MODELING STRATEGIC DIRECTIONS FOR THE RATIONALIZATION OF UKRAINE’S EXPORT COMMODITY STRUCTURE TO EU MARKETS UNDER GLOBAL CHALLENGES
Abstract
The conducted modeling of the rationalization of Ukraine’s export commodity structure to the EU formed a coherent analytical framework in which economic-structural, institutional-integration, geopolitical-logistical, socio-technological, environmental-climatic, and market-price criteria are combined within an integral utility function incorporating state dynamics, network logistics, and robust risk consideration. Based on normalized indicators and latent states, it is shown that optimal trajectories of shifting export shares toward processed goods and mechanical engineering are achieved through the coordinated strengthening of institutional compliance, the development of a multi-channel infrastructure (“sea–Danube–rail–road”), the digitalization of sales processes, and the adoption of “green” production practices. It is argued that the combination of investments in throughput capacity and digital document management reduces the variability of physical flows, lowers logistics costs, and enhances access to the European market for high value-added products. It is substantiated that compliance with EU technical regulations and environmental standards expands the feasible decision space for export structure, reduces regulatory discounts, and strengthens the resilience of the product portfolio to price shocks. It is demonstrated that robust optimization incorporating CVaR under price and logistics disruption scenarios stabilizes foreign-exchange revenues in the medium- and long-term horizon, while the multiplicative component of the integral utility function prevents the masking of structural weaknesses by high values of individual criteria. The coordinated policy derived from the model yields an implementable rationalization plan in which an increasing share of value-added products is accompanied by higher institutional compatibility with the EU market, greater resilience of supply routes, accelerated certification and e-commerce, and reduced carbon intensity of the export basket. The overall outcome implies enhanced competitiveness of Ukrainian exports in European markets in the post-war period, strengthened resilience to external shocks, and the creation of a reproducible, quantitatively verifiable basis for strategic management of foreign trade policy.
References
Baxter M., Kouparitsas M. A. Trade structure, industrial structure, and international business cycles. Boston University. 2002. URL: https://www.bu.edu/econ/files/2012/11/dp127.pdf
Lederman D., Maloney W. F. Trade structure and growth (World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 3025). World Bank. 2003. URL: https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/409091468741371016/pdf/multi0page.pdf
Hausmann R., Hwang J., Rodrik D. What you export matters (NBER Working Paper No. 11905). NBER. 2005. URL: https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w11905/w11905.pdf
Hesse H. Export diversification and economic growth (Commission on Growth and Development Working Paper No. 21). World Bank. 2008. URL: https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/577921468150573677/pdf/577210NWP0Box353766B01PUBLIC10gcwp021web.pdf
Barigozzi M., Fagiolo G., Garlaschelli D. Multinetwork of international trade: A commodity-specific analysis. arXiv. 2009. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/0908.1879
Hidalgo C. A., Hausmann R. The building blocks of economic complexity. arXiv. 2009. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/0909.3890
Basu S. R. Export structure and economic performance in developing countries (UNCTAD Discussion Paper No. 149). UNCTAD. 2011. URL: https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/itcdtab49_en.pdf
Hausmann R., Hidalgo C. A. The network structure of economic output. arXiv. 2011. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1101.1707
Shi P., Zhang J., Yang B., Luo J. Hierarchicality of trade flow networks reveals complexity of products. arXiv. 2014. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.3103
Baxter, M., & Kouparitsas, M. A. (2002). Trade structure, industrial structure, and international business cycles. Boston University. Available at: https://www.bu.edu/econ/files/2012/11/dp127.pdf
Lederman, D., & Maloney, W. F. (2003). Trade structure and growth (World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 3025). World Bank. Available at: https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/409091468741371016/pdf/multi0page.pdf
Hausmann, R., Hwang, J., & Rodrik, D. (2005). What you export matters (NBER Working Paper No. 11905). National Bureau of Economic Research. Available at: https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w11905/w11905.pdf
Hesse, H. (2008). Export diversification and economic growth (Commission on Growth and Development Working Paper No. 21). World Bank. Available at: https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/577921468150573677/pdf/577210NWP0Box353766B01PUBLIC10gcwp021web.pdf
Barigozzi, M., Fagiolo, G., & Garlaschelli, D. (2009). Multinetwork of international trade: A commodity-specific analysis (arXiv:0908.1879). arXiv. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/0908.1879
Hidalgo, C. A., & Hausmann, R. (2009). The building blocks of economic complexity (arXiv:0909.3890). arXiv. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/0909.3890
Basu, S. R. (2011). Export structure and economic performance in developing countries (UNCTAD Discussion Paper No. 149). United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. Available at: https://unctad.org/system/files/official-document/itcdtab49_en.pdf
Hausmann, R., & Hidalgo, C. A. (2011). The network structure of economic output (arXiv:1101.1707). arXiv. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1101.1707
Shi, P., Zhang, J., Yang, B., & Luo, J. (2014). Hierarchicality of trade flow networks reveals complexity of products (arXiv:1401.3103). arXiv. Available at: https://arxiv.org/abs/1401.3103
Copyright (c) 2026 А.В. Пузраков
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
