TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATIONS AND ECOSYSTEM SUSTAINABILITY AS FACTORS OF SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONS
Abstract
The article proposes a model of the integrated impact of environmental sustainability, natural resources, innovation, and institutional quality on ensuring sustainable economic development. Ecosystem resilience, defined as its ability to withstand and recover from shocks, including climate change and epidemics, is key to sustainable economic development. Innovative practices, technologies, and business models can enhance resource productivity, reduce environmental impacts, and promote inclusive growth. Innovation can also increase resilience to external shocks and facilitate the transition to green growth. In conjunction with biocapacity, institutional efficiency plays a primary role in promoting sustainable economic development. This aspect concerns the quality and effectiveness of public institutions, as well as adherence to the principles of good governance and the rule of law. The proposed model considers sustainable development through the prism of such variables as gross domestic product per capita, natural resource rent, number of registered patents, institutional quality index, trade turnover to GDP ratio, biocapacity. The long-term and short-term impact of environmental sustainability, institutional quality, natural resource productivity, innovation and trade openness on the sustainable economic development of Ukraine is analyzed. The results obtained showed a positive and significant relationship between biocapacity and GDP per capita in the long term. An increase in environmental sustainability by one percent leads to an increase in sustainable economic development by an average of 0.193 points. This demonstrates that rich biodiversity in the ecosystem allows you to resist disturbances and achieve sustainable economic development. A positive and significant impact of institutional quality on sustainable economic development is established. This shows that a one percent improvement in institutional quality leads to an average increase in sustainable economic development of 0.161 percent in the long run. The short-term dynamics of the variables showed that in the near term, an increase in biocapacity or institutional quality may not have the expected positive impact on economic development. The impact of other variables is also not significant in the short term. This suggests that in the near term, fluctuations or changes in these factors may not have a noticeable impact on economic development.
References
Folke C. et al. Our future in the Anthropocene biosphere. Ambio. 2021. Vol. 50. P. 834–869.
Hassan S.T., Baloch M.A., Mahmood N., Zhang J. Linking economic growth and ecological footprint through human capital and biocapacity. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2019. Vol. 47. Article 101516.
Ni Z., Yang J., Razzaq A. How do natural resources, digitalization, and institutional governance contribute to ecological sustainability through load capacity factors in highly resource-consuming economies? Resour. Pol. 2022. Vol. 79. Article 103068.
Біленко В.О. Особливості економіко-математичного моделювання сталого розвитку. Економіка та держава. 2018. № 4. С. 66–69.
Ковальчук О., Гирила О. Моделювання економічних вимірів глобального сталого розвитку. Вісник Тернопільського національного економічного університету. 2019. № 1. С. 117-130.
Пивавар І. В., Пономаренко О. О., Дьячкова О. В. Моделювання сталого економічного розвитку в розрізі ресурсно-екологічної складової. Бізнес Інформ. 2024. №3. C. 183–192.
Тарасенко Д.Л. Моделювання еколого-економічних процесів для забезпечення ефективної соціальної політики у сталому регіональному зростанні. Вчені записки ТНУ імені В. І. Вернадського. Серія: Економіка і управління. 2018. Т. 29(68). № 5. С. 129–133.
Бондаренко Л., Блавт А. Акценти інвестування у сталий розвиток на принципах ESG в умовах воєнного стану в Україні. Економіка та суспільство. 2024. Вип. 59.
Васильчук І. П., Соколов А. О. Інвестиції бізнесу у сталий розвиток: кращі практики вітчизняних компаній. Інвестиції: практика та досвід. 2021. № 1. С. 46–52.
Гуменюк Я., Ткачов З. Інвестиції у сталий розвиток: світова практика та перспективи для України. Економіка та суспільство. 2024. Вип. 67.
Vimalnath P., Tietze F., Eppinger E., Jain A., Gurtoo A., Elsen M. Responsible intellectual property strategy for sustainability transition-An exploratory study. World Patent Inf. 2023. Vol. 73. Article 102195.
Franco S, Presenza A., Petruzzelli A.M. Boosting innovative business ideas through hackathons. The “Hack for Travel” case study. Eur. J. Innovat. Manag. 2021. Vol. 25. No. 6. P. 413–431.
Smith A.C., Harrison P.A., Leach N.J., Godfray H.C.J., Hall J.W., Jones S.M. et al. Sustainable pathways towards climate and biodiversity goals in the UK: the importance of managing land-use synergies and trade-offs. Sustain. Sci. 2023. Vol. 18. No. 1. P. 521–538.
Dakos V., Kéfi S. Ecological resilience: what to measure and how. Environ. Res. Lett. 2022. Vol. 17. No. 4. Article 043003.
Loisel J., Gallego-Sala A. Ecological resilience of restored peatlands to climate change. Commun. Earth & Environ. 2022. Vol. 3. Article 208.
Global Footprint Network. What Biocapacity measures. URL : https://www.footprintnetwork.org/what-biocapacity-measures/ (accessed April 18, 2026).
Pesaran M.H., Shin Y., Smith R.J. Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. J. Appl. Econ. 2001. Vol. 16. No. 3. P. 289–326.
Pesaran M.H. A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J. Appl. Econom. 2007. Vol. 22. No. 2. P. 265–312.
Westerlund J. Testing for error correction in panel data Oxf. Bull. Econ. Stat. 2007. Vol. 69. Iss. 6. P. 709–748.
Wang J., Jiang Q., Dong X., Dong K. Decoupling and decomposition analysis of investments and CO2 emissions in information and communication technology sector. Appl. Energy. 2021. Vol. 302. Article 117618.
Folke C. et al. (2021) Our future in the Anthropocene biosphere. Ambio, vol. 50. pp. 834–869.
Hassan S.T., Baloch M.A., Mahmood N., Zhang J. (2019) Linking economic growth and ecological footprint through human capital and biocapacity. Sustain. Cities Soc., vol. 47, 101516.
Ni Z., Yang J., Razzaq A. (2022) How do natural resources, digitalization, and institutional governance contribute to ecological sustainability through load capacity factors in highly resource-consuming economies? Resour. Pol., vol. 79, 103068.
Bilenko V.O. (2018) Osoblyvosti ekonomiko-matematychnoho modeliuvannia staloho rozvytku [Features of economics and mathematical modeling of sustainable development]. Ekonomika ta derzhava, no 4, pp. 66–69. (in Ukrainian)
Kovalchuk O., Hyryla O. (2019) Modeliuvannia ekonomichnykh vymiriv hlobalnoho staloho rozvytku [Modeling the economic dimensions of global sustainable development]. Visnyk Ternopilskoho natsionalnoho ekonomichnoho universytetu, no 1, pp. 117–130. (in Ukrainian)
Pyvavar I. V., Ponomarenko O. O., Diachkova O. V. (2024) Modeliuvannia staloho ekonomichnoho rozvytku v rozrizi resursno-ekolohichnoi skladovoi [Modeling sustainable economic development in terms of the resource and environmental component]. Biznes Inform, no. 3, pp. 183–192. (in Ukrainian)
Tarasenko D.L. (2018) Modeliuvannia ekoloho-ekonomichnykh protsesiv dlia zabezpechennia efektyvnoi sotsialnoi polityky u stalomu rehionalnomu zrostanni [Modeling of ecological and economic processes to ensure effective social policy in sustainable regional growth]. Vcheni zapysky TNU imeni V. I. Vernadskoho. Seriia: Ekonomika i upravlinnia, vol. 29(68), no 5, pp. 129–133. (in Ukrainian)
Bondarenko L., Blavt A. (2024) Aktsenty investuvannia u stalyi rozvytok na pryntsypakh ESG v umovakh voiennoho stanu v Ukraini [Emphasis on investing in sustainable development based on ESG principles under martial law in Ukraine]. Ekonomika ta suspilstvo, no. 59. (in Ukrainian)
Vasylchuk I. P., Sokolov A. O. (2021) Investytsii biznesu u stalyi rozvytok: krashchi praktyky vitchyznianykh kompanii [Business investments in sustainable development: best practices of domestic companies]. Investytsii: praktyka ta dosvid, no. 1, pp. 46–52. (in Ukrainian)
Humeniuk Ya., Tkachov Z. (2024) Investytsii u stalyi rozvytok: svitova praktyka ta perspektyvy dlia Ukrainy [Investments in sustainable development: global practice and prospects for Ukraine]. Ekonomika ta suspilstvo, no. 67. (in Ukrainian)
Vimalnath P., Tietze F., Eppinger E., Jain A., Gurtoo A., Elsen M. (2023) Responsible intellectual property strategy for sustainability transition-An exploratory study. World Patent Inf., vol. 73, 102195.
Franco S, Presenza A., Petruzzelli A.M. (2021) Boosting innovative business ideas through hackathons. The “Hack for Travel” case study. Eur. J. Innovat. Manag., vol. 25, no. 6, pp. 413–431.
Smith A.C., Harrison P.A., Leach N.J., Godfray H.C.J., Hall J.W., Jones S.M., et al. (2023) Sustainable pathways towards climate and biodiversity goals in the UK: the importance of managing land-use synergies and trade-offs. Sustain. Sci., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 521–538.
Dakos V., Kéfi S. (2022) Ecological resilience: what to measure and how. Environ. Res. Lett., vol. 17, no. 4, 043003.
Loisel J., Gallego-Sala A. (2022) Ecological resilience of restored peatlands to climate change. Commun. Earth & Environ., vol. 3, 208.
Global Footprint Network. What Biocapacity measures. URL : https://www.footprintnetwork.org/what-biocapacity-measures/ (accessed April 18, 2026).
Pesaran M.H., Shin Y., Smith R.J. (2001) Bounds testing approaches to the analysis of level relationships. J. Appl. Econ., vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 289–326.
Pesaran M.H. (2007) A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J. Appl. Econom., vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 265–312.
Westerlund J. (2007) Testing for error correction in panel data Oxf. Bull. Econ. Stat., vol. 69, iss. 6, pp. 709–748.
Wang J., Jiang Q., Dong X., Dong K. (2021) Decoupling and decomposition analysis of investments and CO2 emissions in information and communication technology sector. Appl. Energy, vol. 302, 117618.
Copyright (c) 2026 Михайло Курилюк
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
