Already two years have passed since the day Viktor Yanukovich announced new reformation course and presented Economic reform program 2010-2014 «Prosperous society, competitive economy, effective state». The ambitious plan outlined considerable changes in economic system and even in case the plan was partially implemented, Ukraine could reach another level of development. A Coordinative Center for Economic Reforms had been created at the President Office and active work had started. However, after two years of active changes and contradictory results a question arose – what, out of all implemented measures, was indeed for good and deserves to be called «reforms».

A year and a half have already passed since the start of Viktor Yanukovich reform. The ambitious transformation plan has showed noticeable progress on many directions. However, so far none, including the authorities’ representatives, can call the reformation efforts successful. Properly outlined priorities and action plan stumbled on financial and political interests of various influential groups, what, naturally, stipulated for a large-scale ‘correction’ of the reform plan. Apparently every plan needs to be updated with time. However, comparative analysis of the new reform action plan showed that ‘reformators’ have already skipped many initially positive initiatives.

Over the last two years Ukraine has implemented many policy changes outlined at the President Reform Program for 2010-2014. Despite the large number of bills and laws approved through 2010-2011, the program lags behind the outlined schedule and none of the reforming priorities has reached the declared goals. Some of the adopted regulations are quite positive; however, still the initiatives have quite limited effect due to existent practices for administrative pressure, corruption and poor confidence on judicial power. Large number of approved laws and regulations are simply technical, which means that the essence of the problems they addressed remains unchanged. Positive steps were observed in reformation of healthcare, education, and pension system, however, so far no fundamental changes happened at the areas. Some of the reform priorities remained untouched. For instance, in electricity sector and oil and gas sector, where business and political interests are closely interlinked, powerful business-groups simply blocked any reforms. In general, the reformation process is poorly transparent. Moreover, for many important directions the authorities ignore public opinion consulting with civil society players only formally.

Nobel Prize winner Douglass North defines two types of social order. The first one is the open access order, which stands on principles of openness and fair competition. The second one is the limited access order, which relies on selectiveness and privileges thus restricting both political and economic competition. In the first case the open system brings to success the most competitive players (those who can produce the best quality and the cheapest products and services). In case of limited access order the success depends only on how someone is close to the clan, family or caste. Ukraine, apparently, is a country with the limited access order. And it needs fundamental changes to pass to the openness. However, political elites as well as business elites face conflict of interests when it comes too close to real reforms since fundamental changes threaten their own rent-seeking schemes. In that case the only way (though a thorny one) is to build demand for real changes from “below”.

This working paper contains the results of the research conducted in the framework of the project Trade SIA Study FTA EU-Ukrain

The presentation summarizes the results of modeling and qualitative analysis of possible consequences of the Free Trade Agreement between Ukraine and the EU, as well as an extended analysis of possible social impacts.

Prepared in the framework of Trade Sustainability Impact Assessment (TSIA) study carried out by an international consortium of ECORYS Netherlands BV and CASE Ukraine.

The paper presents analysis of selected sub-sectors of agriculture of Ukraine in the context of international integration. The study aims assessment of possible economic impact of Free Trade Agreement between the EU and Ukraine on domestic agriculture. This paper serves as a background for broader analysis that is been undertaken in the framework of TSIA Study project.

The paper presents an overview of transport services in Ukraine (road, rail, water and sea, other), studies present agreements between the EU and Ukraine penetrating into the sector, and assesses possible economic and environmental impacts the FTA can bring. This paper serves as a background for broader analysis that is been undertaken in the framework of TSIA Study project.

This working paper contains the results of the first stage of the research conducted in the framework of the Work Package 11 of the ENEPO project. Work package 11, called “The costs and benefits of institutional harmonization” aims to identify the costs and benefits of institutional harmonization between EU and its Eastern neighbors.

Переглянути архів по роках