Abstract

The aim of the article. The aim of the article is to assess the country position in the capital market and development priorities of its marketing strategy to provide state funding for innovative economic development. The results of the analysis. Increased budgetary imbalances in financing innovative development of economy and rise in the cost of borrowing in the capital markets determine the importance of effective publicmarketing in these markets. The evaluation positions of Ukraine on lending markets revealed significant deterioration of its image as a reliable borrower, which affects the achievement of objectives of innovation and targets of Sustainable Development Strategy. In our opinion, the key problematic aspects of public marketing in Ukraine are the lack of experience in public debt management model and as a result institutional support for the implementation of marketing strategies and complex 4Ps; developing an efficient ways of distribution and use of borrowed resources to finance innovation development of economy, the need for positioning the state as a reliable borrower in foreign and domestic markets. Conclusions and directions of further researches. Public marketing and commercial sector marketing is substantially different from the perspective of understanding the product, participants and processes. The dichotomy of these marketing systems determines their strengths and weaknesses through the willingness of the authorities to delegate of rights and obligations to develop a marketing strategy in the market borrowing, 4Ps complex implementation and mandate the use of portfolio approach to debt management. The projection of the public marketing definition in the sphere of debt management suggests the government securities as «product», the market value of these securities – a «price»; positioning of the state in the capital market and the creation of its image as a reliable borrower – a «promotion»; output and government actions in external and domestic debt markets – as a «place». This classic integrated set of marketing tools – 4Ps, involved in debt management, determines the marketing strategy of state borrowing on the markets, which in modern terms should be focused on attracting the necessary funding for innovative economic development. Results of the analysis allowed to develop priorities in marketing strategy of Ukraine on debt markets, its institutional basis and complex of 4Ps. These priorities should relate to the promotion and development of the domestic debt market as the basis of innovation financing within the «golden» fiscal rule. Further studies need to be done in area of specific use of various marketing tools to promote Ukraine’s position in the debt markets to reduce the debt burden and the release of resources for its innovative development, creation effective institutional basis for development and realization of public marketing strategy with American type agent model. Arguments in favor of independent fiscal institution in Ukraine are linked with technical efficiency, hedging different risks, spreading of competitive market environment, professionalism, transparency and accountability of such institution.

Keywords: state marketing, innovative development, «golden rule», image of state, marketing strategy

JEL Classification: D4, D21, L1, M19.

Cite as: Leonov S. & Antonov, M. (2017). Public marketing on lending market as a basis of innovative development of Ukraine’s economy. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 1, 32-41. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2017.1-03

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

References

1. Alekhyn, B.Y. (2007) Hosudarstvennui dolh [Government debt]. Moscow [on Russian]
2. Byudzhetnyi kodeks Ukrayiny [Budget Code of Ukraine]. (2010). zakon0.rada.gov.ua. Retrieved from http://zakon0.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/245 -17 [in Ukrainian].
3. Zvit pro khid I rezultaty vykonannia prohramy diialnosti Kabinetu ministriv Ukrayiny u 2015 r. [Report on the progress and results of the program of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine in 2015]. rada.gov.ua. Retrieved from rada.gov.ua/uploads/documents/35980.rtf [in Ukrainian].  
4. Zvit uriadu Ukrayiny za II kvartal 2016 [Report of the Government of Ukraine for the second quarter of 2016]. www.kmu.gov.ua. Retrieved from http://www.kmu.gov.ua/control/uk/publish/article?art_id=249165390&cat_id=244274130 [in Ukrainian].  
5. Innovatsiina Ukrayina 2020: natsionalna dopovid [Innovative Ukraine 2020: national report]. (2015). Kyiv, NAS of Ukraine [in Ukrainian].
6. Kucher, H. (2011). Rozvytok rynku vnutrishnikh derzhavnykh borhovykh zoboviazan Ukrayiny [Ukrainian domestic debt market development]. Visnyk KNTEU – Bulletin of the KNTEU, 2, 47-58 [in Ukrainian].
7. Makar, O.P. (2012). Svitovyi dosvid upravlinnia derzhavnym borhom i perspekty yoho zastosuvannia v Ukrayini [World evidence of public debt management and its perspectives]. Ekonomika ta derzhava – Economy and State, 10, 54-57 [in Ukrainian].
8. Naukova ta innovatsiina diialnist Ukrayiny: statystychnyi zbirnyk [Scientific and innovative activity in Ukraine: statistics]. (2016). Kyiv [in Ukrainian].  
9. Osoblyvosti ta priorytety borhovoyi polityky Ukrayiny [Features and priorities of debt policy]. (2004). Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
10. Pro zatverdzhennia Stratehiyi staloho rozvytku «Ukrayina 2020» [On approval of the Sustainability strategy «Ukraine- 2020»]: Ukaz Prezydenta Ukrayiny 12.01.2015. zakon2.rada.gov.ua. Retrieved from http://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/5/2015 [in Ukrainian].
11. Rohach, F. (2012). Riski i otsenki hosudarstvennoho dolha Ukrainu [Risk in assessment of Ukrainian government debt]. Ekonomist – Economist, 3, 74-76 [in Russian].
12. Yuriy, S. (2007). Upravlinnia zrostanniam na osnovi borhu I Ukrayina [Growth management on debt basis and Ukraine]. Zhurnal yevropeiskoyi ekonomiky – Journal of the European economy, 1, 6-27 [in Ukrainian]. 
13. Butler, P., & Collins, N. (1995). Marketing public sector services: Concepts and characteristics. Journal of Marketing Management, 11(1-3), 83-96 [in English].
14. Kotler, P., & Murray, M. (1975). Third sector management – The role of Marketing. Public Administration Review 35 (5), 467-472 [in English].
15. Developing the Domestic Government Debtmarket. From Diagnostics to Reform Implementation. (2007). The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank [in English]. 
16. Fiscal Monitor: Now Is the Time Fiscal Policies for Sustainable Growth (2015). IMF. www.imf.org. Retrieved from http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fm/2015/01/fmindex.htm [in English].
17. Gross domestic expenditure on RD by sector of performance and source of funds. stats.oecd.org. Retrieved from https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=GERD_FUNDS [in English].
18. Kaplan, А.М., & Haenlein, M. (2009). The increasing importance of public marketing: Explanations, applications and limits of marketing with inpublic administration / Andreas. European Management Journal, 27, 197-212 [in English].
19. Managing Public Debt. From Diagnostics to Reform Implementation. (2007). The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / TheWorldBank [in English]. 
20. S&P Capital IQ Global Sovereign Debt. A Market Driven Perspective: 4 quarter 2014 [in English].