Diuk A. Economic assessment of social liability formation in agricultural enterprise

UDC338.43:631.15

 

Diuk A.

 

The urgency of the problem. The development of agricultural entrepreneurship in Ukraine is characterized by a significant for science and practice set of problems that are relevant in the socio-economic environment. Today’s situation with the development of rural areas, the level of welfare of peasants, the attitude of the state to the management and support of the village is the basis for a number of changes in doing business. An important issue that needs a long-term and priority solution is the formation of social responsibility of agricultural enterprises, which in scientific and methodological terms also requires improving the principles of economic evaluation.
The purpose of the article is to determine the specifics of the formation of social responsibility in agricultural entrepreneurship, the production system of enterprises, by economic assessment of the dynamics of socially oriented costs, employment and productivity.
Results of the research. The article assesses the formation of social responsibility in agricultural enterprise. The theoretical vision of the signs of social responsibility of agricultural enterprises in carrying out their production activity is formed. The definition of social responsibility as a criterion of social production efficiency is proposed. The directions and criteria of the methodological foundations of the assessment of social responsibility of enterprises in relation to which aspects of the level of socially directed production costs are determined. The dynamics of socially directed expenditures, the dynamics of employment and the sectoral structure of production in the context of their use as indicators of levels of social responsibility are analyzed. The economic features of the character of social responsibility of agricultural enterprises at the present stage of their development are established.

Keywords: entrepreneurship, social responsibility, management, production system, costs, social efficiency.

References:

  1. Analiz vyhid i vytrat : prakt. posib. (2000) / Sekretariat Rady Skarbnytsi Kanady ; per. z anhl. S. Sokolyk ; nauk. red. per. O. Kiliievych. K. : Osnovy, 2000. 175 p. (in Ukrainian)
  2. Vnutrihospodarski orhanizatsiino-ekonomichni mekhanizmy zabezpechennia prybutkovosti silskohospodarskykh pidpryiemstv: Metodychni rekomendatsii (2003) / P.T. Sabluk, M.I. Malik, Yu.S. Kovalenko ta in. K.: IAE UAAN. 2003. 204 p. (in Ukrainian)
  3. Halushka Z.I. (2014).  Instytutsionalizatsiia sotsialnoi vidpovidalnosti biznesu: mekhanizmy stanovlennia / Naukovi pratsi Donetskoho natsionalnoho tekhnichnoho universytetu. Ser. : Ekonomichna. № 1. p. 90-98. (in Ukrainian)
  4. Diiesperov V.S. (2013). Evoliutsiia silskohospodarskykh pidpryiemstv. K. NNTs IAE. 290 (in Ukrainian)
  5. Dolan Э. (1992). Rыnok: mykroэkonomycheskaia model SPb. : Delo. 496 (in Russian)
  6. Druker Pyter. Praktyka menedzhmenta (2015). / M.: Mann, Yvanov y Ferber. 299 (in Russian)
  7. Zoria O.P. (2019). Upravlinnia rozvytkom ahrarnykh pidpryiemstv v umovakh instytutsiinykh transformatsii : monohrafiia. Poltava : Vydavnytstvo PP «Astraia». 321 (in Ukrainian)
  8. Sotsialna vidpovidalnist: teoriia i praktyka rozvytku : monohrafiia (2012). / [A.M. Kolot, O.A. Hrishnova ta in.]; za nauk. red. d-ra ekon. nauk, prof. A.M. Kolota. K. : KNEU. 501 (in Ukrainian)
  9. Lunkina T. I. (2017). Osoblyvosti otsinky rivnia sotsialnoi vidpovidalnosti ahrarnoho sektora / Infrastruktura rynku : elektronnyi naukovo-praktychnyi zhurnal. Vyp. 14. p. 34-38. (in Ukrainian)
  10. Malik M.I. (1995). Motyvatsiia vyrobnychoi diialnosti v ahrarnii sferi ekonomiky. Metodolohiia i orhanizatsiia. K.: IAE. 177 (in Ukrainian)
  11. Malik M.I., Mamchur V.A., Shpykuliak O.H. (2017). Instytutsionalne seredovyshche ta formuvannia sotsialnoi vidpovidalnosti ahrarnykh pidpryiemstv// Ekonomika APK. №12.  5-13. (in Ukrainian)
  12. Malik M.I., Shpykuliak O.H. (2005). Kadrovyi potentsial ahrarnykh pidpryiemstv: upravlinskyi aspekt. Monohrafiia. K.: NNTs “IAE”. 2005. 370 (in Ukrainian)
  13. 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)
  14. Nahornyi V.V., Chetveryk O.V. (2018). Rol sotsialnoi vidpovidalnosti v rozvytku ahrarnoho biznesu. Naukovyi visnyk NUBiP Ukrainy. Seriia «Ekonomika, ahrarnyi menedzhment, biznes». Vyp. 290. p. 209-219. (in Ukrainian)
  15. Rozvytok ekonomiky silskoho hospodarstva Ukrainy v 2011-2015 rr. : naukova dopovid (2016) / Natsionalnyi naukovyi tsentr «Instytut ahrarnoi ekonomiky» [Hadzalo Ya.M., Lupenko Yu.O., Puhachov M.I. ta in.]; za red. Yu.O. Lupenka. K. : NNTs «IAE». 546 p. (in Ukrainian)
  16. Rozvytok pidpryiemnytstva i kooperatsii: instytutsionalnyi aspekt : monohr. (2016) [Lupenko Yu.O., Malik M.I., Zaiats V.M. ta inshi]. K. : NNTs «IAE». 430 (in Ukrainian)
  17. Smit Adam. Doslidzhennia pro pryrodu i prychyny bahatstva narodiv (2018) / per. z anhl. O. Vasyliev, M. Mezhevikina, A. Malivskyi. – K. : Nash format, 2018. 736 p. (in Ukrainian)
  18. Teilor Frederyk Uynslou. (1924). Nauchnaia orhanyzatsyia truda. Predysl. P.M. Kerzhentseva, per. s anhl. A.Y. Zak y B.Ia. M. 292 (in Russian)
  19. Tkachuk V. (2014). Sotsialnyi vektor rozvytku dyversyfikatsiinykh protsesiv v ahrarnykh pidpryiemstvakh / Ahrarna ekonomika. T7. №1 – 2. p. 93-96. (in Ukrainian)
  20. Tuhan-Baranovskyi, M.I. (1994). Politychna ekonomiia : kurs populiarnyi. K. Naukova dumka. 264 p. (in Ukrainian)
  21. Faiol A. (1924). Obshchee y promыshlennoe upravlenye. Per. B.V. Babyna_korenia. M.: «Knyha». 159 (in Russian)
  22. Ford Henri. (2016). Moie zhyttia ta robota [My life is that work]/ per. z anhl. Uliany Dzhaman. K. : Nash Format. 344 p. (in Ukrainian)
  23. Shebanina O. V., Kormyshkin Yu. A. (2019). Suchasna paradyhma innovatsiinoho rozvytku ahrarnoho pidpryiemnytstva. Visnyk ahrarnoi nauky Prychornomoria. Vyp. 3. DOI: 10.31521/2313-092X/2019-3(103). (in Ukrainian)
  24. Shpykuliak O.H. (2007). Vytraty ta efektyvnist vyrobnytstva produktsii v silskohospodarskykh pidpryiemstvakh (monitorynh) / O.H. Shpykuliak, Yu. P. Voskobiinyk, O.V. Ovsiannikov ta in.; Za red. O.H. Shpykuliaka, Yu. P. Voskobiinyka, O.V. Ovsiannikova. K. 294 p. (in Ukrainian)
  25. Shpykuliak O.H. (2004). Kadrovyi potentsial ta yoho formuvannia v ahrarnykh pidpryiemstvakh. Ekonomika APK. №1. p. 155 – 159.
  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)

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

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).