METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT  OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN UKRAINE

Tetyana Ponedilchuk; Tamara Prykhodko

doi:10.35774/ibo2022.03-04.067

METHODOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP IN UKRAINE

Tetyana Ponedilchuk, Tamara Prykhodko

Abstract

Introduction. Entrepreneurship, in particular domestic, has a centuries-old history. Over time, it changed or developed forms, but at the same time kept its essence. For a long time, world scientific thought has been actively engaged in the theory and practice of entrepreneurship. The priority of scientific opinion on the problems of entrepreneurship belongs to foreign economists who made an indisputable contribution to the development of theories and concepts of its development.

Methods. The process of scientific research was based on general scientific and special economic methods. The abstract and logical method is used for the formulation of basic principles, theoretical generalization of conclusions and analysis of research results of other researchers, clarification of the conceptual and categorical apparatus.

The retrospective analysis of the development of entrepreneurship was carried out on the basis of the historical and economic method, in particular, the adoption of historical detailing. The monographic method was used for detailed study and generalization of scientists' research.

The results. Based on the generalization of research by scientists, the author's approach to the interpretation of the concept of “entrepreneurship” is proposed as a complex social and economic phenomenon that includes a number of types of activity (social, investment and innovation), which is carried out at one's own peril and risk and is aimed at improving product production (works, services) and the formation of new quality characteristics with the use of modern technologies, which ensure the rational use of resources and satisfaction of consumer demand, which will contribute to increasing the competitiveness and profitability of the entrepreneur.

Discussion. In the conditions of Russia's aggression against our state, the military economy, which is characterized by the strengthening of the influence of state regulation, has a significant impact on the activities of business entities. In this connection, there is a need to consider the theoretical foundations of the functioning of entrepreneurs in current realities.

Keywords

entrepreneurship; state regulation; economic relations; profitability; entrepreneur

Full Text:

>PDF

References

Champlain S., Giguère G. E. (Ed.) (1973). Oeuvres complètes de Champlain [Complete works of Champlain]. Montreal: Éditions du jour.

Vérin, H. (1982). Entrepreneurs, entreprise: histoire d’une idée [Entrepreneurs, business: story of an idea]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.

Rey A., Le Robert. (1994). Dictionnaire historique de la langue française [Historical dictionary of the French language]. Paris: Dictionnaires Le Robert.

Cantillon R. Essai sur la nature du commerce en général, London: Fetcher Gyler. Also: Edited with an English translation by Henry

Higgs, London:MacMillan (1931). The manuscript was probably written around 1720 and was published after Cantillon was murdered in 1734. It is believed that he himself wrote the French and English versions, 1755.

Schumpeter, J. A. (1954). History of economic analysis, edited by Elizabeth Boody Schumpeter. New York: Oxford University Press; also, London: George Allen & Unwin.

Say, J. B. (1972). Cathéchisme d’économie politique [Catechism of political economy]. (Maison Mame, Trans.). London: Sherwood.

Say, J. B. (1996). Cours d’économie politique et autres essais [Political economy course and other essays]. Paris: GF-Flammarion.

Schumpeter J. A. ‘Des Unternehmer’, in Ludwig Elster et al. (Eds.) Handworterbuch der Staatsvissenschaften, (fourth edition, Jena, 1928). In: Hartmann, H. (1959) ‘Managers and entrepreneurs: a useful distinction’, P. 430–431, Administrative Science Quarterly, P. 429–451.

Schumpeter, J. A. (1912). The theory of economic development. Harvard Economic Studies, 46, 66.

David Ricardo. (2007). Nachala politicheskoy ekonomii i nalogovogo oblozheniya [The beginnings of political economy and taxation]. Moscow: Eksmo.

Smith, A. (1935). Issledovaniye o prirode i prichinakh bogatstva narodov [Study on the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations]. Moscow.

Schumpeter, J. (1982). Teoriya ekonomicheskogo razvitiya: issledovaniye predprinimatelskoy pribyli, kapitala, kredita, protsenta i tsikla konyunktury [Theory of economic development: a study of entrepreneurial profit, capital, credit, interest and the business cycle]. Moscow.

Hisrich, R., Peters, M. (1992). Predprinimatelstvo, ili Kak zavesti sobstvennoye delo i dobitsya uspekha [Entrepreneurship, or How to start your own business and succeed]. (Trans.) Moscow.

Mises, L. (1999). Individ, rynok i pravovoye gosudarstvo [Individual, market and legal state]. (D. Antiseri i M. Baldini, Ed.) St. Petersburg: Pnevma.

Drucker, P.F. (1985). Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Practice and Principles. N.Y.: Harper and Rou.

Friedman, M., Savage, D. (1993). Analiz vybora v usloviyakh riska [Choice analysis under risk]. Rossiyskiy ekonomicheskiy zhurnal [Russian Economic Journal], 9, 12-21. [in Rus.]

Drucker, P.F. (1985). Rynok: kak vyyti v lidery: praktika i printsipy [Market: how to become a leader: practice and principles]. Moscow.

Korotych, O.B., Orel, Yu.L., Ryabichko, O.V. (2010). Pidpryyemnytstvo yak sotsialʹno-ekonomichne yavyshche [Entrepreneurship as a socio-economic phenomenon]. Teoriya ta praktyka derzhavnoho upravlinnya [Theory and practice of public administration], 4, 211-216. [in Ukr.]

Mokryak, V., Mokryak, E. (2009). Bahatomirnist i superechlyvist pidpryyemnytskykh oriyentatsiy: istoriya pytannya y suchasni realiyi [Multidimensionality and contradiction of entrepreneurial orientations: history of the issue and modern realities]. Ekonomika Ukrayiny [Economy of Ukraine], 11, 15-25. [in Ukr.]

Yakovenko, O.Z. (2013). Sutnist i funktsiyi pidpryyemnytstva v intehratsiyi vyrobnytstva na osnovi klasteriv u systemi natsionalnoho hospodarstva [The essence and functions of entrepreneurship in the integration of production based on clusters in the system of the national economy]. Aktualni problemy ekonomiky [Actual problems of the economy], 1, 79-87. [in Ukr.]

Syzonenko, V. (2002). Teoriya pidpryyemnytstva: zdobutky i problemy doslidzhennya [Theory of entrepreneurship: research achievements and problems]. Ekonomika Ukrayiny [Economy of Ukraine], 9, 45-51. [in Ukr.]

Varnaliy, Z. S. (2008). Male pidpryyemnytstvo: osnovy teoriyi i praktyky [Small entrepreneurship: basics of theory and practice]. Kyiv: Znannia, KOO.

Yaremchuk, I. L. (2014). Problemy teoriyi i praktyky pidpryyemnytstva v Ukrayini [Problems of theory and practice of entrepreneurship in Ukraine]. Ekonomichnyy analiz [Economic analysis], 3, 256-262. [in Ukr.]

Marshavin, Yu. M. (2004). Pidpryyemnytstvo, yak faktor rozvytku zaynyatosti naselennya [Entrepreneurship as a factor in the development of population employment]. Kyiv: IPKDSZU.

Kryvenko, L. V. (2016). Stratehichni priorytety pidvyshchennya konkurentospromozhnosti maloho biznesu v Ukrayini [Strategic priorities for improving the competitiveness of small business in Ukraine]. Ekonomika: problemy teoriyi ta praktyky [Economics: problems of theory and practice], 136-145. [in Ukr.]

DOI: https://doi.org/10.35774/ibo2022.03-04.067