You are here
Scientific principles of risk research as an economic category
The article systematizes the scientific principles of risk research as an economic science and defines the main provisions of risk theory at each stage of its development. It is emphasized that risk is an interdisciplinary economic category, since the phenomenon of uncertainty and risky decisions covers various areas of activity, in particular economics, management, sociology, psychology, ecology, law and other fields. It is concluded that an interdisciplinary approach allows for a comprehensive study of the economic nature of risk, which provides a deeper understanding and development of rational approaches to its assessment and management. The stages of risk evolution theories are determined and the scientific principles of the category of “risk” are summarized based on the study of theoretical and methodological approaches of foreign and domestic scientists. It is argued that the change in the stages of development of risk theory occurred under the influence of the socio-economic conditions dynamics of business structures functioning, the results of scientific research, the complication of commodity-monetary relations, the development of quantitative methods in the study of economic systems and phenomena, the methods development for assessing the behavior of business entities and qualitative assessment of risk in numerical values. The scientific ideas and views of scientists on the essence of the risk economic category are summarized, on the basis of which the historical stages of its development are supplemented by pre-classical and integrated. It is substantiated that the prerequisites for the transition from one stage of development of risk theory to another are: the complication of commodity-monetary relations, the development and introduction of quantitative methods in the study of economic phenomena and processes, the quantification of qualitative phenomena and processes. It is established that in the economic literature there is no single approach to understanding risk and there is no universal concept of the phenomenon under study, which is associated with its complexity and multifacetedness. The author’s definition of the risk category is proposed, the peculiarity of which is the probabilistic nature of the event occurrence, losses and new opportunities, as well as the absence of a statement about the a priori awareness of the risk by the business entity. The scientific and theoretical provisions of the risk theory are systematized, namely: risk is an economic and managerial category; risk is an event that affects or may affect the planned result; the consequences of risk can be both negative and positive results, and not only financial; risk management is the choice of an alternative solution; the ability to predict risk.
Key words: risk, uncertainty, business risk, risk management, new opportunities, losses.
https://orcid.org/0009-0000-2462-4916
REFERENCES
1. Hryvkivska, O. V., Heizha, Ye. O. (2024). Ryzyky hospodarskoi diialnosti ahrarnykh pidpryiemstv ta yikh neitralizatsiia v umovakh aktyvnykh boiovykh dii [Risks of economic activity of agricultural enterprises and their neutralization in conditions of active hostilities]. Kyivskyi ekonomichnyi naukovyi zhurnal [Kyiv Economic Scientific Journal]. No. 4. Available at: https://doi.org/10.32782/2786-765X/2024-4-5
2. Raiter, N., Matskiv, H. (2023). Ryzyky ahrarnoho pidpryiemnytstva v umovakh viiny [Risks of agricultural entrepreneurship in conditions of war]. Ahrarna Ekonomika [Agrarian Economics]. Vol. 16 No. 1-2. Pp. 41-50. Available at: https://doi.org/10.31734/ agrarecon2023.01-02.041
3. Ibatullin, I. I., Varchenko, O. M., Krysanov, D. F., Varchenko, O. O., Havryk, O. Y., Kachan, L. M., Lastovska, I. O., Ibatullin, M. I. (2024). Current development aspects in Ukraine’s animal breeding with the consideration of the impact of agrarian crises. Agricultural Science and Practice. Vol. 11(1). Pp. 39-55. Available at: https://doi. org/10.15407/agrisp11.01.039
4. Shust, O. A., Varchenko, O. M., Krysanov, D. F., Dragan, O. O., Tkachenko, K. V., Varchenko, O. O. (2024). Modern trends in the development of plant production under agrarian crises. Agricultural Science and Practice. Vol. 10(3), Pp. 16-34. Available at: https://doi.org/10.15407/agrisp10.03.016
5.European Climate Risk Assessment (EUCRA). Full report. 2024. Available at: https://www. eea.europa.eu/en/analysis/publications/european-climate-risk-assessment
6. Vitlinskyi, V.V. (2004). Ryzykolohiia v ekonomitsi ta pidpryiemnytstvi [Risk Management in Economics and Entrepreneurship]. Kyiv: KNEU, 2004. 480 p.
7. Luhmann, N. (1991). Risks: A Sociological Theory. Berlin; New York: Walter de Gruyter. Available at: https://www.scribd.com/document/669250945/ Risk-a-Sociological-Theory-Luhman
8. Beck, U. (1992). Risk society. Towards a New Modernity. London: SAGE Publications. Available at:http://www.riversimulator.org/Resources/Anthropology/RiskSociety/RiskSoc...
9. Kahneman, D., Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica. 47(2). Рр. 263–292.
10. Society for Risk Analysis. Society for Risk Analysis Glossary. Available at: https://www.sra. org/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/SRA-Glossary-FINAL.pdf
11. Cantillon, R. Essai sur la nature du commerce en général. Partie I. Chapitre XIII. Paris : Institut Coppet, 2011. Рр. 18–21. Available at: https://www.institutcoppet.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/Essai-surla-nature-du-commerce-en-gener-Richard-Cantillon. pdf
12. Filippov, V. Yu. (2019). Evoliutsiia poniatiino-katehoriinoho aparatu pidpryiemnytstva [The evolution of the conceptual and categorical apparatus of entrepreneurship]. Ekonomika: realii chasu [Economics: realities of the time]. 2019. No. 1 (41). Pp. 72–80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3416425
13. Amosov, O. Yu., Syvokon, V. O., Statyvka, N. V. et al. (2017). Istoriia ekonomiky ta ekonomichnoi dumky: navchalnyi posibnyk [History of economics and economic thought: a textbook]. KharRI NASU “Master”. 464 p.
14. Mill, J. (1920). Principles оf рolitical еconomy. London: Macmillan, 1920. Available at: https:// www.gutenberg.org/files/30107/30107-pdf.pdf
15. Marshall, A. (1920). Principles of economic science. London: Macmillan and Co. 8th ed. Available at: https://eet.pixel-online.org/files/etranslation/original/Marshall,%20Pri...
16. Keynes, J. М. (1936). General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. London: Macmillan. Available at: https://www.hetwebsite.net/het/texts/ keynes/gt/gtcont.htm
17. Knight, F. H. (1921). Risk, Uncertainty, and Profit. Boston and New York. Available at: https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/files/docs/publications/books/risk/ riskuncertaintyprofit.pdf
18. Schumpeter, J. The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle. Available at: https://cruel. org/books/hy/shortschumpeter/SchumpeterTheoryofEconDev.pdf
19. Neumann von John. (2004). Contribution to Modern Game Theory. Acta Oeconomica. Vol. 54(1). Pp. 73-84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1556/ aoecon.54.2004.1.5
20. Markowitz ,G. (1952). Portfolio Selection. The journal of finance. Vol. 7. №1. Рр.77- 91. Available at: https://www.scribd.com/document/405128143/Markowitz-1952
21. Xilin, H. (2024). Evolution of option pricing models: From Black-Scholes to Heston and beyond. Theoretical and Natural Science. Vol. 38 (1). Pp. 95-100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54254/2753- 8818/38/20240558
22. Xue-Zhong, He. (2016). A Binomial Model of Asset and Option Pricing with Heterogeneous Beliefs. Journal of Management Science and Engineering. Vol. 1, Is. 1. Pp. 94-113. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3724/ SP.J.1383.101006
23. Kahneman, D., Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decisions under Risk. Econometrica. Vol. 47. Pp. 263-292. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.2307/1914185
24. Vitlinskyi, V. V., Velykoivanenko, G. I. (2002). Ryzykolohiia v ekonomitsi ta pidpryiemnytstvi: monohrafiia [Risk management in economics and entrepreneurship: monograph]. KNEU. 490 p.
25. Rabin, M. (1993). Incorporating Fairness into Game Theory and Economics. The American Economic Review. Vol. 83(5). Рp. 1281-1302. Available at: www.jstor.org/stable/2117561
26. Greenspan, A. (2013). The Map and the Territory: Risk, Human Nature, and the Future of Forecasting. New York, London: Penguin Books. 400 р.
27. Granaturov, V. M., Lytovchenko, I. B., Kharichkov, S. K. (2003). Analiz pidpryiemnytskykh ryzykiv: problemy vyznachennia, klasyfikatsii ta kilkisnoi otsinky: monohrafiia [Analysis of business risks: problems of definition, classification and quantitative assessment: monograph]. Odesa: IPREED. Pp. 104–105.
28. Blank, I.O. (2001). Investytsiinyi menedzhment [Investment management]. Vol. 1. K.: Elha-N. Nika-Tsentr. 536 p.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
 derkach_141-151.pdf | 506.62 KB |