Український соціум (Oct 2024)
Digitalization of the territorial communities of Ukraine during the war: institutional aspects of decentralization
Abstract
Using the example of the process of digitalization of territorial communities and local self-government bodies in Ukraine, the article builds the institutional model of their interaction with central and regional executive bodies that has developed because of a large-scale war. It is found that decentralization has strengthened the cohesion and self-organization of society at the level of micro-regions and has transformed traditionally inert and formal local governments into real subjects of power with significant powers and financial capacities, closest to people, capable of quick responding to challenges (e.g., pandemic and war), particularly in the field of digitalization, which reorients social production to higher technological modes, and social life to forms of its organization more in line with EU approaches to local self-government (democracy, transparency, inclusiveness). In the context of war, decentralization has been objectively slowed down, and its development has been largely based on the mobilization model, with executive authorities playing a leading role in almost all processes of territorial communities, not only in defense-related issues. However, many territorial communities are proactive, cooperate with other communities, businesses, and foreign partners, and are sufficiently institutionally and financially capable of solving problems, including digitalization, so they do not need intermediaries, external management, or duplication of functions, while bureaucratized central and regional executive authorities should mainly be responsible for national-level tasks. At the same time, there are passive territorial communities that do need external assistance from executive bodies at various levels. It is emphasized that central executive bodies in the field of digitalization should adjust their approaches to statistical monitoring of digital transformation so that the focus is on the level of basic-level administrative-territorial units. The Digital Transformation Index of the Regions of Ukraine of the Ministry of Digital Transformation, as well as surveys, do not perform the functions of a digital scoreboard inherent in the EU Digital Economy and Society Index, where information is presented in index and absolute terms, and this needs to be corrected. The author proposes a flexible model of interaction between digitalization stakeholders that takes into account the situation in specific territorial communities.
Keywords
