Affiliation:
1. Donetsk National University of Economics and Trade named after Michael Tugan-Baranovsky
2. Donetsk Academy of Management and Public Administration
Abstract
The purpose of the article is to summarize the existing development experience of the Donetsk People’s Republic in the context of the administrative and territorial structure’s formation and improvement. The authors summarize the existing experience of administrative and territorial division, highlight the most characteristic features of possible transformations, and substantiate the need for early implementation of federal legislation into the current activities of state and local government bodies using logical, comparative, descriptive, and cartographic methods, as well as the method of analogies. The article identifies patterns of the administrative-territorial arrangement transformation in specific historical conditions, establishes cause-and-effect relationships between transformations in social production and changes in territorial development, distinguishes individual economic interest groups that generate contradictions in public relations, identifies the concentration factors for public production facilities in certain territories, visualizes the results of administrative boundaries administrative-territorial entities’ structure changes using maps. The article describes the chronology of transformations in the structure of administrative-territorial units over more than 100 years of Donbass’s existence in modern history. The Soviet period (1917–1991) is characterized by changes in administrative boundaries and the structure of administrative-territorial entities. The Ukrainian period (1991–2014) is distinguished by the intensified tension between local governments and central authorities, management. The period of statehood (2014–2022) is characterized by the completion of preparatory work preceding the entry of the Donetsk People’s Republic into the Russian Federation.
Publisher
Kemerovo State University
Reference27 articles.
1. Аханов С. А. Эффективность общественного производства. Три уровня анализа: народнохозяйственный, региональный, хозрасчетный. М.: Мысль, 1987. 165 с., Akhanov S. A. Public production efficiency. Three levels of analysis: National economic, regional, self-supporting. Moscow: Mysl, 1987, 165. (In Russ.)
2. Brown M. C. Using gini-style indices to evaluate the spatial patterns of health practitioners: Theoretical considerations and an application based on Alberta data. Social Science & Medicine, 1994, 38(9): 1243–1256. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(94)90189-9, Brown M. C. Using gini-style indices to evaluate the spatial patterns of health practitioners: Theoretical considerations and an application based on Alberta data. Social Science & Medicine, 1994, 38(9): 1243–1256. https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(94)90189-9
3. Туровский Р. Ф. Баланс отношений «центр – регионы» как основа территориально-государственного строительства. Мировая экономика и международные отношения. 2003. № 12. С. 54–65. https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2003-12-54-65, Turovsky R. F. Balance in "center – regions" relationships as a basis of terrestrial-state construction. World Economy and International Relations, 2003, (12): 54–65. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.20542/0131-2227-2003-12-54-65
4. Лукьянченко А. А., Амитан В. Н. Концепция формирования местных бюджетов на основе принципа распределения полномочий. Донецк: Юго-Восток, 1999. 38 с., Lukianchenko A. A., Amitan V. N. The concept of forming local budgets based on the distribution of powers principle. Donetsk: Iugo-Vostok, 1999, 38. (In Russ.)
5. Солодухин Ю. Конституционные основы российского федерализма: нерешенные проблемы. Федерализм. 2003. № 2. С. 21–36., Solodukhin Yu. Constitutional foundations of Russian federalism: Unsolved problems. Federalism, 2003, (2): 21–36. (In Russ.)