Five-fold synergy as an optimal innovative model

Julia Yereshko


Introduction. The issue of understanding the patterns and factors of economic growth is reflected in the work of scientists, politicians, historians and publicists from antiquity to the present. The economic system is transforming, at the same time evolving partly randomly, and quantitative changes often precede qualitative ones. Systems of this type are characterized by the bifucarial nature of development, i.e. a change in the qualitative behaviour of such dynamic nonequilibrium systems with a slight alternative to their parameters, bifurcation points (transition or progress) of which are the economic crises, and the equilibrium state is only a certain moment in their movement and development. This nature of evolution is decisive for the whole set of complex multicomponent nonlinear systems, represented by a multiparameter set of dynamic systems of lower order, which include economic ones. However, this typology automatically means a logical problem of finding patterns of their movement and development, given the difficulty of predicting the reaction of this type of system to the impact and change of their parameters.

The aim of the article is to substantiate the optimal innovative model of the economy based on the determination of a key factor of economic development.

The methodological basis of the research is dialectical analysis, the method of studying the causality of phenomena, determinism in the study of systems, theoretical and logical generalizations and hypotheses.

Results. The characterization of economic systems as complex, multicomponent and chaotic, i.e. those that can be deterministic and predictable only in theory, explains the stochastic nature of economic laws and the logical absence of a "universal" recipe for development, which proves the need to find endogenous factors. Based on the assumption of a unified nature of development and unevenness, it is determined that the core of innovative development in the modern world is the intellectualization of economic systems. The factor of unevenness and development, at the same time, in the modern sense, development innovative that is, is the intellectual capital, which produces an innovative flash, which with the appropriate working mechanism becomes the driving force of development. The study of development theories proves the need to endogenize the "Sollow residual", because the assumption of the exogenous nature of scientific and technological development, and hence economic growth, does not explain the root causes of the uneven development of individual economies, and therefore does not explain the key development factor. Naturally, the general trajectory of global development is set exogenously, at the same time, it begins with an endogenous innovation outbreak, which turns into an innovation flow and forms the technological base adopted by the rest of economic systems. The contradiction of the neoclassical paradigm and institutionalism is purely nominal, because the establishment of rules and directives by institutions can be based on "ratio" and convergence of economic agents – institutions, or their synergy can provide recursive directiveness to the system, the economic system as a whole, that is, and "irrational" rules will be organically calibrated as a result of this interaction, at the same time, the presence of rules will give the chaotic multicomponent system some additional determinism. Thus, a five-fold synergy is proposed as an innovative model of economic development, which takes into account the whole set of interactions between economic agents in their joint development and conflict, determining the optimal trajectory of overall sustainable economic growth.


sustainable development; economic growth; Sollow residual; intellectual capital; theory of endogenous growth; neoclassical paradigm; institutionalism

Full Text:



Kuznets, S. (1955). Economic growth and income inequality. The American economic review, 45(1), 1-28.

Global Competitiveness Report 2019: How to end a lost decade of productivity growth

GII Annual Report 2020.

Brožová, D. (2015). Modern labour economics: the neoclassical paradigm with institutional content. Procedia Economics and Finance, 30, 50-56.

Pack, H. (1994). Endogenous growth theory: intellectual appeal and empirical shortcomings. Journal of economic perspectives, 8(1), 55-72.

Romer, P. M. (1994). The origins of endogenous growth. Journal of Economic perspectives, 8(1), 3-22.

Silverberg, G., & Soete, L. (1994). The economics of growth and technical change. Edward Elgar Publishing.

Yereshko, Yu. О. (2021). Aktualizatsia paradegmy staloho rozvytku z pozytaii ii liudynicentrychkosti. Pidpryjemnytstvo ta innovatsii, 7. [in Ukrainian].

Etzkowitz, H. (2002). Incubation of incubators: innovation as a triple helix of university-industry-government networks. Science and Public Policy, 29(2), 115-128.

Yereshko, Yu. О., & Kreidych, I. M. (2021). Kliuchovyi innovatsijnyi resurs staloho rozvytku. Ekonomichnyi visnyk Natsionalnoho technichnoho universytetu Ukrainy «Kyivskyi politeknichnyi instytut», (18). [in Ukrainian].


Article Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

Metrics powered by PLOS ALM


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2021 Julia Yereshko

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.


Articles are distributed under Creative Commons Attribution  International 4.0 (CC-BY-NC 4.0) 

Science Works Journal "Ekonomichnyy analiz"

ISSN 1993-0259 (Print)  ISSN 2219-4649 (Online) DOI: 10.35774/econa

© West Ukrainian National University

© «Ekonomichnyy analiz», 2007-2023