Intelligent Decision Support Systems in Investment Planning for Post-War Economic Reconstruction: The Case of Ukraine (African Journal Of Applied Research)

Summary

• The study is based on 11 annual observations of Ukraine's macroeconomic indicators.p.1
• Macroeconomic and investment indicators alone explained little of growth (R² = 0.423), while the model with institutional and structural indicators achieved R² = 0.995.p.1
• GDP growth fell to –28.8% in 2022, the most severe macroeconomic shock in the period under review.p.9
• GDP growth partly recovered to 5.5% in 2023 and 2.9% in 2024.p.9
• The share of ICT services exports rose from 18.56% in 2016 to 53.18% in 2026.p.9
• In the extended model, the industrial production index (β = 0.890; p < 0.001) and FDI (β = 0.163; p = 0.035) were statistically significant.p.14
• In the reconstruction model M0, changes in energy and reconstruction needs explain about 50.4% of the variation in economic growth.p.15

Key insights

1. Inflation and unemployment together explain only about 7.1% of changes in GDP growth.p.12
2. Adding gross capital formation and FDI raised R² to 0.423, which does not substantially improve the model's explanatory capacity.p.12
3. FDI inflows range from $–1,549 million to $+1,838 million, indicating an unstable flow of capital.p.10
4. Reconstruction should also support industrial capacity, production chains, logistics and export-oriented sectors.p.14
5. Political stability is not significant (p = 0.290) and should be treated as a background condition for investment recovery.p.14
6. Adding FDI to the reconstruction model raises R² to 0.995, but with one residual degree of freedom this does not confirm the role of foreign investment.p.15
7. Since the 11 annual observations include projected values, the estimates are exploratory.p.19