/
European Commission. (2019). EU foreign investment screening regulation enters into force. URL: https://policy.trade.ec.europa.eu/news/eu-foreign-investment-screening-regulation-enters-force-2020-10-11_en
European Network for Cyber Security. (n.d.). European Network for Cyber Security (ENCS). URL: https://encs.eu/
Finnish Government. (2019). Finland’s cyber security strategy. URL: https://turvallisuuskomitea.fi/en/finlands-cyber-security-strategy/
Fjäder, C. (2014). The nation-state, national security and resilience in the age of globalisation. Resilience, 2(2), 114-129. URL: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21693293.2014.914771
Fuerth, L. S. (2009). Foresight and anticipatory governance. Foresight, 11(4), 14-32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/14636680910982412
Hybrid CoE. (2020). Hybrid warfare against critical energy infrastructure. URL: https://www.hybridcoe.fi/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/20220331-Hybrid-CoE-Paper-12-Fifth-wave-of-deterrence-WEB.pdf
International Centre for Defence and Security. (2022). Russia’s hybrid war in Ukraine. URL: https://icds.ee/en/russias-hybrid-war-in-ukraine-lessons-for-baltic-security-and-nato/
Komljenovic, D., & Andersson, J. (2021). Hybrid threats and the critical infrastructure protection challenge. Technology in Society, 66, 101674. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2021.101674
Linkov, I., & Trump, B. (2019). Resilience and hybrid threats: Security and integrity for the digital world. IOS Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-61499-918-8
NATO ENSEC COE. (2022). Hybrid warfare against critical energy infrastructure. URL: https://www.enseccoe.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/2021-03-2.pdf
North, D. C. (1991). Institutions. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 97-112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.5.1.97
OECD. (2024). Facts not fakes: Tackling disinformation, strengthening information integrity. OECD Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/d909ff7a-en
OFSI. (2021). National risk assessment of proliferation financing. URL: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1020695/National_risk_assessment_of_proliferation_financing.pdf
Sperling, J. (2022). The politics of resilience and transatlantic order: Enduring crisis? Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003007739
Tagliapietra, S. (2022). REPowerEU: Will EU countries really make it work? Bruegel. URL: https://www.bruegel.org/blog-post/repowereu-will-eu-countries-really-make-it-work
Tamošiūnienė, R., & Munteanu, C. (2015). Current research approaches to economic security. Paper presented at the 1st International Conference on Business Management,
Valencia, Spain. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4995/ICBM.2015.1537
Trump, B. (2019). The science and practice of resilience. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04565-4
Wood, D. M., & Wright, D. (2015). Before and after Snowden. Surveillance & Society, 13(2), 132-138. DOI: https://doi.org/10.24908/ss.v13i2.5710
World Economic Forum. (2023). Global risks report 2023. URL: https://www.weforum.org/reports/global-risks-report-2023
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
