1 Department of Entrepreneurship and Business, Kyiv National University of Technologies and Design, Kyiv, Ukraine

2 Department of Private and Public Law, Kyiv National University of Technologies and Design, Kyiv, Ukraine

3 Problematic Research Laboratory of Institutional Support for the Public Employment Service and Partnership with Employers, Ukrainian State Employment Service Training Institute, Kyiv, Ukraine

4 Department of Management, Ukrainian State Employment Service Training Institute, Kyiv, Ukraine

5 Scientific and Pedagogical Work, International Activity and Development, National University of Life and Environmental Sciences of Ukraine, Kyiv, Ukraine

6 Department of Marketing and Corporate Communications, Simon Kuznets Kharkiv National University of Economics, Kharkiv, Ukraine


This study provides a multidimensional analysis of sustainable socio-economic development and its challenges in the rural areas of Ukraine. The methodology of realization of sustainable development’s conceptual provisions was created. The advantages of using indicative assessment at the regional level were justified. The methodical approach how to define the indicators of sustainable development (including economic, socio-demographic, labor and environmental domains) of rural areas was proposed. Statistical data, experts’ and rural residents’ evaluation were used to assess the level of socio-economic development of rural areas. The proposed system of indicators is applicable not only to the rural areas of the whole region, but also to its different parts. The tracking model is based on the consistent use of economic, mathematical and expert methods: SWOT-analysis, factor, cluster and discriminant analysis. The construction of the dendrogram allows to determine the type of representative for each cluster. The modeling of sustainable socio-economic development for each sample is applicable to all areas within same cluster. A representative sample from each cluster makes it possible to identify the presence in the region of the so-called "points of growth" and to forecast their development. Two scenarios are considered: maximum (the share of GRP accumulation growth 21.2%) and moderate (the share of GRP accumulation growth 10.6%). GDP Gross Domestic Product growth will differentiate by the type of activity: cluster 1 (agriculture, hunting and forestry) 13% increase; cluster 2 (trade, service and household services) 21% increase; cluster 3 (tourism and international cooperation) 18% increase; cluster 4 (processing industry) 8% increase. Therefore, the using of key indicators for monitoring the sustainable development of rural areas provides an opportunity to take into account the specifics of sustainable development of different specialization branches of rural areas that will support high economic and social growth in the future.

Graphical Abstract

Use of key indicators to monitor sustainable development of rural areas


  • Factor analysis selected 11 out of 15 key indicators to monitor the level of socio-economic development of rural areas;
  • SWOT and cluster analysis identified 4 clusters of socio-economic development of rural areas;
  • The maximum scenario of development of rural areas corresponds to the share of GRP accumulation growth of 21.2%, while the moderate scenario corresponds to the share of GRP accumulation growth of 10.6%;
  • GDP growth will differentiate by the type of activity: cluster 1 (agriculture, hunting and forestry) 13% increase; cluster 2 (trade, service and household services) 21% increase; cluster 3 (tourism and international cooperation) 18% increase; cluster 4 (processing industry) 8% increase.


Main Subjects

Adjei, P.; Kosoe, E.; Forkuor, D. (2017). Facts behind the myth of conservative rurality: major determinants of rural farmers' innovation adoption decisions for sustainable agriculture, Geol. J., 82(5): 1051-1066 (16 pages).

Angilella, S; Catalfo, P.; Corrente, S.; Giarlotta, A.; Greco, S.; Rizzo, M. (2018). Robust sustainable development assessment with composite indices aggregating interacting dimensions: The hierarchical-SMAA-Choquet integral approach. Knowledge Based Syst., 158: 136-153 (18 pages).

Battino, S.; Lampreu, S. (2019). The Role of the Sharing Economy for a Sustainable and Innovative Development of Rural Areas: A Case Study in Sardinia (Italy). Sustainability. 11(11): 1-20 (20 pages).

Borowy, I., (2014). Defining sustainable development: the World Commission on Environment and Development (Brundtland Commission), Milton Park: earthscan/ Routledge.

Brundtland, G.H., (1987). Chairman’s Foreword in The World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Carroll, A.B., (2000). Ethical challenges for business in the new millennium: Corporate social responsibility and models of management morality. Business Ethics Quarterly. 10.

Cattaneo, T.; Giorgi, E.; Ni, M. Giorgio, D., (2016). Sustainable development of rural areas in the EU and China: a common strategy for architectural design, research practice and decision-making. Buildings. 6(4): 1-22 (22 pages). 

Cieslikowski, David. (2009). World development indicators (English). World development indicators. Washington, DC: World Bank.

De Lucia, C.; Pazienza, P.; Balena, P., (2019). Exploring local knowledge and socio-economic factors for touristic attractiveness and sustainability. Int. J. Tourism Res., 1-19 (19 Pages).

Gheorghiu, A.; Iacob, O.; Volintiru, A. (2014). Sustainable development of national agriculture. Scient. Pap. Ser.: Manage., Econ. Eng. Agric. Rural Dev. 14(4): 107-112 (6 pages).

Gorlachuk, V.; azarieva, O.; Belinska, S.; Potapsky, Yu.; Petryshche, O., (2018). Defining the measures to rationally manage the sustainable development of agricultural land use. East. Europ. J. Enterp. Technol. 4(3): 47-53 (7 pages).

Hair, J.F., Jr.; Anderson, R.E.; Thatam, R.L.; Black, W.C., (1998). Multivariate Data Analysis (5th ed). Prentice-Hall, International, Inc.

Hamilton, K.; Clemens, M., (1998). Genuine savings rates in developing countries (English). Washington, DC: World Bank.

Nordhaus, W. D. (2009). Measurement of income with time use with applications to hedonic indicators of happiness and misery. Cowles Foundation Discussion Paper No. 1705 (25 pages).

ISD, (2007).Guidelines and Methodologies.Indicators of Sustainable Development. United Nations, New York.

Kalashnikova, T.; Кoshkalda, І.; Тrehub, O., (2019). Mathematical methods of data processing in the formation and evaluation of sectoral structure in agricultural enterprises. Global J. Environ. Sci. Manage., 5: 87-95 (9 pages).

Kiselitsa, E.; Shilova, N.; Liman, I., (2018). Impact of spatial development on sustainable entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Sustainability Issues. 6 (2): 890-911 (22 pages).

Kubiszewski, I.; Costanza, R.; Franco, C.; Lawn, P.; Talberth J.; Jackson, T.; Aylmer, C., (203). Beyond GDP:Measuring and achieving global genuine progress. Ecol. Econ., 93: 57–68 (12 pages)

Kulchii, I., (2019). Sustainable rural development in Ukraine: Legal aspect. Future of Food: J. Food Agric. Soc., 6 (2): 29-40 (12 pages).

Lipsey, M.W.; Wilson, D.B., (2001). Practical Meta-Analysis. Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA. 49.

Makate, C.; Mango, N.; Makate, M., (2019). Socioeconomic status connected imbalances in arable land size holding and utilization in smallholder farming in Zimbabwe: Implications for a sustainable rural development. Land Use Policy. 87.

Mannis, A., (2019). Indicators of sustainable development. Environ. Software and Services.

Manns, J., (2010). Beyond Brudtland's Compromise. Town and Country Planning July/August 2010, 337.

Nguyen, P.T.; Wells, S.; Nam N., (2019). A systemic indicators framework for sustainable rural community development. Syst. Pract. Action Res., 32(3): 335-352 (18 pages).

Oerther, S., (2019). Localizing the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals to rural communities in America through university extension programs. Nursing Open 6(3): 662-663 (2 pages).

Okunola, A., (2016). Nigeria: positioning rural economy for implementation of sustainable development goals. Turk. J. Agric. Food Sci. Technol., 4(9): 752-757 (6 pages).

Ottomano, P.; Govindan, K.; Boggia, A., (2016). Local Action Groups and Rural Sustainable Development. A spatial multiple criteria approach for efficient territorial planning. Land Use policy. 59: 12-26 (15 pages).

Rio+20, (2012). United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development.  

Schwartz, M.S.; Carroll A.B., (2003). Corporate social responsibility: A three-domain approach. Business Ethics Quarterly. 13.

Shibaeva, N.; Baban, T.; Prokhorova, V.; Karlova, O.; Girzheva, O.; Krutko, M., (2019). Methodological bases of estimating the efficiency of organizational and economic mechanism of regulatory policy in agriculture. Global J. Environ. Sci. Manage., SI: 5: 160-171 (12 pages).

SEDU, (2018). State Statistics Service of Ukraine. Socio-economic development of Ukraine for 2018.

Suganthi, L., (2018). Multi expert and multi criteria evaluation of sectoral investments for sustainable development: An integrated fuzzy AHP, VIKOR/DEA methodology. Sustainable Cities Soc., 43: 144-156 (13 pages).

SSDU, (2017). Sustainable strategy development of Ukraine by 2030, Project-2017, Kyiv.

Talberth, J.; Cobb, C.; Slattery, N., (2007). The Genuine Progress Indicator 2006: A Tool for Sustainable Development.

Tulla, A.F., (2019). Sustainable rural development requires value-added activities linked with comparative advantage: the case of the Catalan Pyrenees. European Countryside. 11(2): 229-256 (28 pages).

Utting, P.; Marques, J.C., (2010). Corporate social responsibility and regulatory governance -towards inclusive development.International Political Economy Series.

Widomski, M.K.; Ladziak, E.; Lagod, G., (2017). Economic aspects of sustainable sanitation in rural settlements. Archit. Civ. Eng. Environ., 10(3): 46– 57 (12 pages).

Wojcik-Len, J.; Len, P.; Mika, M., (2019). Studies regarding correct selection of statistical methods for the needs of increasing the efficiency of identification of land for consolidation: A case study in Poland. Land Use Policy, 87.

WSSD, (2002).World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg.

Yilmaz, H.; Lauwers, L.; Buysse, J., (2019). Economic aspects of manure management and practices for sustainable agriculture in Turkey. Present Environ. Sustainable Develop., 13(1): 249-263 (15 pages).

Zainoddin, A.; Amran, A.; Shaharudin, M., (2017). Factor That Impacts the Capability Development and Sustainable Income of the Rural Development Program in Malaysia, International Conference on Information in Business and Technology Management. 23(11): 10621-10624 (4 pages).

Letters to Editor

GJESM Journal welcomes letters to the editor for the post-publication discussions and corrections which allows debate post publication on its site, through the Letters to Editor. Letters pertaining to manuscript published in GJESM should be sent to the editorial office of GJESM within three months of either online publication or before printed publication, except for critiques of original research. Following points are to be considering before sending the letters (comments) to the editor.

[1] Letters that include statements of statistics, facts, research, or theories should include appropriate references, although more than three are discouraged.
[2] Letters that are personal attacks on an author rather than thoughtful criticism of the author’s ideas will not be considered for publication.
[3] Letters can be no more than 300 words in length.
[4] Letter writers should include a statement at the beginning of the letter stating that it is being submitted either for publication or not.
[5] Anonymous letters will not be considered.
[6] Letter writers must include their city and state of residence or work.
[7] Letters will be edited for clarity and length.