This article examines the challenges of designing and implementing industrial policy in peripheral and semi-peripheral economies under conditions of external constraints, using Ukraine as an illustrative example. The Ukrainian economy operates under the influence of multiple and often contradictory factors whose combined effect significantly narrows the available industrial policy toolkit and increases the risk of further peripheralization within the international division of labour. The origins of this vulnerability can be traced to long-standing adherence to Washington Consensus prescrip-tions, and the neglect of key structural regularities of economic development, including increasing returns, diversifica-tion of economic activities, economic complexity, cumulative causation, economies of scale, and cluster and synergy effects. The study characterizes the structural weakness of the Ukrainian economy, manifested in processes of deindus-trialization, raw-material specialization, and the loss of economic complexity compared with the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. It also provides a theoretical interpretation of the nature of external constraints faced by peripheral and semi-peripheral countries in shaping industrial policy and systematizes their manifestations in Ukraine, including WTO trade commitments, the financial conditionality of IMF programmes, the requirements of the EU acquis com-munautaire and the “Ukraine Facility” programme, climate-related regulatory pressure from the European Union, as well as the asymmetry of bargaining power in interactions with transnational corporations. The paper shows that these constraints reflect deeper structural asymmetries of the global economy: countries that historically developed their in-dustries through protectionist policies and state support for domestic producers now shape international trade rules that effectively limit the ability of developing economies to replicate a similar development trajectory. For Ukraine, mitigat-ing the impact of these constraints requires both defending the right to expand the industrial policy toolkit in negotia-tions with international partners and strengthening domestic productive capabilities while increasing domestic value added. These conditions highlight the need for structural and technological transformation of industry along two inter-related dimensions: a techno-economic trajectory associated with the principles of Industry 4.0 and a value-oriented trajectory aligned with the concept of Industry 5.0. Using the economic complexity approach as an analytical basis for selective industrial policy, the study outlines related diversification paths for the Ukrainian economy that are relatively attainable given the country’s existing productive capabilities while also possessing the potential to increase technologi-cal sophistication and enable further diversification. This framework provides an analytical basis for the implementation of a selective industrial policy aimed at fostering more complex economic activities. On this basis, the article substanti-ates strategic principles for Ukraine’s industrial policy aimed at overcoming the peripheralization trap and facilitating the structural transformation of the economy through the development of productive capabilities under conditions of external constraints and the requirements of Industry 4.0 and Industry 5.0.

This study analyzed the temporal dynamics of the relative frequency of the term “reconstruction” in English-language printed literature from 1860 to 2022. The analysis revealed that its usage was primarily associated with negative events of regional or global scale — such as wars, military conflicts, natural disasters, and economic crises — and efforts to address their consequences. Additionally, the term was linked to positive societal transformations related to decolonization, urbanization, and sustainable development. Understanding of the reconstruction concept has been enhanced through synthesizing its definitions found in scholarly, regulatory, and informational sources. This involved identifying of its core and composite types of change and the term’s contextual polysemy. The proposed typology of changes that reflect the essence of reconstruction may serve as a framework for analysis and decision-making, particularly in the selection of priority recovery projects for regions and communities. Building on the postulates and principles of O. Vyshnevskyi’s General Theory of Strategizing, this typology is integrated with the main branches of contemporary philosophy (ontology, epistemology, and axiology), which enables the identification of the most appropriate type of change aligned with the mission, vision, and values of a specific territory. Such an integrated approach ensures a scientifically grounded choice of reconstruction strategy (ranging from adaptive recovery for stable territories to comprehensive recovery for the most severely affected regions) and contributes to improving the quality of strategic planning in the field of regional development. A comparative analysis of reconstruction and related concepts was conducted, identifying their common feature and conceptual distinctions across five criteria: depth of change, scale of change, object of change, time horizon, and initiator of change. Despite their formal semantic similarity, most English-language terms commonly used as synonyms for “reconstruction” (such as “recovery”, “rebuilding”, “renovation”, “restoration”, “regeneration”, and “rehabilitation”) operate according to different change logics and have more limited applications. The analysis also found that the term “recovery” dominates in frequency of use in English-language printed literature. However, this stems not from its conceptual precision in describing recovery processes, but from its political appeal and linguistic simplicity. Of all related concepts, reconstruction encompasses the broadest range of changes, including both physical-spatial and functional transformations — at the levels of improvement and/or transformation — designed to mitigate the destructive impacts of shocks and crises or to facilitate societal transformations. These conceptual differences carry practical implications: terminological inaccuracy directly affects the quality of strategic planning, while term substitution may result in a narrowing of strategic vision and distortion of development priorities for territories.

To implement structural changes in Ukraine’s economy, merely creating equal conditions for all economic activities is insufficient. It is necessary to introduce radical economic measures and effective, internationally proven, tools for economic development. These tools can enable the country to overcome the resource curse, deindustrialization, and break out of the vicious cycle of poverty. One such tool is the establishment of special economic zones (SEZ) – geographically delineated areas within a country’s national borders or border regions of multiple countries, characterized by special, more favorable regulatory and fiscal regimes and well-developed infrastructure. In Ukraine, special economic zones suffered a reputational setback due to the illegal activities associated with the Donetsk special (free) economic zone (S(F)EZ), which generated widespread negative perceptions of this instrument. However, the experience of other zones, particularly the Transcarpathian S(F)EZ, highlights the untapped potential of this tool in attracting foreign investment, stimulating industrial activity, creating jobs, and increasing tax revenues. This underscores the need to reassess the viability of using S(F)EZs as a mechanism for Ukraine’s economic reconstruction amidst the destruction and losses caused by wartime. The purpose of the article is to substantiate the feasibility and the conditions for reviving the activities of special (free) economic zones in Ukraine as a tool for reindustrialization and structural economic transformation in the wartime and post-war context. Achieving this purpose entails a critical analysis of the experience of economic zones in Ukraine and abroad, along with consideration of contemporary global trends in their development influenced by the Fourth Industrial Revolution. The theoretical foundation of the study is based on the developmentalist tradition, A. Serra's theory of uneven economic development, and F. List's theory of economic nationalism. The article outlines the historical evolution and modern global trends in the development of special economic zones. It is determined that a new generation of special economic zones is emerging, aligned with the requirements of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. These zones are characterized by their reliance on resource-efficient, energy-saving practices and the integration of digital technologies. Two key digital technologies driving the formation of modern industrial zones are digital twins and the metaverse. The adoption of these technologies enhances the innovativeness of industrial zones by optimizing costs and reducing the time required for modeling new production processes, prototyping, product testing, real-time monitoring of production efficiency at individual stages, and addressing operational challenges. The analysis of international experience in the operation of special economic zones has revealed key lessons essential for shaping effective policies for their development. Specifically, SEZs require an incubation period of 5–10 years (or even longer in developing countries) to achieve tangible economic outcomes. State support and the clear alignment of their objectives with the country’s core interests and strategic development priorities are critical factors for success. Additionally, SEZs must account for the realities of global competition by offering investors a comprehensive set of advantages, including not only fiscal incentives but also modern infrastructure, access to a highly skilled workforce, and streamlined business processes. The legal principles underpinning the support and development of S(F)EZs in Ukraine have been analyzed in greater depth. Proposals have been developed to refine Chapter 39 of the Economic Code of Ukraine, with a focus on strengthening economic incentives for domestic and foreign investors engaged in production activities in regions located near the front line, in de-occupied territories, or in areas affected by active hostilities. Implementing these proposals will enhance the quality of managerial decision-making related to creating favorable investment and infrastructure conditions, thereby contributing to the economic reconstruction of Ukraine.

The article examines the issue of spatial transformation in post-war Ukraine by combining European experience with local innovations. It suggests using an infrastructure-service approach to rebuild the country, combining physical reconstruction with the development of a service ecosystem focused on innovation, human capital and sustainable development to foster regional and community growth. The types of local innovation are categorised, and their unique role in territorial transformation «from below» is demonstrated. The results of European case studies on spatial transformation (in Denmark, Spain and Germany) in terms of restoring energy, social and environmental infrastructure, and restructuring the economy are presented. These results could be adapted for the post-war recon struction of Ukrainian territories. The article proposes a system of metrics for evaluating the effectiveness of infrastructure and service design for managing the reconstruction of Ukraine’s affected regions. This system seeks to coordinate the activities of government agencies, corporations, communities, and foreign partners; ensure the transparency of management decisions; and set criteria for choosing reconstruction projects.

The article is devoted to researching the prospects and possibilities of implementing the concept of a smart city in order to restore the industrial sector of Ukraine. The authors systematically analyze the key aspects of modern smart cities, in particular the use of advanced technologies of the Internet of Things, data analysis, and automation of production processes. The article highlights the potential benefits of implementing a smart grid in Ukrainian industry, such as increasing the efficiency of production processes, optimizing resource use, and creating environmentally friendly technological solutions. In particular, the possibilities of using smart technologies in production, logistics and management, as well as their impact on increasing the competitiveness of enterprises, are considered. The study is based on the study of the experience of implementing a smart grid in other countries and takes into account the specifics of the Ukrainian industrial sector. Thanks to this analysis, the authors provide specific recommendations for the implementation of a smart grid in Ukraine in order to increase its competitiveness and create sustainable economic growth.

Industrial regions of Ukraine, especially near-front territories (Donetsk, Luhansk, Kharkiv and Zaporizhzhia regions), suffered the greatest damage and losses as a result of the full-scale war. The needs for their recovery, according to the joint assessment of international institutions and the Ukrainian government, constitute half (50.46% or $207.2 billion USD) of the reconstruction needs for Ukraine. Considering the structural lag of the economy in industrial regions, dominated by sectors with weak innovation activity and low technological intensity, the continuation of pre-war development trajectories is absolutely unacceptable and non-competitive in the context of the Industry 4.0-5.0 which gains traction globally. In the conditions of a significant change in the profiles of industrial regions due to the war, there is an opportunity to revive their economy but on fundamentally new, innovative principles. Smart specialization can be utilized for this purpose, aiming at the structural transformation of the economy and the development of new competitive advantages for regions and countries. Emphasis is placed on the necessity of conducting a critical analysis and rethinking the implementation directions of smart specialization in the industrial regions of Ukraine. This is due to the varying degrees of consideration of its fundamental principles in the regional development strategies for 2021-2027 and the need for the structural transformation of their economies to overcome the consequences of the war for the local population. The purpose of the article is to identify key problems in the field of organizational and economic support for the implementation of the smart specialization approach in the industrial regions of Ukraine and to determine ways to solve them, taking into account purely Ukrainian challenges and EU experience. The role of organizational and economic support for the implementation of the smart specialization approach in national conditions has been substantiated. The scientific understanding of the main organizational and economic problems and shortcomings of the implementation of the smart specialization approach in the industrial regions of Ukraine has been deepened. It is highlighted that freezing these problems and the absence of appropriate actions to address them will prevent structural and innovation transformations in the economies of regions based on the principles of sustainable development, thereby excluding the possibility of overcoming their structural backwardness. Proposals on ways to solve existing organizational and economic problems are substantiated, taking into account purely Ukrainian challenges, and the knowledge obtained in the EU member states during the implementation of this approach over the last ten years. The practical implementation of these proposals will make it possible to adjust the smart-oriented goals and sectoral focuses of regional development strategies, to direct them to the transformation of the economy of industrial regions through the support of sectors and industries that have the potential to develop new competitive advantages.

The relevance of this work stems from the necessity to make informed government decisions aimed at strengthening the innovation ecosystem and its entrepreneurial component as the foundation for the recovery of the Ukrainian economy and overcoming its structural and technological backwardness. This requires the production of high quality and reliable statistical data that conform to the best practices of the European Union. The article delineates the institutional framework for adapting Ukraine’s state statistics in the field of innovation to the requirements of European standards. The results show that the national statistical methodology for assessing innovation activities of enterprises generally complies with EU regulations and recommendations. However, the suspension of publication of current statistical information during the period of martial law prevents an assessment of all components of the quality of the respective state statistical observation for accuracy, consistency, comparability, and comprehensibility of statistical data. Furthermore, the article elucidates the specific aspects of the EU tools employed to assess national and regional innovation ecosystems and their entrepreneurial component, in particular, the European Innovation Scoreboard (EIS) and the Regional Innovation Scoreboard (RIS). It outlines the characteristics of individual EIS indicators that are outside the scope of state statistics in 2023 and assesses the capacity of the State Statistics Service to measure them. Among these indicators, those that were duplicated in another, more comprehensive EU toolkit for assessing the digital performance of Europe–the Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI)–were identified. Following a Ukrainian government decree, these indicators will be collected and published annually starting in 2025. Finally, the article outlines the conditions for the inclusion of Ukrainian regions in the RIS, which will be facilitated by the adopted statistical classification of territorial units of Ukraine (NUTS-UA).

Specific proposals are presented to support and development of the energy system, engineering, metallurgical and chemical industries, as well as the possibilities of preserving, attracting and using personnel potential in all branches of domestic industry to meet the primary needs of the state during martial law. The presentation and substantiation of the proposals regarding the machine-building, metallurgical, chemical, light industries, and the energy system were based on the following logic: a description of the problems that need to be solved by industry; measure (mechanism) to support national production, aimed at solving the proposed problem; regulatory and legislative acts, strategic (program) documents that require adoption (amendment) for the implementation of the measure and resolution of the problematic issue; approximate expected effect for meeting the state’s primary needs in the conditions of martial law.

Поглиблено розуміння природи спільнот, для чого використано різні критерії їх визначення, зокрема географічний, професійний, соціально-проблемний, екологічно-проблемний, культурно-етнічний. Визначено, що одним з видів спільнот є інноваційні спільноти – групи людей, які спрямовують свою діяльність на отримання інноваційних результатів у спільному середовищі, що здатні вплинути на вирішення значущих соціально-економічних і екологічних проблем суспільства. За результатами систематизації науково-теоретичних засад виявлення феномену інноваційних спільнот визначено їх сутнісні характеристики й переваги для розвитку територіальних громад. Інноваційні спільноти є джерелами прогресивних суспільних трансформацій, оскільки спрямовані на стійкий і сталий розвиток територій. Обґрунтовано роль і можливості інноваційних спільнот у відродженні постраждалих від війни українських територій за принципом «відбудувати краще, ніж було» (build back better). Розкрито сутність цього принципу, який полягає у відновленні, відбудові й реконструкції різних сфер суспільства після катастроф і лих не просто до попереднього (у випадку України – довоєнного) стану, а на основі впровадження якісно нових змін і вдосконалень. Підкреслено відповідність реалізації цього принципу національним інтересам України. Визначено необхідність забезпечення еволюції територіальних громад та їх населення від переважно пасивного спостерігача і споживача до активного учасника процесу відродження населених пунктів на засадах стійкості й сталості. Це потребує запровадження відкритості в державному управлінні й партнерських відносин місцевих органів влади з місцевим населенням, розвитку громадської свідомості й активності, заохочення підприємництва, соціальних і екологічних місцевих ініціатив, поширення успішних інноваційних практик і сталого способу життя.

The article identifies and substantiates the current directions and development prospects of industrial parks and clusters in Ukraine to accelerate the recovery of the national economy in modern and post-war conditions. They are as follows: (1) the resumption of the activity of industrial parks operating before the start of martial law, the arrangement of industrial parks included in the Register with engineering and transport infrastructure, in particular as sites for the relocation of enterprises; (2) the formation of powerful industrial and innovation clusters as tools for promoting and developing the competitive advantages of the regions, including smart-oriented goals of regional development strategies for 2021-2027; (3) priority state support for industrial parks and clusters in industries that meet the basic needs of the population in war and post-war conditions, as well as in rapidly developing innovative industries; (4) institutionalization of cluster processes at the state and regional levels; (5) promoting the unification of clusters, the formation of their interregional and intersectoral alliances and integration into the EU economic area with subsequent entry into interstate and cross-border clusters; (6) support for industrial parks and clusters with a focus on promoting the development of small and medium enterprises; (7) the use of tax and non-financial incentives to enhance the activities of industrial parks and cluster cooperation as a tool for solving problems of employment, slowing down migration and returning Ukrainians from abroad. The substantiated directions and prospects form the scientific basis to include relevant solutions in state and regional policies to create favorable conditions for industrial parks and clusters development in the interests of the modern and post-war recovery of Ukraine.

The importance of supporting and promoting entrepreneurship development is due to its positive impact on economic growth, innovation processes, and the population welfare, the ability to contribute to the solution of modern challenges. In Ukraine, the entrepreneurial sector – the totality of large, medium, small, and micro-enterprises that carry out entrepreneurial activities in the country – faces problems of premature deindustrialization, slowing down innovation processes and their consequences in the form of a structurally weak, resource-based economy, which are further exacerbated in wartime conditions, when the country suffers from huge destruction and losses. Solving these problems requires a deep economic restructuring – from raw materials to industrial-innovative economy – in which the entrepreneurial sector will play a key role. The article aims to assess sectoral maladjustments of the Ukrainian entrepreneurial sector related to the need for innovative transformation as a basis for economic restructuring in modern and post-war conditions. The assessment was performed based on a set of proposed scientific and methodological foundations using indicators reflecting the level of investment in innovation and proving the effectiveness of enterprises' innovative activities, as of the pre-war period, to further (if relevant statistical information is available) compare the obtained estimates with the structural characteristics of the entrepreneurial sector during the war and post-war periods. It has been established that there are sectoral maladjustments linked to enterprises' economic opportunities in the technological sectors of the manufacturing and high-tech knowledge-intensive services, when it comes to implementing innovative transformation. Sectoral maladjustments in the levels of technological intensity of the sold innovative products in the entrepreneurial sector have been identified. It has been revealed that there are sectoral maladjustments in the levels of the entrepreneurial sector innovative effectiveness by types of economic activities (TEA), which vary significantly by industries depending on their specifics, economic status and other conditions. A grouping of TEA according to the level of innovative effectiveness (IE) has been made. It has been revealed that most of them belong to the group with a low level of IE, which indicates the unbalanced investment and innovation development of the Ukrainian entrepreneurial sector. A comparative analysis of the entrepreneurial sectors of Ukraine, innovatively developed countries, and peer countries in terms of indicators characterizing the state of technology-intensive industries development showed that the national economy lags behind both groups of countries and the need for its restructuring in the direction of increasing the share of gross value added of the manufacturing of high-technology and medium-high-technology industries. This research forms a scientific basis for substantiating and including appropriate actions in state policies to create favorable conditions for the modern and post-war recovery of the Ukrainian economy on a fundamentally new, competitive and innovative, basis.

The Russian Federation’s war of aggression against Ukraine has caused enormous destruction and damage to the national economy, prompting the search for the most effective ways and directions of rebuilding the country, eradicating poverty, and ensuring economic growth based on the principles of sustainability. This paper argues that in the present days and in the postwar period, structural transition of the economy to higher technological levels is a prerequisite for the recovery of Ukraine. Business sector plays an exceptionally important role in these processes in the context of the new industrial revolution, and its potential should be directed to the production of high value-added industrial products and provision of high-tech services. The most significant technological and sectoral structural deformations, caused by problems and crises in the national economy, are identified and summarized. The research conclusions present ways to overcome them that take into account the peculiarities of pre-war and current conditions and the country’s European integration progress.

The article is devoted to the analysis of digital aspects of innovation policy, in particular, based on the use of international ratings, the determination of the features of the construction of the digital component of innovation networks, and the deepening of scientific and methodological approaches to the digital support of innovation processes. Data from the Global Innovation Index and the ICT Development Index were used to assess the impact of digitalization on the development of innovation processes. Based on the results of the calculations, significant positive correlation estimates were obtained with the key components of the innovation system and the level of cluster development. Marketing, communication, infrastructural, international dimensions of digitalization of innovative processes are defined. It has been proven that the growing availability of ICT makes it necessary to rethink many processes in the innovation field in a timely manner. On the basis of world experience, the role of universities is argued, which should assume a significant share of responsibility for the formation of a new technological order by improving the quality of research and implementing their results in the real economy within the framework of S2B-B2S (Science-to-Business – Business-to-Science).

Purpose. The purpose of the study is to analyse and systematise the smart priorities of the territories of Central and Eastern Europe with a focus on the sustainable development of the agricultural sector and to identify current trends in the innovative development of agriculture. Methodology / approach. The main research method is benchmarking which includes identification, comparative analysis, generalisation and application of best practices in various fields of activity. The authors’ methodology of regional benchmarking has been tried out in the work. The methodology provides implementation of a set of scientific and analytical measures at the following stages: (1) mapping and identification of smart priorities in focal economic activities; (2) analysis of regional priorities according to the European goals of smart specialisation policy including the structure of their selection; (3) studying the content and goals of the regional priorities establishing cross-sectoral links; (4) examination of the exploit of established and emerging clusters in the regional smart specialisation with identification of their localisation and selected priority areas; (5) analysis of interregional cooperation in smart specialisation domains; (6) processing and formalisation of the obtained research results. Results. We identified and analysed 44 priorities involving the agricultural sector, which belongs to 12 Central and Eastern European countries. The dominant policy objectives of smart specialisation of these territories are Sustainable Innovation, Public Health & Security and Key Enabling Technologies, which are mainly focused on achieving sustainable agriculture, establishing bioeconomy and providing food security & safety. These smart specialisation domains at the national and sub-national levels clearly contribute to the attainment of the Sustainable Development Goals. Priorities were grouped according to their internal goals and content, which allowed identifying key trends of innovative development of the territories with the involvement of the agricultural sector. It is concluded that the regions combine knowledge and assets through the intensification of cross-sectoral, interregional cooperation and the use of clusters. We determined that cross-sectoral links within smart priorities are mostly formed within existing value chains, but recently, new cross-sectoral and interregional partnerships emerge and actively develop. They are mainly focused on the diffusion of innovative bio- and digital technologies in agro-food systems. We highlighted the key issues that need to be addressed by regional working groups while selecting the smart priorities of the Ukraine’s regions. Originality / scientific novelty. This paper presents the results of the thematic research in a new understudied direction – Smart Specialisation Strategies for Sustainability. Based on the authors’ methodology of regional benchmarking, the smart priorities in the agricultural sector of Central and Eastern European countries have been analysed. Practical value / implications. The results of the study can be used by regional working groups of the Entrepreneurial discovery process to draw up possible ways of agricultural development. The obtained results may also be of interest to researchers from different countries involved in the implementation of smart specialisation approach and the improvement of its methodology.

The purpose of the article is to analyze the approach of smart specialization through the prism of key provisions of D. Ricardo's theory of comparative advantage, to identify its limitations for industrial weak countries and on this basis to identify key guidelines for the development of smart specialization strategies in Ukraine in view of the challenges of the postwar era. Materials and methods. The study is based on theoretical works of Ukrainian and foreign scientists on the problems of implementing the approach of smart-specialization in the practice of regional development. The work was carried out using the methods of systematization and generalization, analysis and synthesis, comparative analysis, and systematic approach. Results. The theoretical basis of the approach of "smart specialization" is revealed, the synthesis of economic schools, theories and concepts underlying this approach is defined. The insufficient theoretical development of its main provisions, which is negatively reflected in practice, especially in less economically developed countries and regions, was substantiated. It is concluded that the reasons for this lie, in particular, in the limitations of the Ricardian theory, on the provisions of which the smart specialization approach is based. It is emphasized that the Ricardian theory does not take into account the technological factor, which considers the technological base of the country as a constant, which does not give industrial weak countries an opportunity to change the raw material nature of their economy to a fundamentally new - innovative one. The historical retrospective traces the strategy of development of economically powerful countries in achieving their international competitive advantages, which is diametrically opposed to Ricardian theory. On the basis of this the key guidelines for the development of strategies of reasonable specialization in Ukraine in the post-war period of its reconstruction in order to prevent the preservation of the raw material nature of the national economy and its secondary position in the world are outlined. Conclusion. It is proved that post-war reconstruction of Ukraine should be aimed at radical changes in the structure of the economy, the transition from the agrarian-raw type to industrial-innovative type on the basis of creating a modern high-tech industry in the conditions of unfolding in the world of a new technological revolution.

Ukraine’s European integration aspirations, granting our state the status of a candidate for EU membership, as well as the need for financial, technological, managerial, and other assistance from the EU, in particular in the post-war restoration of the field of research and innovation, actualize the task of accelerating its integration into European Research Area (ERA). The article aims to analyze the current stage of development of the European Research Area in the context of the new strategic goals of the EU and, considering this and the war conflict in Ukraine, to identify opportunities for expanding cooperation between Ukraine and the EU in the field of research and innovation, deepening its integration into the ERA as a source of post-war reconstruction, stabilization and advanced innovative development of the national economy. It is shown that the war unleashed by the Russian Federation against Ukraine led to the formation of a new normal in international scientific cooperation and served as a trigger for the development of a self-sufficient pan-European innovation ecosystem that would more closely connect science and industry and be able to solve global challenges. The essence of a new European Innovation Agenda is highlighted, in the implementation of which the central place is given to the European Research Area. An idea of the ERA and the main results of its implementation in the EU over twenty years are revealed. The features of the current stage of development of the ERA and its priorities in the context of the new strategic agenda of the EU are defined. An analysis was made of the fundamental documents that should guide the EU member states in the field of research and innovation – a Pact for research and innovation and the ERA policy agenda for the period 2022-2024. The key features of the current program period of the EU development are identified. The article focuses on the main tools and initiatives aimed at bringing the EU closer to its strategic goals: smart specialisation strategies, mission-oriented innovation policy, Partnerships for regional innovations. According to the results of summarizing the initiatives in support of Ukrainian scientists and innovative entrepreneurs, introduced by the European Commission in response to the military aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine, taking into account the new strategic plans and goals of the EU in the context of global geopolitical changes, opportunities were identified and proposals were made to expand cooperation between Ukraine and the EU in research and innovation during the war and post-war periods. Their implementation will make it possible to increase Ukrainian presence in the ERA as a condition for ensuring its post-war innovative growth and prosperity for the long term.

This article is devoted to the problems and prospects of Ukraine’s integration into the European Research Area (ERA). The impact of European integration processes on the state of the economy and innovation ecosystem of Ukraine is studied. Positive results are summarized, and the main systemic problems that hinder Ukraine’s integration into the ERA are identified. A set of organizational and institutional measures for gaining wider access to knowledge, infrastructure, and funding of the European Union and accelerating the pace of integration into the ERA are proposed. Recommendations for the formation of an integrated system of state strategic planning for the development of scientific, technological, and innovative spheres of Ukraine are developed. Strategic priority areas of cooperation between Ukraine and the EU in the field of science, technology, and innovation have been identified, taking into account national and global challenges, achievements and potential of Ukrainian science, and the new strategic agenda of the EU.

Introduction. The development of an innovation-based competitive and highly structured model of the Ukrai-nian economy is impossible without modern advanced industry. Problem Statement. To launch structural and technological transformations, Ukraine needs to implement a systematic, consistent innovative industrial policy aiming at neo-industrialization as a basis for developing the domestic market, increasing exports of goods with a high added value, improving the quality of life, reducing poverty, and forming the middle class of society. Purpose. To determine the current trends in the innovative processes in Ukraine's industry by technology-in-tensive sectors from the standpoint of opportunities and threats for the neo-industrial development of Ukraine. Materials and Methods. The research is based on the Neo-Schumpeterian school and institutional theory and on the theoretical achievements of Ukrainian and foreign researchers on innovation and the implementation of structural and technological shifts in the economy. The methods of analysis and synthesis, logical generalization, system approach, and statistical analysis have been used. Results. The institutional foundations for the modernization and development of Ukrainian industry in ac-cordance with the modern world trends has been found underdeveloped. The innovative activities of industries in terms of costs and benefits, which are systematized according to the levels of manufacturability based on the Eurostat methodology have been analyzed. Unstable dynamics and a significant difference between technology-intensive sectors, a decrease in the knowledge intensity of innovation products, a low efficiency of investment in innovation in most industries, and a tendency towards simplifying the innovative activities in the industry have been revealed. Conclusion. The proposed directions and measures of innovation-based industrial policy are to facilitate neo-industrialization of Ukraine and to overcome its innovative and technological decline.

The purpose of the study is to reveal specific features of modern EU innovation policy in the context of its focus on sustainable European development and to conduct an assessment of the parameters of national innovation ecosystems of the EU member states with different innovation potential and Ukraine from the standpoint of their influence on the innovative development of countries worldwide. With the use of the correlation-regression analysis, the hypothesis of changing the parameters of national innovation ecosystems that affect the innovation of the EU member states and Ukraine in the global context depending on the level of their productivity and innovation potential was reiterated. The factors that have the greatest impact on the ranking of the countries in the Global Innovation Index, depending on which group the countries under study belong to according to the classification of the European Innovation Scoreboard, were identified. It was revealed that the set of such factors in each group of countries varies and has a different degree of influence on the level of their innovation development. Based on the results of the assessment, taking into account the need for a speedy post-war reconstruction of Ukraine, policy recommendations were made for Ukraine. Their implementation will ensure the systemic influence of the state on the national innovation ecosystem of the country.

The paper comprises a comparative analysis of provisions of neoclassical, institutional, neo-Schumpeterian economic theories and the developmental tradition in terms of reasons for and limits to the government interventions into innovation. The theory behind the innovation policy has been improved and systemized in accordance with these economic approaches, creating a firm foundation for scientifically substantiated choices of political tools aimed at solving problems in innovation and eliminating their causes. Research results highlight that any choice of political tools must take into account recommendations of various economic theories and the features of the specific country, i.e., whether it is developed or developing, post-industrial, industrial or agrarian, its culture and history, economic and political circumstances etc. Theoretical arguments serve as the substantiation for proposals on the need to reconceptualize the support network and innovation incentives in Ukraine.