Malik Mykola, Doctor of Economics, Professor, Chief Researcher, Department of Entrepreneurship, Cooperation and Agro-Industrial Integration, National Scientific Centre “Institute of Agrarian Economics”, Kyiv, Ukraine

ORCID: 0000-0001-9198-4460
e-mail: malik_coop@iae.kiev.ua

Kravchenko Svitlana, Doctor of Economics, Professor, Leading Researcher, Department of Entrepreneurship, Cooperation and Agro-Industrial Integration, National Scientific Centre “Institute of Agrarian Economics”, Kyiv, Ukraine

ORCID: 0000-0001-5541-4495
e-mail: sv.kravchenko.777@gmail.com

Shpykuliak Oleksandr, Doctor of Economics, Professor, Scientific Secretary, National Scientific Centre “Institute of Agrarian Economics”, Kyiv, Ukraine

ORCID: 0000-0001-5257-5517
e-mail: shpykuliak@ukr.net

Tomashuk Inna, Doctor of Philosophy in Economics, Associate Professor of the Department of Economics and Entrepreneurship, Vinnytsia National Agrarian University, PhD student National Scientific Centre “Institute of Agrarian Economics”, Kyiv, Ukraine

ORCID: 0000-0001-6847-3136
e-mail: Tomashuk.inna@ukr.net

Anikeienko Volodymyr, PhD in Public Administration, Doctoral Candidate, National Scientific Centre “Institute of Agrarian Economics”, Kyiv, Ukraine

ORCID: 0009-0008-1525-1554
e-mail: anikejenko.vin@gmail.com

Ecosystems of Agricultural Entrepreneurship: Structural Distribution and Modification

Abstract. Introduction. Developing the agrarian entrepreneurship ecosystem promotes the investment and innovative activity of business entities, increasing the potential for food security. This article explores the conceptual foundations of the agrarian entrepreneurship ecosystem’s structure to identify transformative changes in agrarian economic development under conditions of war and European integration. In this regard, the distribution and modification of the ecosystem’s components is of decisive importance. 

Purpose. The purpose of the article is to deepen the theoretical foundations of ecosystem construction, determine the features of ecosystem formation and the functioning of agricultural entrepreneurial entities, and analyze the structural distribution of its components. 

Results. The essence, interconnection, networking, and cluster structures of the agrarian entrepreneurship ecosystem have been determined. The features of successfully operating business systems and the roles and functions of the ecosystem’s constituent entities have been identified. The challenging management conditions in the context of military operations in the Russian Federation necessitate the development of agrarian entrepreneurship to construct a robust economic structure. The theoretical essence of the relationships between the components of entrepreneurial activity is revealed and substantiated based on institutionalist theory regarding human activity associated with territory and business entities that interact directly or indirectly with each other. A cluster is defined as an association of homogeneous entities located within a defined geographical area that function as a single unit. These structural associations increase productivity through the synergy of joint activities. 

Conclusions. It has been established that to assess the positive performance of the ecosystem, it is necessary to develop key performance indicators for each area of the ecosystem and establish threshold values and methods for evaluating results. The data and analytical material can be taken into account when developing business plans for entities in the agricultural sector of the economy and in scientific and educational processes of agricultural educational and scientific institutions.

Keywords: entrepreneurship; ecosystems; business entities; agricultural sector; functions of members of business entities.

References:

1. Pugachov, M., Shpykuliak, O., Zhuk, V., Bezdushna, Yu., Ksenofontova, K. (2024). Development of the entrepreneurial ecosystem for the agricultural sector in Ukraine during wartime. Ekonomika APK, 31(5), 59–75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32317/ekon.apk/5.2024.59 [In English]. 
2. Bezruk, V.M. (2018). Teoretychna identyfikatsiya kompetentnosti u konteksti suchasnykh doslidnytsʹkykh pidkhodiv [Theoretical identification of competence in the context of modern research approaches]. Efektyvnistʹ derzhavnoho upravlinnya, 51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33990/2070-4011.51.2017.149609 [In Ukrainian].
3. Boychenko, K., Syerhyeyev, M. (2024). Ekosystemnistʹ ta heneruvannya tsinnostey u pidpryyemnytstvi [Ecosystemism and value generation in entrepreneurship]. Ekonomika ta suspilʹstvo, 64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32782/2524-0072/2024-64-3 [In Ukrainian].
4. Borysyuk, A.S. (2013). Teoretychni pidkhody do vyznachennya identychnosti [Theoretical approaches to the definition of identity]. Problemy suchasno psykholohi, 19, 55–64. Available at: http://dspace.msu.edu.ua:8080/bitstream/123456789/241/1/26r.pdf [In Ukrainian].
5. Voloshchuk, K.B., Voloshchuk, V.R. (2025). Rozvytok ekosystemy ahrarnoho pidpryyemnytstva v umovakh viyny ta v konteksti yevrointehratsiyi [Development of the agrarian entrepreneurship ecosystem in wartime and in the context of European integration]. Innovatsiyna ekonomika, 1, 171–180. DOI: https://doi.org/10.37332/2309-1533.2025.1.20 [In Ukrainian].
6. Hesiod (2018). Pokhodzhennya bohiv. Roboty i dni. Shchyt Herakla [The Origin of the Gods. Works and Days. The Shield of Hercules] / per. Andriy Sodomora. Lʹviv : PP «Vydavnytstvo «Apriori» [In Ukrainian].
7. Dubnytsʹkyy, V., Pavlova, V. (2025). Ekosystemnyy pidkhid do pidpryyemnytstva v umovakh tsyfrovizatsiyi yak innovatsiynyy instrument upravlinnya konkurentospromozhnistyu [Ecosystem approach to entrepreneurship in the context of digitalization as an innovative tool for competitiveness management]. Herald of Khmelnytskyi National University. Economic Sciences, 344(4), 251–258. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31891/2307-5740-2025-344-4-34 [In Ukrainian].
8. Zhydyk, YA. (2025). Ekonomichne modelyuvannya rozvytku ekosystemy pidpryyemnytstva na rivni terytorialʹnykh hromad [Economic modeling of the development of the entrepreneurship ecosystem at the level of territorial communities]. Ekonomika ta suspilʹstvo, 82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32782/2524-0072/2025-82-89 [In Ukrainian].
9. Kisilʹ, M. (2024). Investytsiyni aspekty stvorennya i rozvytku ekosystem ahrarnoho pidpryyemnytstva [Investment aspects of the creation and development of agricultural entrepreneurship ecosystems]. Ekonomika ta suspilʹstvo, 70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32782/2524-0072/2024-70-178 [In Ukrainian].
10. Kyrylenko, S.V. (2024). Formuvannya innovatsiynoyi ekosystemy pidpryyemnytstva v umovakh tsyfrovoyi ekonomiky [Formation of an innovative ecosystem of entrepreneurship in the conditions of a digital economy]. Visnyk skhidnoukrayinsʹkoho natsionalʹnoho universytetu imeni Volodymyra Dalya, 4(284), 36–42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33216/1998-7927-2024-284-4-36-42 [In Ukrainian].
11. Kupyra, M. (2026). Komponentnyy sklad ekosystemy rozvytku pidpryyemnytsʹkykh struktur : naukovi pidkhody ta paradyhma zrostannya [Component composition of the ecosystem of the development of entrepreneurial structures: scientific approaches and the growth paradigm]. Stalyy rozvytok ekonomiky, 1(58), 12–18. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32782/2308-1988/2026-58-2 [In Ukrainian].
12. Medovz, D. (2025). Mystetstvo myslyty systemno. Rozvyazannya problem vid osobystoho do hlobalʹnoho masshtabu [The Art of Thinking Systemsly. Solving Problems from the Personal to the Global Scale]. Perek. z anhl. YU. Shepet. Kharkiv: Vivat. [In Ukrainian].
13. Moskalʹ, YU. (2006). Identyfikatsiya i identychnistʹ u suspilʹnomu formati teoretychnoho analizu [Identification and identity in the social format of theoretical analysis]. Psykholohiya i suspilʹstvo, 1(23), 96–112. Available at: https://pis.wunu.edu.ua/index.php/uapis/article/view/238 [In Ukrainian].
14. Palyanytsya, V.V. (2024). Ekosystema pidpryyemnytstva : innovatsiyni stratehiyi ta innovatsiyni zminy [The entrepreneurship ecosystem: innovative strategies and innovative changes]. Zhurnal stratehichnykh ekonomichnykh doslidzhenʹ, 4(21), 60–68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30857/2786-5398.2024.4.6 [In Ukrainian].
15. Prib, A. (2024). Ekosystemy ahrarnoho pidpryyemnytstva yak suchasnyy mekhanizm intehratsiyi hospodaryuyuchykh subʺyektiv [Ecosystems of agricultural entrepreneurship as a modern mechanism for the integration of economic entities]. Ekonomika ta suspilʹstvo, 61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32782/2524-0072/2024-61-40 [In Ukrainian].
16. Prib, A.H. (2025). Rozvytok metodychnykh pidkhodiv shchodo otsinyuvannya ekosystem ahrarnoho pidpryyemnytstva [Development of methodological approaches to the assessment of agrarian entrepreneurship ecosystems]. Aktualʹni pytannya ekonomichnykh nauk, 8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14958069 [In Ukrainian].
17. Prib, K.A., Prib, A.H. (2026). Ekosystemy ahrarnoho pidpryyemnytstva yak instytutsiyna osnova zabezpechennya prodovolʹchoyi bezpeky ta staloho rozvytku [Ecosystems of agricultural entrepreneurship as an institutional basis for ensuring food security and sustainable development]. Efektyvna ekonomika, 3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32702/2307-2105.2026.3.34 [In Ukrainian].
18. Rozvytok ta rehulyuvannya pidpryyemnytsʹkoyi diyalʹnosti hospodarsʹkykh formuvanʹ na seli: teoretyko-metodychnyy aspekt [Development and regulation of entrepreneurial activity of economic formations in the countryside: theoretical and methodological aspect] / Za red. M.Y. Malika. Kyyiv: NNTs «IAE». Available at: http://www.iae.org.ua/activity/books/3708-rozvytok-ta-rehulyuvannya-pidpryyemnytskoyi-diyalnosti-hospodarskykh-formuvan-na-seli-teoretyko-metodychnyy-aspekt-za-red-my-malika-kyyiv-nnts-liaer-2023-192-s.html [In Ukrainian].
19. Sadovnyk, O.V. (2023). Rozvytok ekosystemy innovatsiynoho pidpryyemnytstva ahrobiznesu v umovakh turbulentnosti [Development of the ecosystem of innovative entrepreneurship in agribusiness in conditions of turbulence ]. Vcheni zapysky : zb. nauk. pr. Kyyiv : KNEU, 31, 301–312. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33111/vz_kneu.31.22.02.27.187.193 [In Ukrainian].
20. Svystun, V.I. (2024). Ekolohichne pidpryyemnytstvo yak zaporuka staloho rozvytku suchasnoyi ekosystemy [Ecological entrepreneurship as a guarantee of sustainable development of the modern ecosystem]. Zhurnal stratehichnykh ekonomichnykh doslidzhenʹ, 3, 117–124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30857/2786-5398.2024.3.12 [In Ukrainian].
21. Fedorenko, S.V., Vasylenko, L.O. (2024). Shlyakhy vyrishennya problem rozvytku ekolohichnoho pidpryyemnytstva v umovakh pislyavoyennoyi vidbudovy Ukrayiny [Ways to solve the problems of developing ecological entrepreneurship in the conditions of post-war reconstruction of Ukraine]. Ahrosvit, 4, 80–86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32702/2306-6792.2024.4.80 [In Ukrainian].
22. Shpykulyak, O., Ksenofontova, K. (2024). Formuvannya i rozvytok biznes-ekosystemy «zelenoho» fermerstva za umov voyennoho stanu [Formation and development of the business ecosystem of “green” farming under martial law]. Ekonomika ta suspilʹstvo, 64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32782/2524-0072/2024-64-163 [In Ukrainian].
23. Schumpeter J. A. (2011) Teoriia ekonomichnoho rozvytku. Doslidzhennia prybutkiv, kapitalu, kredytu ta ekonomichnoho tsyklu [The Theory of Economic Development: An Inquiry into Profits, Capital, Credit, Interest, and the Business Cycle]. Kyiv: Vydavnychyi dim «Kyievo-Mohylianska akademiia» [In Ukrainian].
24. Yaremenko, V. (2025). Zaluchennya inozemnykh investytsiy v rozvytok zelenoho pidpryyemnytstva (alʹternatyvnykh dzherel enerhetyky) v Ukrayiny v umovakh viyny ta enerhetychnoyi bezpeky [Attracting foreign investment in the development of green entrepreneurship (alternative energy sources) in Ukraine in conditions of war and energy security]. Ekonomika ta suspilʹstvo, 80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32782/2524-0072/2025-80-59 [In Ukrainian].
25. Shpykuliak, O., & Sakovska, O. (2020). Agricultural cooperation as an innovation for rural development. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, 6(3), 183–189. https://doi.org/10.30525/2256-0742/2020-6-3-183-189