UDC 330.43:330.5:338.45(477); JEL C67, D57, L16, L52, O14, O52
Sozanskyy, L. Y. (2026). Sektoral'ni transformatsiyi ta mul'typlikatyvni efekty v ekonomitsi Ukrayiny v konteksti importozamishchennya [Sectoral transformations and multiplier effects in the economy of Ukraine in the context of import substitution]. In Sotsial'no-ekonomichni problemy suchasnoho periodu Ukrayiny [Socio-Economic Problems of the Modern Period of Ukraine]: Vol. 178 (2) (pp. 55-61). DOI: https://doi.org/10.36818/2071-4653-2026-2-6 [in Ukrainian].
Sources: 14

Authors



Sozanskyy Lyubomyr Yosypovych

Doctor of Economics, Senior Researcher

Leading Researcher, Scientific Secretary of the unit of the Department of problems of the real sector of regions' economy of the Dolishniy Institute of Regional Research of NAS of Ukraine

Contacts: ls.ird2@ukr.net

Webpages:

Resume

The article examines sectoral transformations in the Ukrainian economy during 1995–2022 through the dynamics of domestic output and gross value added (GVA) multipliers in the context of import substitution. The relevance of the study is determined by the need to strengthen national economic resilience, reduce dependence on imported intermediate inputs, and restore the capacity of domestic production linkages to generate value added within the country during wartime and reconstruction. The theoretical and methodological basis of the study is the input–output approach, the concept of structural transformation, and the analysis of intersectoral linkages. The empirical calculations are based on harmonized national input–output tables from the OECD, which make it possible to compare changes in domestic production effects and GVA effects across economic activities over a long period. The study shows that the average domestic output multiplier increased from 1.824 in 1995 to 1.918 in 2022, while the GVA multiplier decreased from 0.740 to 0.601. This divergence indicates that the growth of domestic output was accompanied by a weakening of the economy’s capacity to retain value added within national production chains. The sectoral analysis reveals that services and basic life-support activities, including education, public administration, water supply, and energy supply, demonstrated a relatively high ability to generate domestic GVA because of their lower dependence on imported material inputs. Meanwhile, manufacturing industries remained important for the formation of output effects and for the potential implementation of selective import substitution policies. Particular attention is paid to sectors in which the GVA multiplier remained low or decreased significantly, including chemicals, petroleum refining, rubber and plastic products, and metallurgy. The results show that import substitution should not be interpreted as the preservation of existing production structures or a simple restriction of imports. Rather, it should be understood as a policy of technological upgrading, localization of intermediate production, deeper processing of raw materials, and stronger interaction between industry, engineering, science, and professional services. The findings may be used to substantiate sectoral priorities during Ukraine’s post-war recovery, reconstruction policy, structural resilience, economic security, long-term economic growth and the expansion of domestic value added in Ukraine.

Keywords:

sectoral transformations, multiplier effects, intersectoral linkages, gross value added, import substitution, structural resilience

References


1. Leontief, W. W. (1936). Quantitative input and output relations in the economic system of the United States. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 18(3), 105-125. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1927837
2. Miller, R. E., & Blair, P. D. (2022). Input-output analysis: Foundations and extensions (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108676212
3. Rasmussen, P. N. (1956). Studies in inter-sectoral relations. Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company; Copenhagen: Einar Harcks.
4. Hirschman, A. O. (1958). The strategy of economic development. New Haven: Yale University Press.
5. Chenery, H. B., Robinson, S., & Syrquin, M. (1986). Industrialization and growth: A comparative study. New York: Oxford University Press.
6. Dietzenbacher, E., Los, B., Stehrer, R., Timmer, M., & de Vries, G. (2013). The construction of world input-output tables in the WIOD project. Economic Systems Research, 25(1), 71-98. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09535314.2012.761180
7. Timmer, M. P., Erumban, A. A., Los, B., Stehrer, R., & de Vries, G. J. (2014). Slicing up global value chains. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 28(2), 99-118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.28.2.99
8. Input-output tables: 2025 release (2025). OECD: Website. Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/en/data/datasets/input-output-tables.html
9. Heyets, V. M., Shynkaruk, L. V. (Ed.), & Artyomova T. I., et al. (2011). Strukturni zminy ta ekonomichnyy rozvytok Ukrayiny [Structural changes and economic development of Ukraine]. Kyiv: Institute for Economics and Forecasting of the NAS of Ukraine. Retrieved from https://ief.org.ua/publication/monohrafii/2011/strukturni-zminy-ta-ekonomichnyy-rozvytok-ukrainy [in Ukrainian].
10. Kindzerskyy, Yu. V. (2013). Promyslovist’ Ukrayiny: stratehiya i polityka strukturno-tekhnolohichnoyi modernizatsiyi [Industry of Ukraine: Strategy and policy of structural-technological modernization]. Kyiv: Institute for Economics and Forecasting of the NAS of Ukraine. Retrieved from https://ief.org.ua/publication/monohrafii/2013/promyslovist-ukrainy-stratehija-i-polityka-strukturno-tekhnolohichnoi-modernizacii [in Ukrainian].
11. Tochylin, V. O. (Ed.), Ostashko, T. O., & Pustovoyt, O. V., et al. (2009). Rynky real’noho sektoru ekonomiky Ukrayiny: strukturno-instytutsional’nyy analiz [Markets of the real sector of Ukraine’s economy: Structural-institutional analysis]. Kyiv: Phoenix. [in Ukrainian].
12. Heyets, V. M. (2020). Fenomen nestabil’nosti – vyklyk ekonomichnomu rozvytku [The phenomenon of instability as a challenge to economic development]. Kyiv: Akademperiodyka. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15407/akademperiodyka.403.456 [in Ukrainian].
13. Kindzerskyy, Yu. V. (2023). Promyslova polityka dlya ekonomichnoho rozvytku: do problemy yiyi obgruntuvannya z pozytsiyi svitovoho dosvidu ta v konteksti neobkhidnosti vykorystannya u voyennyy period ta pry povoyennomu vidnovlenni v Ukrayini [Industrial policy for economic development: To the problem of its justification from the standpoint of world experience and in the context of the need for use during the war period and post-war recovery in Ukraine]. In Ekonomichnyy analiz [Economic Analysis]: Vol. 33(3) (pp. 110-129). DOI: https://doi.org/10.35774/econa2023.03.110 [in Ukrainian].
14. Zveryakov, M. I. (2024). Struktura natsional’noyi ekonomiky v umovakh hlobal’nykh zmin [Structure of the national economy under global changes]. EkonomikaUkrainy – Economy of Ukraine, 67(12), 3-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15407/economyukr.2024.12.003 [in Ukrainian].