Article

Received 21.01.2025

Revised 09.05.2025

Accepted 24.06.2025

Retrieved from Vol. 29, No. 2, 2025

Pages 62 -84

Hurtovyi, Y. (2025). Conceptual models of state support for agriculture: From direct producer support to financing general agricultural services. Ukrainian Black Sea Region Agrarian Science, 29(2), 62-84. https://doi.org/10.56407/bs.agrarian/2.2025.62

Conceptual models of state support for agriculture: From direct producer support to financing general agricultural services

Yurii Hurtovyi

Since the concept of state support for agriculture in Ukraine is not perfect and requires improvement, given the limited financial capabilities of the country during a full-scale invasion and post-war recovery, the aim of the article was to find an optimal model of state support based on the experience of countries with a highly developed agricultural sector. The features of conceptual models of state support were considered through indicators of structural and dynamic analysis and assessments of the effectiveness of budget support in the EU, Canada, New Zealand, the USA, and Ukraine. The premise of the study was an analysis of the overall imbalance level of state support directions for agriculture, according to the results of which none of the countries had a balanced approach to regulating the agricultural sector. It was established that the reason for the highest levels of imbalance in the EU was the undisputed dominance of producer support and, in the USA – consumer support, simultaneously with a low priority of financing for agricultural knowledge and innovations in both countries. A hybrid model of state support turned out to be a feature for Ukraine since dissimilar directions prevailed during different periods of turbulence. Given the assessment of the effectiveness, Ukraine should use the Canadian model in the short term, which, although similar to the EU, supports farmers on a much smaller scale and has a relatively upper focus on general services for the agriculture, in particular inspections and controls and knowledge and innovations. It was established that in the long term, the priority is to adapt the New Zealand approach with the absolute dominance of investments in infrastructure, research and technological development, which ensures maximum economic effect and competitiveness of the industry. The findings of the study can be used by the Ukrainian authorities, in particular the Ministry of Agrarian Policy and Food, to improve state support programmes for agriculture by adapting effective financing models based on international experience and taking into account the economic and resource realities of the country

agricultural sector; Ukraine; imbalance level of state support; efficiency; value of agricultural products; agricultural knowledge and innovation; New Zealand
  1. Amaglobeli, D., Benson, T., & Mogues, T. (2024). Agricultural producer subsidies: Navigating challenges and policy considerations. IMF Notes, 2024(002), 1-33. doi: 10.5089/9798400285950.068.
  2. Bayne, K., & Renwick, A. (2021). Beyond sustainable intensification: Transitioning primary sectors through reconfiguring land-use. Sustainability, 13(6), article number 3225. doi: 10.3390/su13063225.
  3. Belasco, E.J., & Smith, V. (2022). The impact of policy design on payment concentration in Ad-hoc disaster relief: Lessons from the market facilitation and coronavirus food assistance programs. Food Policy, 106, article number 102189. doi: 10.1016/j.foodpol.2021.102189.
  4. Canadian Chamber of Commerce. (2024). Policy matters: Advancing Canada’s agriculture and agri-food sector. Retrieved from https://chamber.ca/policy-matters-advancing-canadas-agriculture-and-agri-food-sector/.
  5. Caradus, J. (2024). Challenges and opportunities impacting New Zealand’s economic foundation – pastoral agriculture. Journal of New Zealand Grasslands, 86, 17-31. doi: 10.33584/jnzg.2024.86.3710.
  6. Cherevko, H. (2022). Russian military aggression as a challenge for Ukraine’s agriculture. Social Inequality and Economic Growth, 72(4), 88-102. doi: 10.15584/nsawg.2022.4.5.
  7. Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry of Australian Government. (2021). United States and Australian agriculture – a comparison. Retrieved from https://www.agriculture.gov.au/abares/products/insights/us-andaustralian-agriculture-comparison#us-agricultural-policy.
  8. Dinis, I. (2023). Exploring the drivers of microregional agricultural labor productivity: Empirical insights from Portugal. Agriculture, 13(11), article number 2150. doi: 10.3390/agriculture13112150.
  9. Eckhold, K. (2024). Agri update – global dairy trade auction results. Retrieved from https://www.westpac.co.nz/assets/ Business/tools-rates-fees/documents/economic-updates/2024/Other/Agri_Dairy-Update_report_03Apr24.pdf.
  10. Economist Impact. (2023). Global Food Security Index 2022: Global report. Retrieved from https://impact. economist.com/sustainability/project/food-security-index/.
  11. Erjavec, E., Volk, T., Rednak, M., Ciaian, P., & Lazdinis, M. (2021). Agricultural policies and European Union accession processes in the Western Balkans: Aspirations versus reality. Eurasian Geography and Economics, 62(1), 46-75. doi: 10.1080/15387216.2020.1756886.
  12. Finney, B. (2021). Capitalizing on the kiwis: Using New Zealand’s success to reform United States agriculture. Tulane Law Review, 96(4).
  13. Foley, J. (2022). Science and innovation in New Zealand agriculture. Retrieved from https://www.nuffieldscholar. org/sites/default/files/2022-07/John%20Foley_Science%20and%20Innovation%20in%20New%20 Zealand%20Agriculture_web.pdf
  14. Furman, I. (2021). State support for agriculture: Problems, world practices and prospects for Ukraine. Bulletin of the Khmelnytskyi National University. Series: Economic Sciences, 5(298), 315-323. doi: 10.31891/2307-57402021-298-5(1)-55.
  15. Gulab, S., & Lhermie, G. (2025). Enhancing agricultural research and development for sustainable growth in Canada. The School of Public Policy Publications, 18(1). doi: 10.55016/ojs/sppp.v18i1.80911.
  16. Gumeniuk, M., & Nemish, D. (2024). Ensuring the sustainable development of small farms in the conditions of martial law. Bulletin of Agricultural Science, 102(10), 76-83. doi: 10.31073/agrovisnyk202410-10.
  17. Gutiérrez Cano, L.F., Zartha Sossa, J.W., Orozco Mendoza, G.L., Suárez Guzmán, L.M., Agudelo Tapasco, D.A., & Quintero Saavedra, J.I. (2023). Agricultural innovation system: Analysis from the subsystems of R&D, training, extension, and sustainability. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 7, article number 1176366. doi: 10.3389/ fsufs.2023.1176366.
  18. Hall, D. (2021). Agricultural economics and food policy in New Zealand. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. doi: 10.1007/9783-030-86300-5.
  19. Hryhorieva, K. (2024). The twentieth anniversary of the Law of Ukraine “On State Support of the Agriculture of Ukraine”: Is there a future? Analytical and Comparative Jurisprudence, 2, 335-344. doi: 10.24144/27886018.2024.02.58.
  20. Ilchuk, О.М. (2019). State support of agriculture in Ukraine. Ekonomika APK, 26(2), 93-98. doi: 10.32317/22211055.201902093.
  21. Ivanov, R.V., Hurtovyi, Y.V., Katan, V.О., & Ivanov, K.R. (2024). Strategic planning of agricultural development as the basis of state agrarian policy and ensuring economic security of Ukraine. In T. Grynko (Ed.), Economic determinants and competitive strategies for the development of modern business structures (pp. 85-102). Dnipro: Publisher Bila K.O.
  22. Ivanov, R.V., Katan, V.О., & Hurtovyi, Y.V. (2023). Assessment of the impact of the state of agriculture on the country’s economic security.In T. Grynko (Ed.), Entrepreneurship: Current challenges, trends and transformations (pp. 187-201). Dnipro: Publisher Bila K.O.
  23. Kharchenko, T.О. (2022). Designing the structural concept of estimating the international position of Ukraine in the world context of state financial and economic support to the agricultural sector. Pressing Problems of Public Administration, 1(60), 42-61. doi: 10.26565/1684-8489-2022-1-03.
  24. Knook, J., Eastwood, C., & Pinxterhuis, I. (2022). Understanding mechanisms that agricultural producers apply in response to evolving social pressures. Journal of Rural Studies, 89, 306-315. doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.12.009.
  25. Kolotukha, S., Gvozdej, N., & Vinnytska, O. (2019). Improving the level of financial support for agricultural enterprises. Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, 5(4), 95-110. doi: 10.51599/ are.2019.05.04.06.
  26. Konovalchuk, I.S., & Kovalоv, V.G. (2023). Preculiatories of state regulation and support of the agricultural sector of the Ukrainian economy under conditions of marital law. Таuridа Scientific Herald. Series: Public Management and Administration, 5, 27-33. doi: 10.32782/tnv-pub.2023.5.3.
  27. Lavruk, V., & Pokotylska, N. (2019). State financial support strategy for animal husbandry. Scientific Notes of Taurida National V.I. Vernadsky University. Series: Economy and Management, 30(69(5)), 114-120. doi: 10.32838/2523-4803/69-5-48.
  28. Lysenko, H. (2024). Effectiveness of programs and measures to support meat and meat products producers in Ukraine. Food Resources, 12(23), 290-300. doi: 10.31073/foodresources2024-23-31.
  29. Ministry of Agriculture and Food Sovereignty of France. (2025). Liberalisation of agricultural policies: The case of New Zealand. Retrieved from https://agriculture.gouv.fr/liberalisation-agricultural-policies-case-new-zealand.
  30. Mitchell, I., & Baker, A. (2019). New estimates of EU agricultural support: An “Un-common” agricultural policy. Retrieved from https://www.cgdev.org/publication/new-estimates-eu-agricultural-support-un-common-agricultural-policy.
  31. OECD. (2023). Agricultural support estimates: Reference tables. doi: 10.1787/538bf42b-en.
  32. Petliuk, L., & Miedviedkova, N. (2021). State support in ensuring the development of the agricultural sector of the Ukrainian Economy. Economy and State, 2, 105-111. doi: 10.32702/2306-6806.2021.2.105.
  33. Pruntseva, G. (2020). Analysis of the efficiency of agricultural enterprises state support. Economics and Organization of Management, 1(37), 79-88. doi: 10.31558/2307-2318.2020.1.8.
  34. Rogach, S., Vdovenko, L., & Polishchuk, O. (2019). Agriculture of Ukraine under the joint policy of the European Union. Baltic Journal of Economic Studies, 5(3), 178-183. doi: 10.30525/2256-0742/2019-5-3-178-183.
  35. Rusaniuk, V. (2021). Metrics of efficiency indicators of state support for small entrepreneurship in the agricultural sector. Ekonomika APK, 28(6), 117-127. doi: 10.32317/2221-1055.202106117.
  36. Saunders, C. (2019). Sustainable agriculture – life beyond subsidies: Lessons from New Zealand. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 70(3), 579-594. doi: 10.1111/1477-9552.12354.
  37. Shelenko, D., Diuk, A., & Matsola, M. (2023). State regulation of agricultural business development in the conditions of systemic security challenges. Economy and Society, 56. doi: 10.32782/2524-0072/2023-56-67.
  38. Shyian, N., & Kolosha, V. (2020). Formation of milk prices in Ukraine in the context of world trends. Agricultural and Resource Economics: International Scientific E-Journal, 6(4), 232-250. doi: 10.51599/are.2020.06.04.12.
  39. Sulaiman, A., Ali, M.S.S., & Ahmad, A. (2020). Encouraging comparative advantages of export-oriented Indonesian agriculture products. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 575(1), article number 012073. doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/575/1/012073.
  40. Umantsiv, I., Cherlenjak, I., Prikhodko, V., Sonko, Y., & Shtan, M. (2021). Integrated evaluation of investment attractiveness in the context of economic sectors: Ukraine as a case study. Investment Management and Financial Innovations, 18(2), 118-129. doi: 10.21511/imfi.18(2).2021.10.
  41. Vannier, C., Cochrane, T.A., Zawar-Reza, P., & Bellamy, L. (2022). Development of a systems model for assessing pathways to resilient, sustainable, and profitable agriculture in New Zealand. Land, 11(12), article number 2334. doi: 10.3390/land11122334.
  42. Vdovenko, L. (2022). Instruments of state financial support of the agricultural sector under the conditions of marital state. Economy and Society, 44. doi: 10.32782/2524-0072/2022-44-82.
  43. Vdovenko, N., Shaposhnykova, I., Krylov, D., Pereguda, Y., Adamenko, S., & Shut, S. (2024). Institutional environment of state regulation of business in the conditions of the closed cycle transformation of the national economy. Management Theory and Studies for Rural Business and Infrastructure Development, 46(2), 183-189. doi: 10.15544/mts.2024.19.
  44. Windfeld, E., & Lhermie, G. (2022). The value of Canadian agriculture: Direct, indirect, and induced economic impacts. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 6, article number 940968. doi: 10.3389/fsufs.2022.940968.
  45. Yang, W., Rennie, G., Ledgard, S., Mercer, G., & Lucci, G. (2020). Impact of delivering “green” dairy products on farm in New Zealand. Agricultural Systems, 178, article number 102747. doi: 10.1016/j.agsy.2019.102747.
  46. Yeung, M., & Kerr, W.A. (2021). Canadian agri-food export opportunities in a Covid-19 world. The School of Public Policy Publications, 14(1). doi: 10.11575/sppp.v14i.70578.
  47. Yukhymenko, P., Sokolska, T., Arbuzova, T., Paska, I., Zharikova, О., Khakhula, L., & Zhytnyk, T. (2021). Formation of the model of state support for the Ukrainian agrarian sector in the market economy: Change of the approach. Economic Annals-ХХI, 187(1-2), 75-81. doi: 10.21003/ea.v187-07.