CC BY
2
UDC 331.1
Viktoriia KOLOMIIETS1*, Maryna FESENKO2, Olga ZOLKINA3
1* Professor of Accounting and Economic Analysis, Doctor of Economics, docent, MELITOPOL INSTITUTE OF PUBLIK AND MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION OF THE «CLASSIC PRIVATE UNIVERSITY», e-mail: vik2005vik@meta.ua, ORCID: 0000-0003-3427-8986
2 Director, Doctor of Economics, professor, MELITOPOL INSTITUTE OF PUBLIK AND MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION OF THE «CLASSIC PRIVATE UNIVERSITY», e-mail: ra_va@ukr.net, ORCID: 00000003-2288-3388
3 Director, Master of Finance and Credit, BUSINESS INDUSTRY LLC, e-mail: ola1993ola@meta.ua, ORCID: 0000-0003-2642-6520
METHODICAL TOOLS FOR DETERMINING THE LEVEL OF HUMAN CAPITAL DEVELOPMENT
Annotation. Methodical tools for determining the level of human capital development have been developed. The managerial approach to measuring human capital aims to gain more management tools. The author hypothesized that there is an interdependence between the human capital index and the development of the country's institutional system. A selection of indicators has been made for describing the dependence of human capital development on the development of the institutional system of the country, which included political, legal, economic, social, institutional systems, using the expert method of analysis. Based on the hypothesis, an analytical model for assessing the development of human capital has been worked out, which was used to calculate the level of human capital development. The model proposed by the author takes into account the development of the country's institutional system and allows to find out correlation between human capital development and the country's institutional system, which allows to develop forecasts of the dynamics of human capital development from political, legal, economic, social, institutional changes and determine public policy. It is steadily increasing. For multifactor models or phenomena, it is expedient to use methods of multiple correlation-regression analysis, which allows to study and quantify the internal and external consequence correllations between model-forming factors and to establish patterns of functioning and development trends of the studied performance trait. In a real economy conditions, there are probabilistic interdependence between performance and factors. The main task of correlation and regression methods of analysis is to analyze statistical data to identify the mathematical dependency between the studied features and to establish a comparative estimate for the density of the interconnection.
Keywords: institutions, institutional content, human capital; methodical tools, the human capital index
Statement of the problem
The effective functioning of human capital becomes the main tool with help of which it is possible to implement the strategic objectives of the state. The purpose of the article is to implement an analytical characteristic of humans capital practice in Ukraine and other countries, indicators of human capital development, determining the place of Ukraine on the background of other countries. There is no single system of indicators for the chatacterization of human capital. The author s system in this research is formed and analytical characteristics of practice of human s capital functioning in Ukraine and other countries of the world are considered. Analysis of the characteristics of human's capital functioning in Ukraine and other countries of the world showed a relatively low level of the studied indicators.
Analysis of recent researches and publications
The last four decades of studying the human capital as a component of national wealth have been in focus of world-class experts - G. Becker [5], J. Mincer [8] and T. Schulz [9] (50-70 years of XX century), I. Fisher [6, p. 225-243].
N. Bryukhovetska, I. Buleev, D. Bohynia, O. Borodina, N. Golikova, V. Geets, O. Grishnova, I. Kalenyuk, E. Libanova, V. Mandibura, L. Chernobay, A. Chukhno, Y. Shiron and others have been studying various aspects of human capital.
Observations at the world level bring analytical considerations about the progress of mankind beyond economic growth, firmly assigning to man and his well-being a central place in development policy and strategy [1, p. 2].
Today, the priority in the effective
management of resources is given to human capital, because it is a stock of knowledge, skills, competencies and abilities of people that can create private, social and national well-being [3].
The impact of human capital on economic development is observed not only for individual countries but also for entire regions [10, p. 2700-2702].
Economic opportunities can play a constructive role in human capital to support growth [4, p. 3]. At the same time, it was recognized that human capital stimulates and ensures the formation of man's economic capacity, enterprise, nation.
Thus, the functioning of human capital becomes the main way by which it is possible to implement the strategic objectives of the state.
Requirement in building strong human capital for the rapid development of a country is still an unresolved problem. This study helps to solve this issue.
Formulation of the purpose of the article
The goal of this article is to make scientific and practical recommendations for the use of methodological tools to determine the relationship between human capital development
and the system of institutional development of the country, calculation's results of the correlation matrix.
The main material of the research
The implementation of the goal set in this study provides an analytical description of human s capital in Ukraine and developed countries on certain indicators.
Researches on the measurement of human capital is divided into five stages [2]: Stage 1: development of the basic concept and its theoretical substantiation. Stage 2: development of basic measurement models for academic research and development. Stage 3: research of interest in development of the topic of researchers and business. Stage 4: drop of academic and business interests due to lack of understanding of easy and basic level of research and lack of understanding of researcher's resources. Stage 5: from 1981 till today, when international interst has grown in both theory and practical use.
Theoretical and methodological studies provided the basis for determining indicators that describe the impact of factors on the development of human capital, and their grouping (Table 1).
Table 1
Indicators of factors influencing the humans capital development of the national economy by groups*
* Author's development
Groups
o M « .2
regulatory policy
level of corruption
level of
bureaucracy
trade
economic policy
efficiency of law-making
law level
level of GNI per capita level of investment
level of investment
minimum wage
level of consumer prices
unemployment rate
labor migration rate
birth rate
mortality rate
health care costs
culture costs
environmental efficiency
index pension replacement rate
competitiveness Index of Countries
competitiveness of Employees
Internet Access
computer Support
Access
access to
Communication
Systems
provision of
Communication
Systems
number of new technologies
costs of innovation
costs of science
costs of research
costs of energy-saving technologies
protection of intellectual property
e Js 1£=
freedom of business freedom of the labor
market monetary freedom of trade
freedom of
investment
financial
freedom
fiscal health
government
spending
tax burden
government decency efficiency of the judiciary property rights
An acceptable measure of human capital can be based on an equation where the cost of labor, wages, and other benefits will be proportional to the economic benefit, such as turnover or gross profit. But this approach does not take into account the opportunities created by human capital for business development or measuring the benefits of developing practices and processes. The general problem is to measure the value of hidden values: how hidden factors in
creating the value of human capital, such as rare skills, unique knowledge, skills, social skills, implicit knowledge, could be better used for national development if they are recognized and identified.
Authors hypothesized an interdependence between the human capital index and the development of the country's institutional system. It is offered to describe this contact by means of the model presented on Figure 1.
where HCI - human capital index, RP - regulatory policy, LC - level of corruption, LB - level of bureaucracy, TEP - trade and economic policy, PLI - group of political and legal indicators, UR -unemployment rate, IL - investment level, MS - minimal salary, LCP - level of consumer prices, GEI -group of economic indicators, BR - birth rate, MR - mortality rate, HCC - health care costs, CC - culture costs, IEI - environmental efficiency index, PRR - pension replacement rate, LM - labor migration rate, GE - gender equality, GSI - group of social indicators, CIC - competitiveness index of countries, CE -competitiveness of employees, GOAI - group of organizational and administrative indicators, NNT -number of new technologies, CI - costs of innovation, CS - costs of science, CR - costs of research, CEST - costs of energy-saving technologies, PIP - protection of intellectual property, GSTI - group of scientific and technological indicators, AI - access to the Internet, CS - computer support, ACS - access to communication systems, PCS - provision of communication systems, ART - availability of radio and telecommunications , GICI - group of information and communication indicators, FB - freedom of business, FLM - freedom of the labor market, MF - monetary freedom, FT - freedom of trade, FI -freedom of investment, FF - financial freedom, FH - fiscal health, GS - government spending, TB - tax burden, GD - government decency, GJ - efficiency of the judiciary, PPR - protection of property rights, GII - a group of institutional indicators.
Fig. 1. Factors influencing the development of human capital *
* Author's development
The group of political and legal indicators includes: regulatory policy, level of corruption, level of bureaucracy, trade and economic policy. Group of economic indicators includes the unemployment rate, level of investment, minimum wage, level of consumer prices. The group of social indicators includes the birth rate, mortality rate, health care costs, culture costs, environmental efficiency index, pension replacement rate, labor migration rate, gender equality.
A selection of indicators describing the dependence of human capital development on the
development of country's institutional system, which included political, legal, economic, social, institutional, using the expert method of analysis.
When calculating the reliability of these indicators, the value of the Cronbach's alpha coefficient was 0.78, which confirms the consistency of the characteristics within the group and the possibility of combining them into a single group. The relationship between the indicators showed that the variance between them is at an acceptable level in the range of 0.25-0.55.
The Cronbach's alpha coefficient shows the internal consistency of the characteristics that
describe one object, but is not an indicator of the homogeneity of the object. The coefficient is often used in expert assessments when constructing tests and to verify their reliability.
The standardized Cronbach's alpha coefficient is calculated by the formula: ast = N x r, where N is the number of test components, r is the average correlation coefficient between the components.
Cronbach's alpha can take values: > 0.5 - low
consistency, > 0.6 - questionable consistency, > 0.7 - sufficient consistency, > 0.8 - good consistency, > 0.9 - very good consistency.
- Based on the hypothesis, an analytical model for assessing the development of human capital of the national economy was developed [12], which is used to calculate the level of human capital development of the national economy:
LHCD = g GPL, X ( g GEj/m) X (j GSk /p)/g GIt , (1)
ge LHCD - pÍBeHb po3BHTKy nrogcbKoro Kamra^y; GPL,— z'-THH noKa3HHK rpynn nomTHKO-npaBOBHx noKa3HHKÎB ; GE/ - j-THH noKa3HHK rpynn eKOHOMÍHHHx noKa3HHKÍB ; GSk - &-thh noKa3HHK rpynn co^anbHHx noKa3HHKÍB ;
GI - /-THH noKa3HHK rpynn mcrHTy^OHa^bHHx noKa3HHKÍB.
i=i
Model (1) proposed by the author takes into account the development of country's institutional system and allows to establish the interdependence between human capital development and the country's institutional system, which allows to develop forecasts of the dynamics of human capital development from political, legal, economic, social, institutional changes and determine public policy. Its steadily increasing.
For multifactor models or phenomena, it is advisable to use methods of multiple correlation-regression analysis, which allow to study and quantify the internal external consequences between the model-forming factors and to establish patterns of functioning and development trends of the studied performance trait. In a real economy, there are probabilistic (stochastic) relationships between performance indicators and factors. The main task of correlation and regression methods of analysis is to analyze statistical data to identify the mathematical relationship between the studied features and to establish with the help of correlation coefficients a comparative estimate of the density of the relationship, which has a certain numerical expression.
The indicators of human capital index of 157 countries [7] are taken as actual data, which was sorted into 3 groups according to the level of HCI, indicators of the development of the institutional system of the country [7], based on the components of economic freedom. From each
group build a matrix of 3 tables. The table shows the indicators of the human capital index for countries with a high level of GNI per capita.
High index of human capital development is observed in such developed countries as Japan (3rd place), Finland (5th place in the ranking), Australia (7th place in the ranking). Comparison with the data on the human development index according to the UNDP report gives the following result. Not in all cases does the human capital index correspond to the human development index, which is explained by the different methodology for determining indicators, which was also developed by completely different world institutions - the United Nations within the UNDP and the World Bank in the document "Human Capital Development Project". In some cases, the data differ significantly. Thus, if Norway ranks first in the human development index, the human capital index ranks only 18. Former Soviet Union countries Estonia and Lithuania rank 30th and 35th respectively in terms of HDI and 29th and 37th respectively in terms of HCI.
Indicators characterizing the development of the institutional system for building a matrix for countries with a high level of GNI per capita have been analyzed [7].
The indicators of the human capital index for countries with an average level of GNI per capita ahave been analyzed [7].
This group includes Ukraine, which took 50th place in this ranking of the World Bank. At the
same time, China in the ranking located near Ukraine - 46th place. Turkey ranks 53rd. The countries of the former Soviet space - Moldova, Kyrgyzstan, Armenia, Tajikistan - are holding 75, 76, 78, 89 places, accordingly.
Data on human development for countries with an average level of GNI per capita are shown. Comparison of these data with data on the human development index according to the UNDP report gives the following result. In some cases, the data differ significantly. According to the UNDP, Ukraine ranks 88th according to the UNDP, which is taken into account as an average indicator of the level of human development. In the group of countries with an average level of GNI per capita among the former countries of the Soviet Union outlined above, Armenia holds the highest city 83 (5 positions higher than Ukraine).
Indicators that characterize the development of the institutional system for building a matrix
for countries with an average level of GNI per capita are analyzed [11].
The indicators of the human capital index for countries with a low level of GNI per capita are analyzed [7].
This group includes the poorest countries in the modern world - Mozambique, Guinea, Madagascar, Chad, Ethiopia. In the ranking of the human development index, they rank from 152 to 189.
The data characterizing the development of the institutional system for the construction of a matrix for countries with a low level of GNI per capita have been analyzed [11].
Conclusion
As part of the study, methodological tools were developed to determine the level of development of human capital.
В. М. КОЛОМЮЦЬ1*, М. М. ФЕСЕНКО2, Ольга ЗОЛК1НА3
1* професор закладу вищо! освгга, д.е.н., доцент, Мелгтопольський тститут державного та мунщипального управлтня «Класичного приватного ушверситету», e-mail: vik2005vik@meta.ua, ORCID: 0000-0003-34278986
2 директор, д.е.н., професор, e-mail: ra_va@ukr.net, ORCID: 0000-0003-2288-3388
3 директор, мапстр з фтанав та обл^, ТОВ «Б1ЗНЕС 1НДУСТР1Я», e-mail: ola1993ola@meta.ua, ORCID: 0000-0003-2642-6520
МЕТОДИЧНИЙ 1НСТРУМЕНТАР1Й ВИЗНАЧЕННЯ Р1ВНЯ РОЗВИТКУ ЛЮДСЬКОГО КАП1ТАЛУ
Анотащя. Розроблено методичний тструментарш визначення рiвня розвитку людського капталу. Управлтський тдхщ до вимiрювання людського катталу спрямований отримати бшьше тструменпв управлтня. Автором висунуто гшотезу про наявшсть зв'язку мiж iндексом людського катталу та розвитком тституцюнально! системи крати. Проведено вiдбiр показнишв, що описують залежнiсть розвитку людського капiталу ввд розвитку iнституцiональноi системи крати, до яких увiйшли полггако-правовi, економiчнi, соцiальнi, iнституцiональнi, iз застосуванням експертного методу аналiзу. На пiдставi висунутоi гiпотези розроблено аналiтичну модель оцтки розвитку людського капiталу, за допомогою яко1' розраховуеться рiвень розвитку людського катталу. Запропонована автором модель враховуе показники розвитку iнституцiональноi' системи крати та дозволяе встановити взаемозв'язок мiж розвитком людського катталу та тституцюнально1' системи крати, що дае можливють розробляти прогнози динамiки рiвня розвитку людського катталу ввд полiтико-правових, економiчних, соцiальних, iнституцiональних змiн та визначати державну полiтику щодо його сталого пвдвищення. Для багатофакторних моделей чи явищ доцiльно використовувати методи множинного кореляцiйно-регресiйного аналiзу, якi дають змогу вивчити та шльюсно оцiнити внутршш i зовнiшнi наслiдковi зв'язки мiж утворюючими модель факторами та встановити закономiрностi функцiонування i тенденцii розвитку дослщжувано1' результативноi' ознаки. В умовах реальноi економiки мiж результативними показниками та чинниками дшть вiрогiдностнi зв'язки. Основне завдання кореляцiйного i регрестного методiв аналiзу полягае в аналiзi статистичних даних для виявлення математичноi залежностi мiж дослiджуваними ознаками i встановлення порiвняльноi оцiнки щiльностi взаемозв'язку.
Ключовi слова: iнституцii, iнституцiйний змют, людський капiтал, методичний iнструментарiй, iндекс людського капiталу
REFERENCES
1. Jahan, S. & al. (2018). Indeksy i indikatory chelovecheskogo razvitiya: Obnovlennyye statisticheskiye dannyye 2018 dr. [Human Development Indices and Indicators: Updated Statistical Data 2018] etc. Retrieved from http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/2018_human_development_statistical_update_ru.pdf. (in Ukrainian).
2. Rekun, I. (2018). Instytutsional'na transformatsiya ekonomichnoyi bezpeky.[ Institutional transformation of economic security]. M. Radieva (Ed.), A. Tkach, V. Kolomiiets & al., Transformatsiyni protsesy v ekonomitsi: instytutsional'nyy kontekst [Transformational processes in economics: institutional context] (pp. 218-278). Melitopol': TOV «Kolor Prynt». doi: https://doi.org/10.32901/978-966-2489-64-4/2018. (in Ukrainian).
3. Freeman, E. M. & Freeman, I. M. (2018). Chelovecheskiy kapital kak faktor konkurentosposobnosti predpriyatiya. [Human capital as a factor of enterprise competitiveness]. Skhidna Yevropa: ekonomika, biznes ta upravlinnya]. 2(13). 150-153. (in Ukrainian).
4. Ali, M., Egbetokun, A., & Memon, M. (2018). Human capital, social capabilities and economic growth. Economies, 6(2), 1-18. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/economies6010002.
5. Becker, G. S. (1964). Human Capital. N. Y.: Columbia University Press.
6. Fisher, I. (1930). The application of mathematics to the social sciences. Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., 36(4), 225-243. doi: 10.1090/s0002-9904-1930-04919-8.
7. Index of economic freedom. The Heritage Foundation. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.heritage.org/index/pdf/2018/book/index_2018.pdf.
8. Mincer, J. (1981). Human Capital and Economic Growth. NBER Working Paper. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w0803.pdf.
9. Schulz, T. W. (1961, march). Investment in Human Capital. American Economic Review, 51, 1-17.
10. Siddiqui, A., & Rehman, A. (2016). "The Human Capital and Economic Growth Nexus: in East and South Asia", Applied Economics, 49(28), 2697-2710. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2016.1245841.
11. The Human Capital Project. World Bank. (2018). Retrieved from https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/30498/33324RU.pdf?sequence=13&isAllowed=y.
12. Tkach, A., Kolomiiets, V. & Radieva, M. (2019, marz). Institutional platforms transformation of the economy. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, 2, 289-293. Riga: Publishing House "Baltija Publishing". doi: htp://dx.doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2019-2-2-289-293.
OraiTa HagiMmna go pega^ii': 28.05.2022 Received: 2022.05.28
