Ushbu maqolada bugungi innovatsion taraqqiyot modeliga oʻtish sharoitida dunyo mamlakatlarining barqaror ijtimoiy-iqtisodiy rivojlanishini ta’minlash zamonaviy innovatsion gʻoyalar, ishlanmalar va ilmtalab texnologiyalar asosida amalga oshirishni taqozo etishini e’tiborga olgan holda, barqaror ijtimoiy-iqtisodiy rivojlanish omillarini aniqlash hamda uning Yevropa Ittifoqi mamlakatlaridagi darajasini baholash koʻrib chiqiladi. Tadqiqotda oʻrtacha yechimdan uzoqlik (an evaluation based on distance from average solution (EDAS)) usulidan foydalanib, qaysi mamlakatlarda barqaror ijtimoiy-iqtisodiy rivojlanish darajasi yuqori va qaysi davlatlarda past ekanligi aniqlanadi hamda ushbu darajalar orqali mamlakatlar reytingi tuziladi. Shuningdek, maqolada baholash natijalariga tayangan holda, mamlakatlarning kuchli va zaif tomonlari aniqlanadi hamda kelgusida mazkur davlatlarning reytingdagi pozitsiyalarini yanada yaxshilash borasida xulosa va takliflar beriladi.
Ushbu maqolada bugungi innovatsion taraqqiyot modeliga oʻtish sharoitida dunyo mamlakatlarining barqaror ijtimoiy-iqtisodiy rivojlanishini ta’minlash zamonaviy innovatsion gʻoyalar, ishlanmalar va ilmtalab texnologiyalar asosida amalga oshirishni taqozo etishini e’tiborga olgan holda, barqaror ijtimoiy-iqtisodiy rivojlanish omillarini aniqlash hamda uning Yevropa Ittifoqi mamlakatlaridagi darajasini baholash koʻrib chiqiladi. Tadqiqotda oʻrtacha yechimdan uzoqlik (an evaluation based on distance from average solution (EDAS)) usulidan foydalanib, qaysi mamlakatlarda barqaror ijtimoiy-iqtisodiy rivojlanish darajasi yuqori va qaysi davlatlarda past ekanligi aniqlanadi hamda ushbu darajalar orqali mamlakatlar reytingi tuziladi. Shuningdek, maqolada baholash natijalariga tayangan holda, mamlakatlarning kuchli va zaif tomonlari aniqlanadi hamda kelgusida mazkur davlatlarning reytingdagi pozitsiyalarini yanada yaxshilash borasida xulosa va takliflar beriladi.
В этой статье, учитывая то, что обеспечение устойчивого социально-экономического развития стран мира при условии перехода к модели инновационного развития требует реализации на основе современных инновационных идей, разработок и наукоёмких технологий, делается попытка определения факторов устойчивого социально-экономического развития и оценка их уровня в странах Европейского Союза. Используя в исследовании метод оценки отклонения от среднего решения (an evaluation based on distance from average solution (EDAS)), определяется в какой стране высокий уровень устойчивого социально-экономического развития, в какой – низкий, исходя из этих уровней составляется рейтинг стран. Также в статье, опираясь на результаты оценивания, определяются сильные и слабые стороны стран и даются заключения и рекомендации по дальнейшему улучшению позиций этих стран в рейтинге.
This article discusses factors of sustainable socio-economic development and its level in the EU countries, taking into account that ensuring sustainable socio-economic development of the world in today’s transition to an innovative model of development requires implementing of modern innovative ideas, developments and science-based technologies and evaluation was considered. The study uses evaluation which is based on a distance from average solution (EDAS) to determine which countries have the highest levels of sustainable socio-economic development and those having the lowest indicators, and to rank countries by these levels. The article also identifies the strengths and weaknesses of the countries based on the results of the assessment, and provides conclusions and recommendations for further improvement of the position of these countries in the ranking.
| № | Муаллифнинг исми | Лавозими | Ташкилот номи |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Rajabov A.X. | tayanch doktorant | Urganch davlat universiteti |
| № | Ҳавола номи |
|---|---|
| 1 | S. Awaworyi Churchill (ed.), Moving from the Millennium to the Sustainable Development Goals. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore, 2020, pp. 2-8. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-981-15-1556-9 |
| 2 | Bermejo R. Sustainability of Social-Economical Systems. In: Handbook for a Sustainable Economy. Springer, Dordrecht, 2014, pp. 85-97. https://doi.org/10.1007/978- 94-017-8981-3_6 |
| 3 | Garbie I. Assessments of Economic Sustainability. In: Sustainability in Manufacturing Enterprises. Green Energy and Technology. Springer, Cham, 2016, pp. 91-99. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-319-29306-6_9 |
| 4 | Lemke C. Measuring and assessing contributions to sustainable development. In: Accounting and Statistical Analyses for Sustainable Development. Sustainable Management, Wertschöpfung und Effizienz. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden, 2021, pp. 41-62 https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-658-33246-4_3 |
| 5 | Cubas-Dı́az, M. & Martı́nez Sedano, M. A. (2018). Measures for sustainable investment ´ decisions and business strategy - A triple bottom line approach. Business Strategy and the Environment, 27 (1), 16–38. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.1980 |
| 6 | Waas, T., Hugé, J., Block, T., Wright, T., Benitez-Capistros, F. & Verbruggen, A. (2014). Sustainability assessment and indicators: Tools in a decision-making strategy for sustainable development. Sustainability, 6 (9), 5512–5534. https://doi.org/10.3390/su6095512 |
| 7 | Madanchi N., Thiede S., Sohdi M., Herrmann C. Development of a Sustainability Assessment Tool for Manufacturing Companies. In: Thiede S., Herrmann C. (eds) Eco-Factories of the Future. Sustainable Production, Life Cycle Engineering and Management. Springer, Cham., 2019, pp. 41-68. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319- 93730-4_3 |
| 8 | Mahravan A., Vale B. The Sustainable Portion of Gross Domestic Product: A Proposed Social Ecological Economic Indicator for Sustainable Economic Development. In: Karyono T., Vale R., Vale B. (eds) Sustainable Building and Built Environments to Mitigate Climate Change in the Tropics. Springer, Cham., 2017. pp. 53-69. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3- 319-49601-6_5 |
| 9 | Kalkavan H., Eti S. Determining Optimal Islamic Financing Methods for Small-Scale Sustainable Energy Investments Regarding Socio-Economic Welfare. In: Yüksel S., Dinçer H. (eds) Strategic Approaches to Energy Management. Contributions to Management Science. Springer, Cham., 2021. pp. 271-283. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-76783-9_20 |
| 10 | Peter A. Wilderer, Martin Grambow, Michael Molls, Konrad Oexle. Strategies for Sustainability of the Earth System. Springer, Cham., (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978- 3-030-74458-8 |
| 11 | Bolcárová, P. & Kološta, S. (2015). Assessment of sustainable development in the EU 27 using aggregated SD index. Ecological Indicators, 48, 699–705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. ecolind.2014.09.001 |
| 12 | Costanza, R., Daly, L., Fioramonti, L., Giovannini, E., Kubiszewski, I., Fogh Mortensen, L., . . . Wilkinson, R. (2016). Modelling and measuring sustainable wellbeing in connection with the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Ecological Economics, 130, 350–355. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2016.07.009 |
| 13 | Constantin Zopounidis, Michalis Doumpos (Eds). Multiple Criteria Decision Making (Applications in Management and Engineering). Springer International Publishing Switzerland (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-39292-9 |
| 14 | Sandra Huber, Martin Josef Geiger, Adiel Teixeira de Almeida (Eds). Multiple Criteria Decision Making and Aiding (Cases on Models and Methods with Computer Implementations). Springer Nature Switzerland AG (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978- 3-319-99304-1 |
| 15 | De Felice F., Petrillo A. Multi-criteria Decision-Making: A Mechanism Design Technique for Sustainability. In: Luo Z. (eds) Mechanism Design for Sustainability. Springer, Dordrecht. 2013. pp. 15-35. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5995-4_2 |
| 16 | Bonina N., Meiriño M.J., Méxas M.P., Arese M.C. Use of Multicriteria Decision Aid Methods in Evaluating the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) and Post-2015: Alternative for Effective Implementation of Sustainable Development Goals (SDG). In: Leal Filho W., Frankenberger F., Iglecias P., Mülfarth R. (eds) Towards Green Campus Operations. World Sustainability Series. Springer, Cham., 2018. pp. 279-296. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3- 319-76885-4_18 |
| 17 | Zindani D., Maity S.R., Bhowmik S. (2019) Fuzzy-EDAS (Evaluation Based on Distance from Average Solution) for Material Selection Problems. In: Narayanan R., Joshi S., Dixit U. (eds) Advances in Computational Methods in Manufacturing. Lecture Notes on Multidisciplinary Industrial Engineering. Springer, Singapore. pp. 755-771. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-981-32-9072-3_63 |
| 18 | Keshavarz Ghorabaee, M., Amiri, M., Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Antucheviciene, J. (2017). Stochastic EDAS method for multi-criteria decision-making with normally distributed data. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 33(3), 1627–1638. https://doi.org/10.3233/ jifs-17184 |
| 19 | Keshavarz Ghorabaee, M., Amiri, M., Zavadskas, E. K., Turskis, Z., & Antucheviciene, J. (2017). A new hybrid simulation-based assignment approach for evaluating airlines with multiple service quality criteria. Journal of Air Transport Management, 63, 45–60. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2017.05.008 |
| 20 | Peng, X., & Liu, C. (2017). Algorithms for neutrosophic soft decision making based on EDAS, new similarity measure and level soft set. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 32(1), 955–968. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-161548 |
| 21 | Turskis, Z., Morkunaite, Z., & Kutut, V. (2017). A hybrid multiple criteria evaluation method of ranking of cultural heritage structures for renovation projects. International Journal of Strategic Property Management, 21(3), 318–329. https://doi.org/10.3846/1648 715X.2017.1325782 |
| 22 | Alinezhad A., Khalili J. (2019) EDAS Method. In: New Methods and Applications in Multiple Attribute Decision Making (MADM). International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol 277. Springer, Cham. pp. 149-155. https://doi.org/10.1007/978- 3-030-15009-9_21 |