United territorial communities strategies in the context of sustainable development policy implementation

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Analysis of the united territorial communities strategies in the context of sustainable development policy implementation

Yuriy M. Petrushenko, Anna S. Vorontsova,

Oksana S. Ponomarenko, Kostiantyn O. DerbenoV.



The concept of sustainable development has been considered as the main ideological paradigm of human existence. It is oriented not only on economic but also on social and environmental development. Its main ideas are grouped into Global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), which found their implementation at the national level of different countries, including Ukraine. They are also documented in such important political documents, as programs and strategies of the socio-economic development of the regions and the united territorial communities that have been formed due to the decentralization reform. The research paper analyses the number of SDGs which are adapted to the national (Ukraine) and regional (Sumy) levels. During the study, the aggregated ratings of SDGs according to their significance have been proposed. The study results reveal the priority directions of sustainable development of the whole country and its regional development vector. At the country level, the main trends have been highlighted: firstly economic, which involves the development of industry and infrastructure, increase in innovations, energy efficiency and secondly social, which includes improvement of healthcare, a justice system, and education. As for regional development, the main vectors have also been determined as economic growth, which is primarily due to the betterment in the labor market, the development of industry and infrastructure and social improvement, which is related to poverty reduction and improvements in quality of education, cooperation, and partnership. At the local level, the nine Strategies of united territorial communities of Sumy region were analyzed for using the methodology of sustainable development. Their main priorities have been appealed as followings: the openness, security, vitality and environmental sustainability of cities and towns; the strengthening of the global partnership for sustainable development; the establishment of sustainable infrastructure, the promotion of comprehensive and sustainable industrialization and innovation.



Анализ стратегического обоснования территориальных общин в контексте реализации политики устойчивого развития

Концепция устойчивого развития все больше приобретает признаки основной идеологической парадигмы существования человечества, ориентируется не только на экономическое, но и социальное и экологическое развитие. Основные ее идеи, которые сгруппированы в глобальных Целях устойчивого развития, постепенно имплементируются на национальные уровни различных стран, в том числе и Украины, находя свое отражение в таких важных политических документах, как Программы и Стратегии социально-экономического развития регионов или даже объединенных территориальных общин, возникших в процессе реформы децентрализации. В данной статье было детально проанализировано количество адаптированных целей устойчивого развития на национальном (Украина) и региональном (Сумская область) уровнях, а также предложены сведенные рейтинги их важности. По полученным результатам были выявлены приоритетные направления устойчивого развития страны в целом (прежде всего экономический, предусматривающий развитие промышленности и инфраструктуры, повышение инновационности, энергоэффективности и социальный, предусматривающий улучшение уровня здравоохранения, правосудия и образования), и ее региональный вектор развития (экономический рост, обусловленный, прежде всего, улучшением ситуации на рынке труда, а уже потом развитием промышленности и инфраструктуры, социальное улучшение, что связано с преодолением бедности и улучшением состояния и качества образования, налаживанием сотрудничества и партнерства). На местном уровне были проанализированы стратегии девяти объединённых территориальных общин Сумской области на предмет использования методологии устойчивого развития. Их основными приоритетами были выявлены обеспечение открытости, безопасности, жизнестойкости и экологической устойчивости городов и населенных пунктов и укрепление глобального партнерства в интересах устойчивого развития, а также создание устойчивой инфраструктуры, содействие всеобъемлющей и устойчивой индустриализации и инновациям.

Ключевые слова: объединённая территориальная община, устойчивое развитие, стратегия, глобальная цель устойчивого развития, национальная цель устойчивого развития, региональное развитие.



Аналіз стратегій об'єднаних територіальних громад в контексті реалізації політики сталого розвитку

Концепція сталого розвитку все більше набуває ознак основної ідеологічної парадигми існування людства, що орієнтується не лише на економічний, а й на соціальний та екологічний розвиток. Основні її ідеї, що згруповані в глобальних Цілях сталого розвитку, поступово імплементуються на національних рівнях багатьох країн, у тому числі і України, знаходячи своє відображення у таких важливих політичних документах як Програми та Стратегії соціально- економічного розвитку регіонів чи навіть об'єднаних територіальних громад, що виникли в процесі реформи децентралізації. В даній статті було детально проаналізовано кількість адаптованих цілей сталого розвитку на національному (Україна) та регіональному (Сумська область) рівнях, а також запропоновано зведені рейтинги їх важливості. За отриманими результатами було виявлено пріоритетні напрями сталого розвитку країни в цілому (передусім економічний, що передбачає розвиток промисловості та інфраструктури, підвищення інноваційності, енергоефективності та соціальних, що передбачає покращення рівня охорони здоров'я, правосуддя та освіти), та її регіональний вектор розвитку (економічне зростання, що пов'язано з передусім покращенням ситуації на ринку праці, а вже потім розвитком промисловості і інфраструктури, соціальне покращення, що пов'язано з подоланням бідності та покращенням стану та якості освіти, налагодженням співпраці та партнерства). На місцевому рівні було проаналізовано стратегії дев'ятьох об'єднаних територіальних громад Сумської області на предмет використання методології сталого розвитку. Їх основними пріоритетами були виявлені забезпечення відкритості, безпеки, життєстійкості й екологічної стійкості міст і населених пунктів та зміцнення глобального партнерства в інтересах сталого розвитку, а також створення стійкої інфраструктури, сприяння всеохоплюючій і сталій індустріалізації та інноваціям.

Ключові слова: об'єднана територіальна громада, сталий розвиток, стратегія, глобальна ціль сталого розвитку, національна ціль сталого розвитку, регіональний розвиток.



Introduction

Recently the sustainable development is considered to be the prior ideological concept of the 21^st century in the world community. The main reason for this is the integrated approach used in the paradigm of sustainable development, which gives an opportunity to get a better understanding of the current state of our civilization. Comparing this concept, other economic theories and even ideologies appeared to be fragmentary. Thus they cannot fully meet the issues of civilization. According to the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development, it aimed to satisfy the needs of modern society to provide future generations with the ability to meet their requirements [7].

The principles of sustainable development have been included in the development of strategies and plans regarding humanity, such as economic development, social development, and environmental protection, since 2000. This moment assumed to be as the beginning of the concept of sustainable development as the main ideological paradigm of human existence. The 2030 Sustainable Development Agenda was adopted by all the United Nations members at the General Assembly in 2015 and identified 17 SDGs or Global goals that are represented in 169 tasks.

For now, the Ukrainian government has adopted the SDGs based on national specificity, which is reflected in 86 national development tasks and 172 indicators for their monitoring [9]. It should be noted that this is almost half of the tasks identified by the United Nations.

It should be also admitted that the Strategy of Sustainable Development of Ukraine up to 2030, developed by experts with financial support from the United Nations Development Program in Ukraine and the Global Environment Facility [12], is still needed to be legally established (for now, there is a draft law N 9015). The Strategy, proposed for Ukraine by United Nations Development Programme experts, considered to be a framework document to identify the strategic directions in terms of long-term balanced development of Ukraine and its regions and local communities. This strategy is especially important for working out the trends of development for recently formed united territorial communities.



Problem statement

The establishment of the basic ideas of the concept of sustainable development is usually associated with the representatives of the Rome Club (W. Behrens and Е. E. Pestel, H. Daly, D. Meadows, J. Forrester and others [1]). They studied the main challenges of human civilization and worked to find ways to solve them. The world community realized that the resources are limited and their reckless growing consumption could lead mankind to new global crises.

The result of this research brings up the forming of GSDGs and modern society aims to match them. Another reason for the development of the conception is ecologic-centered sciences that became popular at the edge of the 19th and 20th centuries. Due to all these reasons, the concept of sustainable development was adopted to the level of international organizations, and subsequently to the United Nations.

The need for national adaptation of the sustainable development concept and its implementation at local levels outlined the prospects for further research. In terms of the decentralization reform, UTC were formed in Ukraine, they appeared to be a focus of study for such authors as Vasilchenko G. [4], Parasyuk I., Yeremenko N., Gordeeva O. K. [5], Sharia V. I., Dendemarchenko H. H. [13] and many others. Bezugly O. [3], Zalutsky I., Brusak R., Shevchuk B. [6] considered the functioning and development of UTC through the concept of sustainable development. However, the issue of the relevance of the regional and local strategies to the national strategy and the GSDGs itself got insufficient attention in the scientific literature, which determines the relevance of our research.

The purpose. The aim of this paper is to analyze the UTC strategies due to the main priorities of sustainable development policies at the national, regional and local levels and find how the strategic development vectors of different authorities match each other.



Results of the research

The normative and legal base of the UTC is the Law of Ukraine “About Voluntary Association of Territorial Communities”, by art. 6 they are defined as “the primary subject of local self-government, the main bearer of its functions and powers” [10]. According to this law, “adjacent territorial communities of villages, settlements, cities” can be united in the UTC [10]. Thus, UTC became a key-point in the further local and regional policy of the Ukrainian government. As of December 23, 2018, elections were held in 828 communities, 879 communities are currently waiting for status for the election.

UTC has expanded fiscal, economic, and institutional-legal capabilities compared to the populated areas of their membership. Also, we can observe that the higher the number of UTC population, the higher the income for one inhabitant of the community. Instead, communities with low population have limited potential for sustainable development and reproduction, and it is difficult for them to provide the necessary services. Due to this reform, the responsibility for the policy of sustainable economic development was transferred from the state and region authorities to local self-government of UTC.

First of all, in this research, we propose to analyze the peculiarities of GSDGs adaptation for Ukraine. We chose 86 national development tasks from a total of 169 tasks and 172 indicators for their monitoring. It should be noted that 43 tasks are “accounted”, but not adapted to national tasks, so the number of global tasks of sustainable development goals that are adapted or taken into account at the national level is 129. On the basis of a detailed analysis, we present a summary Table 1 that shows the share of adapted tasks, both individually and with the “accounted” tasks.



Table 1 Analyses of GSDGs adaptability at the national level

№	Sustainable Development Goals	The share of adapted tasks, %	The share of adapted tasks with the “accounted” tasks, %
1	2	3	4
1.	End poverty in all its forms everywhere	42,86 %	71,43 %.
2.	End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture	50,00 %	75,00 %
3.	Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages	72,73 %	100,00 %
4.	Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all	70,00 %	80,00 %
5.	Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls	66,67 %	77,78 %
6.	Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all	62,50 %	75,00 %
7.	Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all	80,00 %	80,00 %

Source: the authors' own calculations based on [9].

united territorial sustainable development

On the basis of the analyzed data, we aimed to calculate the aggregated rating of the correspondence of the national SDGs to the global ones. The methodological tools for the aggregated rating calculations were the following: “accounted” tasks, we consider as partially adapted, and assigned them a significance of 0,5 from the adapted ones. The results are presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1. The aggregated rating of the national SDGs correspondence to the global ones due to the number of adapted tasks (National rating)

Source: the authors' own calculations based on [9]

The calculations present the result of how the national SDGs quantitatively match to the global ones, which show the level of coherence national SDGs to the global ones. We can also assume it as the level of government's attention to certain SDGs according to their quantitative performance or in the form of adaptation of certain GSDGs tasks at the national level. In this limelight the most adapted goals are (we use the reduced national definitions >= 75 %):

- Goal 9. Industry, innovation, and infrastructure (100 %);

- Goal 3. Strong health and well-being (86,37 %);

- Goal 16. Peace, justice and strong institutions (83,34 %);

- Goal 7. Clean and Available energy (80 %);

- Goal 4. Good quality of education (75 %).

The least adapted goals (we use the reduced national definitions, < 50 %) are:

- Goal 17. Partnership for Sustainable Development (34,21 %);

- Goal 14. Conservation of marine resources (35 %);

- Goal 13. The decrease of the influence of climate change effects (40 %).

The general aggregated level of coherence of the national SDGs to the global according to a quantitative number of the adapted tasks is - 63,6 %.

The next step of our research devoted to the regional level, we propose to analyze the strategy of Sumy region development for the period till 2020 [11]. It was formed under the concept of decentralization reform and based on the real interests of the population, social groups, existing institutions, business and the third sector, guided by the principle of “no one left out”. The regional strategy is determined by the combination of medium-term (task) and long-term (direction) planning cycles. It aims to adapt the region development to economic changes by improving its competitive position. In these terms, we emphasize the significance of production factors: human resources, information, and technology, capital and infrastructure.

Speaking about vector-methodological tools, the following are used: the number of references of methods, principles, goals, and tasks consistent with the SDGs and the global tasks that implement them:

- Goal 17 - 14 times.

- Goal 9 - 5 times.

- Goal 8 - 5 times.

- Goal 4 - 5 times.

- Goal 11 - 4 times.

- Goal 2 - 3 times.

- Goal 16 - 3 times.

- Goal 12 - 3 times.

- Goal 1 - 1 time.

- Goal 10 - 1 time.

- Goal 3, 5, 6, 7, 13, 14, 15 not mentioned in the methodological-vector part.

The strategy of regional development of the Sumy region for the period up to 2020 identified a number of strategic tasks and operational objectives:

1. Development of the regional economic potential. (№ 8, № 1 GSDGs).

1.1. Creation of new high-tech productions and innovative forms of enterprise organization (№ 8, № 9 GSDGs).

1.2. Stimulating the development of small and medium businesses (№ 8, № 9 GSDGs).

1.3. Development of the domestic and inbound tourism (№ 8, № 9, № 15 GSDGs).

1.4. Enhancing of energy efficiency in all sectors (№ 7, № 8 GSDGs).

2. Development of the rural territories (№ 2, № 11, № 8 GSDGs).

2.1. Increasing of the level of production efficiency in the agrarian sector (№ 2, № 8, № 9, № 1 GSDGs).

2.2. Development of the rural territories and periphery around small cities (№ 11, № 8, № 4, № 9, № 1, № 3 GSDGs).

3. Human capital development (№ 4, № 8, № 1 GSDGs).

3.1. Increasing the adaptability of the population to the needs of the labour market (№ 4, № 1, № 8 GSDGs).

3.2. Raise of awareness and social activity of the inhabitants (№ 10, № 4, № 12, № 8, № 17, № 9, № 16, № 3 GSDGs).

3.3. Improvement of the regional management system (№ 17, № 16 GSDGs).

In general, the number of references to each of the global goals of sustainable development:

- Goal 8 - 11 times.

- Goal 9 - 6 times.

- Goal 1 - 5 times.

- Goal 4 - 4 times.

- Goal 17 - 2 times.

- Goal 11 - 2 times.

- Goal 2 - 2 times.

- Goal 3 - 2 times.

- Goal 16 - 2 times.

- Goal 12 - 1 time.

- Goal 10 - 1 time.

- Goal 15 - 1 time.

- Goal 7 - 1 time.

- Goals № 5, № 6, № 13, № 14 are not mentioned in the document.

Due to the results of our research, we elaborate the aggregated rating of the importance of the SDGs based on the comparison of the ratings according to the strategy methodology and the strategic goals (Table 2).



Table 2 The regional rating of the importance of the SDGs, the ratings due to the strategy methodology and the strategic goals

The regional rating (aggregated)	The ratings due to the strategy methodology	The rating due to strategy goals	The name of the Sustainable Development Goals
і	2	3	4
і	2	1	Goal 8: Promote sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, full and productive employment and decent work for all
2	2	2	Goal 9: Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation
3	2	4	Goal 4: Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all
3	1	5	Goal 17: Strengthen the means of implementation and revitalize the global partnership for sustainable development
5	5	5	Goal 11. Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable
6	6	5	Goal 2: End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition and promote sustainable agriculture
6	6	5	Goal 16. Promote peaceful and inclusive societies for sustainable development, provide access to justice for all and build effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels
8	9	3	Goal 1: End poverty in all its forms everywhere
9	11	5	Goal 3: Ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages
9	6	10	Goal 12: Ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns
11	9	10	Goal 10: Reduce inequality within and among countries
12	11	10	Goal 7: Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable and modern energy for all
12	11	10	Goal 15: Protect, restore and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, and halt and reverse land degradation and halt biodiversity loss
14	11	14	Goal 5: Achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls
14	11	14	Goal 6: Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all
14	11	14	Goal 13: Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts
14	11	14	Goal 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development

Source: the authors' own calculations based on [11].



Table 3 Analysis of the conformity of the strategic goals of the regional level (Sumy region) and the national level

Rating level	Order number of SDG
	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17
National rating	12	10	2	5	6	8	4	9	1	11	7	13	15	16	14	3	17
Regional rating	8	6	9	3	14	14	12	1	2	11	5	9	14	14	12	6	3
Discrepancy	4	3,5	7,5	1,5	9,5	7,5	7,5	8	1	0	2	3,5	0,5	0,5	1,5	3,5	12,5

To make the results more clearly we explain the rating methodology in detail. If the same goals have a similar position in the ratings according to the strategy methodology rating or the strategy goals rating, we assign them the number in a next way: the number of goals that have a higher rating significance + 1. Thus, if there are two goals that would rank the seventh position, then the next goal would obtain the ninth rating positions because there are eight (n-1) more priority and important goals. This is important because some goals have the same positions in both ratings, and in our case, the differentiation of rating positions increases the accuracy of the final aggregated rating what makes the real situation clearer. To clarify the methodology we briefly review the example based on two ratings: one rating has one goal on the first position, other on the second and so on; the other rating has two options (goals) at the first position, and further positions are occupied only by one goal. In this case, it leads to the artificial predisposition to the second-ranking that may cause the misrepresentation final ranking and in the aggregated indicator. To deal with this issue, the rating position is determined by the number of previous rating positions. For further estimation of the discrepancies between regional and national goals, the averaged indicators would be used. It means that if two goals occupy the 7th position, then the same goals occupy the 8th position as well, thus, we expect the position of such goals as arithmetic mean of simple arithmetic progression in which the number of members is equal to the number of goals occupying this position: i = (n + (n + 1) +... + (n + k)) / (k + 1). Thereby, if two goals occupy the 7th position, their priority and the subsequent rating position will be calculated as 7,5. In the case when three goals held the same position, for example, the 10th, we would count this as follows: (10 + 11 + 12) / 3 = 11.

Summing up the results of analyses of Strategies of the Sumy regional development we found that the local vector of priority goals diverges from the national level. Discrepancies in goals are presented in Table 3.

The average arithmetic difference is 4,35. It should be noted that GSDG 17 ranks as first in the ratings due to the strategy methodology, as the third in the regional rating and the last in the national one. It should be mentioned that GSDG 8 takes the first position in the rating due to the strategic goal and in the regional ratings, but it ranks nine in the national one. Significant discrepancy we observe in 3 GSDG 3, it gets the second position in the national and ninth in the regional ratings. Significant matches on defining positions were found: GSDG № 9, № 4, № 11 (discrepancy ±2) and № 16, № 2 (discrepancy ± 4). The study result and the discrepancy show a lack of awareness of the government from the needs of the population.

The final step in our study is to analyze the nine UTC strategies of the Sumy region in the context of the implementation of sustainable development policies (Table 4) at the national, regional and local levels. We aimed to discover the common features in the usage of sustainable development methodology. The “usage” was chosen as the 18th feature for analysis.

According to the results of the comparative analysis, the average difference between the national and regional rating is 4,35. The average difference between the UTC level and the regional level is 2,24. The average difference between the national level and the UTC level is 5,18. It should be noted that the maximum mathematically possible deviation is 8,5 positions.



Table 4 Analysis of the match of the UTC goals and tasks to the SDGs

№ SDG / name of UTC	Boromlyans'ka	Dubov'yazivs' ka	Kyrykivs'ka	Krasnopil's'ka	Mykolayivs'ka	Myropil's'ka	Nedrygajlivs'ka	Stepanivs'ka	Xotins'ka	Summarize
і	3	+	+	-	4	2	3	2	2	8(18)
2	2	+	3	-	+	+	2	+	+	8(12)
3	2	2	+	3	2	3	2	+	2	9(18)
4	5	+	4	4	2	3	8	4	3	9(34)
5	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	0(0)
6	+	+	+	+	+	-	2	3	+	8(11)
7	+	+	+	3	+	+	3	+	+	9(13)
8	4	5	6	3	4	2	10	7	4	9(45)
9	3	3	4	4	7	5	4	6	11	9(47)
10	2	-	-	+	+	-	3	+	-	5(8)
11	10	10	2	16	14	7	13	11	6	9(89)
12	2	4	5	2	+	+	3	4	4	9(26)
13	+	2	3	+	-	3	3	3	-	7(16)
14	Not relevant for the region
15	+	2	2	+	-	4	2	5	-	7(17)
16	+	2	2	4	3	+	7	3	+	9(24)
17	4	4	5	4	4	7	7	7	5	9(47)
18	-	-	-	+/-	+	-	+	-	2	3,5(4,5)
Summarize	15(42)	13(39)	14(35)	13,5(46,5)	15(46)	13(40)	16(73)	15(58)	13(52)	Х

Source: the authors' own calculations based on [8].

The resulted SDG rating due to their usage in strategic plans of united territorial communities in Sumy is represented in Figure 2.

Figure 2. The UTC goals rating



Table 5 The aggregated rating of the UTC goals of Sumy region in comparison with the regional and national strategy

Ratings/Order number of SDG	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12	13	14	15	16	17
1. National rating	12	10	2	5	6	8	4	9	1	11	7	13	15	16	14	3	17
2. Regional rating	8	6	9	3	14	14	12	1	2	11	5	9	14	14	12	6	3
3. The UTC goals rating	9	13	8	5	16	14	12	4	3	15	1	6	11	17	10	7	2
Discrepancy 1 & 2	4	3,5	7,5	1,5	9,5	7,5	7,5	8	1	0	2	3,5	0,5	0,5	1,5	3,5	12,5
Discrepancy 2 & 3	1	5,5	1,5	1,5	0,5	1,5	0,5	3	1	4	4	3,5	4,5	1,5	2,5	0,5	1,5
Discrepancy 1 & 3	3	3	6	0	10	6	8	5	2	4	6	7	4	1	4	4	15

As a result of our research, we should conclude that national-level strategic plans, in comparison with regional and local ones, have significant discrepancies. The actual comparative analysis of the goals and tasks of the UTC strategies shows the significant coincidence with the GSDG, from 75 % to 93,75 %. At the same time, the share of UTC that do not use the methodology of sustainable development in their strategies is 66,67 %.



Conclusions and prospects of further research

The research analysis of the SDGs implementation process in Ukraine at the national, regional (Sumy region) and local (9 UTC of the Sumy region) levels confirmed the existing discrepancies among them. At the regional level, the existing strategic plans have a rather high level of coincidence with the sustainable development goals (75,00 %-93,75 %). On the other hand, the share of UTC, which matched their strategies for sustainable development, is rather low (33,33 %). According to the study results, we summarize that the development of strategies was based on the simplified methodology and used the SDG methodology fragmentary. This approach in long-term planning may cause the issues for social, economic and ecological systems of UTC. It leads to methodological dependence on a central support, which should observe the accuracy of the development vector of its methodologically subordinate systems. Without a holistic methodology, it would be difficult for UTC to formulate their own goals and strategies, especially after the implementation of current strategic plans. This methodology compromises the performance of the long-term prospects for their development and the implementation of the sustainable development concept as itself.



References

1. Daly, H. (1991). Steady-State Economics: 2nd edition. Island Press, Washington DC, 286.

2. Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L., Randers, J., Behrens, W. (1972). The Limits to Growth. A Report for the Club of Rome's Project on the Predicament of Mankind. New York: Universe Books, 205.

3. Bezuhlyy, O. V. (2008). Terytorial'na hromada v Ukrayini: napryamy ta chynnyky staloho rozvytku [Territorial community in Ukraine: directions and factors of sustainable development]. (avtoref. dys....kand. nauk z derzh. upr.: 25.00.04). Kharkiv. rehion. in.-t derzh. upr.; Nats. akad. derzh. upr. pry Prezydentovi Ukrayiny. Kharkiv, 20.

4. Vasyl'chenko, H., Parasyuk, I., Yeremenko, N. (2015). Planuvannya rozvytku terytorial'nykh hromad [Planning of development of territorial communities]. Navchal'nyy posibnyk dlya posadovykh osib mistsevoho samovryaduvannya. Asotsiatsiya mist Ukrayiny. K.: TOV «PIDPRYYEMSTVO «VI EN EY», 256. Retrieved from https//auc.org.ua/sites/default/files/library/1plangrweb.pdf.

5. Hordyeyev, O. K. (2014). Mekhanizmy zabezpechennya staloho rozvytku terytorial'noyi hromady [Mechanisms for the sustainable development of the territorial community]. (PhD thesis). Nats. akad. derzh. upr. pry Prezydentovi Ukrayiny. Odes. rehion. in't derzh. upr. Odesa, 200.

6. Zaluts'kyy, I., Brusak, R., Shevchuk, B. ta in. (2008). Osnovy staloho rozvytku terytorial'noyi hromady [Fundamentals of Sustainable Development of a Territorial Community]. Navchal'nyy posibnyk. Kyiv: NADU, 64.

7. Korobko, B. (2007). Enerhetyka ta stalyy rozvytok [Engineering and Sustainable Development]. Informatsiynyy posibnyk dlya ukrayins'kykh ZMI. Kyiv, 44. Retrieved from http://archive.mama- 86.org/archive/files/esd_new_web.pdf.

8. Media-platforma Sums'koho «Tsentru rozvytku mistsevoho samovryaduvannya» [Media platform of

the Sumy Center for Local Self-Government Development]. Retrieved from

http://ufuti.pro/strategies.html?fbclid=IwAR2L-vALc8u3XO1EkpFjYAlz2- d7PzWdShfwLmAuDBDwrKh3tf9VHsW_m1g.

9. Natsional'na dopovid': Tsili Staloho Rozvytku: Ukrayina [National Report: Sustainable Development Goals: Ukraine]. Retrieved from http://un.org.ua/images/SDGs_NationalReportUA_Web_1.pdf.

10. Pro dobrovil'ne ob'yednannya terytorial'nykh hromad [About Voluntary Association of Territorial

Communities]. Zakon Ukrayiny vid 05.02.2015 # 157-VIII. Retrieved from

https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/157-19.

11. Stratehiya rehional'noho rozvytku Sums'koyi oblasti na period do 2020 roku [Strategy of regional

development of the Sumy region for the period till 2020]. Rishennya shostoho sklykannya Sums'koyi oblasnoyi rady vid 09.04.2015. Retrieved from

http://dfrr.minregion.gov.ua/foto/projt_reg_info_norm/2016/02/Strategiya-regionalnogo-rozvitku- Sumskoyi-oblasti-na-period-do-2020-roku-ta-Plan-yiyi-realizatsiyi-na-2015-2017-roki.pdf.

12. Stratehiya staloho rozvytku Ukrayiny do 2030 roku [The Strategy of Ukraine's Sustainable Development till 2030]. Ofitsiynyy sayt Prohramy rozvytku Orhanizatsiyi ob'yednanykh natsiy. Retrieved from http://www.ua.undp.org/content/ukraine/uk/home/operations/projects/closed- projects/integrating-rio-provisions.html.

13. Sharyy, V. I., Dendemarchenko, H. H. (2010). Metodyka stratehichnoho upravlinnya rozvytkom terytorial'noyi hromady v Ukrayini [Methodology of Strategic Management of Territorial Communities Development in Ukraine]. Universytets'ki naukovi zapysky, 4, 291-298. Retrieved from http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Unzap2010450.



Література

1. Daly, H. Steady-State Economics / H. Daly. - 2nd edition. - Island Press, Washington, DC, 1991. -286 p.

2. Meadows, D. H. The Limits to Growth / D. H. Meadows, D. L. Meadows, J. Randers, W. Behrens. A Report for the Club of Rome's Project on the Predicament of Mankind. - New York: Universe Books, 1972. - 205 p.

3. Безуглий, О. В. Територіальна громада в Україні: напрями та чинники сталого розвитку: автореф. дис....канд. наук з держ. упр.: 25.00.04. / О. В. Безуглий. - Харків. регіон. ін.-т держ. упр. Нац. акад. держ. упр. при Президентові України. Харків, 2008. - 20 с.

4. Васильченко, Г. Планування розвитку територіальних громад: навчальний посібник для посадових осіб місцевого самоврядування [Електронний ресурс] / Г. Васильченко, І. Парасюк, Єременко. Асоціація міст України. - К., ТОВ «ПІДПРИЄМСТВО «ВІ ЕН ЕЙ», 2015. - 256 с. - Режим доступу: https//auc.org.ua/sites/default/files/library/1plangrweb.pdf/.

5. Гордєєв, О. К. Механізми забезпечення сталого розвитку територіальної громади: дис.... канд. наук з держ. упр.: 25.00.04 / О. К. Гордєєв. Нац. акад. держ. упр. при Президентові України. Одес. регіон. ін'т держ. упр. Одеса, 2014. - 200 с.

6. Залуцький, І. Основи сталого розвитку територіальної громади: навчальний посібник / Залуцький, Р. Брусак, Б. Шевчук та ін. - Київ: НАДУ, 2008. - 64 с.

7. Коробко, Б. Енергетика та сталий розвиток: інформаційний посібник для українських ЗМІ [Електронний ресурс] / Б. Коробко. - Київ, 2007. - 44 с. - Режим доступу: http://archive.mama- 86.org/archive/files/esd_new_web.pdf.

8. Медіа-платформа Сумського «Центру розвитку місцевого самоврядування» [Електронний ресурс]. - Режим доступу: http://ufuti.pro/strategies.html?fbclid=rwAR2L-

vALc8u3XO1EkpFjYAIz2-d7PzWdShfwLmAuDBDwrKh3tf9VHsWm1g.

9. Національна доповідь: Цілі Сталого Розвитку: Україна [Електронний ресурс]. - Режим доступу: http://un.org.ua/images/SDGs_NationalReportUA_Web_1.pdf.

10. Про добровільне об'єднання територіальних громад: Закон України від 05.02.2015 № 157-VIII [Електронний ресурс]. - Режим доступу: https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/157-19.

11. Стратегія регіонального розвитку Сумської області на період до 2020 року: рішення шостого скликання Сумської обласної ради від 09.04.2015. - Режим доступу:

http://dfrr.minregion.gov.ua/foto/projt_reg_info_norm/2016/02/Strategiya-regionalnogo-rozvitku- Sumskoyi-oblasti-na-period-do-2020-roku-ta-Plan-yiyi-realizatsiyi-na-2015-2017-roki.pdf.

12. Стратегія сталого розвитку України до 2030 року [Електронний ресурс]. Офіційний сайт Програми розвитку Організації об'єднаних націй. - Режим доступу: http://www.ua.undp.org/content/ukraine/uk/home/operations/projects/closed-projects/integrating-rio- provisions.html.

13. Шарий, В. І. Методика стратегічного управління розвитком територіальної громади в Україні [Електронний ресурс] / В. І. Шарий, Г. Г. Дендемарченко // Університетські наукові записки. - 2010. - № 4. - С. 29і-298. - Режим доступу: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/Unzap2010450.

Размещено на Allbest.ru

...