INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ASSESSMENT: DEVELOPMENT OF INFORMATION AND METHODOLOGICAL SUPPORT IN CONDITIONS OF LIMITED INFORMATION

T . M o m o t Doctor of Economic Sciences, Professor, Head of Department* Е-mail: tvmomot@gmail.com, momot@kname.edu.ua M . K a r p u s h e n k o PhD, Associate Professor* E-mail: Mariamaria1864@gmail.com S . P r y l y p k o Doctor of Law, Professor, Head of Department Department of Private Law Law and Management Institute of the Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University Metalistiv str., 17, Kyiv, Ukraine, 03057 E-mail: sn.prylypko@gmail.com N . M u s h c h y n s k a PhD, Associate Professor Department of Land Administration and Geographic Information Systems** E-mail: muschinska@gmail.com D . M o m o t Postgraduate Student* E-mail: momotdaryna@gmail.com *Department of Financial and Economic Security, Accounting and Auditing** **O. M. Beketov National University of Urban Economy in Kharkiv Marshala Bazhanova str., 17, Kharkiv, Ukraine, 61002 Assessment of intellectual property is an important process of commercialization of scientific and technical developments of enterprises of all forms of ownership. This is carried out to determine the value of intellectual property objects (IPO) in connection with the transfer of ownership (purchase, sale) to the corresponding object, the conclusion of a license agreement for the IPO use, accounting for IPO in accounting, contributed to the authorized capital, etc. Under such conditions, the problem of IPO underestimating significantly reduces the efficiency and effectiveness of enterprises. At the same time, the uniqueness of many types of intellectual assets and the impossibility of their visual assessment determine the expediency of systematizing methodological approaches to assessing the value of intellectual property assets to ensure an objective assessment of the value of intellectual property. This will help increase the profitability and business value of the enterprise. The aim of research is to develop theoretical and methodological provisions and substantiate practical recommendations for improving information and methodological support for assessing the value of intangible assets, taking into account the requirements of regulatory documents and the availability of the necessary information. Based on the results of the study, methodological approaches to determining the value of intangible assets are systematized. According to the financial statements, the value of intangible assets of the leading enterprises of Ukraine and their share in the total value of assets were analyzed. The features of the assessment of intangible assets in accordance with accounting standards have been determined, a methodological approach to the assessment of the value of intellectual property has been developed, it allows to reasonably choose a method for assessing IPO based on the analysis of available information. It is proved that the lack of objective information on the value of IPO significantly reduces the value of assets of Ukrainian enterprises in comparison with the leading companies in the world, reduces their investment attractiveness and does not contribute to economic development


Introduction
In modern conditions of the digital economy, the number of commercial transactions carried out with objects of intellectual value is constantly growing. Such operations include:

Literature review and problem statement
The theoretical and methodological basis of the study is formed by the scientific works of scientists on the application of information and methodological support for assessing the value of IP. In particular, it is proved that according to the results of the analysis of changes in the structure of investments in all developed countries of the world over the past 40 years, investments in intangible assets have significantly increased, that is, funds are directed to the acquisition or creation of intellectual assets related to knowledge (software, research and development (R&D), design and development, artwork, market research, training and new business processes, etc.). The authors note the complexity of the processes of applying modern tools for assessing the value of IP, which involves taking into account many factors [10].
Focusing on the need to take into account such factors as: the specifics of doing business, economic conditions and strategic management provides another focus of the process of assessing intangible assets [11]. This approach is important, but does not take into account the use of methods for IPO assessment in the context of insufficient information.
It should be noted that some studies [12] are limited to the use of the discounted cash flow method as part of the income approach to IPO assessment, which reduces the validity of the results and requires improvement of information and analytical support in the direction of strengthening the integrated use of various approaches to assessing the IPO value of IP.
The loss of intangible assets and their assessment according to international standards is also an important subject of research [13], while not focusing on the features of the application of methods for assessing intangible assets.
The assessment of innovations in accounting was carried out in [14]. It is emphasized that in traditional accounting, innovations are usually recognized as expenses and are not covered by the concept of an asset, since they do not meet strict recognition criteria. It offers a solution to this issue with the help of integrated reporting, which can be used to assess innovation in terms of creating value for the company. At the same time, the authors do not pay attention to the analysis of methodological approaches to assessing the value of intangible assets.
A radical solution is proposed in [15], where it is noted that the use of traditional methods for assessing IPO is a complex process that does not always allow to obtain the desired result. The authors proposed a comprehensive valuation model combining seven indicators of patent value. This methodology allows decision-makers to choose the solution that best suits their strategy for achieving future innovation goals. However, the proposed approach can be applied only for certain types of IPO, which limits its application.
According to the efficient markets hypothesis, as stated in [16], the price of a firm's shares reflects the investors' perception of the current and future profit potential of all its assets, including both tangible and intangible. At the same time, it has been proven that the valuation of the value of this type of intangible asset as a brand is significantly related to stock prices. However, the authors limit themselves only to the study of one type of IPO, but do not apply various methodological approaches to assessing the IPO value.
Taking into account the complexity of the process of assessing intangible assets, in [17] it is proposed to dis--privatization, corporatization, reorganization (merger, acquisition, etc.) or restructuring of an operating enterprise; -purchase and sale of patents and licenses; valuation and accounting of intangible assets and others.
The valuation of intellectual property is regulated by a number of legislative and regulatory documents. So, according to the Regulation (standard) of accounting 8 "Intangible assets" (hereinafter R(S) A 8), an intangible asset is a non-monetary asset that has no tangible form and can be identified [1].
That is, intellectual property rights are inherently part of intangible assets. Therefore, the approaches by which intangible assets are assessed, according to certain legislative and regulatory documents [1,2], are quite related to intellectual property.
In accordance with the norms of clause 17 R(S) A 8"Intangible Assets" [1] or International Accounting Standard 38 "Intangible Assets" (hereinafter IAS 38 "Intangible Assets") [2], the cost of such expenses includes: wages workers, created such an asset, material costs, other costs and the like. Sometimes the cost of such self-created intangible assets is generally not assessed at all, since the costs of creation were not allocated to a separate group of expenses and were not taken into account as the cost of the created object.
According to legislative and regulatory documents [3][4][5][6][7][8][9], the assessment of IPO is carried out by certain regulated methods. This is a complex process based on principles that reflect socio-economic factors and patterns in the formation of the value of an enterprise's property.
Objects of intellectual property rights include various types of intangible assets, in particular: -objects of copyright and related rights, including the right to various works (literary, artistic, musical works, computer programs); -objects of industrial property (the right to industrial designs, inventions, utility models, trade marks); -other objects of intellectual property (scientific discoveries, rationalization proposals, commercial secrets), etc.
Sometimes such rights are not accounted for or are measured only at the cost of the actual costs incurred in connection with the registration of an intellectual property.
All this leads to the investor receiving distorted information that does not reflect the fair value of the intellectual property.
At the same time, accounting for intellectual property objects allows to both create an additional asset that is of commercial interest to third parties, and defend your interests in court if there are precedents for the use of such assets by other persons.
Therefore, the assessment of the value of any object of intellectual property rights is very important for a reliable assessment of the value of such assets, primarily in the practice of enterprises. This makes it possible to carry out capitalization into intangible assets, carry out further revaluation, and assess the value of assets for the further sale of such objects.
So, the systematization of methodological approaches to the assessment of intellectual property objects and the determination of the most priority one, taking into account the needs of users and the availability of the necessary information, is relevant in modern conditions of digital technologies. tinguish three stages of determining their fair value. At the first stage, the principles that form the basis of the methodology are determined. At the second stage, a study of international experience in conducting a fair valuation of intangible assets is conducted. At the third stage, the specifics of enterprises' own methods of fair valuation of intangible assets are determined. But the study suggests that enterprises independently choose methods for evaluating intangible assets, taking into account the cost of conducting an assessment, the degree of measurement uncertainty, and others. An analysis of the possibilities of using methods, taking into account the availability of certain information, can be a solution option.
Sufficiently justified is the proposal given in the study [18] on the assessment by the method of determining the economic effect. Indeed, it allows for the measurement of the expected costs and revenues from activities related to the use of intangible assets, between the respective reporting periods, taking into account the indicators of economy, efficiency and effectiveness. This approach concretizes the definition of profit from the use of intangible assets, taking into account the following main criteria as reliability, objectivity, universality, consistency, reliability, adequacy, practicality. The author emphasizes the need to use methods and parameters that should be understandable [18], without paying attention to the limited or insufficient information available on the assessment of the IPO value.
The problem associated with the comparison of methods for evaluating intangible assets is considered in the study [19]. It is this problem that remains unsolved. It is argued that the most common methods of the income approach include methods of direct capitalization, discounting cash flows, excessive profits, royalties, exemption from royalties. The authors argue that the use of the income approach is dominant, but again attention should be paid to the lack of necessary information that can interfere with the valuation process.
Recently, great attention has been paid to the impact of the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic on all aspects of the life of both people and enterprises. The paper [20] considers aspects of the influence of the current situation on intellectual property and its consequences, the peculiarities of accounting and assessment of innovative products in modern conditions. However, the authors do not offer specific methods for assessing the value of intangible assets in the absence of the necessary information.
Having analyzed the main conceptual provisions of the proposals set forth in [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20], it should be concluded that the current state of information and analytical support for the IPO valuation is characterized by the lack of a unified approach to the valuation of intangible assets. This is due to the fact that each IPO is a unique object and requires the use of reasonable information and methodological support for assessing the IPO value using a reasonably chosen method for assessing IPO based on the analysis of available information. Therefore, it is necessary and timely to generalize the realities of the valuation of intangible assets, to critically analyze valuation methods, to improve the information base on which the valuation is based, and to develop recommendations on the procedure for assessing intellectual property objects in conditions of limited information.

The aim and objectives of research
The aim of research is to develop theoretical and methodological provisions for the IPO assessment, which will justify practical recommendations for improving the information and methodological support of this process, taking into account the requirements of regulatory documents and the availability of the necessary information.
To achieve the aim, the following objectives are set: -to analyze statistical data on the value of intangible assets and their share in the total value of assets; -to investigate the peculiarities of the valuation of intangible assets in accordance with international and national accounting standards; -to determine and systematize the features of the valuation of intangible assets using various methodological approaches and available information; -to form information and methodological support for the assessment of intellectual property in conditions of limited information.

Materials and methodology for the assessment of intellectual property objects
The theoretical and methodological basis of the study was the scientific works of leading scientists in the field of assessing the value of intellectual value [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]. The informational component of such studies made it possible to determine and systematize the features of the assessment of intellectual property assets using various methodological approaches and to form information and methodological support for such a process in conditions of limited information.
Legislative and normative acts in the field, regulating the application of information and analytical support to the IPO assessment [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9], made it possible to analyze approaches and establish certain patterns that made it possible to form information and analytical support.
The study is based on a systematic approach, within which the following methods are applied: abstract-logical analysis -to determine and systematize the features of the assessment of intangible assets using various methodological approaches and available information, theoretical generalization -to form information and methodological support for the IPO assessment, systemic and statistical analysis -to determine the main trends in investing in intangible assets and to conduct a comparative analysis of indicators of the value of intangible assets and their share in the composition of assets, a graphical method -with a visual presentation of theoretical and methodological material.
The data accumulated from information sources published on the website of the Ministry of Statistics of Ukraine [21], Smida [22], official web portals of enterprises [23,24], Macrotrends [25] are used as an information base for the study.
On the basis of the indicators of the Ministry of Statistics [21], using statistical methods, the tendencies of changes in investments in intangible assets in recent years and their share in the total volume of investments were determined (Table 1).
From the data of the Smida resource [22] and the websites of enterprises [23,24], the value and share of intangible assets of some enterprises in Ukraine at the beginning of 2020 were determined ( Table 2). Table 2 The value of intangible assets of leading companies, thousand USD [22][23][24] No. Indicators of the Macrotrends resource [25] made it possible to determine the value and share of intangible assets of world companies in the total value of assets (Table 3).
Such calculations provide information on the value of intangible assets and allow conclusions to be drawn regarding the specifics of the valuation.

1. Analysis of statistical data of companies on the value of intangible assets and their share in the total value of assets
In the modern economic space, the concept of "Intellectual property appraisal" (English) is used -determining the value of the volume of rights to the results of intellectual activity, the ownership of which provides their owner with a certain benefit. This assessment is used in many countries, but in some cases, intellectual property remains underestimated. For example, the value of Internet sites, databases, computer programs developed by businesses for personal use, the value Table 1 Investments of Ukrainian enterprises (statistical indicators), million USD [21] No. of brands, etc. In most cases, the value of such assets consists of the cost of creating such assets. Analysis of investments in intangible assets (Table 1) shows that their share is very small. From data in Table 1, it should be concluded that investments in intangible assets increased by 27.33 % in 2015-2019, but not as much as investments in tangible assets -by 135.77 %. From intanigible assets, software increased more -by 108.12 %. If to consider the share of investments in intangible assets, it is possible to see that it is very small and amounts to 3-6 %. At the same time, this share has decreased significantly. This indicates either that enterprises pay little attention to the development of intellectual property, do not finance the development of new technologies, or do not assess intellectual property objects accordingly.
Confirmation of the fact that Ukrainian enterprises do not properly assess intangible assets is the indicators of intangible assets reflected in the financial statements of Ukrainian enterprises (Table 2). Indeed, the share of intangible assets in the total asset value of all analyzed companies is less than 1 %. An exception is the State Enterprise "Kharkiv Machine-Building Plant FED", where the share of intangible assets is more than 10 %.
In addition, in all considered enterprises, the share of intangible assets, except for State Enterprise "Kharkiv Machine-Building Plant FED", is worn out by 30 % or more. That is, they are obsolete and not renewable. The financial statements also reflect that enterprises do not revalue intangible assets, even though these intangible assets will continue to bring economic benefits to the enterprise.
At the same time, in the United States of America, the value of some companies is more than 50 % of intangible assets. This is due to the fact that the United States is home to many of the world's largest IT companies, such as Apple, Google and Facebook, since the Internet is one of the "intangible" areas of business. This conclusion is confirmed by calculations of the percentage of the value of intangible assets in the total assets of world leading companies.
From the above data, it should be concluded that the value of intangible assets in the Walt Disney company was the highest -96,862 billion USD. In 2020, the share of intangible assets ranged from 53 % to 48 % of the total value of assets. This is due to the specifics of the activity, since the company owns the copyright for films and makes a profit from this. The value of Johnson & Johnson's intangible assets is 51.5-47.63 %, that is, they really make up the majority of the company's asset value. Undoubtedly, under such conditions, the value of intangible assets is measured by certain methods precisely at fair value.
Since intangible assets are in most cases unique and cannot be valued visually, special approaches must be used and valuation methods are valid.

2. Features of the valuation of intangible assets in accordance with international and national accounting standards
Assessment of intellectual property objects that relate to intangible assets is carried out using accounting standards -R(S)A 8 "Intangible assets" [1] and IAS 38 "Intangible assets" [2].
Schematically, the assessment according to the standards can be displayed as follows (Fig. 1). The revalued amount is the fair value at the date of the revaluation less any subsequent accumulated depreciation and any subsequent accumulated impairment losses. Fair value should be estimated by reference to an active market (paragraph 75). From those shown in Fig. 1 of the statements, it can be concluded that at the time of initial recognition in accordance with the standards, a cost estimate is provided, that is, a cost approach. But at the same time, IASB 38 "Intangible Assets" contains definitions of value and income method. Subsequently, during revaluation, the cost is determined by a comparative approach.

3. Features of the assessment of intangible assets taking into account the available information
The assessment of intellectual property objects is carried out by applying the approaches generally known in international practice: profitable, costly and comparative. The same approaches to the assessment are used by domestic researchers, meets the requirements of the National Standard No. 4 "Assessment of property rights of intellectual property" [4].
Let's consider in more detail the methods of assessing intellectual property that are used in international and national practice. Taking into account the norms of the National Standard No. 4 "Assessment of intellectual property rights" and the development of scientists [10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20], it is advisable to highlight the following assessment methods that are used most often (Fig. 2).
Consider the features of the application of various approaches.
The income approach is based on an assessment of value based on the determination of expected income, that is, it is applied if it is possible to establish income from the use of such an asset. Within the framework of this approach, methods of direct capitalization, discounting of cash flows, excessive profits, royalties, and exemption from royalties are distinguished. The royalty method is most often used in international practice, with the price of licenses being determined based on the cost of royalties over the period of use of intangible assets. An alternative is the royalty exemption method. This approach estimates the proportion of a company's profits that is attributed to the intellectual property based on the royalty rate that the company would pay to use the asset if it did not own the asset. In other words, the value of the asset is equal to the cost of the royalty from which the company is exempted by owning the asset. This method applies a royalty rate based on available market data for licenses that include similar assets, industries, territories and other characteristics.
It should be noted that at first glance, the income approach is the most optimal. Indeed, according to R(S) A 8 "Intangible assets", an intangible asset should be accounted for in the balance sheet if the company subsequently receives future economic benefits from the sale or use of the intangible asset [2]. That is, a priori, an enterprise recognizes intangible assets subject to forecasting certain economic benefits. But in fact, it is not always possible to assess economic benefits or income, since in conditions of economic instability, many factors can negatively affect the projected income indicator.
In contrast to the income approach, the cost approach is based on determining the amount of expenses required to restore or replace the subject of assessment. The direct reproduction method relies on establishing the present value of the creation (development) or acquisition costs at the date of valuation of certain intellectual property rights.
The replacement cost is determined based on the present value of the costs of creating or acquiring an object of intellectual property rights, similar to intellectual property rights that are being estimated. This object can replace the one assessed according to certain indicators.
The comparative approach is used if there is a sufficient amount of necessary information on prices for such objects. The set of comparison parameters is formed from factors affecting the value of intellectual property rights.
In accordance with the Methodology for the assessment of intellectual property rights during the application of the comparative approach, it is necessary to take into account three important aspects [5]: 1) whether there is information available regarding the sale of similar objects of intangible assets; 2) or information on sales prices and conditions is available contracts; 3) analytical information is available on the impact of certain features and characteristics of intellectual value objects on their value.
Since intellectual power is a specific type of asset, it is very difficult to find analogues, and therefore to carry out such an assessment.
In the absence of the specified information, it is necessary to consider the possibility of conducting an independent study by the appraiser. As a result, the market value of intellectual property is determined by adjusting the selling prices of similar items, taking into account adjustments.
However, taking into account the peculiarities of this approach, let's believe that the main disadvantage of the comparative approach is the impossibility of finding an analogue for comparison in a number of cases and indicators for adjusting the value.

4. Information and methodological support for the assessment of intellectual property in conditions of limited information
The substantiation of the method for assessing intellectual property is associated with the characteristics of various objects of intellectual property and the method of obtaining them. They are unique and this excludes the possibility of using a single approach to the calculation and in each case requires an individual approach, which is based on taking into account certain aspects.
An essential role in the choice of methods for assessing intellectual property is played by the information that is the basis for the assessment. The first and most preferred  assessment method among the listed methods is profitable approach -indeed, it is who meets the requirements of international standards, since it focuses on future economic benefits. And, as it is known, it is international standards that should take precedence when determining the fair value of assets. But reliable information about the size of future economic benefits is not always available. In addition, for intellectual property objects used not only at the city or country level, but also distributed at the global level, it is the income approach that can provide a reliable estimate. Indeed, the revenues from their use can amount to billions of dollars, and in some countries the value of such assets is a tiny percentage. The second method that should be applied in the absence of the necessary information is the cost approach. It is based primarily on national accounting standards. Its use is advisable if there is no information on the amount of income, but there are available indicators indicating the amount of expenses for the creation of intellectual property. In the absence of reliable information on the amount of costs, a comparative approach should be used. The necessary information can be collected on the basis of additional studies of similar objects.
Thus, the choice of a method for assessing intellectual property objects requires an assessment of the available information from the standpoint of the possibility of further analytical calculations.
The assessment procedure should begin with the analysis of the objects being assesses, the establishment of certain restrictions, the determination of the necessary parameters, the analysis of the results obtained.
The results of the research made it possible to form a model of information and methodological support for the assessment of intellectual property objects in conditions of limited information, which allows, taking into account the available information, to reasonably choose the IPO method (Fig. 3). It is important to note that in the absence of the necessary information for the application of these assessment methods, approximate estimates based solely on the views of experts are used. The quality of the expert assessment depends significantly on the experience and competence of the expert.
Schematically, the choice of the method for assessing intellectual property and carrying out the assessment procedure is presented in the following form (Fig. 3). Thus, the formed information and methodological support for the assessment of intellectual property in conditions of limited information provides for the opportunity to reasonably select the most adequate method for assessing the value of the IPO of the available information and consistently carry out the assessment procedures.

Discussion of the results of the creation of theoretical and methodological provisions for the assessment of intellectual property
Calculations of the share of the value of intangible assets in the total value of assets indicate that in world companies it sometimes amounts to more than 50 % ( Table 2). But for most Ukrainian enterprises, their cost is less than 1 % (Table 3). The size of investments in intangible assets of enterprises is also insignificant ( Table 1). From this, it should be concluded that the indicators of the valuation of intangible assets are distorted. This is most likely due to the lack of the necessary information and the cost estimate.
The study carried out a study of various methods of valuation of intangible assets, in contrast to the study [13], which mentions valuation methods only according to international accounting standards. According to national and international accounting standards, it is established that the assessment is based on both economic benefits (income) and costs. As a result of a joint analysis of the research of specialists and normative acts, it was found that OIP is carried out by three methods -profitable, costly and comparative. Each of the methods has its own advantages and disadvantages due to the limited information available.
In the study, in contrast to work [17], where it is proposed to independently choose methods for assessing intangible assets, taking into account the costs of the assessment, the degree of measurement uncertainty and others, the proposed sequential procedure for assessing and choosing a particular assessment method based on the available information. It should be borne in mind that the income approach is the most recommended for use, since it is it that allows to display the size of future economic benefits. If such information is available, then the method is used that requires its use. At the same time, in the works of researchers, these issues are not sufficiently discussed and a clear sequence of actions to determine the cost of evaluating an object has not been established.
So, the proposed model of information and methodological support for the assessment of intellectual property assets in conditions of limited information contains the necessary information that must be taken into account during the assessment and allows to reasonably choose a specific assessment method. In addition, the model highlights the issues of the order of the assessment, specifying the sequence of actions.
But the study has certain drawbacks. Indeed, in conditions of limited information, due attention is not paid to the procedure for determining the amount of income, taking into account the level of distribution of the intellectual property object -regional or global. Such a calculation should have certain features and contain appropriate assumptions.
This problem can be deepened and investigated further, taking into account the likelihood of certain risks associated with forecasting income.

Conclusions
1. The analysis of statistical data of companies on the value of intangible assets and found that their value in some US companies exceeds 50 % of assets, but sometimes vice versa -so, in Ukrainian leading companies, their value is less than 1 % of the value of assets, that is, they are undervalued, their cost is accounted for at the initial cost of their creation.
2. Investigated the procedure for assessing intangible assets in accordance with IASB 38 "Intangible assets" and P (S) A 8 "Intangible assets", as a result of which it was established that the initial assessment according to the standards is based on the cost approach, the revaluation is carried out on the basis of the comparative approach.
3. The features of the valuation of intangible assets by the income, cost and comparative approach have been determined. As a result of the study, it was found that the income approach is the most optimal, since it corresponds to the main essence of assets -bringing economic benefits. But in fact, it is not always possible to assess economic benefits, since in conditions of economic instability, many factors can negatively affect the projected income indicator. It was found that the cost approach in terms of content is the simplest and corresponds to the procedure for calculating the value of intangible assets in accounting -the cost of objects includes all costs associated with the acquisition or creation of intangible assets. But the cost with this approach is negligible. The comparative approach is used if there is a sufficient amount of necessary information on prices for similar objects, but since IPOs are specific, it is very difficult to find such objects, and, therefore, to determine such information.
4. The research results made it possible to form a model of information and methodological support for the assessment of intellectual property objects in conditions of limited information. This model contains the necessary information that must be taken into account during the assessment, the procedure for conducting the assessment with the specification of the sequence of actions. The use of this development makes it possible to solve the problem of choosing a method for assessing IPO. The study focuses on the extent to which the technological factor affects economic growth and analyzes its role in enhancing socio-economic differentiation. We develop a methodology for ranking countries according to the level of their technological effectiveness using the specific index. Correlation and regression analysis is used to identify technological factors in economic development. Approbation of the approach took place on the example of the United States and China. The data obtained demonstrate that the increase in R&D costs and the export of high-tech products has a positive effect on economic growth. R&D spending provides 31.6 % to 41.9 % of GDP growth for the United States and China, respectively. Exports of high-tech products support GDP growth at the level of 2.7 % to 4.7 %. The research findings confirm that the technological factor encourages economic development through more efficient allocation of resources, the spread of innovations and the growth of high-tech exports. Regression models have proved this relationship. China ranks first in the index of technological effectiveness and is followed by the United States and Japan. Such countries as Kazakhstan, Brazil and Ukraine are lagging significantly behind some technologically advanced European nations (Romania, Poland, Bulgaria), as well as Turkey and Mexico. Analysis of data from a sample of 30 countries showed that technological differentiation is a direct cause of overall inequality. To bridge this technological gap, it is expedient to develop the existing technological potential in a consistent manner, while concentrating efforts on high-tech sectors capable of strengthening the foundation of the economy.
Keywords: economic growth, innovations, global competitiveness, high-tech exports, production platform, USA, China. To rationally solve problems in the financial subsystem of startup management, it is necessary to preliminary determine the socio-demographic predictors of priority investment of startups of the respective country and area of activity. The practical tools for determining such predictors have been tested during this study.
The practical significance of the research is due to the growing pace of development of startup technologies, the need to improve the effectiveness of the startup management financial subsystem, and increase the efficiency of the startup support infrastructure.
Keywords: startup, startupper, startup management, financial support to startup management, priority startup investment, sociodemographic predictors.
This research has investigated the retrospective trends in financing startups in Ukraine corresponding to the socio-demographic characteristics of startuppers (founders). Studying the dependences between the amount of funding and the qualitative characteristics of startuppers has made it possible to determine the socio-demographic predictors of making a positive decision regarding the financing of startups.
As the current study has shown, in order to receive an investment, a startupper must meet the investor's expectations regarding reliability, qualifications, experience, and potential prospects. The investor analyzes not only the business idea of the startup but also the potential recipient for compliance with a series of socio-demographic predictors such as gender, age, level, and specialization of education. It has been proven that the largest amount of funding for startups in Ukraine is received by male funders, aged 35 to 45, who have a higher technical education. Startup investors consider such startuppers a priority for their investments since they see the least risks and a high probability of successful deployment of invested funds.
The identified investors' preferences when choosing startup founders can be extrapolated to the startup environment of any country, however, they may change over time, depending on the specificity of the situation in the investment country.
The article discloses the problem of distributing state financial support based on an integrated approach. The study has proved the urgency and necessity of state support for the lowest priority territorial units (regions). It answers the research question of what components need to be included in the methodology for determining state financial support. A comprehensive method for estimating the share of public funds is proposed, taking into account the investment attractiveness of a region (oblast) and the risk of the corresponding region (oblast). To achieve this goal, the following general scientific and special methods and research techniques were used in the work, such as comparative analysis of scientific literature and information sources based on methods of comparison, systematization, and generalization; generalization of the analysis results, as well as logical generation of conclusions and integral assessment.
Since the problem of financing the construction and reconstruction of bridges is relevant for a number of countries, this technique was tested using an example of bridge construction.
According to the obtained results, territorial units (regions) that are not leaders in priority for the investor and have a high level of riskiness of investing financial resources become eligible for state financial support. The problem of financing such regions can be solved only through state support. The results of calculations show that the distribution of financial resources with the available volume of public finances K=1 allocated for support is carried out proportionally. An integrated approach made it possible to identify 10 territorial units (oblasts) for funding, with the oblasts with the worst priority factors receiving the largest share of state financial support.
This study is of practical interest to government agencies in the distribution of public funds, and it is of theoretical importance to researchers dealing with issues of financial security and public administration.
Keywords: government funding, financial support, government support, financing model, bridge construction. This paper considers the issues and theoretical aspects related to improving the design of maritime tethered systems (MTSs) with flexible links (FLs) using underwater towed systems (UTSs) as an example. That allows them to be used in the early stages of design by implementing the principles of Shipbuilding 4.0 and BIM technologies. Such regimes have not previously been described by existing mathematical models (MMs). The expected result of the current study is a significant decrease in the cost of different resources. At the same time, the basic reliable results of design solutions could be obtained already in the early stages of design.
The theoretical basis of the proposed method for improving the design of MTS with FL is the improved design concept (IDC) for MTS with FL while the tool base of the method is a special modeling complex (SMC). The use of IDC along with SMC at the research (preprototype) design phase reduces the number of MTS design stages.
The proposed method to improve the design of MTS with FL, based on the MM that notates the dynamics of MTS FL and MTS with FL, makes it possible to investigate different modes of operation of almost all

Momot Darina
O. M. Beketov National University of Urban Economy in Kharkiv, Kharkiv, Ukraine ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6026-541X Assessment of intellectual property is an important process of commercialization of scientific and technical developments of enterprises of all forms of ownership. This is carried out to determine the value of intellectual property objects (IPO) in connection with the transfer of ownership (purchase, sale) to the corresponding object, the conclusion of a license agreement for the IPO use, accounting for IPO in accounting, contributed to the authorized capital, etc. Under such conditions, the problem of IPO underestimating significantly reduces the efficiency and effectiveness of enterprises. At the same time, the uniqueness of many types of intellectual assets and the impossibility of their visual assessment determine the expediency of systematizing methodological approaches to assessing the value of intellectual property assets to ensure an objective assessment of the value of intellectual property. This will help increase the profitability and business value of the enterprise.
The aim of research is to develop theoretical and methodological provisions and substantiate practical recommendations for improving information and methodological support for assessing the value of intangible assets, taking into account the requirements of regulatory documents and the availability of the necessary information. Based on the results of the study, methodological approaches to determining the value of intangible assets are systematized. According to the financial statements, the value of intangible assets of the leading enterprises of Ukraine and their share in the total value of assets were analyzed. The features of the assessment of intangible assets in accordance with accounting standards have been determined, a methodological approach to the assessment of the value of intellectual property has been developed, it allows to reasonably choose a method for assessing IPO based on the analysis of available information. It is proved that the lack of objective information on the value of IPO significantly reduces the value of assets of Ukrainian enterprises in comparison with the leading companies in the world, reduces their investment attractiveness and does not contribute to economic development.
Keywords: intellectual property, intangible assets, income approach, comparative approach, cost approach.