DEBT POLICY OF UKRAINE UNDER THE CONDITIONS OF MARITAL STATE
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article examines the current state of Ukraine's debt policy during the war. It was found that public debt is an integral part of the financial system not only of countries with a transitory economy, but also of highly developed ones. The reasons for the rapid growth of the national debt of Ukraine from 2014–2015 to the present are analyzed. The main sources of financing of the state budget of Ukraine are presented, which in turn were formed from external foreign cash flows and corresponding internal borrowings: military bonds, loans from international financial organizations, as well as bilateral loans and grants. It was established that Ukraine received about $4.2 billion in aid from four international organizations – the IMF, the European Union, the World Bank and the European Investment Bank, and these were loans received on preferential terms. At the same time, Ukraine received considerable loans from the governments of such foreign countries: Canada, Great Britain, France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Sweden, Italy, and others. The most profitable assistance is a grant, because this money does not have to be returned. According to the analysis, America takes a leading position in this type of aid. It was also analyzed that at the moment the economic situation in Ukraine is difficult, but not yet critical, as there is $22 billion in state reserves. The main strategic directions and step-by-step actions of the Government of Ukraine in the context of optimizing the management of the public debt of Ukraine are highlighted, namely: the approval of the medium-term Strategy for the management of the public debt for 2021–2024, which is the basic document regarding the debt policy of Ukraine. In addition, according to the forecasts of leading economic experts, in order to improve the debt and budget policy, the state cannot issue national currency through the banking system (printing press) on a permanent basis, receiving financial assistance from international partners, and ultimately reducing non-priority state budget expenses, remains important. The strategy defines 4 main goals of public debt management for the next three years: increase in the share of state debt in the national currency; extension of the average term to repayment and provision of a uniform repayment schedule of the state debt; attraction of long-term preferential financing; continued development of strong relationships with investors and further improvement of the public debt management policy. The strategy also contains an analysis of forecast debt indicators and conclusions on debt sustainability, as well as an action plan for 2021–2024 and indicators of achieving goals — in particular, reducing the ratio of the amount of public debt to GDP by the end of 2024 to 47%. However, the strategy in an updated format, closer to global practices, was approved in 2019 and has proven its effectiveness as a tool for increasing the transparency of decision-making and improving communication with both investors and international partners. Thus, as a result of its implementation, it has already been possible to achieve important goals: an increase in the share of the state debt in the national currency (from 33.4% in 2018 to 38.2% in 2020), an improvement in the structure of the state debt in terms of repayment terms, and an increase in international ratings of Ukraine. Ukraine also received recognition at the international level: the international publication GlobalMarkets awarded Ukraine in the nomination "The best public debt management office in Central and Eastern Europe".
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it