Abstract

In recent years, in most countries of the world, it is observed the spread and change of the main paradigm of the education system, which involves the addition of classical formal education (in official educational institutions with the official document about a degree) with informal and informal types. The last two forms of education are the acquisition of knowledge, skills and abilities for comprehensive development and qualification development of a person, the formation of a civic position and the motivation for self-development and self-education, which is not necessarily accompanied by officially recognized documents but has no less value. This leads to the formation of a new system of learning that will operate throughout the life of a person and should become one of the strategic objectives for any state that strives for sustainable development. Such changes require an innovative approach at all stages of the new system formation, including its financial support. However, due to objective reasons for the limited budget funds, the state cannot independently provide financing for the lifelong learning system without involving additional economic entities. Thus, this article is devoted to building expenditure optimization model as the main innovation in the financing of the lifelong learning system. For this purpose, the authors define the stage of formation, the essence and basic characteristics of the lifelong learning system in the modern world. The next step was a providing of a comparative analysis of the main trends in financing education in the countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and their partners and Ukraine at the expense of various sources (public and private) and for different levels of education (primary education, secondary education, postgraduate education, elementary education higher education, higher education). On the results of analysing the absence of structured information about extra-budgetary funding of lifelong learning system is indicated. Thus, authors developed the approach to estimating potential volume of extra-budgetary sources of funding for a lifelong education system by using structured equation modelling method, where the informational basis are education expenditures of the Consolidated Budget of Ukraine and the Education Index (as a component of the Human Development Index). For calculations software, STATISTICA 6.1 was used. This approach allows to indicate the expenditure optimization model and to determine the financial potential of the lifelong learning system development.

Keywords: financial support, lifelong learning system, public expenses, private expenses, expenses optimization model, structured modelling.

JEL Classification: A13, A20, C13, C51, F01, H52, I22.

Cite as: Vorontsova, A. S., Lieonov, S. V., Vasylieva, T. A., & Artiukhov, A. Y. (2018). Innovations in the financing of lifelong learning system: expenditure optimization model. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 2, 218-231. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2018.2-18

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

References

1. Aspin, D. N., Chapman, J. D. (2000). Lifelong learning: concepts and conceptions. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 19(1), 2-19.
2. Bagmet, M., Liakhovets, O. (2017), Towards the European Union’s Education Standards: Expectations of the Ukrainians, Economics and Sociology, Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 191-206. DOI: 10.14254/2071-789X.2017/10-2/14.
3. Lifelong Learning in the 21st Century and Beyond. Journal of RadioGraphics. 29(2), 613-622.
4. Dave, R. H. (1976). Foundation of Lifelong Education: Some Methodological Aspects. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
5. Dave, R. H. (1976). Illustrative Content Analysis and Synthesis. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
6. Duyff, R. L. (1999). The value of lifelong learning: key element in professional career development. Journal of Am Diet Assoc. 99 (5), 538-543. Ishchenko-Padukova, O., Kazachanskaya, E., Movchan, I., & Nawrot, L. (2017)
7. OECD (2017). Education at a Glance 2017: OECD Indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/eag-2017-en.
8. Economy of education: National and global aspects. Journal of International Studies, 10(4), 246-258. doi:10.14254/2071-8330.2017/10-4/19.
9. Jikia G., Vorontsova A., Petrushenko Y. (2017). Measuring Efficiency of Financial Support in Lifelong Learning System: A Case Study of Ukrainian Regions. Business Ethics and Leadership. Vol.1, Issue 4. P. 84-92. DOI: 10.21272/bel.1(4).84-92.2017.
10. Laal, M. (2011). Barriers to lifelong learning. Social and Behavioral Sciences. 28, 612-615.
11. World Bank (2003). Lifelong Learning in the Global Knowledge Economy: Challenges for Developing Countries. A World Bank Report. Washington, D.C. Retrieved from: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTLL/Resources/Lifelong-Learning-in-the-Global-Knowledge-Economy/lifelonglearning_GKE.pdf.
12. Petrushenko, Yu. M., Vasylieva, T. A., Lyeonov, S. V., Vorontsova, A. S. (2017). Investment in the development of a system of long life education as an effective factor of socioeconomic development. Financial and credit activity: problems of theory and practice: collection of scientific works, 2(23), 426-436.
13. Skačkauskienė, I., Kazlauskienė, E., Katinienė, A. (2017). Modelling Knowledge Synergy Evaluation. Montenegrin Journal of Economics, Vol. 12, No. 3, 35-49.
14. Švagždienė, B., Jasinskas, E., Simanavičius A. (2017). The Success of Learning Organisation: Values Contextualization Dimension, Montenegrin Journal of Economics, Vol. 13, No. 4, 101-108.
15. Szilágyi, G. A. (2017). Exploration Knowledge Sharing Networks Using Social Network Analysis Methods. Economics and Sociology, 10(3), 179-191. doi:10.14254/2071-789X.2017/10-3/13.
16. UN General Assembly (2015). Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Retrieved from: http://www.refworld.org/docid/57b6e3e44.html.
17. Tvaronavičienė, M., Tarkhanova, E., & Durglishvili, N. (2018). Sustainable economic growth and innovative development of educational systems. Journal of International Studies, 11(1), 248-256. doi:10.14254/2071-8330.2018/11-1/19.
18. Vardanyan, N. (2017). Education Quality Assessment from the Perspective of Stakeholders on the Example of Armenian Higher Education Institutions. Business Ethics and Leadership, 1(3), 93-97. DOI: 10.21272/bel.1(3).93-97.2017
19. Vasilyeva, T., Lyeonov, S., Adamičková, I., Bagmet, K. (2018). Institutional Quality of Social Sector: the Essence and Measurements. Economics and Sociology, 11(2), 248-262. doi:10.14254/2071-789X.2018/11-2/17.
20. Vasylieva, T., Lyeonov, S., Vorontsova, A. (2018). Management of education in the context of its financial support as a public-private good. Annals of Marketing Management & Economics.  Vol. 4, No 1. Р. 163-173.
21. OECD (2017). Who really bears the cost of education? How the burden of education expenditure shifts from the public to the private sector. Education Indicators in Focus. 56. Paris: OECD Publishing. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/4c4f545b-en.
22. Kozmenko, O. V., Kuzmenko, O. V. (2014). Ekonomiko-matematyčni metody ta modeli (ekonometryka) (Economic-mathematical methods and models (econometrics)): a manual. Sumy: Universytetska knyga.
23. Ukrainian State Statistics Service (2015). National Accounts of Education of Ukraine. Statistical Bulletin.
24. Shevchenko, L. S. (2013). Bezperervnistʹ jak osnovnyj pryncyp reformuvannja sučasnoji systemy osvity  (Continuity as the main principle of reforming the modern education system). Socio-economic transformations of the modern world: scientific-practical conference materials. Kharkiv: National University Jaroslav Mudriy Law Academy of Ukraine, 83-86.