INSTITUTIONAL TOOLS FOR ENSURING RESILIENCE OF NATURAL RESOURCE COMPLEX: SECURITY ASPECT

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15407/economyukr.2024.08.077

Keywords:

resilience; natural resource complex; environmental safety; tools; mechanisms.

Abstract

Institutional tools as levers of influence on resilience in socio-ecological-economic systems are studied. It is determined that the tools should be effective, sufficiently flexible and adapted to economic, social and environmental changes (gradual or those resulting from emergencies). The toolkit is an important component, as it affects the effectiveness of the implementation of all territorial development programs.

Based on the analysis of the world experience of building resilience, it is established that the latter represents the absorption capacity of the natural resource complex, that is, the ability to quickly absorb shocks and recover. Given the tasks of post-war recovery of Ukraine’s territory, this property will become an integral part of this process. However, modern scientific research does not fully explain the nature of institutional support of resilience building process for the natural resource complex (taking into account the latter’s complex characteristics). Institutional support of resilience is studied, in particular, as the result of the experiences and reactions of actors facing social and/or environmental disturbances.

Given the various aspects of the tools that can be used in resilience building, they are divided into three main groups: administrative, economic, and market. Actually, the system of institutional regulation tools involves joint organizational-administrative and economic measures. The task of institutionalization consists in ordering roles and managing processes of interaction between organizational and economic components. Regarding the building and maintaining a high level of resilience of the natural resource complex, especially amidst existing uncertainty, certain tasks and traditional functions of tools will require improvement, since in their traditional role they can be economically costly, inflexible and, as a rule, do not create incentives for technological innovations. Therefore, it is recommended to combine the institutional component with economic prerequisites, taking into account the current state of the natural resource or territory. This will make it possible to both solve the environmental problem and prevent its recurrence.

References

Khvesyk, M., Bystryakov, I. (2019). Financial and economic principles of environmental management regulation. Kyiv. 304 p. [in Ukrainian].

Khvesyk, M., Bystryakov, I., Obykhod, H. (2022). Environmental economics: a glossary of basic terms. 2nd ed., enlarged. Kyiv. 118 p. [in Ukrainian].

Maddi, S. (2005). On hardiness and other pathways to resilience. American Psychologist. Vol. 60. No. 3. P. 261-262. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.3.261

Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-network-theory. Oxford, Oxford University Press. 18 р. URL: https://www.uni-weimar.de/kunst-und-gestaltung/wiki/images/Latour-introduction-to-ant-theory.pdf

Ilyina, M., Kolmakova, V., Veklych, O. (2021). Assessing ecosystem assets of territorial communities. Kyiv. 288 p. [in Ukrainian].

Khvesyk, M., Sunduk, A. (2021). Formation of a platform for system interactions of natural-resource and market cycles of development. Kyiv. 360 p. [in Ukrainian].

Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding Institutional Diversity. Princeton, Princeton University Press. 375 р. URL: https://wtf.tw/ref/ostrom_2005.pdf

Pyrozhkov, S., Bozhok, Ye., Khamitov, N. (2021). National resilience of the country: strategy and tactics of anticipation of hybrid threats. Visn. Nac. Acad. Nauk Ukr. No. 8. P. 74-82. https://doi.org/10.15407/visn2021.08.074 [in Ukrainian].

Walker, B. (2020). Resilience: what it is and is not. Ecology and Society. Vol. 25 (2). Iss. 2. Art. 11. URL: https://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol25/iss2/art11/

Cherevatskyi, D. (2023). The resilience of economics and the economics of resilience. Economy of Industry. No. 1. P. 31-39. https://doi.org/10.15407/econindustry2023.01.031 [in Ukrainian].

Khvesyk, M., Bystryakov, I., Klynovyi, D. (2018). Natural resources in the financial and economic support of the development of the united territorial community (recommendations for local leaders and heads of the united territorial communities). Kyiv. 36 p. URL: https://www.nas.gov.ua/UA/Messages/news/Pages/View.aspx?MessageID=4593 [in Ukrainian].

Khvesyk, M., Bystryakov, I. (2017). Formation of a system of natural resource management mechanisms in the context of European integration processes. Kyiv. 595 p. URL: https://www.nas.gov.ua/UA/Book/Pages/default.aspx?BookID=0000010435 [in Ukrainian].

Beunen, R., Patterson, J., Van Assche, К. (2017). Governing for resilience: the role of institutional work. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. Vol. 28. P. 10-16. URL https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1877343517300106?via%3Dihub

Published

24.08.2024

How to Cite

KHVESYK, M., OBYKHOD, H., & MANDZYK, V. (2024). INSTITUTIONAL TOOLS FOR ENSURING RESILIENCE OF NATURAL RESOURCE COMPLEX: SECURITY ASPECT. Economy of Ukraine, 67(8 (753), 77–87. https://doi.org/10.15407/economyukr.2024.08.077

Issue

Section

Sustainable and inclusive development, environmental economics, and “green transition”