Archetypic of economic analysis in public management systems
The article examines the conceptual foundations of economic analysis within the public management system. Attention is focused not only on generally accepted approaches, but also on the archetypal approach. The main goal of the article is to determine the features of appliying economic analysis to the public management system within the framework of the archetypal approach. The methodological basis of the article is the key methods of economic analysis, applied in the study and analysed in the work and analysed in the paper. The dominant models of public management in global practice and in domestic contexts, based on the archetypal paradigm, have been identified and characterised. The influence of archetypes on the formation of individual behaviour in society is identified. The results of the analysis demonstrate that there are a number of objective and subjective factors, the interdependence and interaction of which affect human behaviour, generate conditions for public actions and administrative management. It has been proven that any process in one way or another affects to a certain extent changes in the behaviour of individuals, officials, employees and government officials. It is established that still all relations within the state are structured on the basis of formed national characteristics, the dominant archetypes become an indispensable component of public management in a particular state. The need to apply economic analysis to both the study of public management and administration and to the phenomena under study has been substantiated. A scheme of an archetypal decision-making model and a scheme of the interrelationship between archetypes, economic analysis and management decisions in public management are proposed. The main archetypes of economic analysis in public administration and its tools, taking these archetypes into account are identified. The most suitable and appropriate methods of economic analysis for use in public administration are determined, and their interpretation in light of the specific features of analysis in this field is provided.
Amosov, O.Yu., Gavkalova, N.L. (2013). Models of public administration (archetypal paradigm). Public administration: theory and practice: collection of scientific works of the Association of Doctors of Science in Public Administration. Kharkiv: DokNaukDerzhUpr. Special issue, June, 6-13 [in Ukrainian]
Pokatayev, P.S., Latynin, M.A., Stepanenko, S.V., Pasemko, G.P., Taran, O.M. (2024). Fundamentals of public administration and administration. Kharkiv [in Ukrainian]
Public administration in Ukraine: historical experience and development prospects: materials of the All-Ukrainian scientific-practical conference (2025) edited by L.G. Komakha, N.M. Korchak, L.V. Gonyukova. Kyiv: NNIPUDS Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv [in Ukrainian]
Perkhach, O.L., Lukashevska, U.T. (2019). Archetypal models of public administration. Public Governance, 9, 357-368 [in Ukrainian]
Mishchenko, M.N. (2014). Ukrainian national archetypes: from the collective unconscious to conscious national identity (on the relevance of the methodology of archetypal analysis). The Journal of V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University. Series Philosophy. Philosophical Peripeteias, 1130 (51), 90-94 [in Ukrainian]
Sushiy, O.V. (2018). Social archetypalism in the problem field of public administration: current state and prospects for development. Public Governance, 4 (14), 340-354 [in Ukrainian]
Buchanan’s, J., Tullock, G. (1962). The Calculus of Consent: Logical Foundations of Constitutional Democracy. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69 (1), 3-19.
Osborne, D., Gaebler, Т. (1993). Reinventing Government. New York: Penguin Publishing Group.
Niskanen, W.А. (1971). Bureaucracy and Representative Government. Transaction Publishers.
Gavkalova, N., Amosov, O. (2018). The influence of archetypes on social transformations. Public Governance, 4 (14), 63-76 [in Ukrainian]
Sushiy, O.V., Afonin, E.A. (2016). Archetypics and public management: challenges and risks of social transformation. Ukr. socìum – Ukrainian society, 2 (57), 137-141 [in Ukrainian]
Danilkova, A., Shelest, E., Mantur-Chubata, O. (2026). Implementation of the concept of good governance in the practice of public administration of Ukraine: synergy of international standards and academic values. Herald of Khmelnytskyi National University. Economic Sciences, 350 (1), 440-447 [in Ukrainian]
Grishina, N. (2026). Doctrine of good governance: formation and role in the activities of public authorities. Scientific Bulletin of Uzhgorod National University, 93, 3, 96-1007 [in Ukrainian]
Andriyash, V.I., Yevtushenko, O.N. (2018). The concept of “public administration” in domestic scientific discourse. Public Governance and Regional Development, 1, 51-65 [in Ukrainian]
Kudrina, O.Yu., Kalchenko, I.V. (2025). Economic analysis in the system of public administration of the region. Tavria Scientific Bulletin. Series: Public administration and administration, 1, 50-56 [in Ukrainian]
Larchenko, O. (2023). Mathematical methods of economic analysis solving problems. Taurida Scientific Herald. Series: Economics, (16), 293-298 [in Ukrainian]
Karpenko, G.V. (2024). Quality of life of the population as an indicator of the overall social efficiency of the public administration system. Bulletin of NTU “KhPI”. Series: Actual problems of development of Ukrainian society, 1, 69-72 [in Ukrainian]
Abdelghani, К., Boudhar, А., Oudgou, М. (2024). Assessing Public PoliciesA Comprehensive Review of Evaluation Methods. International journal of applied management and economics, 11.