You are here

Головна » 2020 » ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT APC №2 2020

Inclusive Growth Flagship Initiatives: EU vs Ukraine

Significant imbalances of existing development models are demonstrated by global economic growth, and outlines the need to move to a new more flexible and balanced model that is able to maintain the declared high and long-term growth rates together with the preservation of social equality and population general welfare. The purpose of the study is to identify EU comprehensive growth opportunities through of EU flagship initiatives achievement current EU situation in the field of poverty, unemployment, youth and women's unemployment and their involvement as labor force geographical aspects analysis; current state and prospects of EU inclusive development analysis; possibility of the sustainable development goals and inclusive growth based on the EU's flagship initiatives achievement substantiation. The object of the study is the process of inclusive economic growth within the EU through the EU flagship initiatives practical implementation.
It is determined that along with traditional economic growth indicators it is necessary to take into account the human capital equality, ecological state of the environment, social protection, food security and social cohesion. Imperative knowledge on the interconnection of EU policy priorities and flagship initiatives, sustainable development goals and their compliance with inclusive economic development are systematized. The expediency of European inclusive economic growth model, declared in the “Europe 2020” strategy, design and implementation was grounded. Modern trends and geographical aspects of state of unemployment and poverty in the European region countries is determined. The level of women's participation in the European economy is analyzed.
The level of women employment in comparison with men in the EU countries is analyzed, which made it possible to determine that this indicator is consistently lower, however, there is no significant disparity in most member states. It is substantiated that at the new cross-border economic order conditions, proposed by the EU, inclusive growth allows all member countries enjoy the progressive results of the union, economic integration and economic growth.
Key words: inclusive growth, sustainable development, employment.
Chaikin O. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2985-0407


  1. Andabaka, A., Sertić, M., Harc, M. (2019). Eco-innovation and Economic Growth in the European Union. Zagreb. International Review of Economics and Business. Vol. 22(2), pp. 43–54.  DOI: 10.2478/zireb-2019-0019.
  2. Baiardi, D., Morana, C. (2018). Financial development and income distribution inequality in the euro area. Economic Modelling. Vol.70, pp. 40­–55. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2017.10.008.
  3. Beugelsdijk, S., Schaik, T. (2005). Social capital and growth in European regions: An empirical test. European Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 21(2), 301–324 p. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2004.07.004.
  4. Chaikin, O. (2014). Corporate responsibility, ecological certification aspect. Management Theory and Studies for Rural Business and Infrastructure Development. Vol. 36. No 3, pp. 463–470. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15544/mts.2014.043.
  5. Chaikin, O. (2019). Food Security Through the Rural Inclusive Growth Opportunities. Sustainable Development of Rural Areas: monograph: collective monograph / ed. T. Zinchuk, J. Romanauskas. Klaipeda: Klaipeda University; Kyiv: Center of Educational Literature, pp. 255–264.
  6. Chaikin, O. (2019). Global Wealth and Inclusive Growth. Inclusive Community-Based Rural Development Strategy: Projects, Realities and European Perspectives for Ukraine: monograph: collective monograph / ed. T. Zinchuk.  Kyiv: Center of Educational Literature, pp. 343–352.
  7. Chaikin, O., Usiuk, T. (2019). The Imperatives of Inclusive Economic Growth Theory. Scientific Horizons.  Zhytomyr. No 11, pp. 3–12. doi: 10.33249/2663-2144-2019-84-11-3-12
  8. Chaikin, О., Kirieieva, Е., Slobodeniuk, О. (2018). Environmental Management Certification: Socio-Economic Monitoring. Management Theory andStudies for Rural Business and Infrastructure Development. Vol. 40. No 3, pp. 297–306. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15544/mts.2018.28.
  9. Charron, N., Dijkstra, L., Lapuente,  V. (2015). Mapping the regional divide in Europe: A measure for assessing quality of government in 206 European regions. Social Indicators Research. Vol. 122(2), pp. 315–346. doi: 10.1007/s11205-014-0702-y.
  10. Cichowicz, E., Rollnik-Sadowska, E. (2018). Inclusive Growth of the CEE Countries as a Determinant of Sustainable Development. DOI: 10.20944/preprints201809.0344.v1.
  11. Despotovic, D., Cvetanovic, S., Nedic, V.,  Despotovic, M. (2016). Economic, social and environmental dimension of sustainable competitiveness of European countries. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. Vol. 59, pp. 1656–1678. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2015.1085370
  12. European Commission (EC). Europe 2020: A Strategy for Smart, Sustainable and Inclusive Growth. Communication from the Commission; Publications Office of the European Union: Luxemburg, 2010; Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/FR/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52010DC202... (accessed on 29Feb 2020).
  13. Georgescu, M., Herman, E. (2019). Productive Employment for Inclusive and Sustainable Development in European Union Countries: A Multivariate Analysis. Sustainability. Vol. 11(6), 1771 p. DOI: 10.3390/su11061771
  14. Gupta, J., Vegelin, C. (2016). Sustainable development goals and inclusive development. Int. Environ.Agreem.-Polit. Law Econom. Vol.16. pp. 433–448. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-016-9323-z.
  15. Manafi, I., Marinescu, D. (2013). The Influence of Investment in Education on Inclusive Growth – Empirical Evidence from Romania vs. EU. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. Vol. 93, pp. 689-694. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.09.262.
  16. McCann, P., Ortega-Argilés, R. (2015). Smart specialization, regional growth, and applications to European union cohesion policy. Regional Studies. Vol. 49(8), pp. 1291–1302. doi: 10.1080/00343404.2013.799769.
  17. Soava, G., Mehedintu, A., Sterpu, M. (2020). Relations between income inequality, economic growth and poverty threshold: new evidences from EU countries panels. Technological and Economic Development of Economy. Vol. 26(2), pp. 290-310. https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2019.11335.
  18. The Global Economy. Business and Economic Data. Available online: https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/youth_unemployment/European-un...(accessed on 29 Feb 2020).
  19. The World Bank. Available online: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.UEM.TOTL.ZS?view=map (accessed on 29 Feb 2020).
  20. UN-United Nations. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development; A/RES/70/1; United Nations General Assembly: New York, NY, USA, 2015; Available online: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/21252030%20Agenda%20for%20Sustainable%20Development%20web.pdf(accessed on 20 Feb 2020).
  21. World Poverty Map. Available online: https://worldpoverty.io/map (accessed on 29 Feb 2020).
AttachmentSize
PDF icon chaikin_o.pdf2.04 MB
2020
ECONOMICS AND MANAGEMENT APC №2 2020