Institutional genesis of kleptocratic economy and its formation in Ukraine
/ 0
- Details
- Category: Content №5 2021
- Last Updated on 29 October 2021
- Published on 30 November -0001
- Hits: 4871
Authors:
R.Pustoviit, orcid.org/0000-0003-0188-2677, Cherkasy State Business-College, Cherkasy, Ukraine, email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
O.Kuklin, orcid.org/0000-0001-6904-3496, Cherkasy State Business-College, Cherkasy, Ukraine, email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
N.Azmuk, orcid.org/0000-0002-6650-328X, Cherkasy State Business-College, Cherkasy, Ukraine, email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
I.Yakushyk, orcid.org/0000-0002-5958-9791, Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Kyiv, Ukraine, e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
V.Gunko, orcid.org/0000-0001-7772-9041, Cherkasy Gymnasium No. 9, Cherkasy, Ukraine; e-mail: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Naukovyi Visnyk Natsionalnoho Hirnychoho Universytetu. 2021, (5): 180 - 187
https://doi.org/10.33271/nvngu/2021-5/180
Abstract:
Purpose. To analyze the kleptocratic economy as an institutional arrangement that is focused on the key function of generating sources of income for the ruling pseudo-elite by introducing corrupt non-market transaction costs for firms and households, which are based on administrative, bureaucratic and political violence.
Methodology. In the proposed scientific research, we distinguish three types of research methods: firstly, inherent in cognition as a whole (general logical) methods such as analysis, synthesis, abstraction, generalization, induction, deduction, analogy; secondly, general scientific, primarily empirical, research methods, namely observation, description, measurement; thirdly, the theoretical methods of cognition used by the economic science, in particular: idealization, formalization; the axiomatic method for constructing theoretical knowledge; a hypothetical-deductive method for constructing and developing theoretical knowledge.
Findings. The socio-economic structure of Ukraine is analyzed from the point of view of the factors that are determined by the impact of formal and informal institutions in kleptocratic economy and affect corruption risks. Recommendations are provided for modernization of the institutional environment in Ukraine in the context of the modern methodological paradigm of searching for points of contact within the interaction of government, business and society.
Originality. The proposed study carried out a comprehensive analysis of the institutional environment of the Ukrainian economy, which provides convincing grounds to characterize it as kleptocratic, and such where the fundamental modernization proposed in the work has yet to be implemented, accounting for the European integration prospects. In contrast to previously proposed studies, the presented approach focuses on the correlation between key performance indicators of institutions, GDP per capita, and corruption indices in Ukraine and in the studied countries of the European Union.
Practical value. The research results can be used by specialized experts when forming the institutional requirements for creating an effective system for preventing corruption.
Keywords: institutional economy, kleptocratic economy, corruption, institutional environment
References.
1. Pustoviit, R., & Kuklin, O. (2020). The impact of institutional factors and risks of political instability on the state economy. Economy of Ukraine, 2, 22-44.
2. Vdovychenko, E. (2016). Destructive Impacts of Corruption Processes on the Formation of Future Generations Mentality, Future Human Image, 3(6), 109-119.
3. Nitsenko, V. (2020). Mismanagement in Ukraine. Problems of Management in the 21st Century, 15(1), 4-8. https://doi.org/10.33225/pmc/20.15.04.
4. Tkach, O., & Tkach, A. (2019). Volunteer Movement in Ukraine in the Situation of External Aggression. Ukrainian Policymaker, 4, 52-61. https://doi.org/10.29202/up/4/8.
5. Thompson, D.F. (2018). Theories of Institutional Corruption. Annual Review of Political Science, 21, 495-513. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-polisci-120117-110316.
6. Filipchuk, V. (2019). Information and Digital Toolset in a Fight against Liberal Democracy and Values of Open Society, Ukrainian Policymaker, 5, 34-43. https://doi.org/10.29202/up/5/4.
7. Ryzhenko, I., & Halahan, O. (2019). Types of Liability for Illegal Space Activities, Advanced Space Law, 3, 97-107. https://doi.org/10.29202/asl/2019/3/8.
8. Frantsuz, A. (2020). Central and Eastern Europe the Globalization Process, Hybrid Threats: Political and Legal Aspects. Ukrainian Policymaker, 6, 24-31. https://doi.org/10.29202/up/6/3.
9. Prykhodko, A., & Oksin, V. (2020). Corruption Factor as a Destabilizing Element of Development of the Space Industry. Advanced Space Law, 5, 71-82. https://doi.org/10.29202/asl/2020/5/7.
10. Gossel, S. (2017). Breaking Zumas kleptocracy is up to all of us. Retrieved from https://www.gsb.uct.ac.za/fo-zuma-kleptocracy.
11. Transparency International (2019). Corruption Perceptions Index 2019. Retrieved from https://www.transparency.org/.
12. Karlin, A. (2017). Ernst & Young: Ukraine Tops World Corruption Rating. Retrieved from https://www.unz.com/akarlin/ernst-young-ukraine-tops-corruption/.
13. Dwiputri, I., Arsyad, L., & Pradiptyo, R. (2018). The corruption-income inequality trap: a study of Asian countries. Economics Discussion Papers, (81). Retrieved from http://www.economics-ejournal.org/dataset/PDFs/discussionpapers_2018-81.pdf.
14. Halunko, V., Buhlak, Yu., & Pauk, O. (2020). International Legal Regulation of the Missile Technology Control Regime in the Aspect of Private Space Company Activities. Advanced Space Law, 5, 34-47. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.29202/asl/2020/5/4.
15. Shwed, Z. (2019). Theoretical Approaches to the Study of the Economy of Religion. Future Human Image, 11, 83-90. https://doi.org/10.29202/fhi/11/9.
16. Pleines, H. (2016). Oligarchs and Politics in Ukraine. Demokratizatsiya The Journal of Post-Soviet Democratization, 24(1), 105-127. Retrieved from https://forschungsstelle.uni-bremen.de/UserFiles/file/pleines2016-Oligarchs-UA.pdf.
17. Schwab, K. (Ed.) (2019). The Global Competitiveness Report. Geneva, World Economic Forum. Retrieved from http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_TheGlobalCompetitivenessReport2019.pdf.