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

2 Office of the Project, Integrated Development in Ukraine, Poltava, Ukraine

3 National University, Yuri Kondratyuk Poltava Polytechnic, Poltava, Ukraine


This study provides a comprehensive scientific analysis of contemporary problems resulted from the forced migration of the Ukrainian population and its impact on the sustainable development of 47 host communities of Poltava region. By means of cluster analysis 4 clusters of 26 rural territories were identified. They differ in the size of local budgets and the involvement level of forcedly displaced population into the local economy. Factor analysis showed that the involvement level of forcedly displaced population in the region's economy is determined by 2 groups according to 10 indicators. 8 indicators of the first factor determine 2/3 of the dispersion of refugees' impact on rural economy. The first factor reduces the gross regional product by 61.75%. The indicators of the second factor shows a positive impact and determines 15% of the dispersion. The use of game theory to identify conflicts of interest between refugees and host communities was justified. The reasonability to use the taxonomy method to construct a map of positioning rural areas according to the size of local budgets and the degree of integration of refugees is justified. The use of the created map identified the “growth points” in particular clusters. As a result of the implementation of the proposed conflict resolution mechanism between refugees and host communities, the budget of the rural areas of the first cluster increased by 18%, the second cluster by 14.5%, the third cluster by 13%, the fourth by 8%, refugee participation by 30%.

Graphical Abstract


  • A new approach to resolving conflicts of interest between forcedly displaced population and host communities through game theory has been proposed;
  • Two key factors have been identified as influencing forced migration on sustainable rural development. The first factor (community maintenance costs) reduces the gross domestic product by 61.75%. The second factor (refugee entrepreneurial activity) increases the budget of rural areas by 15%;
  • A map of the positioning of rural areas in Poltava region of Ukraine has been developed on the size of local budgets and the level of integration of refugees;
  • The proposed methodology allows identifying active "growth points" in Quadrants 2 and 3 of the rural area positioning map;
  • The use of 30% of refugee potential and economic activity increases the rural budget of the first cluster by 18%, the second cluster by 14.5%, the third cluster by 13%, the fourth cluster by 8%.


Main Subjects

Adamson, F., (2006). Crossing borders: international migration and national security. Int. Secur., 31(1): 165–199 (35 pages).

Adamson, F.; Tsourapas, G., (2019). The migration state in the global south: nationalizing, developmental, and neoliberal models of migration management. Int. Migration Rev., XX(X): 1–30 (30 pages).

Aleshkovski, I., (2017). Globalization of international migration: social challenges and policy implications. RUDN J. Soc., 17(2): 213–224 (11 pages).

Arakelova, I., (2017). The influence of internally displaced persons on the social and economic development of regions in Ukraine. Baltic J. Econ. Stud., 3(5): 6–12 (7 pages).

Arandarenko, M.; Corrente, S.; Jandrić, M.; Stamenković, M., (2020). Multiple criteria decision aiding as a prediction tool for migration potential of regions. Eur. J. Oper. Res., 284(3): 1154–1166 (13 pages).

Arango, J., (2000). Explaining migration: a critical view. Int. Social Sci. J., 52(165): 283-296 (14 pages).

Arcarazo, A.; Freier, D.; Feline, L., (2015) Turning the immigration policy paradox upside down? Populist liberalism and discursive gaps in South America. Int. Migration Rev., 49(3): 659-696 (38 pages).

Balueva, O.; Chuprina, Е., (2018). Strategic priorities for the internal migration processes regulation in Ukraine. Baltic J. Econ. Stud., 4(1): 16–24 (9 pages).

Bank R., (2015). The potential and limitations of the court of justice of the European Union in shaping international refugee law. Int. J. Refugee Law, 27(2): 213–244 (32 pages).

Betts, A., (2012). Global migration governance. Int. J. Refugee Law, 24(3): 653–655 (3 pages).

Bezugly, V.; Boyko, Z.; Tsvietaieva, О., (2019). Demographic transformation in the agglomerations of Dnipropetrovsk region. J. Geol. Geogr. Geoecol., 28(1): 3–10 (8 pages).

Bil, M.; Stepura, T., (2018). Human development in Ukraine: assessment and policy of provision in mobile society. SCIREA J. Econ., 3(1): 19-31 (13 pages).

Bisong, A., (2019). Trans-regional institutional cooperation as multilevel governance: ECOWAS migration policy and the EU. J. Ethnic Migration Stud., 45(8): 1294-1309 (16 pages).

Bogush, L., (2018). Improvement of social inclusion of ATO participants and their families in Ukraine: approaches, problems. J. Geogr. Politics Soc., 8(1): 9-23 (15 pages).

Bucholski, M., (2015). Deliberative democracy and the European Union: habermasian and foucauldian perspectives. Thesis for: Bachelor of Arts (22 pages).

Castles, S., (2002). Migration and community formation under conditions of globalization. Int. Migration Rev., 36(4): 1143–1168 (25 pages).

Danko, Y.; Medvid, V.; Koblianska, I.; Kornietskyy, O.; Reznik, N., (2020). Territorial government reform in Ukraine: problem aspects of strategic management. Int. J. Sci. Technol. Res., 9(1): 1376-1382 (7 pages).

Demirdjian, Z., (2005). Differential perceptions of the dynamics of globalization: a survey study. Prob. Perspect. Manage., 3(2): 5–16 (12 pages).

Drakokhrust, Т.; Prodan, I.; Tkach, U., (2019). Migration challenges: trends and implications for Ukraine and countries of Eastern Europe. Baltic J. Econ. Stud., 5(2): 30–37 (8 pages).

Greussing, E.; Boomgaarden, H., (2017). Shifting the refugee narrative? An automated frame analysis of Europe’s 2015 refugee crisis. J. Ethnic Migration Stud., 43(11): 1749-1774. (26 pages).

Habchak, N.; Dubis, L., (2019). Labour migration of the population of Ukraine to the countries of the European Union: factors and risks of influence. J. Geol. Geogr. Geoecol., 28(1): 59–67 (9 pages).

Ineli-Ciger, M., (2019). The global compact on refugees and burden sharing: will the compact address the normative gap concerning burden sharing? Refugee Surv. Q., 38(2): 115–138 (24 pages).

Kolodiziev, O.; Tyschenko, V.; Ostapenko, V.; Kolodizieva, T., (2018). Assessment of the level of development of information and communication infrastructure in the regions of Ukraine. Prob. Perspect. Manage., 16(2): 134–144 (11 pages).

Lavenex, S., (2019). Regional migration governance – building block of global initiatives? J. Ethnic Migration Stud., 45(8): 1275-1293 (19 pages).

Nitschke, P., (2019). Migration, inequality and equality in a globalized world: The paradox of reframing the nation state. J. Globaliz. Stud., 10(2): 37–44 (8 pages).

Morales, L.; Pilet, J.; Ruedin, D., (2015). The gap between public preferences and policies on immigration: a comparative examination of the effect of politicisation on policy congruence. J. Ethnic Migration Stud., 41(9): 1495-1516 (22 pages).

Panizzon, M.; Riemsdijk, M., (2019). Introduction to Special issue: ‘migration governance in an era of large movements: a multi-level approach’. J. Ethnic Migration Stud., 45(8): 1225-1241 (17 pages).

Petrushenko, Y.; Kostyuchenko, N.; Danko, Y., (2014). Conceptual framework of local development financing in UNDP projects in Ukraine. Actual Prob. Econ., 9(159): 257–263 (7 pages).

Pogorelov, Y.; Ivchenko, Y., (2017). The influence of internally displaced persons on the social and economic development of regions in Ukraine. Baltic J. Econ. Stud., 3(5): 358–366 (9 pages).

Romaniuk, М.; Smutchak, Z., (2016). Migratory threats to national security of Ukraine: current challenges and ways of regulation. Baltic J. Econ. Stud., 2(3): 107–112 (6 pages).

Pylypenko, V., (2018). Socio-economic consequences of labour migration in Ukraine. Int. J. Innovative Technol. Econ., 4(16): 84–88 (5 pages).

Roskladka, A.; Roskladka, N.; Karpuk, A.; Stavytskyy, A.; Kharlamova, G., (2020). The data science tools for research of emigration processes in Ukraine. Prob. Perspect. Manage., 18(1): 70–81 (12 pages).

Sardak, S.; Korneyev, M.; Dzhyndzhoian, V.; Fedotova, T.; Tryfonova, O., (2018). Current trends in global demographic processes. Prob. Perspect. Manage., 16(1): 48–57 (10 pages).

Sassen, S., (2005). Regulating Immigration in a global age: a new policy landscape. Parallax 11(1): 35–45 (11 pages).

Shymanska, K.; Kurylo, M.; Karmaza, O.; Timchenko, G., (2017). Determinants of migration motives as a precondition for the migration flows formation. Prob. Perspect. Manage., 15(3): 352–364 (13 pages).

Simianescu, М.; Strielkowski, W.; Kalyugina, S., (2017). The impact of Brexit on labour migration and labour markets in the United Kingdom and the EU. ТЕRRА Econ., 15(1): 148–156 (9 pages).

Stukalo, N.; Simakhova, A., (2018). Social and economic effects of the war conflict in Ukraine for Europe. Geopolit. Globaliz., 2(1): 11–18 (8 pages).

Vasyltsiv, T.; Lupak, R.; Kunytska-Iliash, M., (2019). Social security of Ukraine and the EU: aspects of convergence and improvement of migration policy. Baltic J. Econ. Stud., 5(4): 50–58 (9 pages).

Zhitin, D.; Krasnov, A.; Shendrik, A., (2016). Migration flows in Europe: space and time transformation. Baltic reg., 8(2): 68–86 (19 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.