THE PROBLEM OF UNEMPLOYMENT IN RURAL AREAS: THE IMPACT OF DECENTRALIZATION REFORM
Abstract
The impact of decentralization reform on unemployment in territorial communities formed in 2015–2020 as a result of the reform of the administrative-territorial system in Ukraine is considered. Focused onthe problem of unemployment in rural areas in the context of the reform of the administrative-territorialsystem. The peculiarities of strategies for the development of grassroots territorial communities in termsof ensuring the creation of new jobs are highlighted. Emphasis is placed on the efforts to form nonagriculturalemployment in rural areas of newly created grassroots territorial communities in Ukraine.The peculiarities of community action plans aimed at combating unemployment and migration fromthe Ukrainian countryside are highlighted. The materials of surveys of territorial communities’ leaders2019–2021 conducted by the analytical center of the All-Ukrainian Association of Joint TerritorialCommunities on the formation of policies to combat unemployment are analyzed. The peculiarities ofbudgetary and financial policy of grassroots territorial communities in Ukraine in the context of theirinfluence on the fight against unemployment in rural areas are revealed. The impact of the COVID-2019coronavirus pandemic on the economic development of newly formed grassroots territorial communitiesin Ukraine is reflected. The vision of the leaders of territorial communities on the consequences of thegovernment’s introduction of a set of economic measures to reduce the tax burden on the economyand small and medium-sized businesses, which are related to counteracting the spread of coronavirusCOVID-2019, was analyzed. Community leaders have identified an assessment of government measures to reduce the tax burden on the economy and small and medium-sized businesses and local budget lossescaused by them, measures that will have the greatest impact on the labor market in local communities atthe grassroots level. The ability of territorial communities to keep jobs in the field of medium and smallbusiness and the need for external support to local communities to combat corporate bankruptcies andthe threat of unemployment have been identified.
References
2. Адміністративно-територіальна реформа: завдання, шляхи реалізації, критерії ефективності : матеріали «круглого столу» / за ред. З.С. Варналія. Київ : ШСД, 2005. 73 с. [Administrative-territorial reform: objectives, ways of implementation, performance criteria: roundtable materials (2005). (ed. Varnalii Z.S.). Kyiv: ShSD] (in Ukrainian)].
3. Alm, J., Aten, R.H. and Bahl, R. (2001). Can Indonesia Decentralize Successfully? Plans, Problems and Prospects. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies. 37(1), 83–102.
4. Brodjpnegoro, B.S. and Martinez Vasques, J. (2002). Analysis of Indonesia’s transfer system: recent performance and future prospects. Paper prepared for conference on Can Decentralization Help Rebuild Indonesia? Atlanta, May 2002. Georgia State University.
5. Baranovskyi, M.O. (2009). Scientific principles of socio-geographical study of rural depressed areas of Ukraine. Nizhyn. Private enterprise Lysenko M.M., 396 p.
6. De Montis A., Caschili S., Chessa A. (2013). Commuter networks and community detection: A method for planning sub regional areas. The European Physical Journal. Special Topics, 215 (1), 75–91.
7. Firman, T. (2010) Indonesia’s Rapid Decentralization Needs InterLocal-Government Partnership: Kartamantul (Greater Yogyakarta) and Jabodetabek (Greater Jakarta) Compared. Unpublished Manuscript.
8. Ганущак, Ю. (2013) Реформа територіальної організації влади. Київ, 160 с. [Hanushchak, Yu. (2013). Reform of the territorial organization of power. Кyiv, 160 p. (in Ukrainian)].
9. Малько, Ю. (2017). Реформування адміністративно-територіального устрою України і його вплив на державне управління сільським розвитком у ХХ–ХХІ ст. Державне управління та місцеве самоврядування. Вип. 1(32). С. 35–41. [Malko, Yu. (2017). Reform of administrative and territorial structure of Ukraine and its impact on the rural development governance in Ukraine in XX–XXI centuries. Public Administration and Local Government, 1 (32), 35–41. (In Ukrainian)].
10. Malchykova, D.C. (2014). Theoretical, methodological and methodological principles of rural geoplanning at the regional level. Kherson State University. Kherson : Hrin D.S. 361 p.
11. Маруняк, Є.О. (2014). Територіальне (просторове) планування: зміст, еволюція та основні сучасні напрями. Український географічний журнал. № 2. С. 22–31 [Maruniak, Ye.O. (2014). Territorial (spatial) planning: content and evolution of major modern trends. Ukrainian Geographical Journal, 2, 22–31. (in Ukrainian)].
12. Нападовська, Г.Ю., Пилипенко, І.О. (2018). Просторовий аналіз процесу об’єднаних територіальних громад. Регіон-2018: стратегія оптимального розвитку : матеріали міжнародної науково-практичної конференції (м. Харків, 8–9 листопада, 2018 р.). Харків : ХНУ імені В.Н. Каразіна. С. 181–183 [Napadovska, G.Yu. (2018). Spatial analysis of the process of united territorial communities. Kharkiv, V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University, 181–183. (in Ukrainian)].
13. Нападовська, Г.Ю. (2019). Особливості сільського розселення в контексті децентралізації (на прикладі Херсонської області). Науковий вісник Херсонського державного університету. Серія: географічні науки. Херсон, 2019. Випуск № 10. С. 85–88 [Napadovska, G.Yu. (2019). Features of agriculture development tin the context of decentralization (in the case of Kherson region). Kherson State University Herald. Series: “Geographical Sciences”, (7), 85–88. (in Ukrainian)].
14. Олійник, Я.Б., Остапенко, П.О. (2016) Формування спроможних територіальних громад в Україні: переваги, ризики, загрози. Український географічний журнал. № 4. С. 37–43 [Oliynyk, Ya.B., Ostapenko, P.O. (2016). The formation of amalgamated territorial communities in Ukraine: benefits, risks, threats. Ukrainian Geographical Journal, 4, 37–43. (in Ukrainian)].
15. Oliynyk, Y.V., Stepanenko, A.V. (2003). Social development of the village and rural areas. 128 p.
16. Pratikno, P. (2008). Recommendations on Modifications of Regional Development Policy: Proliferation and Amalgamation of Regions. Unpublished Policy Paper, Democratic Reform Support Program, United States Agency for International Development, February 29.
17. Rondinelli, D.A. (1990). Decentralizing Urban Development Programs: A Framework for Analyzing Policy. Office of Housing and Urban Programs, US Agency for International Development, Washington, D.C.
18. Survey of Joint Territorial Communities leaders on the impact of measures introduced in Ukraine to prevent the spread of coronavirus COVID-19 on the local economy. URL: https://hromady.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/covir-19.pdf (дата звернення: 26.03.2021) (in Ukrainian).
19. Survey of Joint Territorial leaders on the formation of JTC budget revenues. URL: https://hromady.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/5c-d0-91-5c-d1-_38511920-3.pdf (дата звернення: 26.03.2021) (in Ukrainian).
20. Ткачук, А., Ткачук, Р., Ганущак, Ю. (2009). З історії реформ адміністративно-територіального устрою України, 1907–2009 роки. Київ, 152 с. [Tkachuk, A., Tkachuk, R., Hanushchak, Yu. (2009). From the history of administrative division reforms in Ukraine, 1907–2009. Kyiv, 152 p. (in Ukrainian)].
21. Von Luebke, C. (2009). The Political Economy of Local Governance: Findings from an Indonesian Field Study. Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies, 45(2), 201–230.
