Determinants of high-tech exports in the EU and Ukraine in the context of innovation, industrial and entrepreneurship policy

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15587/2706-5448.2025.340796

Keywords:

innovation policy, industrial policy, entrepreneurship policy, European Union – Ukraine, policy effectiveness

Abstract

The object of research is the innovation, industrial and entrepreneurial policy of the EU and Ukraine in 2016–2024, assessed by key performance indicators.

The problem lies in the lack of mechanisms for integrating European practices adapted to Ukrainian conditions, which limits investment potential, the development of innovation ecosystems, acceleration of structural modernization and growth of competitiveness in the context of post-war recovery.

The essence of the results obtained is to identify significant differences between the EU and Ukraine in seven indicators of innovation policy, as well as to establish the factors that most affect high-tech exports. For the EU, a close relationship between R&D funding, business participation, human capital development and commercialization of innovations has been confirmed. In Ukraine, science-industry cooperation and the human resource potential of business research have become decisive, while the impact of R&D funding is weak and unstable. Regression modeling showed that in the EU the key drivers are corporate R&D, human capital and scientific-industrial cooperation, while in Ukraine – institutional and personnel factors.

These results are explained by differences in institutional maturity, quality of innovation management, efficiency of commercialization of developments and integration of science into production. The EU has comprehensive and targeted support instruments that ensure a direct link between innovation spending and economic results. In Ukraine, however, there is fragmentation of measures, declarative nature of reforms and low conversion of costs into high-tech exports.

The results obtained can be used to adjust national innovation development strategies, form post-war recovery programs, increase the role of private R&D, human capital development and intensify cooperation between science and business at all levels.

Author Biographies

Igor Matyushenko, Institute of Providing Legal Framework for the Innovative Development of the National Academy of Legal Sciences of Ukraine

Doctor of Economics, Professor, Leading Researcher

Olena Khanova, V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University

PhD, Associate Professor

Department of International Economic Relations and Logistic

Serhii Hlibko, Scientific and Research Institute of Providing Legal Framework for the Innovative Development of the National Academy of Legal Sciences of Ukraine

PhD, Associate Professor, Director

Anna Zaytseva, V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University

Doctor of Economics, Associate Professor, Head of Department

Department of International Economic Relations and Logistic

Alina Yaremenko, V. N. Karazin Kharkiv National University

Department of International Economic Relations and Logistic

References

  1. Veugelers, R. (2024). An Innovation-Based Industrial Policy for the EU. Intereconomics, 59 (5), 254–261. https://doi.org/10.2478/ie-2024-0052
  2. Dugo, A., Erixon, F., Guinea, O. (2025). Models of industrial policy: Driving innovation and economic growth. European Centre for International Political Economy. Available at: https://ecipe.org/wp–content/uploads/2025/04/ECI_OccasionalPaper_05–2025_LY02.pdf
  3. Landesmann, M. A. (2025). EU industrial policy in the evolving geo–political and geo-economic environment. The Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies, 44. Available at: https://wiiw.ac.at/eu-industrial-policy-in-the-evolving-geo-political-and-geo-economic-environment-dlp-7342.pdf
  4. Batbaatar, M., Larsson, J. P., Sandström, C., Wennberg, K.; Henrekson, M., Sandström, C., Stenkula, M. (Eds.) (2024). The State of the Entrepreneurial State: Empirical Evidence of Mission-Led Innovation Projects around the Globe. Moonshots and the New Industrial Policy. Cham: Springer, 125–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-49196-2_8
  5. Wigger, A. (2023). The New EU Industrial Policy and Deepening Structural Asymmetries: Smart Specialisation Not So Smart. JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 61 (1), 20–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.13366
  6. Garcia Calvo, A., Hancké, B. (2025). When does industrial policy fail and when can it succeed? Case studies from Europe. Socio-Economic Review. https://doi.org/10.1093/ser/mwaf045
  7. The impact of R&I policy instruments: Quarterly R&I literature review 2022/Q4 (2023). European Commission. Available at: https://research–and–innovation.ec.europa.eu/system/files/2023–03/ec_rtd_quarterly–ri–review_042022.pdf
  8. Veugelers, R. (2021). Research and innovation policies and productivity growth. Bruegel. Available at: https://www.bruegel.org/system/files/wp_attachments/WP–2021–08–100521.pdf
  9. Makrevska Disoska, E., Tonovska, J., Toshevska-Trpchevska, K., Tevdovski, D., Stojkoski, V. (2024). Empirical Determinants of Innovation in European Countries: Firm-level Analysis Based on CIS 2018. European Review, 32 (3), 269–290. https://doi.org/10.1017/s106279872400019x
  10. Belanová, K., Ochotnický, P., Sivák, R. (2025). Innovation performance of EU countries in context of R&D: R&D trap risk in Slovakia? Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 14 (1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-025-00533-5
  11. Haddad, C. R., Bergek, A. (2023). Towards an integrated framework for evaluating transformative innovation policy. Research Policy, 52 (2), 104676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2022.104676
  12. Borrás, S., Laatsit, M. (2019). Towards system oriented innovation policy evaluation? Evidence from EU28 member states. Research Policy, 48 (1), 312–321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.020
  13. Edler, J., Berger, M., Dinges, M., Gok, A. (2012). The practice of evaluation in innovation policy in Europe. Research Evaluation, 21 (3), 167–182. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvs014
  14. Cunningham, J. A., Link, A. N. (2016). Exploring the effectiveness of research and innovation policies among European Union countries. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 12 (2), 415–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-016-0394-7
  15. Fuest, C., Gros, D., Mengel, P.-L., Presidente, G., Tirole, J. (2024). Reforming innovation policy to help the EU escape the middle-technology trap. VoxEU. Available at: https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/reforming–innovation–policy–help–eu–escape–middle–technology–trap
  16. Borrás, S., Edler, J. (2014). The governance of change in socio-technical and innovation systems: three pillars for a conceptual framework. The Governance of Socio-Technical Systems. Edward Elgar, 23–48. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781784710194.00011
  17. Cavalcante, P. L. C.; Farazmand, A. (Ed.) (2022). Innovation Policy Governance. Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance. Cham: Springer, 6704–6709. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66252-3_4234
  18. Global innovation index 2024 (2024). World Intellectual Property Organization. Available at: https://www.wipo.int/publications/en/details.jsp?id=4758&plang=EN
Determinants of high-tech exports in the EU and Ukraine in the context of innovation, industrial and entrepreneurship policy

Downloads

Published

2025-10-30

How to Cite

Matyushenko, I., Khanova, O., Hlibko, S., Zaytseva, A., & Yaremenko, A. (2025). Determinants of high-tech exports in the EU and Ukraine in the context of innovation, industrial and entrepreneurship policy. Technology Audit and Production Reserves, 5(4(85), 47–56. https://doi.org/10.15587/2706-5448.2025.340796

Issue

Section

Development of Productive Forces and Regional Economy