A. Diuk. Social responsibility in the production system of agricultural enterprises: Methodical aspects of evaluation

web-mnau

UDC 338.43:631.15

 

A. Diuk

 

The urgency of the problem. Agriculture as a special industry, specific in organizational and economic structure and social significance, imitates the specifics of theoretical and methodological justifications of the principles of social responsibility, as well as criteria of social performance. Scientific substantiations of perspective development of agricultural enterprises methodically concern not only economic, but also social direction of activity. The in-house economic assessment of the composition of socially oriented expenditures is of exceptional importance in the formation of social responsibility, to which attention should be paid immediately. The priority of the given knowledge meets the criterion of exclusive social significance of agrarian management for the development of rural areas, therefore the methodical assessment of the process needs to be improved, first of all from the standpoint of taking into account modern transformational dynamics.
The purpose of the article is to deepen the theoretical provisions of the essence of social responsibility and propose methodological principles for assessing its formation in the production system of agricultural enterprises.
Results of the research.The article proposes improvement of theoretical principles of understanding of the essence of social responsibility of agricultural enterprises on the basis of determination of methodological provisions of evaluation of its representation in the production system. The levels of social responsibility in the functioning of enterprises have been determined. The subsystems of formation of social responsibility of agricultural enterprises are characterized. The proposal of components of formation of social responsibility is made – the mechanisms (subsystems) of its implementation are put into practice with the disclosure of methodological aspects of evaluation. The expediency of applying the category of expenditures to determine the economic basis of the formation of social responsibility in agricultural enterprises was methodically proved.

Keywords: entrepreneurship, social responsibility, production system, methodological aspects, estimation, costs.

References:

  1. Andriichuk V.H. (2018). Osnovy naukovykh doslidzhen v ahrobiznesi : navch. Posibnyk. [Fundamentals of Scientific Research in Agribusiness: Educ. Manual ]Kyiv : KNEU. 491 (in Ukrainian)
  2. Berhman Kh. (1969). Razdelenye truda y spetsyalyzatsyia v selskom khoziaistve. [Division of labor and specialization in agriculture] Per. s nem. Yu.Y. Tymofeeva y O.H. Tropova. Moskva. 296 p.
  3. Diiesperov V.S. (2013). Evoliutsiia silskohospodarskykh pidpryiemstv. [Evolution of agricultural enterprises]. K. NNTs IAE. 290 p. (in Ukrainian)
  4. Yvanukh R.A. y dr. (1983). Spravochnyk эkonomycheskykh pokazatelei selskoho khoziaistva [Handbook of Agricultural Economic Indicators]/ R.A. Yvanukh, M.M. Panteleichuk, Y.V. Popovych; Per. s ukr., dop. Y pererab. K. Urozhai. 184 р. (in Russian)
  5. Kolot A. M. (2011). Sotsialna vidpovidalnist liudyny yak chynnyk stiikoi sotsialnoi dynamiky: teoretychni zasady [Social responsibility of a person as a factor of sustainable social dynamics: theoretical principles] / Ukraina: aspekty pratsi [Elektronnyi resurs] : nauk.- ekon. ta susp.-polit. zhurnal / Vyd-vo «Pratsia»; hol. red. O. Varetska. №3. р. 3-9. (in Ukrainian)
  6. Korporatyvna sotsialna vidpovidalnist biznesu: monohrafiia [Corporate social responsibility of business]/ Pid zahalnoiu redaktsiieiu (2015). M. P. Bukovynskoi. K.: TsP «Komprynt». 297 р. (in Ukrainian)
  7. Kosharnaia H.B. (2014). Sotsyalnaia otvetstvennost subъektov predprynymatelstva: ystoryia y sovremennost [Social responsibility of business entities: history and modernity]. Yzvestyia vыsshykh uchebnыkh zavedenyi. Povolzhskyi rehyon. №1 (29). S. 100 – 108. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/sotsialnaya-otvetstvennost-subektov-predprinimatelstva-istoriya-i-sovremennost (in Russian)
  8. Lopatynskyi Yu. M. (2006). Transformatsiia ahrarnoho sektoru: instytutsiini zasady [Transformation of the agrarian sector: institutional framework] .Chernivtsi : Ruta. 344 (in Ukrainian)
  9. Lupenko Yu.O., Shpykuliak O.H., Malik M.I. ta in. (2017). Rozvytok malykh ahrarnykh pidpryiemstv u rynkovomu instytutsiinomu seredovyshchi: indykatory ta efektyvnist [Development of small-scale agrarian enterprises in a market-based institutional environment: indicators and efficiency]/Natsionalnyi naukovyi tsentr «Instytut ahrarnoi ekonomiky» [Lupenko Yu.O., Shpykuliak O.H., Malik M.I. ta in.]; za red. O.H. Shpykuliaka. K. : NNTs «IAE», 2017. 204 (in Ukrainian)
  10. Malik M.I., Mamchur V.A., Shpykuliak O.H. (2017). Instytutsionalne seredovyshche ta formuvannia sotsialnoi vidpovidalnosti ahrarnykh pidpryiemstv. [Institutional environment and formation of social responsibility of agricultural enterprises] Ekonomika APK.  №12.p. 5-13.(in Ukrainian)
  11. Malik M.I., Shpykuliak O.H. (2005). Kadrovyi potentsial ahrarnykh pidpryiemstv : upravlinskyi aspekt [Personnel potential of agricultural enterprises: management aspect] : monohrafiia. Kyiv : NNTs «IAE». 368 p.(in Ukrainian)
  12. Myroslav Marynovych. (2019). Mytropolyt Andrei Sheptytskyi i pryntsyp «pozytyvnoi sumy» [Andrey Sheptytsky and the principle of “positive sum”]/ peredmova Adriana Slyvotskoho – Lviv : Vydavnytstvo Staroho Leva. 248 p. (in Ukrainian)
  13. Metodы opredelenyia эkonomycheskoi эffektyvnosty selskokhoziaistvennoho proyzvodstva [Methods for determining the economic efficiency of agricultural production] (1959) / Otv. red.: K.P. Obolenskyi. Hosplanyzdat. 240 р.
  14. Mochernyi S.V., Larina Ya.S., Ustenko  O.A., Yurii S.I. (2006). Ekonomichnyi entsyklopedychnyi slovnyk:  [Economic Encyclopedic Dictionary] U 2 t. T.2 /Za red. S.V. Mochernoho. Lviv: Svit. 568 р.15. Obykhod H.O. (2016).  Instytutsionalizatsiia ekolohichnoi bezpeky Ukrainy [Institutionalization of Ukraine’s environmental security] : monohrafiia. Kyiv. 304 р.(in Ukrainian)
  15. Rozvytok pidpryiemnytstva i kooperatsii: instytutsionalnyi aspekt : [Entrepreneurship and cooperation development: institutional aspect] (2016) [Lupenko Yu.O., Malik M.I., Zaiats V.M. ta inshi]. K. : NNTs «IAE». 430 p. (in Ukrainian)
  16. Sychevskyi M.P. (2014). Formuvannia natsionalnoi prodovolchoi systemy na zasadakh nezalezhnosti [Formation of national food system on the basis of independence]. Visnyk ahrarnoi nauky. №6. p. 11 – 18.
  17. Smit Adam. Doslidzhennia pro pryrodu i prychyny bahatstva narodiv [Research on the nature and causes of the wealth of nations](2018) / per. z anhl. Vasyliev, M. Mezhevikina, A. Malivskyi. K., 736 p. (in Ukrainian)
  18. Sociological encyclopedia (2008). [Sociological encyclopedia] / Compiled V.H. Horodyanenko.Kyiv Akademvydav. 456 p. (Series “Encyclopedia erudite”) (in Ukrainian).
  19. Ford Henri. (2016). Moie zhyttia ta robota [My life is that work]/ per. z anhl. Uliany Dzhaman. K. : Nash Format. 344 p. (in Ukrainian)
  20. Kharytonova E.V., Krыlova E.M. (2014). Sotsyalyzatsyia predprynymatelstva kak faktor rosta natsyonalnoho bohatstva [Socialization of entrepreneurship as a factor in the growth of national wealth]. Sotsyalno-эkonomycheskye yavlenyia y protsessы. 9. №5. S. 76 – 83. URL:  https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/sotsializatsiya-predprinimatelstva-kak-faktor-rosta-natsionalnogo-bogatstva. (in Russian)
  21. Khvesyk M.A., Obykhod H.O. (2018) Novitnii vymir ekolohichnykh vyklykiv ta zahroz stalomu rozvytku v epokhu hlobalizatsii [The newest dimension of environmental challenges and threats to sustainable development in the age of globalization]. Ekonomika pryrodokorystuvannia i stalyi rozvytok. №3-4 (22 – 23). p. 5-18. (in Ukrainian)
  22. Shebanina O. V., Kormyshkin Yu. A. (2019).  Suchasna paradyhma innovatsiinoho rozvytku ahrarnoho pidpryiemnytstva [Modern paradigm of innovative development of agrarian entrepreneurship]. Visnyk ahrarnoi nauky Prychornomoria. 3. DOI: 10.31521/2313-092X/2019-3(103). (in Ukrainian)
  23. Shpykuliak O.H. (2007). Vytraty ta efektyvnist vyrobnytstva produktsii v silskohospodarskykh pidpryiemstvakh (monitorynh) [Costs and efficiency of production in agricultural enterprises (monitoring)]/ O.H. Shpykuliak, Yu.P. Voskobiinyk, O.V. Ovsiannikov ta in.; Za red. O.H. Shpykuliaka, Yu.P. Voskobiinyka, O.V. Ovsiannikova. K. 294 (in Ukrainian)
  24. Shpykuliak O.H. (2008). Instytut vytrat v ekonomichnii teorii i praktytsi hospodariuvannia [Institute of Costs in Economic Theory and Practice of Management]. nauk. prats. Ekonomichni nauky. Seriia ekonomichna teoriia ta ekonomichna istoriia. vyp. 5(19), Ch. 2. Lutsk. p. 323-329.(in Ukrainian)
  25. Shpykuliak O.H. (2007). Stanovlennia sotsialnoho kapitalu v ahrarnii sferi transformatsiinoi ekonomiky. [Formation of social capital in the agrarian sphere of transformation economy]. Management Theory and Studies for Rural Business and Infrastructure Development, Volume 8. Page 28 – 34. URL : http://mts.asu.lt/mtsrbid/article/view/678/704.(in Ukrainian)
  26. Shumpeter, J.A. (2011). Teoriia ekonomichnoho rozvytku: doslidzhennia prybutkiv, kapitalu, kredytu, vidsotka ta ekonomichnoho tsyklu [Theory of economic development: the study of profits, capital, credit, interest and the economic cycle]. Kуіv: Kyiv-Mohyla Academy (in Ukrainian).