Ergatic approach to reconstruction and modeling of the spatial future of Ukraine

ABSTRACT

The article expresses the idea of ergaticity and the ergatic approach (behavioral model) in decision-making on the spatial development of Ukraine, which considers the state and its space as a ‘system-process’ that is characterized by behavior, the ability to self-organize and self-develop, and the choice of effective behavior in changing realities and situations. Foreign and domestic scientific sources, statistical compilations, project materials, strategies, and programs for the development of Ukraine, its regions, and cities served as source data. The authors use long-term monitoring of processes at different hierarchical levels of the space of the state, their dynamics, and changes. The study resulted in the substantiation of the conceptual provisions of the ergatic approach to planning and modeling the spatial future of Ukraine. The suggested spatial changes relate to functional and urban zoning of the territories of the state; development of connections and understanding of the multidimensional dynamics of processes in the territory; placement of new elements and investments in the existing structure of natural landscape and urban planning conditions; spatial, temporal, structural, and parametric coordination of processes in the space of the state and creation of systemic effects of using the capacity of ergaticity in the spatial development of Ukraine.

KEYWORDS:

• Ergatic system
• space in urbanism
• space multidimensionality
• processes and behavior
• spatial development

1. Introduction

Thousands of casualties and displacement of the population, relocation of enterprises form the temporarily uncontrolled areas, destruction, and severe negative environmental effects of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine are fundamentally changing the space of the state. The need to substantiate scientific and methodological approaches and models of post-war recovery, development, and revitalization of destroyed territories and cities, as well as systematic updates of project and urban planning documentation at various territorial levels is becoming increasingly urgent.

The key objectives of spatial planning in Ukraine coincide with the European ones and include the balanced development of territorial systems, improvement of living conditions of the population, environmental protection, and efficient use of space and resource management. Actual activities in this domain in Ukraine are characterized by the inconsistency of hierarchical levels of planning (General Scheme of Planning of the Territory of Ukraine, schemes of planning the territories of oblasts, regional development strategies, and strategies for spatial development of local communities) and the absence of agglomeration design. There is still an inertia in understanding the nature of spatial development documents from the perspective of the planned economy and public ownership of land and means of production. The scale and complexity of tasks are growing. The authors offer an ergatic approach to the substantiation of the spatial future of Ukraine, efficient post-war recovery, and modeling the development of the state following the requirements and patterns centered in technologies, processes, synergies, human behavior, and the systems’ ability of self-organization and self-development (M. Habrel et al., 2022).

The studies on the problem raised by the authors are grouped in terms of а) theory and practice of spatial planning; b) impact of wars and catastrophes factor on spatial planning; c) behavior of systems and behavioral analysis of processes in urban studies.

The issues of spatial organization and spatial development of territorial systems of various scales are in the focus of many researchers (Dennis, 2012; Kangas & Ryynänen, 2022; Pelorosso, 2020). Feinstein and DeFilippis (2015) divide the theory of spatial planning into explanatory and normative and examine its role and place in the development of a ‘good’ city and region in different administrative-political systems and the mechanisms for adapting to spatial changes and transformations. Planning is based on numerous patterns that take place in urban studies, environmental protection, management, and social and economic spheres. It has its legislative, administrative, and professional framework, which ensures the legitimacy and imperatives of professional activity (Rydin et al., 2012).

The theoretical foundations of territorial planning in the post-Soviet conditions of Ukraine are studied by Didyk and Pavliv (2003), E. Klyushnychenko (2015), A. Pleshkanovska (2005), Panchenko and Yatsenko (2019), Synhaivska and Cherednichenko (2021); the interconnections of the structural components of territorial systems are addressed by K. Mezentsev et al. (2017), Markevych and Sidenko (2021); the history of mapping and current state and prospects of development of the Ukrainian national cartographic science are examined by Sossa (2007) and D. Isaiev (2016). The mentioned researchers are almost unanimous in their opinion that the living space is formed by competing values and is not neutral. There is a transition from spatial planning based on feasibility studies (forecasting) to planning as a participatory art (discovering the ‘genius’ of space, responding to the behavior and processes in the system, uniting to fill spaces with soul, etc.). The researchers suggest methodological approaches to urban development and spatial planning, in which communities and interrelated processes and behaviors become the basis for the implementation of spatial solutions (Andriienko, 2018; Dreval, 2022; M. Habrel et al., 2023).

Factors of war, catastrophes, conflicts, and risks are phenomena related to crisis management, emergency situations, and response to large-scale shocks (Vardanyan, 2024). The professional database and knowledge base of this issue are currently being rethought and expanded, and new scientific provisions for the study of catastrophes and crises, as well as for responding to them, are being formed (Marunyak et al., 2022). L. Serhiyenko et al. (2023), Shulgan (2023) also study the processes, behaviors, and patterns that operate in and characterize the space of Ukraine. To fully take into account the ‘war factor’ in spatial planning, it is necessary to understand the components of war and space, their fundamental interactions, and key points of intersection. Green et al. (2022) suggest that reconstruction should begin with the return of destroyed cities to life (urban population of Ukraine accounts for more than 70%). Gel (2018) sees the need to rebuild cities on the principle of ‘First people, then spaces and their interactions, and finally buildings’, emphasizing the importance of social factors and public spaces. According to A. Dlihach (2023), Ukraine’s strength is in self-government, and its weakness is in non-modernization.

А. Pilav (2012) reveals the spatial conditions in cities that have experienced war in their recent history, putting the social component in relation to the destroyed environment. Using Sarajevo as an example, the author examines the effectiveness of the city’s strategy for overcoming the consequences of war and the participation of citizens with their ideas about the city in creating models of its future. Researchers from Iran Al-Mosawy et al. (2021) substantiate the concept of events that should be used to justify plans for the reconstruction and development of destroyed cities, identifying different strategies and their interpretations. They also define indicators of the effectiveness of strategies and explanations of the causes of destruction, especially in cases of destruction of historical and cultural values and national identity. This experience is particularly valuable and relevant to the situation in Ukraine. In general, there is an understanding of the impact of wars and catastrophes on spatial planning in different legal, administrative, economic, and cultural contexts. Experts in Ukraine seek to interpret the processes of spatial planning and war risk and explore the relationship between space and risk, and the capacity and challenges of spatial planning (Hrustovskyi & Slobodyanyuk, 2022; Vadimov & Vadimov, 2024).

Awareness and understanding of the processes and behavior of systems, as well as methods of their application, are of particular importance for predicting and solving complex problems with uncertainty in the spatial development of states, cities, and regions, the impact of immaterial factors on the natural environment, as well as the material content of space. Silberberg et al. (2013) emphasize the need for ‘thinking through action and behavior’ and the importance of combining theoretical and practical developments and strengthening civic subjectivity and new conceptual frameworks of behavioral (ergatic) methodology.

Routledge’s research on spatial planning is an expanded view of traditions, processes, and human behavior, which outlines the specifics of research and decision-making in modern urban studies and spatial planning (Biely, 2022; Healey, 2007). The cognitive restructuring of human behavior is considered by Abraham and Sheeran (2003), Holdershaw and Gendall (2008). Using the ideas of behavioral theory, economists emphasize the psychological direction as the most important in the modern economy and substantiate the methodological provisions of behavioral economics and human economic behavior in the face of instability and changes in reality. The concepts of sustainable behavior and the idea of new urbanism are also constructive for this study (Ward, 2020; Zheng et al., 2023).

2. Research methodology and structure of ergaticity of spatial systems

For a qualitative and verifiable result, the article uses systemic, synergistic, and spatial approaches that provide analysis and consideration of all components of the living environment, as well as a set of special methods: logical analysis of data on processes; comparison to compare processes in different regions and identify their features; analogy and consideration of case studies in forecasting the processes of spatial development of the state; classification and systematization of changes and trends in processes, identification of their trends; research of immaterial. The results are visualized using the cartographic method to display the spatial distribution of processes and to substantiate the model of the spatial future of Ukraine.

We identify ergaticity as an integral property of the space of the state that unites all its components – resources, functions, structure, immaterial components, etc. Scientific sources, statistics, project materials, strategies, and programs for the development of Ukraine, its regions, and cities served as the source data for the study of this phenomenon. The authors calculate the indicators and characteristics of behavior and processes in space, which are classified by homogeneous properties based on the model of five-dimensional space (М. Habrel, 2004), identify the integral criteria for their evaluation and the regularities of system behavior, and substantiate the methodological tools and proposals for the reconstruction, reorganization, and spatial development of Ukraine.

The ergatic nature of spatial systems is represented by a tuple

$\mathit{Y}=⟨\mathrm{A},\mathrm{B},\mathrm{O},\mathrm{C},\mathrm{X},\mathit{U}⟩,$

where $\mathit{Y}$ is results of vital activity; $\mathit{A}$ is goals; $\mathit{B}$ is requirements, norms, and restrictions (economic, environmental, moral, security-related); $\mathit{O}$ is subjects of activities; $\mathit{C}$ is means of achieving goals (human, material, technological, informational, temporal); $\mathit{X}$ is conditions for vital processes; $\mathit{U}$ is strategies and technologies for achieving goals.

A tuple for a system-process (in relation to the spatial organization and development of the state) is a sequence of actions within a certain direction and corridor (moral and environmental imperatives) that cannot be changed or crossed. Processes and behaviors have a dynamic and flexible structure, as well as variable relationships between components. Consistency and compliance with regulations are important to them. The characteristic stages of behavior include the development of motives – justification of decisions – choice of decisions – implementation of decisions – evaluation of results. Each stage has its own elements and interrelationships. In particular, behavioral motives form the internal and external needs of the system, the ways of satisfying them, and the values. When setting goals, the chain of ‘motives – constraints – criteria’ is important. Decisions are justified on the basis of a set of goals, means of achieving them, and other initial data. Decision implementation determines the methods of using tools and organizing processes for systems to perform their functions within the specified regulations and to achieve results. Evaluation of the result according to justified criteria gives the opportunity to adjust the goals in the case of significant negative consequences and forms the experience used in justifying decisions, as well as activates the mechanisms of self-development of systems. The choice and its scientific foundation are of particular importance in the tuple. Stages can change, have a different sequence and other components of behavior, and define their own chains and results. This is how a system of behavioral values is formed on the basis of a set of goals, criteria, constraints, and priorities. The tuple must contain the material component of the system in which the processes are implemented. The position of the tuple allows establishing the system-forming chains of behavior and processes in the space of the state and forms an important component of the methodology of the ergatic approach to the spatial organization and development of large territorial systems.

Systems-objects do not have behavior, and for systems-processes, it is their organic property (Batty, 2013; Dennis, 2012). The variety of ergatic properties of the space of the state requires the classification of life processes in spatial systems. They fit into the hierarchical chain ‘actions – operations – processes – technologies’. The following components are distinguished: supply, movement, sanitation, production, household services, communication, management, etc. We have identified technological and social processes, as well as immaterial components, attitude to the environment, and reaction to changes in the system’s state ‘fixed’ at a certain moment, to be the generalized properties of ergatic space. Processes and behaviors are perceived differently (positively or negatively), and as destructive or constructive in terms of their consequences, as well as having or not having material implementation (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Classification and structure of the ergaticity of the state’s life systems.

Since the article raises the issue of reconstruction, spatial reorganization, and spatial development of Ukraine, special attention is paid to the category of the space of living activity. The components of space are structured in a five-vector representation: ‘human H – functions F – conditions C – geometry G – time T’ (М. Habrel, 2004). This model of space allows us to analyze the interactions between dimensions, identify patterns and features of processes in the system, and assess their consistency and efficiency.

The human dimension (H) is one of the most important, because the space provides for various human needs, and a person is the creator of processes in the system. The presence of the ‘human’ dimension in the model forms the main behavioral properties of systems – purposefulness, flexibility, adaptability, and the ability to adjust goals when the spatial situation changes, etc. The assessment of processes in the space of systems is determined by the criteria related to this dimension: the level of satisfaction and coverage of residents’ needs, diversity of interests, management decisions, ability to self-organize, and participation of communities in solving problems in their living space.

Functions (F) in space are realized by processes in production, consumer services, cultural and educational activities, transportation, communication, sports, recreation, and management. The functions of the systems are divided into external, internal, and coordination functions, covering business activities and processes in the areas of life support. The structure of functions determines the behavior and specifics of technologies and social processes in the space.

Conditions (C) include vital resources (natural, territorial, material, and financial), geopolitical, political, and legal conditions, as well as requirements and restrictions on the organization and development of the system, government activities for the development of the territory, priorities of activities, and conditions of regulation. A large number of variables in the environment cause different spatial situations, their characteristics, and modes of use and preservation.

The geometric dimension (G) expresses the dimensional characteristics of the space of the system (area, distance, configuration), its location in the environment, and the structure of the division (layout). The characteristics of this dimension, such as compactness of the structure, transitivity, development of connections and networks, and territorial structure, influence the behavior and processes in the system.

Since the living space is dynamic, a time dimension (T) is its important characteristic, covering history, present, and future (development directions). There are thousands of historical, cultural, and architectural monuments of various levels of protection and significance in Ukraine, and during the war, the chaos in the preservation and use of the historical environment is increasing. The current state of processes in the country is characterized by a critical state of infrastructure, its destruction, depreciation, and expiration date. Each dimension of space is described by a set of quantitative and qualitative characteristics. The following is a brief summary of the interaction between the dimensions in relation to ergaticity:

Double interactions of dimensions. The ‘human-conditions’ interaction (HC) characterizes the needs of people and the processes of living and working conditions (comfort, environmental friendliness), the system’s ability to meet the needs, the state of resources, and the opportunities for self-realization of residents. The HF interconnection describes the processes and technologies that determine the sufficiency of functions from the point of view of the resident (service facilities, transport accessibility), employment, and forms of activity. The combination of HT characterizes the dynamism of social processes (migration, demographic changes), as well as processes related to the attitude to traditions and interactions of the present with the past. The HG combination identifies patterns and processes related to the density and distribution of the population across the territory. CG interaction characterizes the spatial localization of processes and the state and heterogeneity of conditions and resources in space. FG reveals the processes associated with the distribution, density, and configuration of functions in space. The FC discloses the processes associated with the use of conditions, their usefulness, and harmful effects. There are other dual interactions of space dimensions related to the processes of territorial expansion and the system’s relations with the environment, as well as changes in the structure and dynamism of processes that shape the behavior of systems.

Triple combinations of dimensions. Wider possibilities for the analysis of processes and spatial situations are revealed in three-dimensional combinations and when a person is included in the analysis of combinations of dimensions, for example, LFU, when a person implements his or her initiatives taking into account the conditions of the place and understanding of the interactions of processes and situations. Processes and trends in certain fragments of space are outlined in the scope of interactions of functional, geometric, and conditions dimensions (FGC). The combination of HCG vectors characterizes the situation and processes associated with the use of conditions.

Four-dimensional combinations provide for the fixation of one of the dimensions. The HCFG interaction does not consider the time dimension, outlining a set of process characteristics related to the structure of space. HCFT (fixed geometric vector) characterizes local processes in a specific spatial situation. HCGT (functional dimension is not considered) is the identification and analysis of processes and situations related to space resources, their placement, and use.

The complete set of five-dimensional combinations creates integral characteristics of usefulness, efficiency, environmental friendliness, comfort, and aesthetics of processes in space and allows to establish regularities that are revealed when considering the entire array of its characteristics.

The five-dimensional model of space allows for a deeper understanding of the essence of ergaticity, organizing spatial situations by behavior and processes, carrying out their systematic analysis and evaluation, and substantiating the methodological provisions of the ergatic approach to the spatial development of the state. It should be emphasized that each dimension of space contains object and behavioral components, and the system objects also participate in the processes. Therefore, in our study, objects and processes are considered in unity, and processes and behavior of systems are prioritized.

3. Data analysis and assessment of processes in the Ukrainian space

Analysis and assessment are inseparable concepts: analysis is carried out for assessment, and assessment is its final stage and cannot be carried out without analysis. These provisions were used to research and justify decisions on reforming and developing the system. The used model of the five-dimensional space of society’s vital activity makes it possible to examine the links between dimensions by the method of combinatorial analysis and to establish hierarchical levels of processes and tasks of studying the spatial development of the state. Due to the lack of official information (open access to statistical reporting has been closed since the beginning of the full-scale war with Russia, and the last census was conducted in 2001), the authors were not able to comprehensively fill in the selected characteristics of dimensions and interactions with the latest data on processes. However, the information used is sufficient to determine objective trends and patterns of changes in the space of the state, and, accordingly, to justify proposals for the spatial future of Ukraine based on the requirements of ergaticity.

The key idea is to interpret Ukraine and its space as a system with behavior (system – process), i.e. an ergatic one. The research logic lies in the analysis of the processes and behavior of the system (its reactions to changes, events, and phenomena), the identification of trends and patterns in the processes, and the substantiation of methodological approaches to the reorganization and determination of the spatial future of the state. The authors offer a generalized view of the processes in the Ukrainian space, using the expert method as the main one.

Methods of ranks, preferences, and comparison (pairwise and sequential comparisons) are used to analyze and assess behavior, events, and processes in Ukraine, and to determine their impact on spatial solutions. The specifics of conducting research in Ukraine in the context of aggression and full-scale war with Russia (2014–2024), on the one hand, crystallizes and allows us to more clearly define the processes and behavior of the system, and on the other hand, creates difficulties in filling it with quantitative data. Therefore, the study is based on experimental methods. Statistical sampling of information sources was carried out selectively. Satellite imagery and publicly available sources were used to locate ‘war footprints’ in cities. The expert assessment method was implemented by experts from Kyiv, Lviv, and Ivano-Frankivsk, specialists from the Center for Monitoring of Urbanized Systems of the Institute of Spatial Planning and Advanced Technologies of Lviv Polytechnic National University, and the Greater Lviv NGO, whose members include well-known architects, economists, lawyers, and land surveyors of Ukraine. The study uses the local data obtained in the course of substantiating the project proposals, including the location of technology parks and logistics centers, suggested by the Geourbanistics and Planning Research Project Center (https://gplan.com.ua) under the leadership of Mykhailo Habrel.

Assignment of quantitative values to qualitative characteristics in the dimensions from −5 to + 5 involves an initial assessment of processes on the dichotomies ‘positive – negative’ and ‘good – evil’, where 0 is the line of demarcation. The table below provides the assessment of processes and changes in the space of Ukraine made on a 10-point scale in accordance with the model of the five-dimensional nature of the space of life and their dimensions and interactions (Table 1)

Table 1. Assessment of processes in Ukrainian space.

Space dimension	Connection of processes with space dimensions	Score
H	Needs of residents and community Investors’ interests Professionalism of managers	−3 −3 −4
F	Movement, activities Functional completeness Goals and means	+2 +3 +2
C	Political and legal environment Natural conditions and resources Requirements, regulations, and restrictions	−4 −2 −1
G	Geopolitical position Planning structure Scale characteristics	−1 +3 +3
T	Development priorities Degraded objects and territories Modes of operation of objects	−2 −2 −3
HF	Sufficiency of functions Meeting people’s needs Employment and self-realization	+4 +3 +1
HC	Utilization of existing capacity Living conditions Risks for investors	+2 +2 −3
HG	Settlement of the population Location of new construction Critical infrastructure network	0 −3 2
HT	Population dynamics State of the historic environment Validity of development prospects	−4 −2 +2
HFC	Use of conditions and harmful effects Raising awareness of people Social utility of features	+2 −3 +3
HFG	Functional zoning of the territory Movement of people Relationships with the environment	+3 +2 +2
HFT	Changes in employment Dynamics of functions development Harmonization of functions and activities of people	−3 −3 +3
HCG	Meeting the requirements of life in certain areas Developed transportation infrastructure Utilization of transit capacity	−4 +2 +2
HCT	Utilization of natural capacity Changes in living conditions Changes in investment conditions	+3 −3 −3
HGT	Changes in population density Network capacity Harmonization of life support structures over time	0 −2 +1
HFCG	Features of the functional structure Structure of territories Allocation of resources in the territories	+3 +2 +3
HFCT	Utilization of spatial capacity Validity of development priorities Trends of changes	+2 +2 +2
HCGT	State of natural and environmental processes Intensity of land cultivation Capacity of historical and architectural heritage	0 +3 +1
HFGT	Functional organization of the territory Changes in network structure Relations of the city with the adjacent territories	+3 +2 +2
HFCGТ	Efficiency of the use of spatial capacity Prospective activity and adaptive characteristics System resilience	+1 +1 +2

The study determines the weighted average estimates and trends of changes, as well as their generalization with respect to ten integral parameters: geopolitical, social relations, ideological and spiritual, economic, population mobility, environmental, institutional, living conditions, settlement system, and critical infrastructure.

1. Geopolitical processes and changes in Ukraine are caused by and consistent with global trends: а) growing interdependence and globalization of ties that create both positive effects and negative consequences; b) dynamization of processes and awareness of the importance of time as a non-renewable resource; c) aggravation of global shocks and crises; d) development of global networks and innovative technologies, their spread to all spheres of life; d) increasing amount of information and reduced time to justify decisions; е) multicomponent nature of interstate ties and relations; f) nonlinearity and poor predictability of global processes and phenomena. The political leadership made a global mistake in Ukraine’s post-Soviet transformations when state-owned enterprises were ‘sold’ to local (for quick profit) and Russian (for the destruction of competitors and liquidation of production) oligarchs. Foreign investors wanted to enter the country, and their business on the territory of Ukraine would have made it impossible to have a war in the form it is today.

   For Ukraine, the processes and behavior of the global world in the war with Russia and the victory, as well as the construction of new defense systems and critical infrastructure facilities, are becoming important. In general, these processes in the country are assessed by experts at + 2. Geopolitical processes orient the state’s spatial development towards the ideas of partial departure from the orthodox principles and practices of globalism; integration and unification into the European spatial system; revealing the uniqueness of Ukraine’s space; taking into account the requirements of the post-industrial era and digitalization.

2. Social processes and relations are an important sphere of life in society. They determine social cohesion, activity, and opportunities for finding a ‘place in space’ and identifying a person in society, and they influence the specifics of processes and their spatial organization. Ukraine’s social processes are characterized primarily by uncontrolled migration and active depopulation. The explanatory note to the state budget of Ukraine as of January 1, 2023 indicates a population of 34.5 million people, and as of September 1, 2023 – less than 28 million (for comparison: January 1, 1991 51,944.4; January 1, 2001 48,923.2). Since the beginning of the full-scale war with Russia (February 2022 – June 2023), more than 8 million citizens have left Ukraine, and this process continues (Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, 2023). Processes and changes in this area are assessed at −1. It is strategically important for Ukraine to address demographic problems and rebuild and develop the state in the face of depopulation.

3. Ideological and spiritual processes reveal the qualitative aspects of relations – consciousness, mentality, and spiritual values that shape and motivate the behavior of the population in space. The genesis of Ukraine’s development confirms that it is values and the immaterial (ideals as generalized ideas about meanings) that determine the forms of life, behavior, and activities of people and influence the organization of the space of life. The state of Ukrainian culture is dual: a) according to various ratings, Ukraine is among the 50 countries with a strong educational system, but now it is actively being destroyed; b) national values are being revived, but a significant part of society has lost its identity and faith in justice and the state. The reasons for this include a long period of statelessness, the rule of totalitarian regimes, corruption, war, and the incomplete process of forming a Ukrainian political nation. Processes and changes in this area are assessed at + 2. The priorities for Ukrainian society include rights and freedoms, a common civic position on state-building and values, and national consolidation of scientific, artistic, and political elites for the reconstruction and effective development of the state. Much attention is being paid to the ideas related to secularization when religion and the provisions of Christian social science become the worldview and spiritual foundation, and more broadly cover the everyday processes of a large part of society.

4. Economic processes and activities are considered through the functioning of the state’s economic system and the crisis; social responsibility of business; powers and participation of the state; oligarchy, social inequalities; and labor and processes related to it (including training and other types of employment). Ukraine’s economy is based on diversified industry, agriculture, and services. The clan-oligarchic model that has determined the dynamics and condition of the economy and processes in the state in recent decades has turned Ukraine into the most corrupt country in Europe (Mind Intelligence … , 2022; Forbes Ukraine, 2021, 2023). This model in Ukraine is confirmed by ‘classic’ facts: monopolization of entire sectors of the economy (energy, fuel industry) and the use of state resources by oligarchic clan groups in their own interests; lack of social responsibility of clans to their state and people (focus on draining resources from the state and transferring them abroad); merger of financial and industrial clans with the authorities and their influence on politics and public administration, as well as corruption of the authorities; focus of financial and industrial groups on interests and dependence on Russia, as well as their pro-Russian position and activities (Mahiyovych et al., 2017). In addition to the direct damage caused by the war, the state suffers losses associated with the outflow of highly professional labor, a decrease in tourist and investment attractiveness, growing risks for business, etc. The economy has lost 30-50% of its production capacity due to the war, and the critical decline is not felt acutely thanks to the support of partner states, but this is becoming a serious test for the future of the state. Economic processes in the country are assessed at -2.

   There is a need to minimize the phenomena of oligarchy and technological singularity, reorientation from resource-based to innovative management, and preservation of human and social capital related to knowledge, information, technology, science, and professional skills. Before the war, gaining access to foreign markets for goods and capital was the main problem for businesses, but now they face the problems of destroyed infrastructure, lack of demand, and lack of access to finance. The suggestions are based on established trends and patterns of behavior and processes in the Ukrainian space. For instance, studies indicate the imminent destruction of the oligarchic-clan system in the state and its negative manifestations after the end of the war and Ukraine’s victory. On this basis, a model of state development grounded on national identity is proposed, which should be consistent with the provisions of democracy, as well as the ideas of meritocracy, when the state’s activities and spatial organization are based on knowledge and values. These changes in the ideological and geopolitical system of the state will determine transformations in its spatial reorganization and development.

5. The processes associated with population mobility and movements in the system confirm the openness of Ukrainian society. New technologies and mobility opportunities are changing the processes of population movement (work, study, life), affecting flexibility and spatial constraints, as well as the emotional state of people. The transition from peaceful life to a state of war affected the mobility of the population: the change from peaceful professions to military ones, adaptation to curfews, security conditions, shelling and the threat of shelling, and changes in work schedules and places of work (loss of work) changed the processes related to population mobility and movement in the system. In Ukraine, macro processes of movement of materials, energy, and information are changing in the context of large-scale transformations – the formation of new logistics centers, technology parks and networks, local movements, and agglomeration under the influence of economic and social processes, as well as geometric and historical specifics of space (Habrel et al., 2023). These processes are assessed at + 2.

6. Environmental processes in the state are considered in terms of the use of non-renewable resources; challenges and threats to environmental and health safety; and destruction of unique natural resources. The following facts are revealed: а) each region of the country has conditions, natural resources, and potential opportunities for effective spatial development; b) uneven distribution of natural wealth in the space of the state and different processes and approaches to its use; c) agricultural land as a national wealth and non-renewable resource, being highly productive and valuable for the nation, is being intensively destroyed and is not working effectively for the development of the state; d) Ukrainians are characterized by pantheism in their attitude to nature; e) with 65% of the world’s black soil, Ukraine has the world’s worst ratio of plowed land to total land area (80%).

   The war in Ukraine is an environmental disaster on a global scale. Out of 35% of European biodiversity present in Ukraine, at least 10% of species have become extinct forever, 30% of Ukraine’s territory is contaminated with explosive ordnance and requires demining (176,000 sq. km), and almost a third of all Ukrainian forests have been destroyed (Berezutska & Khondak, 2023; Prysedska & Shramovych, 2022). The processes in the environmental sphere of the state are characterized by the reduction of the arable land, the decrease in the profitability of agriculture, the change in forms of land management, and the decrease in the ‘contribution of nature’ to total national wealth. The total score for environmental processes is + 1. To ensure the effective overcoming of the environmental consequences of the war and ‘green’ recovery, the issues of implementing European standards, developing a high-quality legal framework, and ensuring the ability of residents, businesses, and authorities to compensate for the damage are becoming increasingly important.

7. Institutionality is considered through the analysis of processes in the administrative and legal sphere and their connection with the space of the state – decentralization and transfer of more powers in the field of territorial management and spatial planning to the local level. The processes here constitute an extensive and contradictory multi-level system aimed at harmonizing the interests of the authorities, the community, and investors and characterized by duplication and inconsistency. Social institutions (communities, NGOs, associations, etc.) in Ukraine have a historical ‘heritage’ of competition and cooperation in making and justifying decisions. The war confirmed their importance and activity, as evidenced by the high public support for the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

   Reforms in Ukraine are creating new processes of living and working together, using ‘governance’ rights, safety and security rules and regulations, and information sharing (Institutional and Organizational … , 2021). The post-war reconstruction of Ukraine will depend on the effectiveness of the institutional system and the professionalism of managers and will become an important factor in complex spatial transformations. Experts assess the processes in this area at −2.

8. Conditions and processes related to everyday life. The most relevant indicators for the assessment of the processes in everyday life and living conditions are those of housing provision and housing policy of the government and the state of adjacent territories, settlements, and their environment. Housing construction in large cities of safe regions is growing rapidly, driven by ‘quick profits’, leading to increased spatial chaos and other negative processes and exacerbating traffic and social problems and the risk of overheating of the housing market. The issues of rational use of territorial resources and environmental safety, as well as the growing unevenness of economic development of territories, are also becoming more pressing. Conditions and processes in this area are assessed at −3. An increase in multifunctionality and balanced development of the urban space with diversified infrastructure and high-quality living environment may be the solution.

9. Processes and changes in the settlement system. Every year, 20–25 rural settlements disappear from the map of Ukraine. According to the calculations of the Institute of Agrarian Economics, at the beginning of 2015, the share of settlements that were potentially on the verge of extinction was 27.7%, and by 2030, it could reach a threatening 50% of their total number. As for processes in urban settlements, most cities in the country are losing or have lost their city-forming functions, while some cities are stagnating or degrading. The redistribution of goods and capital, information, education, science, and management is becoming their main function; many cities are losing their competitiveness, sprawling uncontrollably, distorting their image, reducing their attractiveness, and alienating their residents from the environment. Before the war, there were five highly efficient cities in Ukraine with a population of over a million people; today, it is only Kyiv and Odesa (Dnipro, Donetsk, and Harkiv have moved to a lower category). ‘Dead’ towns and territories appeared in Ukraine as a result of the Chornobyl accident, with the population completely evacuated (Chornobyl, Pripyat). As a result of the hostilities, their number is now growing. The state has not offered a unified urban policy for the development of cities and urban settlement systems. The processes in the settlement system are assessed at −2.

   After the end of the war, Ukraine will not be able to avoid global changes in settlement, deciding on the ‘fate’ of the border areas (perhaps creating zones without settlements), the role and directions of development of the largest cities of agglomerations as key links in the population settlement, and justifying an effective spatial policy of the state.

10. The processes and state of critical infrastructure are primarily associated with its destruction and damage by war (Figure 2). The territories of Harkivska, Hersonska, Sumska, Chernihivska, Odeska, Kyivska, and Zaporizka oblasts suffer the greatest losses. Critical infrastructure (first of all energy infrastructure) in Ukraine has been virtually destroyed and needs to be restored and modernized with further integration into the new spatial system of the state. It is necessary to transform large-scale engineering networks (gas and oil pipelines, transportation) across Ukraine and to develop a systemic policy in this area through the development of innovative infrastructure, the introduction of information technologies in all areas of life support, and improved access to their use. The state of critical infrastructure is assessed at −4.

    Figure 2. Destruction of Ukraine.

    

The processes in Ukraine can be summarized into characteristics and trends:

• – lack of a systemic ideology of the state’s future in the context of war, losses, and geopolitical changes;

• – the permanence of external threats to the security of the state and the presence of an existential enemy in the neighborhood;

• – depopulation, population decline and changes in the quality of the population, depopulated territories and cities;

• – war-traumatized society, problems of integration of displaced persons into a new environment, increased aggressiveness and conflict behavior of individuals and social groups;

• – change of activities, emergence of new economic sectors, ‘migration’ of capital both within the state and abroad;

• – social inequality increased to critical levels (corruption, reduced efficiency of the legal and governance systems);

• – uncontrolled social ‘mixing’ on the territory of the state, stratification of society by the characteristics of values and material status;

• – reduction of intellectual capacity (destroyed research and design institutes, reduction of systemic research, including the problems of spatial development of cities and territorial systems of different levels);

• – unsystematic changes and substitution of functions, when stronger functions, often less useful, replace weaker ones;

• – the impact of hostilities on the nature and natural complexes of the state, regions, and cities.

Processes arise in every dimension of the national space and their interactions: problems and inconsistencies are caused by the war and irrational use and loss of spatial capacity (people, energy, materials, information, time); positive aspects are associated with the use of new technologies, revival of spirituality and traditional values, and growth of self-organization and self-employment. According to experts, today the state is dominated by the processes of degradation and increasing chaos in the spheres of life, while spatial organization and development require purposefulness. Security-related, moral, and environmental imperatives that form a development corridor become important in organization and development. Processes are defined by the following characteristics: functionality, comfort, efficiency, environmental friendliness, social activity, uniqueness, dynamism, integrative nature, and unevenness. The study offers an ergatic map of processes in Ukraine, built taking into account their classification, location, and evaluation. Territories are distinguished by social processes; conditions, features, and technological processes; emotional component and perception of events. The level of detail of statistical data in the clustering of Ukraine’s space based on the requirements of ergaticity is the same since the information was obtained mainly from official and scientific sources. The qualitative characteristics were determined by experts and using studies that consider Ukraine as a whole.

Oblasts are classified into four clusters based on the analysis and assessment of processes in the state and according to the following criteria (Figure 3):

Figure 3. Map of Ukraine with clustering.

• – the first cluster includes Vinnytska, Poltavska, Hmelnytska, Cherkaska, Ternopilska, Mykolayivska, and Kirovohradska oblasts. The oblasts of this cluster have the highest scores in the assessment of processes;

• – the second cluster includes Dnipropetrovska, Kyivska, Harkivska, Hersonska, Chernihivska, Sumska, Zhytomyrska, Ivano-Frankivska, and Lvivska oblasts. Process indicators in this cluster are above the national average;

• – the third cluster includes oblasts with below-average scores in the assessment of processes – Chernivetska, Zakarpatska, Rivnenska, Odeska, and Zaporizka oblasts;

• – the fourth cluster includes Donetska and Luhanska oblasts and the Crimea. Process indicators in these regions have been little researched in relation to our assessment criteria and are at a minimal level.

Behavior and processes determine the basic requirements and provisions of the spatial future of Ukraine, and their inclusion in the formula of the ergatic approach becomes a key principle of spatial policy for regions and territorial entities at all levels of the hierarchy. Mental characteristics, culture, values, spirituality, and aesthetics have a special place in spatial organization.

4. Discussion and modeling of Ukraine’s spatial future

With regard to the spatial future of Ukraine, a package of discussion points and strategic tasks related to ergaticity and determining the spatial arrangement and development of the state has been formed. The solutions include:

1. changes in urbanization and creation of new poles of development: а) transformation of centers of socio-economic activity; b) re-industrialization and structural modernization of the returned territories; c) adjustment of local settlement systems; d) reform of the functions of new administrative and territorial entities; e) accessibility of services and human-centered solutions (Dudar et al., 2023). In Ukraine, medium-sized and small cities will become new growth centers, including in the de-occupied territories, as their processes and spaces are most relevant for the future (Dulko, 2023). Today, a person can live and be effectively self-realized outside of large cities but has special requirements for living conditions. The proposed idea of ‘alternative urbanization’ is consistent with the policy of supporting rural areas and small towns, taking into account historical, demographic, and migration realities and processes, as well as the tendency to limit the development of agglomeration centers and increase the effects of the influence of city centers on peripheral areas;

2. differentiation of local communities through the ‘war’ processes (affected by the war, located in the war zone, close to the war zones, and receiving IDPs), which determines individual approaches to their spatial organization and development, diversification of life support systems, and return to the path of self-sufficiency, self-preservation, and self-organization of society (Wartime communities, 2024). Growth of trust and the role of the Church, activation of institutional ‘effects’ that become effective components in the model of Ukraine’s spatial future, and improvement of relations and communications in the system;

3. improvement of land management systems and processes in rural settlements related to the management and use of fertile land, forms of life in rural areas, and food security of the state. The processes taking place in rural areas, unique natural resources, and fertile soils direct Ukraine’s development not only towards economic efficiency and technology but also towards the interpretation of land as the highest spiritual value for the nation (Matveyev, 2023). Natural conditions and fertile soils contributed in the past to the sedentarization of the local population, and today they create spatially shaping conditions and centers of life and livelihoods. In a situation where people’s needs are growing and the natural resources to meet them are decreasing, our approach creates conditions for supporting villages and rural areas, increasing the efficiency of the use of the state’s land resources and creating new development centers in the areas of urban influence;

4. disclosure of the specifics of economic processes and development of economic capacity involves the development of new types and forms of activities, as well as the expansion of their functional and typological diversity and technological capacity of the economic system of the state (T. Melnyk, 2023). The most promising industries in Ukraine are agriculture and food, transportation, pharmaceuticals and medicine, IT, green industries, and tourism. They will determine the behavior of the state and its spatial future, as well as infrastructure reform. Economic processes and innovations have an objective nature of development – the laws of efficiency, energy conservation, and system development apply here. Accordingly, the restoration of industry in the affected areas is not always appropriate both from the standpoint of revival of social life and economic reasons. In the face of the destruction of the state’s industrial complex, there is a need to create spatial conditions for the activation of self-employment and initiative of the population;

5. use of the spiritual capacity to create a new quality of spaces based on values, which strengthen the sense of belonging to the national community and self-improvement and change the interaction of society with nature. The spatial system of the post-war society will consist of elements, connections, and relations for which tolerance, respect, identity, and values become important. A significant part of the interests concerns connecting people with their place of residence. Faith and religion, family and social institutions form values that are realized in space through material things, practical actions, and decisions. In the context of social ‘mixing’ as a result of resettlement and migration, interactions on the platform of new values and effective humanitarian policy, its monitoring, and reflection in space are important. Special attention should be paid to historical sites of memory and national identity, and the symbolism of their meanings should be strengthened. Public institutions and spaces associated with human consciousness and spirituality leave an imprint on spatial memory, and, accordingly, their symbolism and values play a special role in the revitalization and spatial development of the state, strengthening the identity of local territories;

6. strengthening the natural and environmental framework of the state is a condition for optimizing the processes of spatial development of the system – environmental orientation of decisions, changes in energy supply systems and development of renewable energy technologies, changes in the principles of landscape planning, mechanisms of alienation and targeted use of land, reduction of the level of plowing, elimination of military destruction of nature and negative environmental consequences, restoration and reform of the system of landscape and recreational areas and natural reserve systems, coordination of their use regimes, increase in forest cover, as well as preservation and ‘revitalization’ of destroyed and degraded areas. The creation of a comfortable environment and living conditions makes ecology a priority in the spatial future of the state and focuses the intellect of specialists on environmentally oriented thinking and environmental preservation in decision-making;

7. optimization of spatial connections and coordination of processes. Social communications in Ukraine cannot be considered effective. Accordingly, the improvement of the characteristics associated with the processes and their integration with each other and the environment requires the development of social infrastructure, openness and increased cooperation between people, protection of privacy and monitoring of processes and behavior, as well as the use of new technologies that will promote effective forms of communication and increase the safety and comfort of the population. This task is solved by improving accessibility and development of public spaces, mobility, and integration of the state’s communication systems into the European Community, taking into account the newly created pan-European corridors as axes of state planning (Figure 4).

   Figure 4. Scheme of the spatial future of Ukraine.

   

There are different approaches to the modeling of spatial development of territorial systems (Baffoe, 2023; Kyzym et al., 2023; М. І. Melnyk & Leshchukh, 2023; Semyhulina et al., 2022). The modeling based on the ergatic approach includes the study of the behavior of real systems, the assessment of processes, events, and scenarios in their various states and conditions, the avoidance of possible bottlenecks, and the optimization of the condition and harmonious spatial development. The ergatic approach and ergatic modeling are new in nature and form. For this purpose, it is important to use resources, intelligence, and spirituality, optimize combinations of materials, processes, and behavior, and take into account the heterogeneity of space and non-deterministic development tasks. A special role belongs to the key ideas, principles, and requirements of ergaticity – disclosure and consideration of the behavioral properties of systems, cyclical development, uniqueness, synergy, unevenness, as well as human and social needs, social behavior, and values. Needs have the following properties: а) reproduction, when their satisfaction in a certain period of time does not exclude the possibility of repetition; b) cyclicity – manifested and actualized with a certain frequency; c) motivation – acting as a stimulant to activity; d) individualization for both individuals and social groups. Needs can be: real and virtual; short-term, long-term, or permanent; dependent on the means of realization.

The ergatic model harmonizes essentially different processes in space with its organization and development, creates synergy between the behavior and space of the state, providing greater ‘added value’ of the spatial ‘product’ and increasing the security of the state and the socio-ecological and economic efficiency of its development. Ergatic model of the future of Ukraine is based on objective laws of functioning and development of society and nature, their harmonization, and gradual transition to the noosphere. It has clearly defined properties of self-organization and self-development and corresponds to the systemic principles of organization and development of space (in the fullness of connections and relations both within the system and with the environment).

The model is:

• – flexible (adaptive), capable of changing the characteristics of the space in accordance with changes in goals, needs, processes, and behavior;

• – predictive and capable of anticipating and changing development paths in achieving strategic goals;

• – human-centered, focused on rethinking the processes of life and behavior of society, increasing the role of values and immaterial (intellect, mentality), and the formation of civil society;

• – problem-oriented – understanding the nature of the problems, eliminating spatial imbalances, and taking them into account when making decisions on the spatial future of the state.

Therefore, the study outlines scientific provisions and specific requirements and solutions for the future spatial development of Ukraine, in particular: hybridization of social infrastructure; development of the foundations of a ‘smart state’; increased attention to social equality and class divisions; avoidance of conflicts over the ‘special status’ of certain territories; coordination of national and local development ‘trajectories’; creation of integration platforms and clustering of processes. The conceptualization of the ergatic approach opens up new forms of life and self-government and new systems of design and management, introduces a new logic into the practice of spatial planning (development of programs, strategies, concepts, and comprehensive plans), and recomposes activities in accordance with the rules of behavior and ‘joint’ action.

The Ukrainian-Russian war puts forward the requirements of safety (vitality), crisis management, environmental friendliness, and development of systems in the context of depopulation and massive resettlement, in particular: 1) development of a new security doctrine; 2) development of the concept of returning destroyed cities and territories to life; 3) justification of a new humanitarian policy – human development and integration of IDPs; 4) development of a post-industrial economy in the context of depopulation in the country; 5) justification of new forms of settlement and development of critical infrastructure; 6) comprehensive consideration of the modes and processes of historical preservation, taking into account the immaterial in modeling the spatial development of the state, its cities, and regions.

The new ‘immaterial’ requirements apply to the following areas:

1. urbanization – adaptation of the historic environment to meet the requirements of the new reality, preservation of the spatial structure of historic districts, and changes in land use;

2. economy – the ‘contribution of the past’ to the economy of the territories and the role of the historical and architectural context in tourism and other activities;

3. social – participation of residents in the processes of restoring the destroyed, taking into account the historical past, new conditions and forms of ownership, and changes in the needs of the population;

4. cultural and spiritual – strengthening local traditions and increasing the role of spirituality, taking into account mentality and culture in the development of public spaces and centers as attractive and educational zones.

The main components of the ergatic model of spatial development of the state are reduced to three groups: a) system as a material object (resources, conditions, environment, content, organization); b) behavior (technologies, events, processes, movement, activities); c) evaluation criteria (purpose, requirements, efficiency, environmental friendliness, comfort). A morphological box of tasks (object-behavior interactions with defined criteria for evaluating solutions) and algorithms for solving them are formed. Each task occupies a separate cell of the model, and in the multi-criteria version – a block of cells (Figure 5). A set of tasks of the state’s spatial development is identified: planar (functional zoning); linear (communication and transport); location in the existing spatial structure (new centers, investments), etc. The entire set of material and behavioral things, as well as interrelationships that need to be considered when modeling the spatial future of the state, comprises 85 tasks of different hierarchical levels, which form blocks of cells of the ergatic model.

Figure 5. MorfologicalMorphological box.

To implement the ergatic model, practical measures and design solutions should be focused on: integration of community initiatives, improvement of conditions for self-organization and self-employment of residents; optimization of managerial connections and relations in the system; adjustment of project documentation to international requirements while observing national peculiarities of regulation of this activity; improvement of creativity of design solutions; improvement of architectural and urban planning mechanisms for the implementation of investment proposals; structuring of decision-making procedures (Figure 6). The high level of uncertainty of spatial situations in Ukraine, the scale of tasks and objects of activity, and the complexity of processes and behavior change professional functions and values, and ‘legitimize’ the specialty of ‘spatial development’. The provisions and solutions offered in this study are intended to be used in substantiating the scientific and design provisions of updating the general scheme of planning the territory of the state and solving lower-level problems, as well as in management activities, which are becoming homocentric processes that combine actions, methods, and means of transforming and developing the space of life at different hierarchical levels of the state, but primarily local communities.

Figure 6. General Scheme of Ukraine.

5. Conclusions

The ergatic nature of the spatial development of territorial systems is interpreted as a focus on the behavior and processes in space and the ability of systems to self-organize and self-develop, taking into account the laws of synergy in the development of open systems, as well as the properties of organicity, evolution, and adaptability. An ergatic system is a system with behavior whose properties are ensured by conditions, processes, and technologies, but first of all by a person – his or her perception and life activity, the impact of cognitive, mental, emotional, and other immaterial factors.

The genesis of the development of cities and territories confirms the effectiveness of the ergatic approach in the creation and development of the space for the life and activity of communities. The success of ergaticity is ensured by the greater freedom and creativity of residents and their consolidation into institutions as an ability to take initiative, propose ideas, and work effectively on their implementation. Today, there is a need to intensify the effect of ergaticity in justifying decisions on post-war reconstruction and spatial development of Ukraine.

The study analyzes and summarizes the peculiarities and patterns of behavior and processes in Ukraine, which are formed under the influence of the needs of technological changes and mental characteristics of the population, as well as their relationship with the spatial structure of the state, cities, and regions. The war caused the destruction of spatial capacity and complex problems in the destroyed cities (their rapid return to life) and changed the processes of life and behavior of the state: population decline and deterioration of its quality, depopulation of territories, war-traumatized society, deepening social stratification, and changes in the organization of space.

The key provisions of an ergatic approach grounded in this study are concentrated around socio-ecological and economic efficiency of processes; contradictions of processes and phenomena in the environment; variability of priorities in time and alternative nature of selection; importance of the categories of ‘time’ and ‘heredity’ in the development of systems, taking into account the past and their ‘genetic’ characteristics. Special attention is paid to immaterial processes and meanings, such as value orientations, social communications, emotions, people’s attitudes towards the environment, behavioral, functional, psychological, and mental characteristics of the population, and their changes over time. This approach allows us to eliminate uncertainties, intensify positive trends in evolution and development, and identify centers and axes of activity for the location of production facilities, logistics centers, infrastructure facilities, etc.

A well-grounded ergatic model of spatial development of Ukraine is optimizing in nature and implies harmonization of behavior and processes in the system according to the criteria of harmony within the framework of moral, environmental, and safety imperatives. The spatial future of Ukraine is determined by the importance of knowledge (scientific justification) and values in decision-making; interpretation of spatial development as a continuous process of change and formation of new qualities of the system; special attention to heterogeneity, self-organizing components, connections, and networks in the reform and development of the space of the state. The study substantiates the integral parameters of the spatial future of Ukraine, which are evaluated by the criteria of behavior and processes – usefulness, efficiency, safety for people and the environment, as well as the duration of the implementation of proposals, and the importance of spirituality and the development of a consistent system of values as the basis for harmonious life and activity.

The study lays down methodological changes and tools for the implementation of an ergatic approach to spatial planning. It suggests spatial changes regarding а) zoning of territories as a division of the state space by a system of ergatic components; b) development and optimization of connections (communication tasks) and understanding of the territory as a process of multidimensional dynamics, as well as development of their spatial integrity; c) positioning of new processes in the existing spatial structure; d) spatio-temporal and structural-parametric coordination of behavior and processes with the material system of the state space and achievement of systemic effects of ergaticity in development. Ergatic modeling of the spatial development of the state serves for the optimization of design decisions and their structural, parametric, and temporal coherence at different hierarchical levels and in the horizontal dimension.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Mykola Diomin

Mykola Diomin is a People’s Architect of Ukraine, Laureate of the State Prize of Ukraine, Corresponding Member of the Academy of Arts of Ukraine, Vice President of the Ukrainian Academy of Architecture, Member of the National Union of Architects of Ukraine, Corresponding Member, Professor of the International Academy of Architecture, and President of the Union of Urbanists of Ukraine. He graduated from the Kyiv Engineering and Construction Institute with a degree in Architecture. He defended his PhD thesis in Kyiv, and his doctoral dissertation on ‘Management of the Development of Regional Urban Planning Systems’ in Moscow. He is the author of more than 60 significant architectural and urban planning projects (including master plans for Kyiv (1986, 2002), Donetsk, and Makiyivka) and about 250 scientific papers on the management of urban planning systems, topical issues of architecture and urban planning, and territorial planning. He was awarded orders and state honors for his design and scientific achievements.

Mykhailo Habrel

Mykhailo Habrel has graduated from the Institute of Architecture at Lviv Polytechnic National University and completed a post-graduate course at the Kyiv National University of Civil Engineering and Architecture. He acts as Associate Professor at the Department of Urban Planning and Architecture, King Danylo University in Ivano-Frankivsk. Member of the Union of Architects of Ukraine and an expert in urban planning documentation at the Lviv Polytechnic Institute of Architecture and Design. In his scientific work, he explores the problems of Ukrainian cities, reveals the similarities and differences of the architectural and urban planning methodological approaches to urban planning. Author of scientific publications indexed in Scopus and Web of Science.

Mykola Habrel

Mykola Habrel completed his post-graduate studies at the Lviv Polytechnic National University, where he studied and defended his PhD in Moscow with a degree in urban planning, district planning, and landscape architecture (1988). Doctor of Engineering – urban planning and territorial planning specialization (2002, Kyiv National University of Civil Engineering and Architecture). Author of about 250 scientific works. He conducts a systematic research on urban planning and regional design. He is the forerunner in the theoretical and methodological foundations of spatial organization and development of large territorial systems. His approaches differ significantly from the traditional interpretation of the process of territorial organization of society. He is actively working on developing programs and strategies for the development of cities and regions of Ukraine. Author of scientific publications indexed in Scopus and Web of Science.

Inna Kovalchuk

Inna Kovalchuk is Assistant Professor of the Department of Architectural Design and PhD student at Lviv Polytechnic National University. Carries out research of modern tools for visualization of architectural objects and urban environment.