| Annotation: | Methods. The results were obtained by applying the methods of systems theory in its structural-functional version – to study the structure of the societal system as a basis for understanding the essence and structure of the institutional environment; concepts of logical and historical – when studying the process of transformation of elements of the societal system in the period of postindustrialism, as well as when establishing relationships between innovative and economic systems of society; the method of classifications – when distinguishing the main structural elements of the societal system; scientific abstraction – when formulating the essence of the category of «institutional environment». Results. It was established that there is no unified approach to the essence and structure of the institutional environment in modern scientific literature. It is proved that the definition of the structure of the institutional environment based on the selection of the main functions and the role of each of its elements allows to provide an essential characteristic of this concept. It was established that the main elements of the institutional environment are the socio-cultural system, the economic system, the political-legal system, the social system, the system of nature use, as well as the innovation system with its three subsystems: knowledge, information-communication and innovationtechnological. It is shown that each of the listed systems plays its own special role in the social system and has its own set of institutions at its disposal. Novelty. Based on the selection of the key parameters of the innovation system - its specific subjects, unique functions, original mechanisms and resources of self-development, as well as its specific institutions and organizations, it was possible to single out the innovation system into a separate element of society and separate it from the economic system. The analysis of the structure of the institutional environment made it possible to formulate the essence of this category as a set of basic economic, political-legal, societal, socio-cultural, ecological, and innovative institutions, that is, formal and informal rules, norms, procedures, restrictions, beliefs and customs that lie in value-cognitive, normative-legal and regulatory plane, and which in joint interaction determine the vector of socio-economic development of society. Practical value. Functional definition of the elements of the institutional environment and delineation of their spheres of competence allows for the development of effective mechanisms of influence on ensuring development goals with the help of specific institutions and mechanisms that each element of the institutional environment has at its disposal. |
| Literature: | - 1. North, D. (1986). Institutions, economic growth, and freedom: An historical introduction. Washington Univ., St. Louis.
- 2. North, D.C. (1991). Institutions. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5 (1), 97-112. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.5.1.97
- 3. Scott, W.R. (1995). Institutions and Organizations. Sage Publications, Inc., Thousand Oaks. https://doi.org/10.1177/017084069601700309
- 4. DiMaggio, P.J. (1983). State expansion and the structuration of organizational fields. In Organizational Theory and Public Policy, ed. R. Hall, R. Quinn. Beverly Hills: Sage.
- 5. DiMaggio, P.J., Powell, W.W. (1991). Introduction. In W.W. Powell, P.J. DiMaggio (Eds.). The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 1-38). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- 6. Meyer, J., Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 87, 340-363. https://doi.org/10.1086/226550
- 7. Fedorova, N.Ye. (2024). Analiz pidkhodiv shchodo sutnisnoho napovnennia kategoriyi «instytut-sionalne seredovyshche Naukovyi visnyk Khersonskoho derzhavnoho universytetu, Ser. «Ekonomichni nauky», 50, 5-11. https://doi.org/10.32999/ksu2307-8030/2024-50-1.
- 8. Parsons, T. (1971). The System of Modern Societies. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/51.1.104
- 9. Bertalanffy, L. (1973). General System Theo- ry. N.Y. : G. Brazillier. https://doi.org/10.2307/1573450
- 10. Varenko, V.M., Bratus, I.V., Doroshen- ko, V.S., Smolnykov, Yu.B., & Yurchenko, V.O. (2013). Systemnyi analiz informatsiynykh protsesiv. Kyiv: Universytet «Ukraina».
- 11. Freeman, C. (1987). Technology Policy and Economic Performance: Lesson from Japan. Pinter Publisher.
- 12. Freeman, C. and Soete, L. (eds.) (1987). Technical change and full employment. Oxford, Basil Blackwell.
- 13. Freeman, C. (1995). The national system of innovation in historical perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 19, 5-24. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a035309
- 14. Freeman, C. (1995/2019). History, co-evolution and economic growth. IIASA Working Paper 95-76. IIASA, Laxenburg now in ICC.
- 15. Lundvall, B-Å. (1988). Innovation as an Interactive Process: From User-producer Interaction to the National System of Innovation, in G. Dosi, C. Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg, L. Soete (eds.). Technical Change and Economic Theory. London and New York: Pinter Publisher, 349-369.
- 16. Lundvall, B-Å. (1992a, Ed.). National Systems of Innovation. Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. Pinter Publisher.
- 17. Lundvall, B-Å. (2007). Innovation System Research and Policy. Where it came from and where it might go. Globelics Working Paper Series 2007-01, Globelics, Global Network for Economics of Learning, Innovation, and Competence Building Systems, Aalborg University, Department of Business and Management.
- 18. Nelson, R. (1988). Institutions Supporting Technical Change in the United States, in G. Dosi, C. Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg, L. Soete (eds.), Technical Change and Economic Theory. London and New York: Pinter Publisher, 312-329.
- 19. Nelson, R. (1992). National Innovation Systems: A Retrospective on a Study. Industrial and Corporate Change, 1, (2), 347-374. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/1.2.347
- 20. Nelson, R. (eds.) (1993). National Innovation Systems: a comparative analysis. New York: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0737-6782(95)90054-3
- 21. Nelson, R. (2009). National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's Academy for Entrepreneurial Leadership. Historical Research Reference in Entrepreneurship Posted, 4. Columbia University, School of In- ternational & Public Affairs (SIPA).
- 22. List, F. (1841). The National System of Political Economy, English Edition (1904). London: Longman.
- 23. Surmin, Yu.P. (2003). Teoriia sistem i sistemnyi analiz. Kyiv: MAUP.
- 24. Pylypenko, Yu.I. (2010). Tekhnolohichna struktura natsionalnoi ekonomiky: teoriia, praktyka ta rehuliuvannia. Dnipropetrovsk: Natsionalnyi hirnychyi universytet.
- 25. Rosenberg, N. (1972). Technology and American Economic Growth. Harper & Row. https://doi.org/10.2307/3113274
- 26. Dosi, G., Freeman, C. and Fabiani, S. (1994). The Process of Economic Development: Introducing Some Stylized Facts and Theories on Technologies, Firms and Institutions. Industrial and Corporate Change, 3(1), 1-45. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/3.1.1.
- 27. Perez, C. (2002). Technological Revolutions and Financial Capital: The Dynamics of Bubbles and Golden Ages. London: Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781781005323
- 28. Schumpeter, J.A. (1911). The Theory of Economic Development. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.
- 29. Lijster, Th., ed. (2018). The Future of the New: Artistic Innovation in Times of Social Acceleration. Arts in society. Valiz.
- 30. Tymochko, N.O. (2005). Ekonomichna istoriya Ukrayiny. Kyiv: KNEU.
- 31. Solow, R.M. (1957) Technical Change and the Aggregate Production Function. Review of Economics and Statistics, 39, 312-320. https://doi.org/10.2307/1926047
|
Archive