Abstract
The purpose of the article is to systematize and generalize the experience of leading countries to form and implement an effective crisis management system; to clarify the role of the state in the formation and implementation of anti-crisis regulation strategy of the real sector of the economy, as well as to substantiate the main methodological provisions of its formation. The subject-matter of the study is the methodological and conceptual foundations of the process of the effective crisis management system of the USA, China, Japan, the EU and Ukraine. Methodology. The research is based on the set of well-known general scientific and special methods of research in economics. In particular, the dialectical method, the method of scientific abstraction, the method of systematic analysis, economic and mathematical modeling has been used in the article. Conclusion. The world experience of solving the problems of enterprise bankruptcy is generalized. The experience of the USA, Japan, China, the countries of the European Union is considered. The econometric model taking into account the heteroskedasticity of the residues shows that an increase of 1% Central government debt, bank capital to assets ratio, expense, exports of goods and services, foreign direct investment, net inflows will increase GDP by 2.41%, 1.53%, 1.23%, 2.03%, and 1.19% respectively in the studied countries. Examining the experience in the field of crisis management, it should be noted that in Europe there is a selective approach aimed at stimulating the activities of specific companies; public sector priorities are education, health care, pensions, and the labor market. In addition, in some countries in order to find innovative structures of enterprises, increase their competitiveness and efficiency, out of the crisis, the development of privatization programs is used, which in each country have their own characteristics. World experience shows that the models of anti-crisis management constructed in different countries of the world provide various potential opportunities for progressive socio-economic changes. However, none of them can be used in its pure form in the formation of anti-crisis management policy in Ukraine. This is due to the conditions of accumulation of this experience by countries, the formation of mechanisms and institutions in a balanced economy, differences in the construction of financial and credit mechanisms, and so on. The use of positive experience should be the first step towards reforming the crisis management system.
Publisher
Publishing House Baltija Publishing
Reference31 articles.
1. Amaro, S. (2018). Greece’s economic future is nearing a crucial moment. CNBC. Retrieved from: https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/23/greeces-economic-future-is-nearing-acrucial-moment.html
2. Aslud, A. (2013). Ukraine’s Financial Crisis 2009. Eurasian Geography and Economics Journal, no. 50(4), pp. 371–386.
3. Atolia, M., Loungani, P., Marquis, M., & Papageorgiou, C. (2017). Premature Deindustrialization, Structural Transformation, and Economic Development: Review and Policy Analysis. Retrieved from: https://www.gov.uk/dfid-research-outputs/premature-deindustrializationstructural-transformation-andeconomic-development-reviewand-policy-analysis (accessed 28 April 2020).
4. Babenko, V., Pasmor, M., Pankova, J., & Sidorov, M. (2017). The place and perspectives of Ukraine in international integration space. Problems and Perspectives in Management, vol. 15, issue 1.
5. Bekiaris, M., Efthymiou, T., & Koutoupis, A. (2013). Economic crisis impact on governance & internal audit: the case of Greece. Corporate Ownership & Control, no. 11(1), pp. 55–64. Retrieved from: http://www.virtusinterpress.org/IMG/pdf/Bekiaris_Efthymiou_Koutoupis_paper_COC__Volume_11_Issue_1_Fall_2013_-2.pdf
Cited by
10 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献