M. Proskurina, Doctor of Economics, Associate Professor

Kyiv University of Culture, Kyiv, Ukraine

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/1728-2640.2021.149.12


ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF UKRAINE AFTER THE RESTORATION OF POLITICAL INDEPENDENCE AT THE END OF THE 20th CENTURY IN SOCIO-CULTURAL DISCOURSE


The article is devoted to identifying the relationship between economic development and the socio-cultural environment of the country, with a transformational economy. The main stages of the formation of the economy of independent Ukraine are analyzed. The article examines the mechanism of economic development and the main milestones of socio-economic transformation of Ukraine. With the acquisition of independence in 1991, Ukraine began a long process of profound systemic changes that affected virtually all aspects of public life. Radical changes have taken place in the economic system, but the initiated structural adjustment has yielded unexpected and rather contradictory results, which were most likely due to the peculiarities of the socio-cultural environment. Having gained political and economic independence, Ukraine has become an independent full-fledged subject of world processes. In turn, the acquired subjectivity determines the expediency of comprehensive coverage of the development of the economic system of the country in the socio-cultural discourse based on the achievements of historical science. The relevance of the historical study of organizational and economic processes of the era of independence is primarily due to the urgent need to identify the principles and patterns of their course. In the study of Ukrainian realities, the contradictions between the established system of formal socio-economic institutions and the mechanisms of their functioning are obvious. This is an indirect confirmation of significant internal transformations in the introduced elements of the market economy, which arose as a result of adaptation to the socio-cultural environment of Ukraine. In fact, such transformations form a national economic environment that operates according to its own laws. This fact can be interpreted in two ways depending on the causes and results of such deviations: as a disadvantage or as a specific element and a potential competitive advantage.

Key words: socio-cultural sector, civilization paradigm, system approach, economic development, transformational economy, civilization, economic history, economic system.

Submitted: 30.04.2021

Download Full Text

References:

1. Bazylevych, V. (2008). Theory of Economy: Political Economy. Kyiv: Knowledge-Press. [in Ukrainian]

2. Yerokhin, S. (2002). Structural Transformation of the National Economy (Theoretical and Methodological Aspects). Kyiv: World of Knowledge. [in Ukrainian]

3. Koziuk, V. & Rodionova, L. (eds.). (2015). History of Economy and Economical Thought. Ternopil: National Economy University of Ternopil. [in Ukrainian]

4. Proskurina, M. (2018). Organizational and Economic Mechanism of the Cultural Industry of Ukraine. A Monograph. Kyiv: National Academy of Management. [in Ukrainian].

5. Stepanenko, S. (2008). Institutional Analysis of Economic Systems: Problems of Methodology. A Monograph. Kyiv: kyiv National Economic University. [in Ukrainian].

6. Bianchini, F. & Parkinson, M. (1994). Cultural Policy and Urban Regeneration. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

7. Chartrand H. H. (2000). Towards an American arts industry. In J. Cherbo, M. Wyszomirski (eds), Public Life of the Arts in America. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press. https://bit.ly/3iN9QEN

8. Cote, D. (2016). The Kilroys release list of 32 plays by women that you should see now. TimeOut. https://bit.ly/3DqJ1y4

9. Gouldner, A. W. (1979). The Future of Intellectuals and the Rise of the New Class: A Frame of Reference, Theses, Conjectures, Arguments, and an Historical Perspective on the Role of Intellectuals and Intelligentsia in the International Class Contest of the Modem Era. New York: Seabury Press.

10. Liemt, Gijsbert van. (2014). Employment relationships in arts and culture (Working Paper No. 301). Geneva: International Labour Organization.