Dmytro Svynarenko

Type of the article: Research Article

Abstract
This study investigates the structural relationships between educational and scientific regulatory interventions and socio-economic development in countries affected by armed conflict and political instability, using the framework of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), specifically SDG 4 (Quality Education), SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), and SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure). Rather than focusing on regulatory interventions in a narrow administrative sense, SDG 4 is conceptualized as a reflection of national efforts to improve access to and quality of education, including institutional reforms, policy initiatives, and capacity-building measures in post-conflict settings. The analysis covers 16 countries affected by conflict and instability across Eastern Europe, including Ukraine; the Balkans (Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Serbia, Slovenia); the Middle East (Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Syrian Arab Republic, Turkey); and the South Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia), using data from 2011 to 2020. Employing multivariate confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), the study reveals statistically significant and conceptually meaningful covariances between the selected SDGs. The strongest relationship is observed between SDG 8 and SDG 9, underscoring the interdependence of economic growth, industrial development, and innovation. Moderate but significant correlations between SDG 4 and both SDG 8 and SDG 9 highlight the foundational role of education in enabling socio-economic recovery and technological advancement. Key indicators such as primary school completion, secondary and tertiary enrollment, employment in industry and services, and high-tech value-added production serve as measurable proxies for these dynamics. The findings emphasize the importance of aligning education policy with broader development strategies to support resilience and sustainable growth in fragile contexts.

Acknowledgments and research funding
This research was funded by the European Union grants “NextGenerationEU through the Recovery and Resilience Plan for Slovakia” (No. 09I03-03-V01-00130) and “Immersive Marketing in Education: Model Testing and Consumers’ Behavior” (No. 09I03-03-V04-00522/2024/VA). This research was also prepared as part of project 0124U000545.

Type of the article: Research Article

Abstract
This study develops and empirically tests a composite framework for assessing the digital and innovation capacity of Ukrainian regions. The aim is to evaluate the impact of digital innovation capacity on regional economic performance under conditions of systemic disruption with the Virtual Grow Poles Index (VGPI) which captures four dimensions using observable indicators: 1) digital infrastructure readiness, 2) mobile internet coverage and uptake of digital public services, 3) startup ecosystem activity, and 4) governance and civic collaboration, which reflects participatory budgeting intensity, use of civic tech platforms, and open-data engagement.
Using a panel dataset of 24 Ukrainian regions for 2018–2024, we apply correlation analysis and fixed-effects regression models to quantify the contribution of digital and innovation capacity to regional economic performance. The VGPI shows a moderate yet stable correlation with per capita GRP growth (r ≈ 0.50). Regression estimates show that a 0.1 increase in VGPI is associated with an additional 0.07–0.09 percentage point increase in regional GRP growth, controlling for unemployment, industrial structure, and war exposure. Most substantial effects are observed in regions with high digital readiness and collaborative governance (Kyiv City, Lviv and Dnipropetrovsk regions), while war-affected regions (Sumy, Chernihiv, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson regions) show substantially lower VGPI values and weaker economic performance. These findings suggest that in conditions of severe structural disruption caused by Russia’s war against Ukraine, strengthened digital ecosystems and collaborative governance structures can partially compensate for damaged physical infrastructure and enhance regional resilience.