Directions of the Influence of the Security Factor on the Spatial Organization of the Economy
When substantiating decisions on the spatial organization of the economy, consideration of the influence of
the safety factor is necessary, as the development of civilization is accompanied by various threats. Safety – the state in which the impact of threats can be reduced to an acceptable level, and the consequences of their influence – to eliminate. Types of economic activity that are sensitive to a safety factor, when placed should be guided by the appropriate places that become for such industries in possible placement (IPP). In this case, the security factor may be dominant (when, in order for the site to become IPP, it is sufficient to be safe) or to influence the group of factors. The security factor influences the spatial organization of the economy by forming the boundaries of the scope of analysis, the state policy of restrictions on the location of economic activity, the state policy of placement and encouragement of the placement of economic activity, the formation of a list of IPP taking into account the safety factor. The directions of the impact of the security factor on spatial organization of the economy include restrictions on production capacity, which are established by the state or arising from other reasons, certain types of economic activity in certain places. It is substantiated that the process of formation of the list of IPP products from the point of view of the factor of safety should provide the following logical sequence: 1. Formation of a list of technologies that can be used for the production of estimated products. Separate technology and manufactured products form a separate product group (SPG); 2. Establishment of the boundaries of the analysis space, within which searches will be made of the optimal places of production, taking into account the safety factors (national, technogenic and ecological, etc.) for each technology from the current list. Since different SPG can be
characterized by different analysis spaces, setting boundaries for this case will require a separate solution. Since the analysis space may be different for different types of security – this should also be taken into account when setting boundaries; 3. Within the established area of analysis for each SPG, places are defined which, from the point of view of safety of the placement of the estimated type of economic activity is not permissible. At the same time, it should be taken into account the suitability of the place of the destructive effects of nature and the dangerous effects of human activity, as well as the possible negative impact of the estimated type of economic activity on the ecological and socioeconomic systems; 4. Within the defined area of analysis for each SPG, IPP of the production of the assessed products are established taking into account the safety factor and other factors specific to the corresponding SPG. Among the IPP there may be existing places of production of estimated products; 5. Justification of the choice of optimal technology for each IPP (competition of technologies in the IPP) provided that the level of product safety is reached, taking into
account the permissible production capacity of the product at that location, using the appropriate technology. For each existing production site, simultaneously with new technologies, the existing technology will be considered; 6. Selected technologies (optimal for the corresponding IPP) will be compared by economic indicators (competition of technologies at a distance). IPP, where the technology lost the competition at a distance, are considered unpredictable for the production of estimated products. IPP, where technologies have not lost competition at a distance, are considered promising for the production of evaluated products; 7. Prospective IPP are evaluated according to the criterion of the size of the sales market. If the size of the sales market exceeds the minimum acceptable level, then the promising IPP is considered to be positively evaluated by the criterion of the size of the sales market; 8. IPP, positively evaluated by the
criterion of the size of the market, are recommended as places of expedient placement of the production of estimated products with a capacity that corresponds to the predetermined size of the market, but does not exceed the permissible. Further studies on the impact of the safety factor on the spatial organization of the economy are promising in the direction of developing a methodology for identifying types of economic activity, the location of which depends on the safety factor, as well as solving problems associated with the establishment of the boundaries of the analysis space for different groups of production and various factors security with non-identical analysis space.
Smętkowski, M. (2013). Rozwój regionów i polityka regionalna w krajach Europy Środkowo-Wschodniej w okresie transformacji i globalizacji [Development of regions and regional politics in the countries of Middleeast Europy in the period of transformation and globalization]. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe Scholar [in Polish].
Heiman, O. A., Kozyrieva, O. V. & Krasnonosova O. M. (2016). Svitovyi dosvid rozvytku teorii prostorovoho rozmishchennia produktyvnykh syl [World experience of development of theory of the spatial placing of productive forces]. Biznes Inform – Business Inform, 1, 35–42 [in Ukrainian].
Mazur, A. H. & Mazur, S. A. Prostorovi aspekty rozvytku rehionalnykh ekonomichnykh system [Spatial aspects of development of the regional economic systems]. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats Vinnytskoho natsionalnoho ahrarnoho universytetu. Seriia: ekonomichni nauky – A series of Economics is a collection of scientific works of Vinnytsia National Agrarian University, 1, 26–32 [in Ukrainian].
Stadnytskyi, Y. U. I., Danylovych, T. B., Muzychenko, O. V., Voitsekhovska, V. V., Symak, A. V., Vysotskyi & A. L., et al. (2013). Prostorova orhanizatsiya ekonomichnykh system [Spatial organization of economic systems]. Lviv: Novyi Svit [in Ukrainian].
Romaniuk, S. A. (2013). Rozvytok rehioniv u vidkrytii ekonomitsi: teoriia, polityka, praktyka [Development of regions in open economy: theory, politics, practice]. Kyiv: NADU [in Ukrainian].
Shchehliuk, S. D. (2016). Teoretychni pidkhody do typolohii prostorovykh form dilovoi aktyvnosti rehionu [The theoretical going is near the typology of spatial forms of business activity of region]. Rehionalna ekonomika – Regional Economy, 3, 69–75 [in Ukrainian].
Zaplatynskyi, V. M. (2012). Lohiko-determinantni pidkhody do rozuminnia poniattia «Bezpeka» [Logically deterministic
approaches to understanding the concept of «security»]. Visnyk Kamianets-Podilskoho natsionalnoho universytetu – Bulletin of the Kamyanets-Podilsky National University, 5, 90–98 [in Ukrainian].
Yaremenko V. & Slipushko O. (2001). Novyi tlumachnyi slovnyk ukrainskoi movy [New explanatory dictionary of
Ukrainian]. Kyiv: Akonit [in Ukrainian].
Stadnytskyi Iu. I. & Koval L. M. (2010). Produkuvannia blah: shcho, de, yak, koly i skilky? [Producting of blessing: that, where, as, when and how many]. Khmelnytskyi: KhNU [in Ukrainian].
Stadnytskyi Iu.I. & Komarnytskyi I.M. Prostorova orhanizatsiia sotsialno-ekonomichnykh system [Spatial organization of the socio-economic systems]. Lviv: Apriori [in Ukrainian].
The history of the CAP. (n.d.). ec.europa.eu/agriculture/cap-history/index_en.htm
Bondarenko, V. (2002). Prezydent Estonii Arnold Riuitel: «Chas zbyraty kaminnia» [President of Estonia Arnold Riuitel: «Time to collect stones»]. Dzerkalo tyzhnia – The mirror of the week, 15.11 [in Ukrainian].
Veselovska, V. (2014). «Nowa Huta» u Krakovi – (ne)zabute mynule [«Nowa Huta» in Krakow – the past is (not)forgotten]. Den – Day, 04.01 [in Ukrainian].
Sahaidachnyi, I. (2006). De Rosii vziaty stilky rosiian? RF spodivaietsia, shcho yii vriatuiut «spivvitchyznyky», kotri
prozhyvaiut za kordonom [Where Russia must take so much Russians? Russian Federation hopes that she will
be saved by «compatriots» that live abroad]. Dzerkalo tyzhnia – The mirror of the week, 07.07 [in Ukrainian].
Fedchuk, A. P. (2012) Evoliutsiia Systemy dohovoru pro Antarktyku: struktura i dynamika aktiv, ukhvalenykh za 1961–2011 rr. [Evolution of System of agreement on Antarctic: structure and dynamics of the acts taken for 1961–2011]. Ukrainskyi antarktychnyi zhurnal – Ukrainian Antarctic Journal, 10–11, 406–427 [in Ukrainian].
Konventsiia pro vidkryte more [Convention on the Open Sea. (n.d.). zakon3.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_180
Konventsiia OON z morskoho prava vid 10 hrudnia 1982 r. [United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of December 10, 1982]. (n.d.). zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/995_057/print1337688575529357 [in Ukrainian].
Stadnytskyi, Iu. I. & Stadnytska, Iu.Iu. (2012). Klasyfikatsiia ekonomichnykh blah za chynnykamy mistsia vyrobnytstva [Classification of economic benefits by factors of place of production]. Rehionalna ekonomika – Regional Economy, 2, 168–176 [in Ukrainian].
Stadnicki, J. & Stadnicka J. (2014). Correct placement of economic activities as a basis for a sustainable competitive advantage. Competitiveness of business entities and its determinants. A. Limanski, P. Tyrała (Ed.); Katowice: WSZMiJO [in Russian].
Chopenko, V. (2016). Nekosherni yaitsia [Non-cherished eggs]. Dzerkalo tyzhnia – The mirror of the week, 12.02 [in Ukrainian].