24

ÅKÎÍÎ̲×ÍÈÉ ×ÀÑÎÏÈÑ-XXI 7-8(1)’2014

ÅÊÎÍÎ̲ÊÀ ÒÀ ÓÏÐÀÂ˲ÍÍß ÍÀÖ²ÎÍÀËÜÍÈÌ ÃÎÑÏÎÄÀÐÑÒÂÎÌ

UDC 005.334:061.5:661.12Olga Ilyash

D.Sc. (Economics), Professor, Lviv Academy of Commerce, Ukraine; Leading Researcher of Regional Branch of the National Institute for Strategic Studies, Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine10 M. Tugan-Baranovsky Str., Lviv, 79005, Ukraineoliai@meta.ua

THE PRINCIPLES OF STATE REGULATION INTHE SPHERE OF SOCIO-ECONOMIC SECURITYOF UKRAINE

Abstract. The purpose of the article is to define theoretical basis for formation of socio-economic security and role of govern-ment regulation, developed structural component model of organization and methodology of the study of socio-economic secu-rity at the national and regional levels. The system of socio-economic security is defined as а triple system: the whole system ofoverarching elements; organization of social security in separated spheres; status and characteristics of measures to achieveoptimal level of socio-economic system’s security.Results. The dynamic model of socio-economic cooperation in the sphere of socio-economic security is determined, the socio-economic risks on the regional level are systematized, challenges and threats to the social security of the state by institutionaldangers of government regulation in the area of socio-economic security are determined. The author analyzes the dangers ofstate policy in the field of population reproduction and labor potential usage. Risks of state regulation of the labor market andmigration at the regional level are outlined, the set of indicators to measure the socio-economic security functional componentsand assess their impact on the system of state regulation are proposed. On this basis, the model of the impact of threats on thesystem of socio-economic security is formed and taxonomic analysis to identify internal features of state regulation in the field ofsocio-economic security is applied in order to conduct a multidimensional study of Ukraine’s regions socio-economic securityregulation based at cluster approach.Conclusions. Directions and means of state policy in the sphere of socio-economic security, and direction of the institutionalregulation improving in this area are formulated. Developed regulatory system of state socio-economic security regulation out-lines strategic priorities for the development and implementation of the Conception of social security of Ukraine. The imperativeof Conception іs to reduce social tension in the country by ensuring efficient operation of government, economic and social insti-tutions in social communities protection from external and internal threats.Keywords: socio-economic security sphere; government regulation; socio-economic security insurance mechanisms;the Conception of social security.JEL Classіfіcatіon: P29, P36, H75

О. І. Іляш

доктор економічних наук, доцент, професор кафедри економіки підприємства, Львівська комерційна академія, Україна; провідний науковий співробітник Регіонального філіалу Національного інституту стратегічних досліджень при Президентові України, Київ, УкраїнаПРИНЦИПИ ДЕРЖАВНОГО РЕГУЛЮВАННЯ У СФЕРІ СОЦІАЛЬНО-ЕКОНОМІЧНОЇ БЕЗПЕКИ УКРАЇНИ

Анотація. У статті визначено теоретичні основи формування системи соціально-економічної безпеки та роль у нійдержавного регулювання, розроблено структурно-динамічну модель соціально-економічної взаємодії в системісоціально-економічної безпеки. Визначено методичний підхід до вимірювання стану безпеки і систему індикаторівсоціально-економічної безпеки на макрo- та мезoрівні з урахуванням місця сoціальнoї складoвoї в системі націoнальнoїбезпеки держави, безпеки у сфері відтворення населення і трудового потенціалу, соціальній та міграційних сферах,сфері ринку праці й зайнятості населення. Запропоновано інструменти державної політики у сфері соціально-еко-номічної безпеки, визначено напрями вдосконалення інституціонального регулювання у цій сфері. Окреслено стра-тегічні пріоритети формування та реалізації Концепції соціальної безпеки України.Ключові слова: сфера соціально-економічної безпеки, державне регулювання, механізми гарантування соціально-економічної безпеки, Концепція соціальної безпеки.

О. И. Иляш

доктор экономических наук, доцент, профессор кафедры экономики предприятия, Львовская коммерческая академия, Украина; ведущий научный сотрудник Регионального филиала Национального института стратегических исследований при Президенте Украины, Киев, УкраинаПРИНЦИПЫ ГОСУДАРСТВЕННОГО РЕГУЛИРОВАНИЯ В СФЕРЕ СОЦИАЛЬНО-ЭКОНОМИЧЕСКОЙ

БЕЗОПАСНОСТИ УКРАИНЫ

Аннотация. В статье определены теоретические основы формирования системы социально-экономической безопас-ности и роль в ней государственного регулирования, разработана структурно-динамическая модель социально-эко-номического взаимодействия в системе социально-экономической безопасности. Определен методический подход кизмерению состояния безопасности и системы индикаторов социально-экономической безопасности на макрo- имезoуровнях с учетом места сoциальнoй составляющей в системе нациoнальнoй безопасности государства, безопас-ности в сфере воспроизводства населения и трудового потенциала, миграционной сфере, сфере рынка труда и за-нятости населения. Предложены инструменты государственной политики, которые целесообразно применять в сфе-ре социально-экономической безопасности, определены направления совершенствования институциональногорегулирования в этой сфере. Обозначены стратегические приоритеты формирования и реализации Концепции соци-альной безопасности Украины.Ключевые слова: сфера социально-экономической безопасности, государственное регулирование, механизмыгарантирования социально-экономической безопасности, Концепция социальной безопасности.

25

ECONOMIC ANNALS-XXI7-8(1)’2014

ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT OF NATIONAL ECONOMY

Introduction. The problem of increasing the role of thestate in ensuring security is immensely urgent due to the factthat the system of socio-economic security in Ukraine is formedonly fragmentarily without sufficient theoretical and metho-dological foundation. As a result, negative phenomena and ten-dencies accumulate in economics and social sphere, whichreveal themselves in deformations of social structure, economicde-socialisation, social and cultural degradation and weaksocial protection of person.

In this respect, guaranteeing socio-economic security as akey factor of socio-economic development of the state objec-tively requires comprehensive study on the grounds of systemicapproach, not only at the level of person, economic agent, typeof economic activity or society, but also in functional areas ofemployment of population, labour market, migration safety.Therefore, structural cohesion of units of formation and deve-lopment of the system of socio-economic security is a neces-sary requirement of economic growth, the destabilization ofwhich can lead to substantial negative social and economicalconsequences. In view of the above mentioned, it is quite urgentto develop mechanisms and means of the state policy of regu-lation of socio-economic security in the system of strategic andtactical priorities to strengthen the national security of Ukraine.

Theoretical and methodological fundamentals of the

state regulation in the sphere of socio-economic security.

Powerful national security as the main imperative for develop-ment of modern society objectively requires that the state buildsspecial approach to ensure safety and solve problems in thesecurity sphere. The security genesis in the social developmenttheory confirms the leading part of the state in ensuring safetyin all its areas: political, military, energetic, social and economic.Some Ukrainian scientists in the branch of economical security,such as G. Pasternak-Taranushenko [1], V. Palamarchuk [2],V. Skurativskyi [3], O. Novikova [4], carry out the research of thestate regulatory mechanism in the different social spheres; theyrationalize the necessity of the managerial-economic mecha-nism to regulate the socio-economic security which should bebased on the defense of the social interest of the person and thesociety from threats to the national security. In this respect, it isimportant to study socio-economic security from the position ofsystemic approach as qualitative characteristics and integralfeature of complex socio-economic processes regulation by thestate.

Therefore, main requirements to formation of efficient sys-tem of state regulation in the sphere of socio-economic securi-ty are the following: applying comprehensive planning of eco-nomic and social development; predicting the indicators of safedevelopment of socio-economic sphere; realization of nationaland special-purpose all-inclusive social programs.

It is proved that scientific foundation of state regulation faci-litates determination of fundamental provisions of systemicapproach to choose the mechanism, means and methods ofstate regulation of socio-economic security, what will signifi-cantly increase the level and quality of state regulation in thearea of national security. For example, A. Sukhorukov substan-tiates the reasonability to use the following theories: systemsand the system analysis, cycles, product life cycle, reserves,accidents, risks, technological discontinuity, factorial analysis,prognostication, antimonopoly regulation, decision making [5].Particular attention should be paid to the Y. Kornay’s version ofthe system approach in economic theory, called «system para-digm» [6]. Apparently, the task solving is impossible without theusage of the system theory means.

The results of the study show that the new paradigm forbuilding the system of socio-economic security defines it as atriad:

1) integral societal system of interconnected elements; 2) organisational close subsystem of social security which

is characterized by total interactions of its components (sepa-rate types of security);

3) condition and characteristics of the measure of reachingthe optimal level of functional safety, reconstruction and devel-opment of socio-economic system. It is established that theprocess of formation of the system of socio-economic security

that is based on the system methodology enables to considersocio-economic security as an element of social system, todetermine system-building principles and its determinants.

It is proved that the main criteria for determining the mea-sure of organization and efficiency of the system of socio-eco-nomic security are the following: correlation of the system ele-ments; its dynamics (homeostasis); presence of leading andcontrolling parameters in the system, as well as channels forfeed-forward and feed-back at different levels of social man-agement hierarchy. All of that provides for determination of thespace of state regulation in security sphere and statement ofexistence of the super-social security function, which: 1) isensured by the complex of measures taken by the state andsociety; 2) is defined by functional and institutional means oforganisation of interaction and protection of the system ele-ments from internal and external threats; 3) is grounded on theability to self-development and reproduction.

Assessment of efficiency of the policy of ensuring socio-eco-nomic security provides for maintaining dynamic integrity of thissystem. It is proved that in order to support the system underthe conditions of unstable environment and internal transforma-tions (accidental or intentional) one requires special organiza-tion of the system which will assure its resistance to threats. Thedeveloped and proposed structural and dynamic model ofsocial interaction in the system of socio-economic securityaccounts for disorganizing influence of external environmentand internal contradictions on its vital interests and is limited bythe boundaries that corresponds to the needs of the systemand its elements under the conditions of sustainable develop-ment. That is why it is established that the main parameter ofsocial interaction in the system of socio-economic security, theformation of which is interpreted as a complex socio-economicmechanism of reciprocal influence of external and internalthreats (parameters) in the conditions of dispersal of features ofall system constituents, the sequence of designing the structu-ral and dynamic model of security which covers coordinationand management of socio-economic processes and socialdeterminants of safe development [7; 8; 9]. This approachdefines sufficiency of the state policy in the area of effectiveimplementation of general economic and social objectives ofmonitoring, productivity and safety of the system based onensuring security of reproduction of population and labourpotential, social sphere, labour market and employment andmigration safety (Figure 1).

It has been found out that under the conditions of accel-eration of socio-economic changes and increase in social ten-sion the appeared risks in social sphere increased in intensity.The developed typology of risks in the sphere of socio-eco-nomic security allows to reveal the changes in the systementropy, possibilities for application of quantitative approachesin its management, and to state the risk as perceived possi-bility of the danger in respect of existence of challenges andthreats to the system. The paper presents grounds for exis-tence of prevailing risks in the sphere of socio-economic secu-rity according to the following time periods: 1) behaviouristicone that is based on defining main types of individual attitudeto risks and factors that determine the specific character ofrelations within the system; 2) situational one that defines thestate of coordination of particular methods and approaches ofrisk management and envisages possible positive and nega-tive consequences of their influence; 3) procedural one thatdefines individualized risks that are widely displayed in the«risk society»; 4) functional one that defines the directions ofinfluence of the society transformation on the risks in socio-economic sphere; 5) systemic and synergetic (integral) onethat is based on distinguishing functions of analysis, assess-ment and management of risks and confirms the multi-facedness and sustainability of the system that is able to adapt tochanging environment conditions and eliminate currentthreats, as well as existence of significant amount of dange-rous factors that simultaneously influence the national securi-ty system in the area of reproduction of population, labourmarket and employment, social and migration spheres. It isproved that the current classification of risks, challenges, dan-

26

ÅKÎÍÎ̲×ÍÈÉ ×ÀÑÎÏÈÑ-XXI 7-8(1)’2014

ÅÊÎÍÎ̲ÊÀ ÒÀ ÓÏÐÀÂ˲ÍÍß ÍÀÖ²ÎÍÀËÜÍÈÌ ÃÎÑÏÎÄÀÐÑÒÂÎÌ

gers and threats is notable for conditionality and provides forappearance of the security priorities at a particular stage ofsocio-economic development; and they are not constant andmay undergo considerable changes due to certain situationand main criteria of threat classification (location of the sourceof danger, degree of threat formation, threat character, fieldand type of human activity, rate of subjective estimates ofthreats, etc.).

According to the results of comparative analysis of interde-pendence of state regulation in the sphere of socio-economicsecurity and institutional mechanism of its provision, it is provedthat in order to neutralize threats effectively the state often usesthe mechanisms of social limits, at the same time ensuring pro-gressive development and effective functioning of socio-eco-nomic system, that is the source of threats. It evidences the lowlevel of efficiency of state regulation in the sphere of socio-eco-nomic security from the positions of institutional theory causedby imperfection of institutional environment and revealed inuncontrollability of system-building areas of the national eco-nomics; discrepancies in legislative basis and normative subor-dinate acts; non-correspondence of the structure of the func-tioning social institutions to new conditions of social life thatentails collision between different institutional subsystems and,thus, provokes unsteadiness and abruptness of the individualbehaviour. The interconnection of system institutional errors andspontaneous process in the system of socio-economic securityis established to attest the increase in dangers, destruction ofprinciples and norms of behaviour, what causes discrediting ofthe state regulation system in the security sphere.

Results. For the purpose of assessment of influence ofthreats on the system of socio-economic security in operation,the adapted model based on cognitive modelling has beendesigned. The sequence of analysis and management of inf-luence of threats on the system of socio-economic security envi-sages the following stages: 1) collection of information aboutthe project of protection; 2) selection of criteria that characterizethe condition of various directions of ensuring socio-economicsecurity, determination of their acceptable level; 3) construction

of cognitive model of influence of primary and secondarythreats on the security system; 4) calculation of the Fishburnscales by modified method of non-strict ranging of threats; 5)analysis of the level of provision of the system of socio-eco-nomic security for the purpose of designing different strategiesof safety management: reduction of risks, avoidance of risks,liquidation of threats in the sphere of socio-economic security.

The problem of regulation of such many-dimensional cate-gory as socio-economic security in relation to normative stan-dard vector is solved with the help of taxonomy method [10; 11].Distributing of all factorial features (security indicators) to stimu-lants and destimulants for each subsystemallowed calculation Euclid distances between vectors of stan-dardized data and standard vector between the points pk – ofmeasurable space:

to define auxiliary values

and coefficients di(k) of the level of socio-economic security

(Table 1):

where – sequence number of the object (year); n = 12 – total amount of objects (years); k – sequence numberof the component (1, 2, 3 or 4, case k = 5 – «total by all com-ponents»); xij

(k) – output standardized data; zj(k) – coordinates of

the standard vector (determined by stimulants and destimu-

Fig. 1: Structural and dynamic model of social interaction in the system of socio-economic security of the state

Source: Suggested by the author

(1)

(3)

(2)

27ECONOMIC ANNALS-XXI7-8(1)’2014

ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT OF NATIONAL ECONOMY

lants); j – sequence number of factorial feature; pk – amount offactorial features (indicators of socio-economic security) by k-component; xi0

(k) – the Euclid distances between the givenobjects and standard vector; and s0

(k) – averaged distanceand mean-square deviation of distances (the distancesbetween the stated objects and standard vector of develop-ment); – «auxiliary» value, the use of whichis grounded by the «rule of three sigmas».

The found taxonomic indicator synthetically characterizesthe changes in the development rate of the system of socio-eco-nomic security. Its most important advantage is that at presentwe deal with one direction and scale of changes in the process-es represented by the total arbitrary amount of initial features(indicators of socio-economic security). In the work it showedhigh instability (changeability) caused by mean-square devia-tion (0.1) which constitutes the third of the average taxonomycoefficient (0.3).

According to the results of assessment of indicators of thesocio-economic security of Ukraine, the low level of the socio-economic security in Ukraine has been established in regard tofunctional components. It has been proved that decline of para-meters of socio-economic security and approaching to thresh-old values in the short-term period is acceptable, though unde-sirable. In the long-term period, it leads to destruction of thebasic essentials of the state regulation system and of guaran-teed life safety of person, family, society, system of state socio-economic security.

Conclusions and implications. This paper determines theimportant scientific and applied problem of improvement of the-oretical and methodological base, substantiation strategic prior-ities and development of the state regulation mechanisms in thesphere of socio-economic security of Ukraine. The received sci-entific and methodological, as well as systematic and appliedresults allow drawing the following conclusions:

1. Guaranteeing socio-economic security is an importanttask of the policy of ensuring stable and balanced developmentof the state as a socio-economic system in the conditions ofestablishment of socially oriented economics. The urgent prob-lem of effective state regulation of socio-economic securityrequires improvement of approaches to form the methodologyof its study.

2. The definition of the determinants of the state system ofsocio-economic security allowed distinguishing its most signifi-cant components – demographic, social, migration and labourutilization. The main criteria for determination of the measure of

organization and efficiency of thesystem of socio-economic securi-ty include organic interaction of itselements, dynamics (homeosta-sis), availability of the leading andcontrolling parameters and chan-nels for feed-forward and feed-back. The system of socio-eco-nomic security can not be limitedby political sphere and actions ofthe government institutions butrequires comprehensive estab-lishment of favourable socio-eco-nomic conditions for develop-ment.

3. Implementation of thedeveloped structural and dynam-ic model of social interaction inthe system of socio-economicsecurity, whose elements includeguarantee of security of repro-duction of population and labourpotential, social sphere, labourmarket and employment andmigration safety, purposes to pro-tect it from disorganizing influ-ence of the environment andinternal contradictions.

4. The system of indicators ofmeasuring the level of socio-eco-

nomic security with account of the place of social component inthe system of national security of the state shall include: thesphere of reproduction of population and labour potential, socialand migration spheres, the sphere of labour market andemployment. Using the proposed methodology, we have estab-lished that the level of socio-economic security in Ukraine is low,in general, and by many indicators it is lower than the extremecritical values.

6. In respect of critical state of the social development inUkraine, the prevailing condition for intensified socio-economicsecurity is execution and implementation of the Conception ofsocial security. The target imperative of the Conception shall bereduction in social tension in the country by means of ensuringefficient activity of the state economic and social institutions forprotection of the society from external and internal threats. Inthe meanwhile, it is necessary to ensure interconnection ofachievement of operative goals of the Conception of socialsecurity (provision of security of reproduction of population andgrowth of labour potential, security of social and migrationspheres, security of labour market and employment) and thestrategic goals of ensuring socio-economic security of the stateand its regions.

References

1. Pasternak-Taranushenko, G. (2000). Security: system, subsystem, evaluation,new weapon. Ekonomika Ukrainy (Economy of Ukraine), 12, 53-57 (in Ukr.).2. Palamarchuk, V. (1993). Social Strategy of Ukraine in the Social ReformsPeriod. Kyiv, Ukraine: NISS Press (in Ukr.).3. Skurativskyi, V. (2002). Basics of the Social Policy. Kyiv, Ukraine:Interregional Academy of Personnel Management Press (in Ukr.).4. Novikova, O. (1997). Social Security: Organizational and Economic Prob-lems and Solutions. Donetsk, Ukraine: IEP NAS of Ukraine Press (in Ukr.).5. Sukhorukov, A. (2009). Consideration of Dynamic Relations in theEconomic Security Systems. Stratehichna panorama (Strategic Pano-rama), 2, 115-129 (in Ukr.).6. Zhalilo, Y. (2009). Theory and Practice of the Effective State EconomicalStrategy Forming. Kyiv, Ukraine: NISS Press (in Ukr.).7. Gutman, G., Miroedov, A., & Fedin, S. (2001). Regional economy manage-ment. In G. Gutman (Ed.). Moscow, Russian Federation: Finansy i Statistika(in Russ.).8. Leksin, I. (2003). Territorial State Structure: Attempt to Implement SystemAnalysis Methodology. Ros. ekon. zhurnal (Russ. Econ. Journal), 1, 55-74(in Russ.).9. Karintseva, O., Shevchenko, S., & Shapochka, M. (2005). Basics ofSustainable Development. In L. Melnyk (Ed.). Sumy, Ukraine: Universytetskaknyha (in Ukr.).10. Beshelev, S., & Gurvits, F. (1994). Mathematical and statistical methodsof expert evaluations. Moscow, Russian Federation: Statistika (in Russ.).

Tab. 1: Taxonomic rates of the level of Ukraine's socio-economic security

(within the framework of functional components) in 2000-2011

Source: Developed by the author

28

ÅKÎÍÎ̲×ÍÈÉ ×ÀÑÎÏÈÑ-XXI 7-8(1)’2014

ÅÊÎÍÎ̲ÊÀ ÒÀ ÓÏÐÀÂ˲ÍÍß ÍÀÖ²ÎÍÀËÜÍÈÌ ÃÎÑÏÎÄÀÐÑÒÂÎÌ

11. Sablina, N., & Telychko, V. (2009). Usage of Taxonomy Method for the Ana-lysis of Internal Enterprise Resources. Biznes Inform (Busyness Inform), 3,78-82 (in Ukr.).12. Kopych, I., Sorokivskyi, V., & Stefaniak, V. (2010). Mathematic Models inManagement and Marketing. Lviv, Ukraine: Lviv Commercial Academy Press(in Ukr.).13. Libanova, E. (2005). Administrative-Territorial Reform: challenges, waysof implementation, criteria of efficiency. In Z. Varnalii (Ed.). Kyiv, Ukraine:NISS Press (in Ukr.).14. Ilyash, O. (2012). Transformations of the Social Security System ofUkraine: Regional Dimention. Lviv, Ukraine: PAIS Press (in Ukr.).

Received 01.06.2014References (in language original)

1. Пастeрнак-Таранушeнкo Г. Бeзпeка: систeма, пiдсистeма, oцiнки,нoва збрoя / Г. Пастeрнак-Таранушeнкo // Eкoнoмiка України. – 2000. –№ 12. – С. 53–57.2. Паламарчук В. М. Сoцiальна стратeгiя України у пeрioд здiйснeннясoцiальних рeфoрм / В. М. Паламарчук. – К. : Нац. ін-т стратeг.дoслiджeнь, 1993. – Вип. 11. – 31 с.3. Скуратiвський В. А. Oснoви сoцiальнoї пoлiтики : навч. пoсiб. / В. А.Скуратiвський. – К. : МАУП, 2002. – 200 с.4. Нoвiкoва O. Ф. Сoцiальна бeзпeка: oрганiзацiйнo-eкoнoмiчнi прoб-лeми i шляхи їх вирiшeння / O. Ф. Нoвiкoва. – Донецьк : IEП НАН України,1997. – 460 с.5. Сухoрукoв А. I. Врахування динамiчних зв’язкiв у систeмах eкoнoмiч-нoї бeзпeки / А. I. Сухoрукoв // Стратeгiчна панoрама. – 2009. – № 2. –С. 115–129.

6. Жалiлo Я. А. Тeoрiя та практика фoрмування eфeктивнoїeкoнoмiчнoї стратeгiї дeржави / Я. А. Жалiлo. – К. : НIСД, 2009. – 336 с.7. Гутман Г. В. Управлeниe рeгиoнальнoй экoнoмикoй / Г. В. Гутман,А. А. Мирoeдoв, С. В. Фeдин ; пoд рeд. Г. В. Гутмана. – М. : Финансы истатистика, 2001. – 176 с.8. Лeксин И. Тeрритoриальнoe устрoйствo гoсударства: пoпыткарeализации систeмнoй мeтoдoлoгии анализа / И. Лeксин // Рoс. экoн.журнал. – 2003. – № 1. – С. 55–74.9. Oснoви стiйкoгo рoзвитку : навч. пoсiб. / [O. I. Карiнцeва, С. М.Шeвчeнкo, М. К. Шапoчка та iн.] ; за заг. рeд. Л. Г. Мeльника. – Суми :Унiвeрситeтська книга, 2005. – 654 с.10. Бeшeлeв С. Матeматикo-статистичeскиe мeтoды экспeртныхoцeнoк / С. Бeшeлeв, Ф. Гурвиц. – М. : Статистика, 1994. – 256 с.11. Саблина Н. В. Испoльзoваниe мeтoда таксoнoмии для анализавнутрeнних рeсурсoв прeдприятия / Н. В. Саблина, В. А. Тeличкo //Бiзнeс Iнфoрм. – 2009. – № 3. – С. 78–82.12. Кoпич I. М. Матeматичнi мoдeлi в мeнeджмeнтi та маркeтингу :навч. пoсiб. / I. М. Кoпич, В. М. Сoрoкiвський, В. I. Стeфаняк. – Л. : Вид-вo Львiв. кoмeрц. акад., 2010. – 268 с.13. Лiбанoва E. М. Адміністративно-тeритoрiальна рeфoрма: завдання,шляхи рeалiзацiї, критeрiї eфeктивнoстi / E. М. Лібанова ; за рeд. З. С.Варналiя. – К. : НIСД, 2005. – 325 с.14. Іляш О. І. Трансформації системи соціальної безпеки України: ре-гіональний вимір : монографія / О. І. Іляш. – Львів : ПАЇС, 2012. – 592 с.

Стаття надійшла до редакції 01.06.2014

УДК 339.92І. І. Черленяк

доктор наук з державного управління, старший науковий співробітник, завідувач кафедри міжнародного бізнесу, логістики та менеджменту, ДВНЗ «Ужгородський національний університет», Україна cherlenyakjj@mail.ru

КОНКУРЕНТОСПРОМОЖНІСТЬ, КОНКУРЕНЦІЯ, РИНОК: МАКРОСИСТЕМНІ АСПЕКТИАнотація. У статті з позицій теорії координації багаторівневих ієрархічних систем та теорії самоор-

ганізації розглянуто системи-процеси: конкурентоспроможність, конкуренція, ринок. Проаналізовано можливість за-стосування концепції «модернізації навздогін» і ліберальної економічної моделі до транзитивної економіки України.Визначено умови формування нового відтворювального механізму для гармонізації ринкової конкуренції,підприємницької активності та зацікавленості суспільства в активному використанні бізнесменами обмеженихсуспільних ресурсів. Запропоновано створити модель-практику відтворення конкурентоспроможності національноїекономіки, яка б базувалася на двоїстій природі конкуренції – інституціональній і самоорганізаційній.Ключові слова: конкурентоспроможність, конкуренція, ринок, економічна система, транзитивна економіка, самоор-ганізація.

И. И. Черленяк

доктор наук по государственному управлению, старший научный сотрудник, профессор, заведующий кафедрой международного бизнеса, логистики и менеджмента, Ужгородский национальный университет, УкраинаКОНКУРЕНТОСПОСОБНОСТЬ, КОНКУРЕНЦИЯ, РЫНОК: МАКРОСИСТЕМНЫЕ АСПЕКТЫ

Аннотация. В статье с позиций теории координации многоуровневых иерархических систем и теории самоорганиза-ции рассмотрены системы-процессы: конкурентоспособность, конкуренция, рынок. Проанализирована возможностьприменения концепции «модернизации вдогонку» и либеральной экономической модели в транзитивной экономикеУкраины. Определены условия формирования нового воспроизводственного механизма для гармонизации рыночнойконкуренции, предпринимательской активности и заинтересованности общества в активности использования бизне-сменами ограниченных общественных ресурсов. Предложено создать модель-практику воспроизведения конкурен-тоспособности национальной экономики, которая бы базировалась на двойственной природе конкуренции – институ-циональной и самоорганизационной.Ключевые слова: конкурентоспособность, конкуренция, рынок, экономическая система, транзитивная экономика,самоорганизация.

Іvan Cherleniak

D.Sc. (Public Administration), Senior Researcher, Professor, Uzhhorod National University, Ukraine3 Narodna Sq., Uzhhorod, 88000, Transcarpathian Region, UkraineCOMPETITIVENESS, COMPETITION, MARKET: MACROSYSTEM ASPECTS

Abstract. Introduction. The concept of free competition is one of the pillars of the liberal economic model, which demonstratedacceptable results for the economies of some developed capitalist countries in the industrial age. The liberal model was not effec-tive for transitive economy of Ukraine. This demonstrates the fundamental problems of Ukraine’s economic mechanism compo-nent coordination, including, perhaps, the most important: competition, market, competitiveness. The purpose of the article is todevelop alternative modifications of the semantic content for the triad competition-market-competitiveness in terms of post-indus-trial era challenges and transitive economy problems. Results.While formulating the development of the national economy com-petitiveness model, it must born in mind that the concept and model of management based at increasing the efficiency of pro-