FRAGMENTATION OF UKRAINE'S NATIONAL INNOVATION SYSTEM IN THE CONTEXT OF GLOBALIZATION

Abstract

This article investigates the phenomenon of the "efficiency paradox" of Ukraine's national innovation system (NIS), characterized by the systematic excess of innovation outputs over inputs in global rankings. The relevance of this study is determined by the need to identify the structural roots of Ukraine's underperformance in the Global Innovation Index (GII) despite demonstrating comparatively high output indicators, particularly in the context of ongoing armed conflict and post-war reconstruction imperatives. The study employs a retrospective analysis of GII data for the period 2011–2025, decomposing the index into input and output sub-indices to quantify the efficiency paradox. Pearson correlation analysis of the seven GII pillars is applied to identify functional interaction clusters among NIS components. Box-plot statistical testing is used to confirm the structural nature of the 2022 break point. The analysis reveals three distinct phases of Ukraine's innovation trajectory and identifies four functional clusters: knowledge synergy (r = 0.78), market antagonism (r = −0.42), infrastructural isolation (r ≈ 0), and creative dispersion (r = 0.30–0.35). These clusters reflect deep fragmentation of the innovation landscape that systematically prevents the realization of synergistic effects across NIS components. The structural break of 2022 is statistically confirmed as systemic rather than cyclical, with a downward median shift of 2.5–2.8 points and a 60% compression of the interquartile range. The practical value of the study lies in the formulation of four strategic priorities for overcoming NIS fragmentation: institutional reform as a system-wide multiplier, resolving the antagonism between infrastructure and human capital investment, integrating the business sector into the innovation ecosystem, and maximizing synergies within the institutional-market cluster. These priorities constitute a hybrid strategy applicable to countries with transition economies seeking to transform innovation efficiency into sustainable global competitiveness. The findings are relevant for evidence-based science and technology policy formulation in post-conflict recovery contexts.