CC BY
21
сшщИСВИВНА
ИВИДВНВННЯтНИВИННН
ВВВВИЯВИИЫИИХ двННВНИшВВВВИЯШ
УДК 330.3(339.9) http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3829425
МАНЦУРОВ 1.Г..
МАХОН1Н В.1.
Статистичне оцiнювання шклюзивного зростання Украши в глобальному конкурентному свiтi
Розвиток економiчноl думки, що за останн десятил'1ття супроводжувався низкою глобаль-них криз, не лише порушив питання ефективност традиц'1йних макроеконом'чних показни^в на кшталт ВВП, але й призв'1в до створення нового композитного ндикатору збалансованого розвит-ку на^онально! економки — 1ндексу нклюзивного зростання (Ю1).
У статт'1 здйнено '¡нтегральне о^нювання моделi економiчного розвитку Укра!ни i проведено анал'з 1! вщповщност стандартам нклюзивного економiчного зростання. Отриман'1 дан дозволя-ють зробити висновки про те, що ^юча модель економiчного розвитку Укра!ни не враховуе фактору глобальних виклик'1в сьогодення. Зi свого боку, результатом цього стали виявлен'1 показники розвитку на^онально! економки, яким властива патолопчн'ють та токсичнсть.
У статт'1 надано концептуальн рекомендацI щодо п'щвищення ефективност економiчноl полтики держави.
КлючовI слова: нклюзивне економiчне зростання, о^нювання показни^в нацональноI еконо-м'1ки, п'1двищення ефективност економiчноl полтики держави, патолог'чн'сть та токсичнсть нац-ональноI економки.
МАНЦУРОВ И.Г, МАХОНИН В.И.
Статистическое оценивание инклюзивного развития Украины в глобальном конкурентном мире
Развитие экономической мысли, которая в последние десятилетия сопровождалась чредой глобальных кризисов, не только поставило под сомнение эффективность использования традиционных макроэкономических показателей — например, ВВП, — но также обусловило создание нового композитного индикатора сбалансированного развития национальной экономики — Индекса инклюзивного развития (Ю1).
В статье проведено интегральное оценивание модели экономического развития Украины и осуществлен анализ её соответствия стандартам инклюзивного экономического развития. Полученные данные позволяют сделать выводы относительного того, что действующая модель эконо-
© МАНЦУРОВ 1.Г., МАХОН1Н В.1, 2020
Формування ринкових вщносин в УкраУж №3 (226)/2020
9
мического развития Украины не учитывает фактора глобальных вызовов современности. В свою очередь, результатом этого стали выявленные показатели развития национальной экономики с характеристиками патологичности и токсичности.
В статье предложены концептуальные рекомендации относительно повышения эффективности экономической политики государства.
Ключевые слова: инклюзивное экономическое развитие, оценивание показателей национальной экономики, повышение эффективности экономической политики государства, патоло-гичность и токсичность национальной экономики.
MANTSUROV I.G., MAKHONIN V.I.
Statistical evaluation of inclusive growth and development of Ukraine in the global competitive world
The development of economic thought, accompanied by a series of crises in recent decades that posed burning global challenges, not only called into question the usefulness of such traditional macroeconomic indicators as GDP, but also led to the development of a new composite indicator of the balanced national economy development - the Inclusive Growth and Development Index (IDI).
The article focuses on the integral assessment of the Ukrainian economic development model as well as its compliance with the standards of inclusive economic growth. The analysis showed that the current model of economic behavior in Ukraine doesn't take into account the contemporary challenges, which results the combination of the national economy indicators that has characteristics of pathology and toxicity.
Conceptual recommendations for improving the state economic policy are provided.
Key words: inclusive growth and development, estimation of the national economy characteristics, improvement of the state economic policy, pathology and toxicity of the national economy.
The world economy is a quite complex system that evolves through close interaction between traditional institutions: international organizations, multinational corporation, states, etc, with the newest structures intellectual valleys, world cities, technology parks, «virtual enterprises» and business relations between them.
The development of global economy on the current stage is characterized by increasing interaction of all participants and components of the world economic system, aggravating the tensions and new global challenges and much better understanding of theoretical concepts. A new «environment» for the countries' economic growth is defined by globalization of the world economy creates, which defines a new approach to the formation of economic policy benchmarks of these countries.
A new methodology of estimation the results of economic and social development of countries should be developed due to modern approaches. These methodologies can be formed on principles of estimating the inclusive growth parameters, the concept of which was developed by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
(OECD) and contained in a program document adopted at the ministerial level during the OECD Council meeting in 2012.
The document is called New Approaches to Economic Challenges, - NAEC and forms an important systematic process for the development and consistent improvement of tools and analytical work that should be used by governments of certain countries and international organizations to resolve the issues identified above.
Bearing in mind the foregoing, the triune purpose of the article defined by the authors implies a) estimation of the compliance of the Ukraine economy state with inclusive growth standards; b) the conceptual defining of inclusive growth in the format of its understanding by influential international organizations; c) the defining of public policy measures, the implementation of which will contribute to inclusive growth.
The search for a model for the development of socio-economic systems that will meet the principles of sustainable development and inclusive growth has been manifested in the increasing number of publications by such foreign scientists as D. Ace-moglu, D. Robinson, E. Rinette, S. Hollander, R. Bol-
ing, S. Podesta, C. Bedos, E. Duflou, M. Todaro and other scientists.
Among Ukrainian scientists, mention should be made of the scientific works of A. Amosha, V . Ani-simova, A. Bazilyk, V. Vishnevsky, V. Granatourova, V. Geets, G. Glukha, T. Zatonacka, E. Yermolayeva, A. Konovalova, E. Libanova, O. Luginina, I. Mantsur-ov, D. Ogol, A. Sidorova, I. Taranenko and other.
Synthesizing the results of studies of foreign and Ukrainian scientists, it can be defined that in the relevant publications, inclusive and extensional development models are considered, and their features are described in different countries, however insufficient attention is paid to scrupulous analysis of each of the mentioned models.
It also should be noted that nowadays the state policy of the OECD member countries and partners are facing an incredibly high number of challenges and risks of a socio-economic nature, namely: the slow post-crisis rehabilitation of national economies, the migration crisis that has pervaded most of the European countries, a steady unemployment rate, growing social differentiation, instability of the international and public finance sector etc.
Having analysed the components of the above-mentioned triune purpose of this article, the authors underline that at the moment there is an objective need to determine the nature of inclusive growth; find new sources in order to improve the well-being of society; develop the categorical and conceptual framework, the concept of sustainable inclusive economic growth is based on, which was emphasized, in particular, at the last World Economic Forum in 2018.
The 1970s in the United States were a moment the term inclusion was used for the first time, when researchers began to emphasize social inclusion, which was understood to mean an increasing the degree of citizens participation in the improvement of social processes.
In the interpretation of the OECD, the term «inclusive growth» implies understanding that the welfare of society is not only the growth of real GDP and material incomes of the population, it's also a multi-vector concept that includes such spheres of a person's life as personal safety, health-care, education, ecology and many others. It should be taken into account that one parameter of «sus-tainability» for economic growth isn't enough, since this parameter should be inclusive, that is, one that positively affects the well-being of the widest possible segments of the population and doesn't adversely affect the environment.
Thus, developing the concept of «sustainable development», the authors emphasize that «inclusive growth», in addition to ensuring high and stable economic growth and preservation of the environment, it must provide people with equal opportunities for realizing their human capacity - regardless of age, gender, place of residence (country, city or countryside) etc.
Therefore, the logic of scientists who formulated and improved the concepts of «economic growth», «sustainable development» and, finally, «inclusive growth», can be outlined as a development of economic theory, in the bowels of which the above-mentioned concepts are crystallized, - and among which each subsequent doesn't deny, but harmoniously develops the previous one.
Characteristic of the economic growth model Characteristic of the sustainable development model Characteristic of the inclusive growth model
I
Economic development based on a predominantly intensive margin, innovation and up-to date knowledge
High economic growth and social standards, resource efficient and clean production, more competitive economy
High and stable rates of economic and social development, advanced level of
members of society and territories, notwithstanding the factors shaping their identity, that ensures the reducing of social fragmentation level
Figure 1. Logic of transformation of economic dynamics models» into an anthropocentric «inclusive growth model»
Note that changes in the essence of these three phenomena in economic development fully meet the challenges and requirements of their time, which formed the fundamental objectives of social production in any given period. In particular, the core characteristics of the «sustainable development model» dialectically deny the characteristics of the previous «economic growth model» by a more modern type of reproduction implies achieving not only high rates of economic growth, but also more efficient use of productive with a view to improving the living standards and the preservation of the environment, which was seriously damaged during the prevalence of pragmatic objectives aimed at increasing economic growth rates.
The further development of public relations objectively shaped the need for an improved anthro-pocentric «inclusive growth model». It implies the ability of the economic system not only to maintain a balance between the economic, social and environmental components of development, but also to maximize the interests all social groups and members of society. It allows to reduce the severity, and ideally - to avoid destructive contradictions and possibly conflict in the interest of not only the current, but also future generations.
Exploring of the current state of Ukraine in terms of compliance with inclusive growth standards
As mentioned above, the Inclusive Growth and Development Index (IDI) was proposed at the World Economic Forum in Davos in 2017 - as an alternative indicator to GDP per capita. This composite or aggregate indicator is proposed to be used for a general estimation of the country's economic development state. At the same time, the indicator «GDP per capita» is considered as one of the components in the calculation of the index.
According to the recommendations of the World Economic Forum, this index should be calculated as an average that averages the values of the Key Performance Indicators (KPI). The new composite indicator more comprehensively and systematically displays the state of the economy, the environment and the level of social standards, which as a result makes it possible to present the distribution of countries by characteristics of the anthropo-centric economic development, social standards, the environment and equality among all members of society and territories - regardless of factors which form identity. In the authors' view, the ranking of countries by values of their inclusive growth
Figure 2. Inclusive growth scorecard
index more rationally characterizes the defining features of the modern development of countries.
In accordance with the WEF methodology, the index averages the values of 12 individual indicators of the country's development, which are distinguished into three groups. Each of these groups combines the characteristics of the state of the economy, the environment, and the country's social behavior model.
In order to calculate the values of the three group indicators (let's call them partial indicators of inclu-siveness), that is, to average the values of the Key Performance Indicators, the WEF proposes to use the principal component analysis (PCA), according to which partial indicators - components Gj - are determined based on their ties with individual (primary) indicators:
z=Y a-G > ¿—t y j
i
where z - standardized values of /-indicator; a
ii ii
- factor load of j- component on /-indicator, which calculates correlation bewtween them.
The Inclusive Growth and Development Index is calculated by the method of summarizing these values as an average arithmetic value on the base of values of the three partial indices Gj.
This analysed methodological approach, first used in 2018 by the World Economic Forum, and subsequently adapted to the Ukraine Statistics Service, allows to solve the next - second - part of the declared article purpose, namely, to estimate the state of Ukraine's compliance with inclusive growth standards and determine Ukraine's position in the international ranking distribution of countries both by the level of the composite index of inclusive growth and by its components.
This year, the World Economic Forum analysed the inclusiveness of the development of 103 countries, among which 28 countries belong to the group of developed countries, and thus, 75 belong to the group of developing countries, among which Ukraine belongs.
According to the results of this study, among the developed countries in terms of the inclusiveness of economic growth, the list of top five includes Norway, Iceland, Luxembourg, Switzerland and Denmark.
The group of developing countries was headed by Lithuania, Hungary, Azerbaijan, Latvia and Poland.
It is well known that according to the World Bank classification, Ukraine is in the group of developing
countries, in which Ukraine ranks 49th in terms of the inclusiveness of the economy, and consequently, 78th out of 103 countries development characteristics of which were examined this year by a team of the World Economic Forum experts. Turkey ranked 16th in the same group, Russian Federation - 19th, Moldova - 31th. Honduras, Pakistan, Tanzania are ranked before Ukraine. Ukraine is followed by Jordan, Kyrgyzstan, Ghana and Cameroon. In terms of the total score, Ukraine is the worst among all European countries.
In this regard, the central thesis of the World Economic Forum expert team is that the need to transition from a «sustainable development» model to a modern and improved «inclusive growth model» is only beginning to be recognized by the governments of most countries, which should provide the situation when the problem of rising economic and social inequality between the different populations and some territorial units will be solved, that is, a higher level of social justice will be achieved.
Special attention should be devoted to analyzing the dynamics of the values of the IDI of individual countries and to the structural change that occurred in the distribution of countries by the level of inclusiveness of their economies.
It should also be noted that 52 of the 103 countries that calculate the IDI recorded a decrease in the level of inclusive development over the past 5 years. This reflects the justified concern of the world expert and scientific community, which was expressed at the World Economic Forum, and revealed the absence of effective policies, approaches and management measures of the governments of most countries, the implementation of which should contribute to the transformation the «economic growth model» or «sustainable development model» into more innovative anthropocen-tric «inclusive growth model».
In 42% of countries, the IDI has decreased quite significantly - even though the growth in GDP per capita. Based on the results of their own calculation, the authors explain this by the fact that in 75% of countries with recorded decrease of the IDI, the level of wealth inequality measured using the Gini coefficient significantly increased. The full results of the calculations are presented in Table 1.
As can be seen from the preceding paragraphs Ukraine in 2018 takes 49 place in the ranking of developing countries. In terms of inclusivity, having
Table 1. The IDI dynamism and the ranking of the leading countries in the relevant international distribution, period 2013-2017
Group of developed countries Group of developing countries
Rating of the top 5 countries in the international distribution by inclusive growth in 2018 and IDI value Ranking of the top 5 countries by rate of increase of growth inclusiveness in 20132017, (%) Rating of the top 5 countries in the international distribution by inclusive growth in 2018 and IDI value Ranking of the top 5 countries by rate of increase of growth inclusiveness in 20132017, (%)
Norway (6,08) 1. Iceland (12,58%) 1. Lithuania (4,86) 1.Republic of Macedonia (9,24%)
Iceland (6,07) 2. Ireland (9,28%) 2. Hungary (4,74) 2. Latvia (8,60%)
Luxembourg (6,07) 3. Denmark (4,76%) 3. Azerbaijan (4,69) 3. Hungary (8,10%)
Switzerland (6,05) 4. Israel (3,57%) 4. Latvia (4,67) 4. Panama (4,80%)
Denmark (5,81) 5.Czech Republic (2,88%) 5. Poland (4,61) 5. Romania (4,21%)
Source: developed by the authors and calculated according to the World Economic Forum data
an IDI, which is equivalent to 5.2, which is 6.8% less than in 2013, when the country occupied in the same ranking 41 positions with an index of 3.67.
Therefore, the percentage of Ukrainians, whose standard of living corresponds to their personal contribution to the process of economic growth, has decreased significantly. In addition, Ukraine tops the list of countries in which a decrease in the level of inclusivity in 2013-2017 was recorded.
It should also be understood that annual - five years in a row - and strong decrease in the IDI value recorded in Ukraine has made the country one and only from the list of 103 countries in the world on this indicator.
Analyzing the Table 3, the reasons for the very negative phenomena in the Ukraine economy can be understood and explained, which in turn disintegrate the values of the aggregate index of inclusive growth into its components.
Based on the analysis of the values of individual (primary) indicators, which are divided into indicator stimulant and destimulant (Table 3), the follow-
Table 2. The IDI dynamism and the ranking of the distribution, period 2013-2017
ing conclusions must be concluded: the extremely low level of the index in Ukraine is shaped by a number of reasons.
As we known, the stimulants are individual indicators, the increase of which positively affects the level of a composite indicator. The indicators, the value of which affects the generalized level of a composite indicator with a negative sign, are called as destimulants.
Sometimes, in order to bring indicators stimulant and indicators destimulant into a single framework, the latter are calculated as inverse, or its values are taken with a negative sign.
There are six indicator stimulants, while the rest are destimulants in the system of 12 individual indicators, by which the growth inclusiveness is measured.
The first group should include GDP per capita, employment, labor productivity, the median population income, average healthy life expectancy, and net savings.
leading countries in the relevant international
Group of developed countries Group of developing countries
Rating of the top 5 countries that demonstrate the most significant pace of decline of IDI and its value in 2017 IDI decline rate in 2013-2018, (%) Rating of the top 5 countries that demonstrate the most significant pace of decline of IDI and its value in 2017 IDI decline rate in 2013-2018, (%)
1 2 3 4
11. Finland (5,33) - 2,92 49. Ukraine (3,42) - 6,80
19. Slovenia (4,93) - 2,39 60. Mali (3,10) - 5,71
26. Spain (4,40) - 2,12 66. Mauritania (3,00) -5,12
28. Portugal (3,97) - 1,42 41. Bolivia (3,76) -3,80
10. Austria (5,35) - 0,17 53. Cameroon (3,32) -2,78
Source: developed by the authors and calculated according to the World Economic Forum data
Table 3. Disintegration of IDI values into partial and individual
Group of countries Individual characteristics of economic growth and its productivity Individual characteristics of social standards and growth inclusiveness Individual characteristics of development sustainability, which should ensure the living standards for future generations
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Developed countries Norway 89818 125236 72,0 61,7 24,9 8,1 80,5 63,8 20,6 16,3 33,2 52,5
celand 48614 78278 72,7 71,1 24,4 6,5 46,7 43,4 14,7 21,2 53,2 52,1
_uxembourg 111001 206734 71,8 55,4 28,4 8,1 68,1 61,8 20,9 32,5 22,6 44,0
Switzerland 75726 98724 73,1 65,4 29,3 7,8 69,4 55,6 17,9 11,8 45,4 49,4
Denmark 60268 89010 71,2 58,3 25,3 5,5 80,9 44,7 18,5 18,2 39,9 56,3
Benchmark evels 1 77085,6 119596,8 72,76 63,18 27,46 8,4 70,52 55,46 20,32 22 41,06 53,26
Developing countries _ithuania 15873 60159 66,1 53,9 34,2 2,7 51,6 18,2 18,8 63,7 40,0 50,5
Hungary 14840 57197 67,4 51,2 28,7 1,0 45,3 18,2 11,3 48,3 74,2 47,9
Azerbaijan 5859 33242 64,7 61,9 28,6 2,7 51,0 8,5 15,9 145,4 37,7 40,9
_atvia 14751 51112 67,1 54,5 36,3 0,9 53,6 25,2 1,9 49,6 34,3 53,3
Doland 15049 55716 68,7 53,2 32,1 0,3 71,7 20,5 11,0 82,9 54,2 44,9
Benchmark evels 2 13274,4 51485,2 66,8 54,94 31,98 1,52 54,64 18,12 11,78 77,98 48,08 47,5
Kazakhstan 10570 45640 63,3 67,7 28,8 0,4 92,6 9,8 10,0 285,1 21,1 52,1
Turkey 14071 57438 66,2 45,1 39,8 2,4 81,8 13,1 8,4 57,5 29,1 49,8
Russian Federation 11099 45832 63,4 59,7 43,9 0,3 82,6 17,1 9,3 213,5 17,0 45,1
Treshold levels 8390 49636,7 64,3 57,5 37,5 1,03 85,6 13,3 9,2 185,36 22,4 49
Boundary levels 3356 19854,7 64,2 56,9 37,1 32,5 84,8 13,2 9,1 74,1 22,1 45,2
Ukraine 2906 15845 64,1 53,9 26,3 0,5 90,1 10,2 1,0 347,0 81,2 45,8
Absolute deviation from benchmark 2 -10368,4 -35640,2 -2,7 -1,04 -5,68 -1,02 35,46 -7,92 -10,78 269,02 33,12 -1,7
Absolute deviation from threshold levels -5484 -33791,6 -0,2 -3,6 -11,2 -0,5 4,4 -3,1 -8,2 161,6 58,8 -3,2
Absolute deviation from boundary levels -450 -4009,6 -0,1 -3,03 -10,8 -32 5,2 -3,0 -8,1 272,8 59,0 0,6
Relative deviation from boundary, % -15,4 -25,3 -0,1 -5,6 -41,1 -6400 5,8 -29,4 -814,1 78,6 72,6 1,3
1 - GDP per capita (in US dollar equivalent); 2 - labor productivity (per worker GDP, in US dollar equivalent); 3 - employment (percentage); 4 - average healthy life expectancy (years); 5 - the Gini coefficient by the income inequality; 6 - poverty rate (percentage); 7 - the Gini coefficient by the wealth inequality; 8 - the median population income (in US dollar equivalent); 9 - adjusted net savings (per cent of GNP); 10 - the industrial emissions intensity (kg CO2 emissions per dollar of GDP); 11 - public dept (per cent of GDP); 12 - the dependency ratio (percentage). Source: developed by the authors and calculated according to the World Economic Forum data
The second group should include the Gini coefficient by the income inequality, the Gini coefficient by the wealth inequality, poverty rate, the dependency ratio, the industrial emissions intensity, and public debt.
It's important to note that among macroeconomic indicator stimulants, three - GDP per capita, labor
productivity, volume of adjusted net savings - have values that are well below not only the levels that are characteristic of the leading states in the developing countries group, but also average values relevant indicators of this group of countries. Moreover, analyzing the temporal change in these indicators,
it should also be underlined that over the last five years, a continuing annual decrease in the values of all indicators stimulants can be traced.
For example, in 2017 the GDP per capita in Ukraine was only $ 2,905, while in 2013 the same indicator was much higher, namely, $ 41,845. For understanding how low the value of this important macroeconomic indicator is, it's enough to compare it with indicators of other countries. And if it makes no sense to compare the indicator of Ukraine with that of, for example, Luxembourg (11,1001), Norway (89818) or Switzerland ($ 75,726 GDP per capita), then the comparison with other post-Soviet states is entirely correct.
And the results of this comparison are stacked against Ukraine. So, in 2017, the GDP per capita in Kazakhstan was $ 10,570, in the Russian Federation - $ 1,1099, in Belarus - $ 7,525. Therefore, currently Ukraine is in last place among European countries by GDP per capita.
The same point could be said about the value of the social labor productivity indicator, which during 2013-2017 has steadily decreased with an average annual decrease rate of 7.8%.
The country is also at a relatively low 51 positions by the rate of employment, which is equal to 53%. The unemployment rate in Ukraine, - that is, the inverse of the employment rate quantitative indicator, - which is defined as the ratio of the number of unemployed to the total number of economically active population, over the last five years has decreased by 0.3%. By September 2013, in Ukraine, the unemployed made up 1.5% of the total number of working-age population, and now they make up only 1.2%. The highest unemployment rate in the last 4 years was in 2014: at the time 1.6% of Ukrainian working age citizens officially remained unemployed.
Starting in 2015, the rate of unemployed begun to demonstrate a trend to decrease.
By December 201 7, in terms of the contents of the labor market with vacancies, Ukraine regressed to approximately the 2014 figures.
There is also a need to emphasize that for various reasons over the last five years, the territory of Ukraine has left, with estimates ranging, from three and a half to five million people - many of whom are the economically active working-age population. Provided the remaining constant of all the circumstances, if above-mentioned hadn't happened, employment rate, according to the authors' calcu-
lations, would have significantly decreased, reaching a very low level of 46%. This would automatically lead to a change in the position of Ukraine from 51 to 88 in the distribution of countries by the rate of employment.
This would help to reduce the IDI from 3.42 to 3, 33, which, in turn, would also lead to a dip in Ukraine's ranking position in the international distribution of developing countries from 49 to 53, and, consequently, to 82 position from 103 countries that WEF experts have included in the rating by IDI values.
Specifizing the analysis, the authors concluded that the ultra-low adjusted net savings volume, which in Ukraine is only 1%, while for the group of developed countries the average value indicator is 1 9%, and in the group of developing countries -11%, is the main reason for the relatively low values of macroeconomic indicator stimulants and the negative dynamism of these values.
The above-mentioned conclusion is proved by the result of a correlation and regressive analysis of GDP per capita, employment and labor productivity, on the one hand, and net savings level, on the other.
In the first case, the coefficient of determination is equal to 0.87, in the second case - to 0.83, in the third - to 0.78. This indicates that 87% of the variation in GDP per capita and, thus, 83% of the variation in labor productivity and 78% of the variation in the level of employment depends on the variation in the values of the net savings volume.
Net savings are a component of national savings, which, in turn, are part of national disposable income that isn't used for final consumption and can be used for accumulation. Net national savings are calculated by calculating consumption of fixed capital from gross national savings, being one of the important sources of investment financing.
The situation with the dynamism of values of indicator destimulators is no better: for example, Ukraine takes one of the last positions in the group of developing countries in terms of social fragmentation by wealth inequality. The corresponding value of the Gini coefficient is 90.1%, which puts Ukraine at 73 position from 79 in the group of developing countries, which in turn indicates that wealth strongly concentrated in a few families, doesn't work to develop production and doesn't generate sufficient incomes for the general public, which are the reasons of contributing the income inequality growth and, as a result, reducing the inclusiveness.
The economy of Ukraine also demonstrates one of the worst indicators in terms of the sustainabil-ity level of development, ranking 75 in total from 79 in the group of developing countries.
In terms of public debt - both in absolute and in percent of GDP - Ukraine is in the middle of a variation row of a corresponding countries distribution. Nevertheless, it was worth noting that Ukraine ranks first among 103 countries of the world by the public debt volume growth rate in percentage to GDP. Over the last five years, the value of this macroeconomic indicator has increased by 43%.
It's fair to say that Ukraine's government and publicly guaranteed debt in 2017 decreased in terms of GDP to 71.8% while in 2016 it was 80.9%, but the results of detailed analysis show that such a reduction in the relative worth of government debt was achieved only by a slight increase in GDP in 201 7 by 2.3%. Meanwhile, the absolute value of Ukraine's government and publicly guaranteed debt in 2017 increased by 7.5% - to 76.3 billion in US dollar equivalent, and by 11% - to 2.1 trillion -in hryvnia equivalent.
In so doing the authors emphasize that there is an inverse, but rather tight link between the GDP and the country's public debt, and the coefficient of determination between these characteristics in the group of developed countries is equal to 0.58, while the values of this coefficient are much higher - 0.82 - in the group of developing countries. The reason is a situation due to which significant public debt aren't seen as a problem in developed economies. Instead, large public debt the impact of which
can lead to serious economic and social problems is a destabilizing factor for developing economies.
Another theoretical and practical interest is paid to the analysis of the effect of population pressure on the volume of adjusted net savings - in order to testing Nathaniel Leff's hypothesis regarding the existence of a tight and fairly significant inverse correlation between the proportion of dependants (pensioners and minors) in the total employed population and the volume of net savings and, as a result, IDI.
The results of the correlation analysis make it possible to note that the values of the coefficients of determination and verification criteria for testing the relationship to materiality (importance) allows to confirm the hypotheses formulated by Nathaniel Leff.
The following Figure 3 presents graphically a dynamics of the values of the three partial indices and the aggregated IDI of the Ukraine economy throughout 2013-2017. In particular, the histograms presented on the graph characterize the chain-growth rates of IDI and its three components.
The form of all four histograms indicates that the characteristics of both economic growth and social standards and sustainable development, having decreased significantly in 2014, haven't yet restored the earlier indices. The specific form of the fourth histogram which combines the points characteristic of the IDI synthesis levels for 20132017 was shaped by the set of averaged characteristics for the three indicators.
Analysis of the characteristics of these histograms in comparison with the threshold values of 12 indi-
100
90
80
70
-Inclusive Growth and Development Index (IDI)
Growth and Development Index (G&D)
■Social and Inclusion Index (S&l)
•Environmental and Social Index (E&S)
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Figure 3. Dynamics of the IDI components of Ukraine in 2013—2017
cators of the economy state, the environment and the country's social behavior pattern (Tables 3 and 4) provides the opportunity to achieve the second component of the purpose of this article, namely, to estimate the compliance level of the Ukraine economy state with inclusive growth standards.
Guided by that objective, the authors substantiated a brand new methodological approach to estimation the ratio, relatively speaking, of the «reference» inclusive growth characteristics with the actual values of the relevant indicators, which determine the state of the economy of Ukraine, the social sphere, inclusive growth and the environment. This approach provides the opportunity in the event of a material breach the analyzed ratio to assess the threat of the emergence of an economic crisis, and in case of its occurrence - the intensity, depth and duration of the crisis.
In the rows of Tables 3 and 4 are preseted the «reference» for each group of countries values of the 12 inclusive growth indicators, and in the group of developed countries, the reference value is calculated as the average of the distribution of the top five leading countries that have achieved the most significant progress - such as Norway, Iceland, Luxembourg, Switzerland and Denmark. Similarly, works the calculation of reference values for a group of developing countries.
It's necessary to calculate the threshold and boundary values of the corresponding individual, partial and composite indicators of inclusive development in order to determining the boundary that divides the relatively normal economic performance state and one that should be classified as pre-crisis and crisis.
The threshold values of the relevant indicators suggest the existence of adverse events in the development of economic systems in general and in a certain sector in particular - which is characterized by the indicator.
The deepening nature of adverse events (symptoms) leads to the emergence of the boundary value of one or other indicator, which demonstrates the formation of the pre-crisis, and later, as the economic situation deteriorates, the crisis state of the economy.
Further strengthening of manifestations of crisis phenomena, that is, in cases where it may be noted that the depth of the crisis is intensifying, inevitably leads to the formation of a supercritical or path-
ological state of the economy, which at the same time sometimes has the features of toxicity.
The actual values of individual, partial and composite indicators of inclusivity are successively compared with reference, threshold, and then if necessary with boundary levels of relevant indicators - to determine the existence and depth of crisis phenomena in the economy and the social sphere. The logic and consistency of testing the hypothesis for the existence of pathological phenomena is presented below.
Step 1. The actual values of individual indicators of inclusivity are compared with reference ones in its own group of countries.
Step 2. If there are most (seven or more) negative (or positive for indicator destimulants) deviations of individual actual values of indicators from the reference ones, the hypothesis regarding the existence of adverse events is accepted as valid and the actual values are compared with the threshold ones.
Step 3. If there are most (seven or more) negative (or positive for indicator destimulants) deviations of the individual actual indicators values of the indicators from the threshold, the hypothesis about the existence of pre-crisis phenomena is accepted as as valid and the actual values are compared with the boundary ones.
Step 4. If there are most (seven or more) negative (or positive for indicator destimulants) deviations of individual actual values of indicators from the boundary, the hypothesis regarding the existence of crisis phenomena is accepted as valid.
Step 5. If there are negative (or positive for indicator destimulants) deviations of at least nine individual actual indicators or two of three partial from the boundary, the hypothesis regarding the existence of supercritical or pathological phenomena is accepted as valid.
The following conclusions are based on the results of data analysis of deviations the individual indicators values of the Ukraine inclusiveness in 20132017, with applying the above-described logic and consistency of testing hypotheses for the existence of pre-crisis, crisis and pathological phenomena.
1. The hypothesis on the presence of adverse and pre-crisis phenomena in the Ukraine economy in 2013 should be accepted as valid. The overall state of the economy should be estimated as unfavorable.
2. The hypothesis on the presence of adverse, pre-crisis, crisis and supercrisis phenomena in
the Ukraine economy in 2014 should be accepted as valid. The overall state of the economy should be estimated as crisis.
3. The hypothesis on the presence of supercri-sis phenomena in the Ukraine economy in 2015 should be accepted as valid. The overall state of the economy should be estimated as supercritical or pathological.
4. The hypothesis on the presence of crisis or supercrisis phenomena in the Ukraine economy in 201 6 should be accepted as valid. The overall state of the economy should be estimated as supercritical or pathological.
5. The hypothesis on the presence of crisis or supercrisis phenomena in the Ukraine economy in 2017 should be accepted as valid. The overall state of the economy should be estimated as crisis.
Based on the analysis, it's possible to define the qualitative characteristics of the Ukraine economy and the level of its compliance with the inclusive development standards (Table 5).
Summarising the previous discussion and based on results of the data in Tables 4 and 5, the following conclusion must be drawn: the state of the Ukraine economy over the past five years can be
Table 4. Estimation of the compliance of the Ukraine economy state with inclusive growth and development standards
Characteristics of growth inclusiveness of Ukraine Individual indicators of economic growth and its productivity Individual indicators of social standards and growth inclusiveness Individual indicators of development sustainability, which should ensure the living standards for future generations
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Benchmark levels 1 77085,6 119596,8 72,76 63,18 27,46 8,4 70,52 55,46 20,32 22 41,06 53,26
Benchmark levels 2 13274,4 51485,2 66,8 54,94 31,98 1,52 54,64 18,12 11,78 77,98 48,08 47,5
Treshold levels 8390 49636,7 64,3 57,5 37,5 1,03 85,6 13,3 9,2 185,36 22,4 49
Boundary levels 3356 19854,7 64,2 56,9 37,1 32,5 84,8 13,2 9,1 74,1 22,1 45,2
Ukraine 2906 15845 64,1 53,9 26,3 0,5 90,1 10,2 1,0 347,0 81,2 45,8
Absolute deviation from benchmark 2 -10368,4 -35640,2 -2,7 -1,04 -5,68 -1,02 35,46 -7,92 -10,78 269,02 33,12 -1,7
Absolute deviation from threshold levels -5484 -33791,6 -0,2 -3,6 -11,2 -0,5 4,4 -3,1 -8,2 161,6 58,8 -3,2
Absolute deviation from boundary levels -450 -4009,6 -0,1 -3,03 -10,8 -32 5,2 -3,0 -8,1 272,8 59,0 0,6
Relative deviation from boundary, % -15,4 -25,3 -0,1 -5,6 -41,1 -6400 5,8 -29,4 -814,1 78,6 72,6 1,3
Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Partial indicators of inclusiveness The economy state as a result of the influence of the relevant characteristics of the partial indicators of inclusiveness
Economic growth and its productivity Unfavorable Supercritical Supercritical Supercritical Crisis
Social standards and growth inclusiveness Unfavorable Unfavorable Supercritical Supercritical Supercritical
Sustainability of development living standards for future generations Unfavorable Crisis Supercritical Crisis Crisis
Integral indicator of inclusiveness Unfavorable Crisis Supercritical (pathological) Supercritical (pathological) Crisis
Source: developed by the authors and calculated according to State Statistics Service of Ukraine and National Bank of Ukraine data
Source: developed by the authors and calculated according to the World Economic Forum data
Table 5. Qualitative indicators of estimation the state of the Ukraine economy in terms of its compliance with inclusive growth and development standards
classified as unsatisfactory and isn't compatible with international inclusive growth standards.
The quantitative and qualitative indicators that characterize the state of the economy of Ukraine deteriorated significantly, while the economies of most European countries developed fairly steadily, which ensured a significant increase in social standards, sustainability of development and the conditions of a decent standard of living of the next generations. If in 2013 this state could be classified as pre-cri-sis, and in 2014 as a crisis, further deterioration of partial indicators of inclusion in 2015-2016 led to the formation of a supercritical, with features of the pathological state of the Ukraine economy.
In the authors' view, pathological state of any economic system should be defined as its dysfunction, that is, a steady and relatively long deviation of the quantitative and qualitative characteristics of the state and development of the system from normal conditions and functioning, which existence should contribute to the process of intensive progression of this system.
The inability to achieve its goals is the phenome-nological feature of the pathological economy state. This definition is quite acceptable provided that the goals are achievable and don't contradict the mission of the existence of the system itself.
The existence of a well-defined strategy for overcoming pathological (crisis) phenomena and its implementation instrument are the main condition for eliminating the pathology of development of economic systems. The core of this strategy is the formation of the mission of the system as a viable mechanism that combines a set of equally viable subsystems, each of which has its own tools to improve livelihoods, and whose functioning is subordinate to higher-level goals and is harmoniously connected with the functioning of other subsystems.
The definition of the «toxicity» concept in the economy should be commented separately.
Toxic economics, in the authors' view, is an economic system that isn't capable of ensuring the effective use and reproduction of the resources of living and materialized labor, which can lead to the degradation of the environment, the productive force, the means of production, leading to formation of an inadequate model of communication with the outside world.
The economy can be toxic both in terms of internal and domestic environment: in the first case, the
negative impact is directed at members of society, the social and labor relations between them and the national environment, both natural and business.
When reproducing the institutional and legal foundations of the economy toxic to the outside world - that is in the second case - the negative impact is directed at citizens, economic systems and the environment of neighboring countries with a whole world.
Unfortunately, it must be acknowleged that Ukrainian economy has some features of both pathological and toxic to the internal and external environment, which are demonstrated in the extremely low development state of productive forces and production relations, the level of social standards and the population's standard of living, the rapidly deteriorating environment, the existence of which leads to pollution of not only its own territory, but also the territories of neighboring countries, etc.
Conclusion
The concept of inclusive growth arose from the fact that GDP growth cannot be the sole criterion for determining the effectiveness of the development of national economies, which is more fully measured by the system of indicators proposed at the last World Economic Forum.
The principal indicator of this system is the Inclusive Growth and Development Index (IDI), which is considered as an alternative indicator to GDP per capita.
The use of the Inclusive Growth and Development Index is expedient not instead, but in addition to GDP per capita, since IDI is an abstract indicator, while GDP per capita is a real and widely understood indicator that has a clear interpretation.
Based on the analysis of the deviations of the actual values of the partial and integral indicators of compliance with the standards of sustainable inclusive and the estimation of the threat of a crisis situation from the threshold levels, it was determined that during the years 2013-2017 the state of the Ukraine economy in general and its components deteriorated significantly. In 2017, as compared to 2013, the integral inclusiveness index value deteriorated by 6.8 points. This indicates the increasing impact of destabilizing factors and the developing of supercritical, with pathological features, state of the Ukrainian economy.
It has been proven that the negative impact on the economy development of inadequate volume of
domestic and foreign investment is increasing, as evidenced by the extremely low value of net savings (only 1 percent). The resurgence of the investment volumes in fixed capital that would correspond to the volumes of the pre-crisis years - for the period of 2014-2017 - hasn't been achieved. In turn, this significantly limits the opportunities for economic growth and increases the level of threat of a deepening economic crisis.
To lift the economy, it's necessary to increase the share of investment in GDP at least to the level common to developed countries - 25-30%. Only under such conditions the opportunities for the functioning of expanded reproduction can be created. In rapidly developing countries, the share of investment in GDP is up to 40%, as in China, for example, which, for 30 years, provides an annual GDP growth of 10% on average.
Taking into account all the above, it can be concluded that the trends of the development of the national economy of Ukraine identified in the work indicate the strengthening of macroeconomic, financial, investment, industrial and foreign economic threats and risks, which extremely aggravate the prospects for recovery and economic growth, and illustrate the existence of supercritical - with a pathological and toxicity features - state.
Thus, the strategic priorities for the functional components of the inclusive growth index are as follows: elimination of distortions in macroeconomic reproduction processes, which consists in ensuring optimal proportions between investments and consumption, streamlining the ratio between wage growth and labour productivity growth, the renewal and disposal rate of fixed assets; keeping inflation at a moderate level, prevention of deflationary processes; stimulation of domestic consumption through the mechanism of consumer household demand growth, etc.
According to the results of the analysis, the authors emphasize that these negative processes are primarily the result of a lightning transition -institutionally and organizationally unprepared -from the model of planned economic management to an extremely liberal management system, which resulted in the elimination of the country's strategic development planning system. In connection with this, the role of deliberate and scientifically grounded state influence on the formation of the main synthetic indicators characterizing the
development of the Ukrainian economy was critically worsened.
Parts of the existing economic system, development priorities, national, sectoral and regional target programmes generally aren't related either to performance indicators or to resource capabilities. At the moment, the Government's influence on the structure and growth rates of the public and private sectors of the economy hasn't been developed from the standpoint of State interests and priorities, including raising social standards.
All of the foregoing testifies to the objective necessity of replacing the current model of economic development with a new one, more effective and progressive, namely: strategically verified, institutionally-streamlined and innovative-oriented, and the identification of priorities for economic development and the formation of a new institutional arrangement is the most important issue in shaping the directions for implementing a new development model.
Non-compliance of reviewed tasks in the visible future, according to the authors, will inevitably lead to further aggravation of pathological processes in the economy and the social sphere, which may logically exacerbate existing contradictions in the aspect of economic and social systems development, strengthen the centrifugal force, and even lead to the country's disintegration.
References
1. Douglass C. North Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. - New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990. - 152 p.
2. Kovalenko D. V., Shalimova I. M., Kernytskyi O. M., Konfliktolohiia: navch. posib. dlia vuziv; Ukr. inzh.-ped. akad. Kharkiv : Tochka, 2012. - 221 s.
3. McConnell, C. R., Brue, S. L. Economics (17th edition). - New-York: McGraw-Hill, 2008. - 876 p.
4. Mantsurov I. G. Instytutsiine planuvannia v systemi derzhavnoho rehuliuvannia ekonomiky: monohrafiia / I. G. Mantsurov. - K.: NDEI 2014. - 457 s.
5. Mantsurov I.G. Makroekonomichna statystyka, tom 1. Pidruchnyk dlia vyshch. navch. zakl. / I.G.Mantsurov, A.M.Yerina, O.K.Mazurenko ta in.; za red. d-ra ekon. nauk, prof. I.G.Mantsurova. - K: KNEU, 2013. - 325 s.
6. George Soros. The Crisis of Global Capitalism: Open Society Endangered. - New York: Public Affairs, 1998. - 245 p.
7. Prohnozuvannia indykatoriv, porohovykh znachen ta rivnia ekonomichnoi bezpeky Ukrainy u serednostrokovii
penspektyvi; analit. dop./ Yu.M. Khanazishvili, Ye.V. Dnon. -K.: NISD, 2014. - 117 s.
8. Stiglitz Joseph E. Economics of the public sector. (Third edition) - New York / London: W. W. Norton & Company, 1999. - 823 p.
9. Tymoshenko O. V. Ekonomichna bezpeka natsion-alnoi ekonomiky v umovakh hlobalizatsii: Monohrafiia / O. V. Tymoshenko. - Kyiv: TOV Nash Format, 2016. -384 s.
10. New Approaches to Economic Challenges - A Framework Paper, OECD, Paris, May 2012.
11. New Approaches to Economic Challenges: A sustainable and inclusive growth agenda, ©OECD Yearbook 2015, www.oecd.org/naec
12. National Accounts Statistics: Main Aggregates and Detailed Tables, 2015. Part I-V. - U.N., N.Y., 2016.
13. The Inclusive Development Index 2018. Summary and Data Highlights. World Economic Forum. Geneva, Switzerland. - P.14.
Дан про aBTopiB
Манцуров 1гор Германович,
д.е.н., професор, член-кореспондент НАН УкраТни, директор 1нституту системних статистичних до^джень (1ССД)
e-mail: imantsurov@gmail.com
Махонн Владислав Iгорович,
асглрант кафедри статистики КиТвського нацюналь-ного еконо1Улчного уыверситету ¡меы Вадима Гетьмана e-mail: davay.syda@ukr.net
Данные об авторах Манцуров Игорь Германович,
д.э.н., грофессор, член-корресгондент НАН Украины, директор Института системных статистических исследований e-mail: imantsurov@gmail.com Махонин Владислав Игоревич, асгирант кафедры статистики Киевского национального экономического университета имени Вадима Гетьмана e-mail: davay.syda@ukr.net
Data about the author Igor Mantsurov,
Doctor of Science in Economics, Professor, Corresponding Member of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Director General of the Research Institute for System Statistical Studies e-mail: imantsurov@gmail.com Vladyslav Makhonin,
PhD Student, Statistical Department of the Kyiv National Economic University named after Vadym Hetman e-mail: davay.syda@ukr.net
УДК 338.2 http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3829487
1ЩУК Я.В, ГОРНА М.О.
Статистичний аналiз впливу корупци на шклюзивний розвиток держави
Предмет до^дження - методолопчш засади оцнювання зв'язку мiж '¡нклюзивним розвитком i коруп^ею.
Метою написання статт е досл'1дження залежност мiж коруп^ею та /нклюзивним розвитком. Коруп^я е однею з головних проблем сучасност'1, яка гальмуе як економ'1чний, так i соцальний розвиток суспльства. Ця риса притаманна не тльки малорозвитнутим кранам. Щорiчнi втрати в'щ корупци вщповщно до о^нок МВФ, складають бля 2% свтового ВВП. Кр'м того, корупщя неми-нуче призводить до суттевого розшарування суспльства та зростання частки б'щного населення. Все це е перешкодами на шляху нклюзивного зростання та розвитку, як основноI концепцп глобального розвитку суспльства.
Методолопя проведення роботи - в досл'щженн для отримання емп'рично!о^нки впливу р'1в-ня корупци на нклюзивний розвиток був проведений анал'з виб'1рки з'1 109 кран. Досл'щження зд)йснено за допомогою таких методов, як: анал'з та синтез - для виявлення передумов нклюзив-ного розвитку та основних засад вим'1рювання корупци; регресйного i кореляцйного анал'зу - для визначення взаемозв'язюв м'ж ндикаторами нклюзивного розвитку та корупци, табличного та графiчного - для в'зуального люстрування результата анал'зу.
22 Формування ринкових вщносин в УкраУж №3 (226)/2020
© ЩУК Я.В., ГОРНА МО, 2020
