ECONOMIC AND MATHEMATICAL MODELING OF THE DETERMINANTS OF POPULATION WELL–BEING IN UKRAINE IN A GLOBAL CONTEXT
Abstract
The problem of population well–being has acquired particular relevance under conditions of global economic turbulence, institutional instability, and deepening disparities in development across countries. In such circumstances, the assessment of well–being cannot be limited to traditional economic indicators, as it reflects a complex interaction of social, institutional, and structural factors. For countries undergoing systemic transformation, including Ukraine, the issue becomes even more acute due to the influence of external shocks, internal institutional changes, and long–term development challenges. This paper addresses the need for a comprehensive analytical framework capable of capturing the multidimensional nature of well–being within a global comparative environment. The study explores methodological approaches to identifying the key determinants that shape national well–being, emphasizing the importance of integrating quantitative modeling tools with flexible analytical techniques. Particular attention is given to the role of institutional quality, social cohesion, and macroeconomic conditions as structural components of sustainable development. The research considers the problem of structural heterogeneity among countries and the limitations of conventional linear interpretations of socio–economic dynamics. It discusses the necessity of applying modeling strategies that account for nonlinearity, interaction effects, and varying development trajectories. Within this context, Ukraine’s position is examined as part of a broader global system characterized by uneven institutional capacity and differentiated development patterns. By focusing on methodological refinement and conceptual clarification, the paper contributes to the discussion on how well–being should be evaluated in a rapidly transforming global environment. The proposed analytical perspective aims to support a more balanced understanding of national development processes and to provide a foundation for evidence–based socio–economic policy under conditions of uncertainty and structural change.
References
1. Easterlin, R. A. (2026). Paradox lost? In pursuit of happiness: Why income isn't the end of the story. Economics and Human Biology. Advance online publication. Available at: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590291126000203 (accessed 25.02.2026).
2. World Happiness Report 2024. (2024). Sustainable Development Solutions Network. Available at: https://worldhappiness.report/ed/2024/ (accessed 20.02.2026).
3. Gallup. (n.d.). Gallup World Poll: Global research database. Gallup Analytics. https://www.gallup.com/analytics/318875/global-research.aspx (accessed 01.02.2026).
4. Marino, D., & Tebala, D. (2022). Clustering countries by subjective well-being: A multivariate analysis. Sustainability, no. 14(22), Article 15213. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su142215213
5. Sharkadi, M. M. (2024). Vykorystannia derevopodibnykh system nechtkoho lohichnoho vyvedennia dlia otsiniuvannia sotsialnoi bezpeky [Use of tree-like fuzzy logic inference systems for assessing social security]. Naukovyi visnyk Uzhhorodskoho universytetu. Seriia: Matematyka i informatyka, no. (2). Available at: https://visnyk-math.uzhnu.edu.ua/article/view/303793 (accessed 01.02.2026).
6. Wickham, H., & Grolemund, G. (2016). R for data science: Import, tidy, transform, visualize, and model data. O'Reilly Media.
7. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
8. Berge, L. (2025). From replications to revelations: Heteroskedasticity-robust inference. Available at: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/325363/1/vfs-2025-pid-126935.pdf (accessed 05.02.2026).
9. Wooldridge, J. M. (2020). Introductory econometrics: A modern approach (7th ed.). Cengage Learning.
10. Breiman L. Random Forests. Machine Learning. 2001. Vol. 45, No. 1. P. 5–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010933404324
11. Chen T., Guestrin C. XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System. Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. 2016. P. 785–794. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/2939672.2939785
12. Hastie, T., Tibshirani, R., & Friedman, J. (2024). The elements of statistical learning: Data mining, inference, and prediction (3rd ed.). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38747-0
13. Molnar, C. (2022). Interpretable machine learning. Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-65933-3
14. Ahmad, A., & Khan, S. S. (2024). Survey of feature selection and parameter optimization in K-means clustering: Trends and challenges. Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery, no. 38(3), pp. 1039–1090. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10618-024-00995-3
15. Desgraupes, B., Antoniadis, A., Bigot, J., & others. (2024). A review of elbow-based methods for K-means cluster validation. Journal of Classification, no. 41(3), pp. 456–478. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00357-024-09485-2
16. Aranganayagi, S., & Thangavel, K. (2023). Validation of clustering results using silhouette and Davies-Bouldin indices: A comparative study. International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science, no. 14(5), pp. 123–130
17. Bezdek, J. C. (1981). Pattern recognition with fuzzy objective function algorithms. Plenum Press.
18. Bárdossy, A., & Duckstein, L. (1995). Fuzzy rule based modeling with applications to geophysical, biological, and engineering systems. CRC Press.
Copyright (c) 2026 О.М. Новоселецький, Ю.В. Клебан, С. Юркайтієне, М.А. Ясковець
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
