Home » Archives for user

The UST Model of Social Market Development of Communities

UST proposes to view a community not merely as an administrative unit or a recipient of assistance, but as a local social market system.

This means that assessing a community’s development should include not only demographics, budget, land or infrastructure. It must answer a deeper question: is the community capable of creating prosperity and fairly transforming it into quality of life for its residents?

Within this logic, the UST model of social market development of communities can consist of several key blocks.

1. Fair Rules for Business

A social market economy begins with rules. Not with a specific investor, not with one large plant, not with the “manual” selection of priority companies, but with a predictable environment for everyone.

For a community, this means transparent procedures for access to land, municipal property, infrastructure, information and local support programmes. Businesses must understand the rules under which they enter the community, what conditions they receive, what obligations they have and how their rights are protected.

The criterion of a social market community is this: the authorities do not appoint winners, but create fair conditions for competition.

2. Small and Medium-Sized Business as the Basis of Resilience

Large investment projects are important. They can create jobs, taxes, logistics or industrial clusters. But a social market economy cannot rely only on large players.

Community resilience is created by small and medium-sized businesses: local producers, workshops, service companies, farmers, processing enterprises, family businesses, social enterprises, creative industries, local trade, crafts and services.

SMEs provide broader employment, competition, flexibility and a link between the economy and local people. Therefore, UST’s methodology should assess not only “who can be attracted from outside”, but also who can be grown from within the community.

3. Social Justice as the Result of the Economy

A social market economy is not reduced to the slogan “more business”. Its meaning is that economic growth must translate into better quality of life.

For a community, this means a direct connection between business development, budget revenues and social outcomes: education, healthcare, support for veterans, inclusion, services for children, elderly people, persons with disabilities and internally displaced persons.

If a community attracts investment, but residents do not see improvements in services, housing, jobs, transport, education or safety, such a model is not fully social market-oriented.

UST’s criterion: economic development should be measured not only by the volume of investment, but also by how it changes people’s lives.

4. Human Capital and Vocational Education

Erhard’s ideas were aimed at releasing the economic energy of society. For modern Ukraine, this is impossible without human capital.

A community may have land, logistics and investment ideas, but without people who have the necessary skills, economic development will remain on paper. Therefore, a social market approach at the level of territorial communities must include vocational education, retraining, work with youth, veterans, women, internally displaced persons and people returning from abroad.

The key question is not only “what business do we want to attract?”, but also “what people and what professions do we need to prepare for this economy?”

5. Responsible Budget Policy

A social market economy requires a responsible budget. For a community, this means that additional revenues should not simply be “spent”, but should work toward long-term capacity.

UST’s methodology can assess whether a community understands its own fiscal base; whether it knows which assets are used inefficiently; whether it evaluates the future cost of maintaining infrastructure; whether it has transparent budget priorities; whether it explains to residents the connection between taxes, business and quality of services; and whether it uses the budget as a development tool, not only to cover current needs.

In social market logic, a strong budget is not an end in itself. It is an instrument for financing quality services and building trust in the community.

6. Municipal Services as the Foundation of Trust

A social market economy at the community level is impossible without quality basic services. Business will not come to a place where there is no road, electricity, water, clear connection procedures, housing for employees or school for their children. People will not stay where there is no accessible education, healthcare, safety, transport or living environment.

That is why, in UST’s methodology, municipal services should be viewed not as “costs”, but as part of the community’s economic infrastructure. Water, roads, energy, schools, kindergartens, medical and social services are not only a social obligation. They are the foundation of investment attractiveness, residents’ trust and the community’s ability to compete for people.

7. Partnership Between Government, Business and Civil Society

One of the main mistakes of many development strategies is to view the community only as a local government apparatus. In reality, a community is a system of interaction.

Local authorities, businesses, civil society organisations, educational institutions, donors, residents, veteran communities, youth, farmers and investors must all be participants in development.

Therefore, a social market community needs institutional mechanisms for dialogue: business councils, investment offices, public consultations, partnership platforms, joint working groups, transparent KPIs for officials and regular reporting on strategy implementation.

UST’s criterion: community development cannot be a document written behind closed doors — it must be a social agreement.

8. From Donor Assistance to Economic Capacity

International assistance is critically important for Ukraine. But the strategic goal is not for communities to remain permanently dependent on grants. The goal is for assistance to launch economic mechanisms that will continue to work after funding ends.

This means that every donor or infrastructure project must answer the following questions: what long-term effect does it create; does it increase the community’s capacity; does it create jobs; does it reduce future costs; does it improve quality of life; can it be scaled; does it help the community become less dependent on external financing?

This is one of the key principles of the social market approach: assistance should not replace development, but launch it.

Possible Criteria for Assessing a Community

For the social market approach not to remain merely a philosophy, it must be translated into practical criteria. UST can use them to analyse communities, prepare strategies, project applications, investment passports and development programmes.

Such criteria may include:

• transparency of access to land and municipal property;
• availability of an open register of investment sites;
• number and dynamics of small and medium-sized businesses;
• share of own-source revenues in the community budget;
• fiscal return from land and municipal assets;
• availability of an investment passport in Ukrainian and English;
• existence of an economic development office or a responsible official;
• number of vocational programmes linked to the needs of local business;
• quality of municipal services;
• presence of mechanisms for dialogue with business and residents;
• energy resilience of critical infrastructure;
• share of donor or investment projects with long-term economic impact;
• availability of indicators of social outcomes: jobs, income, access to services and support for vulnerable groups.

These criteria make it possible to assess a community not only by the number of projects, but by its ability to create sustainable prosperity.

The Ukrainian Perspective

Ukraine has a chance not only to rebuild, but also to rethink its economic model. At the national level, this means deep reforms, fair rules, protection of competition, development of entrepreneurship, strong institutions and social responsibility.

But it is not necessary to wait until all reforms at the central level are completed. Part of this logic can be implemented already now — in communities.

Territorial communities can become laboratories of the social market economy: with transparent asset management, support for entrepreneurship, vocational education, social services, investment passports, fair rules for business, dialogue with residents and measurable development results.

A new economic culture of Ukraine can begin with such communities.

Ludwig Erhard showed that after great destruction, a country can choose not the path of distributing scarcity, but the path of creating conditions for prosperity. For Ukraine, this lesson is especially important.

A social market economy for Ukrainian communities is not an abstract theory. It is a practical answer to the question of how to create communities after the war where business has freedom and fair rules, people have jobs and services, the budget has its own capacity, and partner assistance turns into long-term development.

Ukraine Support Team sees its role in helping communities follow this path — from project-based recovery to social market capacity.

This is not a substitute for nationwide economic reform. But it is a real beginning — at the community level, where the future Ukraine is being shaped every day.

Ukraine’s post-war recovery cannot be limited to rebuilding destroyed facilities. Schools, hospitals, roads, housing, energy systems and infrastructure must be restored. But the key question of the next stage is broader: what kind of economic system are we building after the war — at the national, regional and community levels?

Ukraine needs more than infrastructure reconstruction. It needs a renewal of its economic logic: greater freedom for entrepreneurship, fair rules of competition, responsible government, strong communities, development of small and medium-sized businesses, quality social services, and a clear link between economic growth and people’s well-being.

It is in this context that Ukraine Support Team views community development not as a set of separate projects, but as the formation of new managerial and economic capacity at the local level.

UST is working on an approach that can be defined as a model of social market capacity for communities. It is a set of criteria and practical tools that allow a community to be assessed not only by the existence of strategies, investment ideas or recovery plans, but by its ability to create prosperity, fair rules, jobs, social services and long-term economic resilience.

Ludwig Erhard’s Lesson: Prosperity Is Not Distributed — It Is Created

After the Second World War, West Germany faced the challenge of large-scale reconstruction. One of the main architects of its economic rise, Ludwig Erhard, proposed an approach that became known as the social market economy.

This model was not simply a compromise between the market and social policy. Its essence was that the state must create clear rules, protect competition, avoid suppressing private initiative, and at the same time ensure the social responsibility of the economic system. Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung describes the social market economy as a model associated with Ludwig Erhard and the post-war success story of the Federal Republic of Germany; its principles include private property, responsibility, freedom of contract and trade, a stable currency, open market access and reliable long-term economic policy. (kas.de)

Erhard was not a supporter of manual control over the economy. He was a supporter of framework conditions: strong rules, competition, stability, responsibility and space for entrepreneurship. In his logic, “prosperity for all” does not emerge through the distribution of scarcity. It emerges when people and businesses have the opportunity to work, invest, compete, create added value and feel protected by fair rules.

For Ukraine, it is important not to mechanically copy the German experience of the 1950s. The time is different, the war is different, the structure of the economy is different, and global competition is different. But Erhard’s main lesson remains relevant: after great destruction, a country must not only restore buildings, but also create conditions for mass economic life.

Why This Matters for Ukraine

Today, Ukraine’s economy largely operates under conditions of wartime mobilisation, external support, budget deficits, high risks and constant uncertainty. This is the objective reality of war. But the post-war stage will require a transition from an economy of survival to an economy of development.

The European Union has created the Ukraine Facility, which provides up to EUR 50 billion in stable and predictable support in 2024–2027 for recovery, reconstruction and modernisation. (Enlargement and Eastern Neighbourhood)

However, even the largest international programmes cannot replace the country’s internal economic capacity. Donor funds can restore infrastructure, launch projects and support the budget. But long-term prosperity is created by entrepreneurs, workers, local budgets, investment, competition, education, production, exports and trust in rules.

That is why it is important for Ukraine to rethink its post-war economic model in the direction of greater competition, entrepreneurship, state responsibility, social justice and community capacity.

Why It Is Possible to Start with Territorial Communities

A full transformation of Ukraine’s economic model is a task for the national level. It concerns tax policy, the judiciary, antimonopoly regulation, the financial sector, the labour market, education, industrial policy, European integration and many other areas.

But the foundations of these ideas can already be implemented at the level of amalgamated territorial communities.

A community is the place where people see every day whether the state works. Decisions on land, municipal property, local infrastructure, education, social services, public amenities, local economic development and interaction with business are made here.

This is where trust or distrust is formed. This is where an entrepreneur encounters not an abstract “economic policy”, but a specific procedure, a land plot, a permit, a connection, a road, a school for employees’ children and the quality of local governance.

Therefore, a social market economy at the level of territorial communities is not theory. It is a practical question: does the community create rules and an environment in which business can operate, people can earn a living, and the budget can finance quality services?

In its report on Ukraine’s recovery, the OECD emphasised that multi-level governance, regional development and decentralisation can support reconstruction, the recovery of local economies and the strengthening of community resilience. (OECD)

The Experience of German Communities: A Practical Reference Point for Ukrainian Territorial Communities

The ideas of Ludwig Erhard should not remain only a historical analogy. Their practical value for Ukraine can be revealed through the experience of modern German communities.

It is at the local level that the social market economy appears not as theory, but as everyday governance practice: transparent rules for business, development of small and medium-sized enterprises, vocational education, quality municipal services, energy resilience and partnership between government, business and citizens.

German municipalities have the right to manage local affairs within the law and are much more than mere implementers of state policy at the local level. Municipal services of general interest include water and energy supply, maintenance of roads, schools, kindergartens and hospitals. (SKEW [DE])

For Ukrainian communities, this is an important reference point: a territorial community should be not only a recipient of subsidies or a balance-holder of assets, but a manager of local development. This means inventorying assets, working with business, planning infrastructure, training personnel, strengthening energy resilience and ensuring transparent rules for access to resources.

The German experience also demonstrates the importance of the Mittelstand — small and medium-sized businesses that are often family-owned, regionally rooted, technologically advanced, export-oriented and linked to vocational education. Such businesses form the economic foundation of many communities: not one large investor, but a network of enterprises that create jobs, pay taxes, keep people in the area and shape a local economic culture.

For Ukrainian territorial communities, this may mean establishing local economic development offices, business councils, registers of investment sites, SME support programmes, partnerships with vocational schools and colleges, municipal energy plans and systems of regular reporting to the community on the results of the economic strategy.

The area of German-Ukrainian municipal partnerships is also important. In 2025, the seventh German-Ukrainian Municipal Partnership Conference in Münster focused on the transition “from solidarity to transformation” and brought together representatives of municipalities and participants of the partnership network. (SKEW [DE]) According to BMZ, the German-Ukraine Municipal Partnership Network grew from 70 to 250 partnerships after the start of Russia’s full-scale aggression in 2022. (bmz.de)

For UST, this can become a practical channel: not only humanitarian aid, but also the exchange of governance models, energy solutions, SME support tools, vocational education and approaches to local economic development.

What Community Strategies Often Lack

Many community strategies already include demographics, SWOT analysis, lists of investment ideas, recovery plans, tourism potential or an environmental vision. This is an important foundation. But it is not enough for a social market approach.

A social market strategy must answer not only the questions “what should be built?”, “which investor should be attracted?” or “which projects should be submitted for funding?” It must provide answers to deeper questions:

• what development rules the community guarantees;
• how fair competition is ensured;
• how small and medium-sized businesses are supported;
• how new budget revenues are transformed into quality services;
• how the community trains personnel for the new economy;
• how residents are involved in decision-making;
• how it measures not only investment, but the real well-being of people.

This is where the boundary lies between an ordinary development strategy and a social market model of the community. The former often describes desired projects. The latter creates rules, institutions and mechanisms that allow the community to generate prosperity systematically.

The UST Model of Social Market Development of Communities

UST proposes to view a community not merely as an administrative unit or a recipient of assistance, but as a local social market system.

This means that assessing a community’s development should include not only demographics, budget, land or infrastructure. It must answer a deeper question: is the community capable of creating prosperity and fairly transforming it into quality of life for its residents?

Within this logic, the UST model of social market development of communities can consist of several key blocks.

On October 28, 2024, the analytical report “Economic Modeling for the Recovery and Development of the Borodianka Community” was presented, prepared in collaboration by the Ukraine Support Team, the Office of Effective Regulation BRDO, and Saturday Team.

For the Borodianka community, this research was not merely an analytical document about the consequences of war, demographic risks, or economic potential. Its practical significance lies elsewhere: the report was used by the community as a tool for making management decisions, updating strategic documents, and shaping a new development model.

The Borodianka community is among those Ukrainian communities that suffered significant destruction and losses as a result of the full-scale invasion. However, the challenges it faces are not limited to the physical rebuilding of destroyed facilities. Community recovery requires answers to more complex questions: how many people will live in the area in the coming years, what services will residents need, where will jobs be created, how can the tax base be expanded, how can investors be attracted, and how can an attractive living environment be formed.

It was precisely these questions that the economic modeling addressed. Its primary value lies in the transition from reactive recovery to data-driven development planning.

Research That Went Beyond the Presentation

After the report was presented, its findings were reviewed by the leadership of the Borodianka Village Council and the relevant structural units of the community — not as a formality, but for active use across several areas of work: strategic planning, economic development, education, investment activity, and spatial development.

The most significant practical outcome was that in 2025, based on the findings of this research, the Borodianka Village Council amended the Development Strategy of the Borodianka Village Territorial Community through 2027.

This is a key indicator of analytical effectiveness. The report did not remain an expert recommendation or presentation material. It was integrated into the community’s strategic planning and became part of its official development policy.

What Problems the Modeling Helped Identify

The research enabled a systemic view of the Borodianka community — not merely as a war-affected territory, but as a community that must rethink its own economic role.

Among the key challenges identified by analysts were demographic risks through 2030, the threat of a reduced education network, a shrinking economically active population, the need to create new jobs, and the need to expand the tax base.

A separate issue was the loss of the former role of the Boreks excavator plant as one of the community’s primary economic drivers. For Borodianka, this meant moving away from dependence on an old industrial model and toward finding a new economic foundation.

That is why the research framed the question more broadly: not simply what needs to be rebuilt, but what the community should look like in the future.

A New Model: A Balanced Suburb with Tourism and Recreational Potential

One of the most valuable conclusions for the community was the scenario-based approach to development. The research proposed viewing Borodianka not merely as a “hybrid suburb,” but as a community that could evolve into a balanced suburb with tourism and recreational potential.

This model combines several directions: housing, jobs, logistics, social infrastructure, ecological appeal, recreation, memorial tourism, and local identity.

This matters to the community because it is competing not only for investment, but for people. After the war, communities will have to fight to bring back residents, attract young families, professionals, entrepreneurs, veterans, medical workers, educators, and new inhabitants. Without clear positioning and a quality living environment, that competition will be an uphill battle.

Ecological Positioning as a Practical Direction

A separate recommendation of the research concerned shaping Borodianka as a “green,” ecologically oriented, and comfortable place to live.

This direction is already being applied in the community’s practical work. The Borodianka Village Council, together with UN-Habitat and Urban Reform, developed the Public Spaces Network of the Borodianka Community — aimed at creating modern, inclusive, safe, and ecologically oriented spaces for residents.

This demonstrates that the ecological vision in the research was not merely a communications concept. It became the foundation for concrete spatial decisions intended to affect quality of life, accessibility of public spaces, and the community’s overall attractiveness.

The Zdvyzh Riverfront: From Recreation to Rehabilitation

Another example of the research recommendations being carried forward in practice is the work on a concept for a multifunctional social and recreational space along the Zdvyzh River in the center of Borodianka.

The project, on which the community is collaborating with Thought Group Chile, covers more than 2.7 km of territory. It envisions zones for active recreation, sports facilities, cycling and running paths, fishing spots, children’s play areas, parking, inclusive leisure, and cultural and educational events.

Importantly, this space is envisioned as more than landscaping. Its function is broader — community cohesion, psychosocial rehabilitation for veterans, support for internally displaced persons, and an improved quality of life for residents.

In this way, spatial development in Borodianka is beginning to serve a social, rehabilitative, and integrative purpose.

People as the Foundation of Community Development

A separate section of the research addressed retaining and attracting residents. For Borodianka, this is critically important, as demographics directly affect the economy, education, healthcare, the budget, and development prospects.

The Borodianka Village Council’s response notes that the recommendations regarding population retention and attraction were incorporated into the development of the Citizen Engagement Plan for the Borodianka Village Territorial Community for 2026–2027.

This is yet another example of analytical findings being transformed into a governing document. The community has begun working not only on infrastructure, but on the questions of resident participation, trust, communication, and the engagement of different population groups.

In a post-war context, this is especially important. Veterans, people with disabilities, internally displaced persons, young families, youth, educators, and medical workers need not only services, but a clear sense of what a life in this community can look like.

Education and Jobs: A Connection That Cannot Be Ignored

The research also drew attention to the risks facing the education network should the population continue to decline. For the community, this is not only an educational problem — it is an economic one.

If the population shrinks, the number of children falls, demand for schools and kindergartens weakens, the number of workers decreases, and the tax base erodes. As a result, the community risks losing not just infrastructure, but human capital.

An important recommendation, therefore, was not simply to preserve the existing education network, but to develop modern vocational and technical education aligned with the future needs of the community’s labor market.

This approach directly links education to economic development. If the community wants to attract investors and develop logistics, energy, manufacturing, recreational, and rehabilitation infrastructure, it must understand what specialists will be needed — and how to train them.

Investors and the New Economic Model

Another significant focus of the research was recommendations for active engagement with investors, development of logistics potential, energy projects, and recreational and rehabilitation infrastructure.

As practical evidence of the community’s investment potential, the Borodianka Village Council points to the start of construction of a factory cluster by Epicenter K on a 24-hectare site where the Boreks plant once stood.

This example matters not only as a single investment project. It demonstrates the gradual formation of a new economic model for the community. A territory previously associated with an old industrial center now has the opportunity to become the foundation for a new manufacturing cluster, new jobs, and renewed confidence from major business.

For Borodianka, this represents a shift from the logic of loss to the logic of reimagining assets.

Conclusion

The analytical report “Economic Modeling for the Recovery and Development of the Borodianka Community” stands as an example of how quality expertise can influence the actual policies of local government.

Its significance lies not only in identifying demographic, economic, or infrastructure risks. The central result is that the research findings were used by the community to update its strategy, plan spatial development, engage with residents, attract investors, and shape a new economic model.

For UST, this case confirms an important principle: community recovery must begin with data, scenarios, and an understanding of the future. Only this approach makes it possible to move from chaotic reconstruction to strategic development — one that accounts for people, the economy, space, ecology, memory, and the community’s long-term competitiveness.

A Munitipal Energy Plan (MEP) is a strategic document that defines how a community currently consumes energy and how it plans to move towards greater efficiency and independence. It covers all sectors: municipal buildings, residential housing, transport, heating and water supply systems, and street lighting.

An MEP is a roadmap: a list of specific measures, priority projects, and funding sources that gives a community a clear understanding of what to do and in what order, in order to reduce energy costs and improve infrastructure resilience.

The Law of Ukraine “On Energy Efficiency” requires territorial communities to develop and approve Munitipal energy plans. Without an MEP, a community cannot receive state support for the implementation of energy efficiency measures or funding for infrastructure modernisation.

A Document That Opens Doors to Funding

According to Denys Tomaza, an expert in MEP development, having an approved plan fundamentally changes a community’s position in the eyes of donors and investors. An MEP confirms that the community has a strategic vision for energy development, that priorities have been defined and specific projects have been formulated — making the community significantly more attractive for funding.

MEPs in Action

Sumy community developed an MEP under the international project “Implementation of the European Energy Award in Ukraine,” funded by the Swiss government (SECO), and as a result received grant support for energy efficiency measures.

Vyhoda community developed an MEP under the U-LEAD with Europe programme, where communities were specifically prepared for future attraction of investment and donor funding for energy projects.

For Whom Does an MEP Become a Working Tool?

An MEP is a broadly applicable document, used by a wide range of participants in community development:

• Executive bodies of the council — for budget planning and development programmes
• Energy managers — for daily monitoring and implementation of measures
• Utility companies — heating, water, lighting, transport
• International donors and investors — for assessing community readiness
• Council deputies — for making decisions on development priorities
• Residents and businesses — as a source of information on development plans

The community’s energy manager plays a key role after the MEP is approved. It is they who transform the strategic document into a living tool: coordinating the implementation of measures, monitoring energy consumption in public institutions, preparing grant and loan applications, and liaising with all structural departments.

Novobilous’ka Community: A Special Context

Novobilous’ka community is located in Chernihiv Oblast, approximately 50 kilometres from the border. There, energy issues go far beyond comfort and savings. Here, renewable energy sources are a matter of security.

Solar power plants, decentralised generation sources, and energy storage systems ensure the operation of hospitals, boiler houses, water utilities, and resilience hubs even during blackouts and damage to centralised networks. Local energy sources reduce restoration time and diminish critical dependence on a single grid.

“A decentralised energy system ensures the continuous operation of critical facilities even in the most challenging situations. For front-line communities, this is not an advantage — it is a necessity.” — Denys Tomaza, MEP Development Expert

How UST Is Implementing the Project

The Ukraine Support Team, together with the International Renaissance Foundation, is implementing an 8-month project to develop the concept of a Munitipal Energy Plan for Novobilous’ka community.

Despite the threat posed by proximity to the border and tightened security measures in Chernihiv Oblast, Novobilous’ka community is already actively providing data on municipally owned facilities.

In parallel, preparations are underway for an information campaign: in June 2026, UST energy experts will hold a series of educational lectures for energy managers from Chernihiv Oblast and across Ukraine on the importance of developing MEPs, the stages of development, and how to resolve issues that may arise during the planning process.

What Will the Community Receive as a Result?

• A Munitipal Energy Plan concept through to 2030 — the foundation for official MEP approval and access to state support
• A roadmap for the installation of solar power plants on key community facilities to ensure autonomous operation
• Recommendations for attracting funding — grants, loans, and international assistance for energy efficiency measures
• Enhanced competencies of energy managers and responsible persons in the community
• In the long term: reduced budget spending on energy resources, increased energy independence, and reduced CO₂ emissions

Upon completion of the project, UST plans to provide advisory support to community leadership in finding donors and establishing connections with the State Agency on Energy Efficiency and Energy Saving of Ukraine.

This material was prepared under the “Impulse” Project, implemented by the International Renaissance Foundation and the East Europe Foundation with funding from Norway (Norad) and Sweden (Sida). The content of this material does not necessarily reflect the positions of the International Renaissance Foundation, the East Europe Foundation, the Government of Norway, or the Government of Sweden.

The massive destruction caused by the war has posed an unprecedented challenge for Ukraine: managing millions of tons of construction waste. In search of effective solutions, Ukrainian specialists are increasingly turning to the experience of European countries that have already undergone legislative and technological transformation.

One such country is the Czech Republic. As of 2026, 90% of construction and demolition waste is recycled there, and the recovered materials are successfully used in new construction projects.

On May 21, 2026, the Ukraine Support Team, together with the Partnership Foundation, held an event with Czech experts in construction waste management. The specialists shared practical advice on the effective recycling of construction and demolition waste (CDW).

Miroslav Škopan — a representative of the Association for the Development of Construction Materials Recycling in the Czech Republic (ARSM), which celebrated its 31st anniversary in 2026. He shared practical experience and key approaches that have allowed the Czech Republic to make significant progress in recycling.

Miroslav Duhon — director of RED-BETON (Brno-Hrlice). He described the material recycling production process, practical implementation challenges, and provided specific recommendations for Ukraine.

Where to Begin

Miroslav Škopan emphasized that legislative regulation is the foundation for motivating manufacturers to recycle. Czech waste management legislation is based on the hierarchy established in Framework Directive 2008/98/EC. It places waste prevention first, followed by preparation for reuse without processing, then actual recycling, then disposal by incineration — with landfill burial last.

In EU countries, producers bear full responsibility for a product from construction through to waste disposal. A producer wishing to landfill waste in the Czech Republic must pay 1,600 Czech crowns (€65 per tonne). From 2030, in line with EU requirements, a complete ban on landfilling recyclable CDW will come into force.

In Ukraine, the situation is fundamentally different: landfilling construction waste remains the priority. The cost of disposing of a tonne of CDW at a landfill is only €6–8. These conditions give developers no incentive to handle their waste responsibly or to reuse materials.

At the same time, Ukraine is already moving toward harmonizing its legislation with European standards.

“The reform support team has already prepared four of the thirteen bills that need to be passed. They are expected to be submitted to the Verkhovna Rada in the near future,” said Olena Vusyk, Senior Project Manager for Waste Management Reform at the Reform Support Team under the Ministry of Economy of Ukraine, during a presentation at the Ukraine Crisis Media Center on May 4, 2026.

Selective Demolition as the Basis for Quality Recycling

In Ukraine, sorting construction waste on-site during demolition remains the exception rather than the norm. Yet the quality of recycled material depends directly on the quality of the source material. Czech experts insist that selective dismantling must be carried out at the demolition or destruction site itself.

Before demolition begins, timber and other organic components must be separated, as well as hazardous materials — particularly asbestos, which requires special handling in accordance with sanitary regulations. On-site recycling is also the most cost-effective approach.

Miroslav Škopan gave a practical example: the redevelopment of a former factory in Brno, which is currently being partly converted into a residential and office complex. The old section of the building has been preserved and operates as a museum. Recycled material from the demolished structures was used directly on the same construction site.

However, selective on-site demolition is not always possible. In densely built urban areas — such as some of Brno’s narrow, busy streets — it is impossible to bring in large recycling machinery. In such cases, the rubble is transported to dedicated facilities, where it is further sorted on automated lines.

How to Get Construction Companies to Sort Waste

Miroslav Duhon, director of RED-BETON, highlighted a common barrier encountered in every country: construction firms have no interest in sorting and recycling waste without a clear financial incentive. RED-BETON solved this pragmatically — by introducing cost-effective pricing for those who bring pre-sorted waste to the recycling facility.

“Processing unsorted waste at Red Beton costs 70% more than sorted waste,” said Miroslav Duhon.

This mechanism directly encourages companies to change their behavior on the construction site.

What Ukraine Can Take Away

For Ukraine, the Czech experience is particularly valuable because it demonstrates a realistic, already-tested path that can be adapted to Ukrainian conditions — especially given the scale of destruction and the urgent need for reconstruction.

First: A clear regulatory framework is needed, defining the rules for handling construction and demolition waste: sorting requirements, recycling standards, quality control, and the use of secondary materials.

Second: A sectoral institution or platform is needed to bring together business, academia, authorities, communities, and experts. In the Czech Republic, ARSM plays this role. In Ukraine, a similar model could become an important market coordination tool and a channel for transferring international expertise.

Third: Pilot projects are needed in communities already dealing with large volumes of destruction — particularly in de-occupied and frontline territories. It is at the community level that practical models can be tested: from demolition and sorting to recycling and reuse of materials in local reconstruction projects.

Fourth: Trust in recycled materials must be built. This requires standards, laboratory testing, certification, compelling examples of successful application, and the inclusion of such materials in public procurement where technically justified.

Ukrainian communities are increasingly facing a challenge that goes far beyond current utility costs. It is not just about physically saving electricity or heat, but about the ability of communities to plan their own energy security, reduce dependence on external risks, modernize social infrastructure, and gradually transition to more resilient development models.

For the Ukraine Support Team, this area is one of the practical examples of how expert support can be transformed into concrete solutions for communities. The experience of working with Ivanivska hromada in Chernihiv Oblast demonstrates the full cycle of such support: from collecting and restoring energy data to preparing a municipal energy plan and project documentation for solar power plants.

Why Energy Planning Has Become Critical for Communities

Since the beginning of the full-scale war, the issue of community energy resilience has taken on new significance. For local governments, it is no longer just a question of long-term development, but a condition for the continuous operation of schools, administrative buildings, medical and social facilities.

Tamara Burenko, UST expert on energy-efficient development of communities and enterprises, emphasizes the importance of developing a Municipal Energy Plan (MEP) for stable energy functioning:

“An MEP is not only about achieving emissions reduction targets. It is about a comprehensive set of energy efficiency measures in a community that allows savings on energy resources and smart selection of available fuels and energy sources, which will significantly reduce local budget expenditures and ensure the sustainable delivery of social services to all residents. It is about reliability and compliance with European principles and standards.”

That is why UST works with communities not through general recommendations, but by preparing practical tools: energy consumption analysis, baseline indicator development, identification of priority energy efficiency and conservation measures, assessment of renewable energy potential, and development of project solutions.

In Ivanivska hromada, this work began with the development of an energy plan for the period through 2030. The goal was to provide the community with strategic solutions for improving energy efficiency, reducing emissions, and introducing renewable energy. The UST team analyzed the community’s energy status, established consumption baselines, and developed priority measures to strengthen energy security and ensure the autonomous operation of key facilities providing essential social services to residents.

Ivanivska Hromada as a Case Study in Working Under Difficult Conditions

What makes the Ivanivska hromada case distinctive is that the energy planning work took place amid significant loss of source data. The community was under Russian occupation for 25 days, and all documentation and data required for the preparation of the municipal energy plan was destroyed during the fighting and occupation in 2022.

For UST, this meant that energy planning had to be rebuilt essentially from scratch. The team collected, restored, processed, analyzed, modeled, and re-evaluated energy data, assessed the current condition of facilities, worked with the community to define realistic goals, and formed a set of projects that could be implemented at the local level.

This approach matters beyond Ivanivska hromada. It demonstrates how war-affected communities can return to systematic development management even when foundational technical and administrative information has been lost or damaged.

23 Projects to Reduce Energy Consumption

The outcome of UST’s work was the formation of an energy plan for Ivanivska hromada through 2030. The plan proposed 23 projects aimed at improving the community’s energy efficiency. According to UST estimates, their implementation will reduce energy consumption by 424 MWh.

Key focus areas include modernization of heating systems, thermal retrofitting of buildings, and the introduction of renewable energy projects with electricity storage systems. The combination of these areas is fundamentally important: the community receives not a collection of isolated measures, but a comprehensive roadmap that allows it to gradually reduce costs, improve infrastructure reliability, and attract partners to finance specific projects.

The report prepared by UST is intended to serve as the foundation for the development and adoption of Ivanivska hromada’s local energy plan. The project is being implemented with the support of the International Renaissance Foundation.

From Plan to Project Documentation

The next stage of the work involved preparing concrete project solutions for the implementation of renewable energy. In March 2026, UST handed over to Ivanivska hromada the project documentation for three solar power plants with storage systems, covering the Kolychivskyi Lyceum, the Ivanivskyi Lyceum, and an administrative building.

As part of this work, the design team prepared feasibility studies for all three solar plants. The optimal type of stations was determined, and calculations were made for capacity, expected electricity generation, cost, and payback period. Pre-project solutions were also developed, including layout and connection diagrams for the solar plants and an indicative implementation budget.

This is a significant practical result: the community received not just an analytical document, but a prepared foundation for attracting financing, completing technical procedures, and implementing projects at specific social and administrative infrastructure facilities.

UST’s Role: Not Instead of the Community, but Together With It

The experience of Ivanivska hromada shows that effective support for local government must be built not on external universal solutions, but on collaborative work with the community. The UST team visited the hromada, inspected social infrastructure facilities, discussed technical aspects, and held working meetings with the leadership of the Ivanivska Village Council.

This format makes it possible to better account for the actual condition of facilities, the community’s management capacity, available resources, and priority needs. That is why energy planning as carried out by UST is not a formal document, but a practical decision-making tool.

As UST head Olena Koltyk noted during the presentation of results in Ivanivska hromada, the team helps develop concrete action plans adapted to the real situation in each community.

Why This Experience Can Be Scaled

The Ivanivska hromada case is instructive for many Ukrainian communities, particularly those affected by combat operations or with limited staffing and technical resources to independently prepare energy plans.

UST’s experience demonstrates several important principles that can be applied in other communities:

First, energy planning must begin with thorough data collection and analysis. Second, plans must include not only general goals but specific projects with expected outcomes. Third, renewable energy must be considered part of a broader energy efficiency system, not as a standalone symbolic measure. Fourth, communities need not just consultations, but ready-made documents that can be used to attract financing and support practical implementation.

Ivanivska hromada traveled with UST from initial analysis to concrete project documentation for solar power plants. This is an example of how expert support can help a community move from need to plan, and from plan to real investment decisions.

Energy Resilience as Part of Recovery

For Ukraine, the issue of community energy resilience is directly linked to recovery. This is not only about replacing damaged systems or reducing energy bills. It is about building a new quality of local governance, where a community has data, a plan, priorities, and projects ready for implementation.

In wartime conditions, this is also directly connected to the ability to attract international support, which is one of the key resources for community recovery, infrastructure modernization, and the introduction of energy-efficient solutions. At the same time, access to European funds and international programs depends significantly on how prepared a community is to plan its development strategically and offer specific, implementation-ready projects.

“Having a local energy plan with a clear and comprehensible list of measures opens up opportunities for the community to access European funds and national programs financing energy efficiency measures in communities.” Tamara Burenko, UST expert on energy-efficient development of communities and enterprises.

UST views this work as a contribution to the practical recovery of communities: from analytics and strategic planning to technical solutions that can be implemented at specific facilities.

Ivanivska hromada is one example of how this approach works in practice. First came the analysis of energy status and preparation of the plan through 2030. Then came the identification of priority projects. After that came the preparation of documentation for solar power plants at community facilities.

It is precisely this sequence that allows moving from general discussions about resilience to concrete actions that strengthen communities today.

Representatives of the Ukraine Support Team (UST) participated in the “Energy Security – Lessons from Ukraine” conference, held in Berlin, which brought together government officials, energy industry representatives, network operators, and experts to discuss how Ukraine’s experience is shaping Europe’s approach to energy security.

One of the most powerful statements of the conference came from Germany’s Deputy Minister of Economy and Energy:

Europe will not go back to Russian oil and gas, not now, not ever

This statement effectively set the framework for the entire discussion: energy security is no longer viewed as merely a matter of the market or access to resources. It has become a matter of national security, economic resilience, and the ability of states to function during crises.

Ukrainian Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal spoke about a new approach to managing critical infrastructure—shifting from post-crisis response to readiness to operate under constant threats. In particular, the discussion focused on building reserves of critical equipment, training repair teams, and the principle of “triple redundancy”: when one system component is operational, a second is ready for immediate replacement, and a third is already in reserve or on order.

There was also much discussion about the fact that the question is no longer how to avoid damage, but how quickly the system can recover after an attack.

Moldova’s Minister of Foreign Affairs also delivered a very powerful message:

Ukraine’s resistance is our survival

Moldova shared its own experience of breaking free from energy dependence—from 100% reliance on Russian gas to full diversification of supplies and integration into the European energy system. Particular emphasis was placed on energy efficiency as a tool for energy resilience—from insulating buildings to household support programs for replacing inefficient equipment.

At the same time, representatives of European network operators and the energy sector repeatedly emphasized: Ukraine is gradually becoming a country from which others are learning.

How to operate under attack.
How to quickly restore the system after large-scale outages.
How to ensure the continuity of critical infrastructure.
How to plan for equipment reserves, cybersecurity, and crisis response.

A separate topic was the decentralization of the energy sector: local networks (microgrids), energy storage, distributed generation, and “island mode” (autonomous operation mode), which allows critical infrastructure—hospitals, water supply systems, and heating systems—to continue operating even if the centralized system is damaged.

For UST, the idea that the energy sector can no longer be viewed in isolation from other areas of life has become particularly important. During a crisis, it is directly linked to healthcare, water supply, transportation, humanitarian logistics, digital infrastructure, and the ability of communities to function as a whole.

“Today, resilience is no longer just about energy. It’s about the interconnection of critical systems and the readiness of communities to operate under shock conditions. That is why the high-quality development of resilience plans is becoming critically important—they must take into account not only technical solutions but also the interaction between different sectors and response scenarios,” notes Olena Koltyk, a UST expert.

“Today, resilience is no longer just about energy. It’s about the interconnection of critical systems and the readiness of communities to operate under shock conditions. That is why the high-quality development of resilience plans is becoming critically important—they must take into account not only technical solutions but also the interaction between different sectors and response scenarios,” notes Olena Koltyk, a UST expert.

Ukraine’s experience, shaped by constant attacks on the power grid, is increasingly viewed not as an exceptional situation but as a practical lesson for shaping a new architecture of European energy security.

Ukraine Support Team works systematically with Ukrainian communities in the areas of strategic planning, sustainable development, effective governance, and the preparation of practical solutions for recovery. One key area of this work is the development of community growth strategies, economic modeling, and support for local governments in making data-driven decisions.

After the full-scale invasion, many Ukrainian communities found themselves facing a complex challenge: they needed to simultaneously restore damaged infrastructure, bring people back, support local economies, attract investors, and plan for the future under conditions of limited resources.

In such circumstances, simply rebuilding individual facilities is not enough. It is important to understand what the community will look like in five or ten years: how many people will live there, what services will be needed, which industries can create jobs, how to increase budget revenues, and how to create an attractive environment for residents, businesses, and investors.

This is at the heart of one of the key areas of Ukraine Support Team’s work, which is supporting communities in developing strategic solutions that bring together economics, infrastructure, energy, ecology, social needs, and effective governance.

Community Strategies as a Recovery Tool

For UST, community development is not only a matter of rebuilding structures or repairing infrastructure. It is, above all, about shaping a long-term development model.

This approach involves a community analyzing its own resources, demographic trends, economic potential, land assets, logistical advantages, residents’ needs, and investment opportunities. On this basis, practical development scenarios are formed that can be used by local authorities, businesses, donors, and international partners.

This approach allows communities to move from reactive management to strategic thinking: not simply responding to problems, but planning development, setting priorities, and making effective use of resources.

The Borodyanka Case: From a War-Affected Community to a Model of Thoughtful Development

One example of this work was UST’s participation in the study “Economic Modeling for the Development of the Borodyanka Settlement Community Through 2030,” prepared by the Office of Efficient Regulation in collaboration with Ukraine Support Team and Saturday Team.

The Borodyanka community is one of those that suffered significant losses as a result of hostilities and occupation. At the same time, its challenges go beyond physical destruction. The research showed that even before the full-scale invasion, the community was facing a demographic crisis, a declining share of young people, low fiscal returns, and an insufficient number of jobs.

The study’s presentation noted that the Borodyanka community had been experiencing a prolonged crisis due to population loss, which was further worsened by the 2022 occupation. Due to migration to Kyiv and the surrounding region, the share of young people had been declining and the economically active population was shrinking.

This is precisely why it is important for Borodyanka not simply to restore what was destroyed, but to form a new development model that is economically strong, socially balanced, and attractive for life.

Data Before Decisions

The core logic of the study is that any management decision must be grounded in data. Before deciding to rebuild schools, kindergartens, medical facilities, or other social infrastructure, it is necessary to understand the demographic situation and the future demand for services.

Ukraine Support Team Director Olena Koltyk emphasized:

Before spending money, any resources, before making decisions about rebuilding schools and medical facilities, we need to understand how many people are going to receive that service. To effectively solve a problem, you need to understand its scale.

This approach is the foundation of effective community governance. It helps avoid situations where resources are directed toward facilities without a clear understanding of future demand, demographic shifts, or economic viability.

According to the study’s projections, if conditions remain unchanged, the population of Borodyanka community could decline by 2030, creating the risk of closing up to 7 schools and 7 kindergartens, as well as laying off 236 workers. Minimum budget losses could amount to approximately 17 million hryvnias at 2021 prices, or up to 11% of budget revenues excluding intergovernmental transfers.

These figures demonstrate why strategic planning for communities is not a formality, but a practical instrument of survival and growth.

Economic Modeling as a Foundation for Community Development

The research for the Borodyanka community combined internal and external approaches. On one hand, input was gathered from residents, entrepreneurs, educators, medical professionals, civil society representatives, village heads, and young people. On the other hand, comparisons were made with other communities in Kyiv Oblast and with suburbs of Central and Eastern European capitals.

Specifically, analysts examined 37 communities in Kyiv Oblast within roughly 60 km of Kyiv, as well as 110 suburbs of Central and Eastern European capitals. This analysis helped identify the role Borodyanka could play in the future and which development models are most realistic for it.

One of the conclusions is that the Borodyanka community has the potential to become a balanced suburb with tourism and recreational potential. This means its development should combine jobs, housing, social infrastructure, logistics, recreation, ecological appeal, and local identity.

Business Development and Investment Attractiveness

A dedicated section of the study examined which businesses could become drivers of Borodyanka’s development. Among the promising areas identified are energy projects, flat glass production, Class A warehouses, agricultural machinery manufacturing, and rehabilitation and social services.

The presentation compared potential enterprises that could be attractive to the community: a solar power plant, a float-method flat glass manufacturing plant, Class A warehouses, an agricultural machinery plant, and a disability care center for children. For each direction, the study assessed land requirements, workforce needs, investment volumes, payback periods, and potential economic impact on the community’s budget.

Energy stands out as especially significant. For an investor, a stable electricity supply is a baseline condition for entering a community. Therefore, developing local generation capacity and energy resilience may be one of the first practical steps toward strengthening Borodyanka’s economic attractiveness.

Senior analyst at Saturday Team Dmytro Synko noted:

In total, 49 new businesses and mid-sized enterprises need to be launched. But it makes sense to start with seven. The first should be some kind of energy project, because every investor needs to know: if there is no electricity, how will I save my business?

Logistics is another promising area. Borodyanka is located on Highway M07, which leads to Poland and the Baltic states. This creates conditions for developing warehouse capacity and transport-logistics services.

Ecological Vision and Sustainable Development

UST places importance on the fact that a community development strategy must account not only for economic indicators, but also for ecological considerations, climate risks, and residents’ quality of life.

The study proposed shaping the vision for the Borodyanka community with an emphasis on ecological themes and climate change. Among the factors supporting this direction are a large area of forests, nature protection zones, bodies of water, residents’ affinity for environmental issues, the absence of polluting industrial production, and the community’s partial reputation as a dacha (summer cottage) area.

This approach aligns with the broader logic of UST’s work: communities should develop not only quickly, but well, with attention to energy efficiency, ecology, inclusivity, climate adaptation, and the future needs of residents.

Practical Recommendations for the Community

The study went beyond a general vision. It contains specific recommendations that can serve as a roadmap for local government.

These include defining the community’s development vision, conducting a land inventory, assessing the qualifications of the local workforce, evaluating the potential of energy projects, developing an investment passport in both Ukrainian and English, designating responsible contacts for investor communications, promoting the investment passport, and removing barriers to business entry, including issues related to roads, generation capacity, utility connections, pesticide storage facilities, and peat bogs.

This is precisely the level of practical detail that communities need to move from general declarations to concrete governance decisions.

UST’s Role: Helping Communities Make Strong Decisions

The Borodyanka case illustrates the role Ukraine Support Team can play in community development. UST acts not only as a partner on individual projects, but as an organization that helps communities think strategically, draw on expertise, work with data, and build realistic development scenarios.

This is especially relevant for Ukrainian consolidated territorial communities. In the coming years, communities will be competing for people, businesses, investment, donor programs, and state support. Those with a quality strategy, a clear vision, prepared investment proposals, and strong governance capacity will have significantly better chances of successful recovery.

Borodyanka is one example of how a community can move from crisis to thoughtful development. And for UST, this is part of a broader mission: supporting Ukrainian communities in building effective, sustainable, and competitive models for the future.

Ukraine lags behind its European neighbors in the field of waste management by at least 20–30 years. The previous legislation was in effect for over a quarter of a century and did virtually nothing to encourage change: landfilling remained the only legal method of waste disposal. As a result, over 90% of household waste is still buried in landfills.

The first step toward change was the framework Law “On Waste Management” No. 2320-IX, adopted in June 2022 and enacted in July 2023. It established a fundamentally new waste management framework—harmonized with EU Directive 2008/98/EC. In January 2025, the Cabinet of Ministers approved the National Waste Management Plan through 2033—a “roadmap” setting specific targets for the country.

By 2025, the system is already beginning to undergo real transformation: an electronic waste accounting system (EWAS) has been introduced, shifting the industry from declarative reporting to actual electronic monitoring, and requirements for businesses have significantly increased.

We asked representatives from government ministries and relevant organizations about the three steps needed to get waste recycling up and running in Ukraine.

What did they say?

The Road to Systematic Recycling: Next Steps

Ukraine has already completed an important preparatory phase: framework legislation has been adopted, the National Plan through 2033 has been approved, and an electronic waste tracking system has been launched. But the legal framework is only the foundation. Real change will only occur when three key components work together: legal norms, physical infrastructure, and a culture of waste management.

The next two years are critical. By the end of 2026–2027, Ukraine must demonstrate to the EU a clear picture of its reform progress to gain access to EU financial programs. To do this, it needs to pass the remaining nine of thirteen bills, launch regional planning in all regions, and—just as importantly—conduct a large-scale public awareness campaign.

International experience confirms that countries that have taken this path do not regret it. Leading EU countries have long proven that recycling is the priority, while incineration and landfilling must be minimized as much as possible. Ukraine should learn from others’ experience without repeating their mistakes.

Ukraine is at a stage where infrastructure reconstruction must become not only an engineering but also an environmental challenge. New and restored roads, railway corridors, forest routes, and transport facilities must meet modern European approaches to biodiversity conservation, ecological connectivity of territories, and climate change adaptation.

This is especially important in the context of Ukraine’s European integration, alignment with the EU’s environmental acquis, and the need to incorporate green infrastructure principles into state planning, community development, forest policy, and transport construction.

For this reason, experts from the Ukraine Support Team (UST) have explored this topic and prepared an analytical report: “On the Integration of Environmental Aspects into the Development of Forest and Transport Infrastructure in the Context of Meeting EU Requirements.”

The goal of this research is to form a systemic vision and practical tools for implementing green infrastructure principles in Ukraine — from the level of state policy down to specific engineering solutions on the ground.

Why Transport Infrastructure Has an Environmental Dimension

Roads and railways are critically important for the economy, population mobility, defense, and territorial recovery. At the same time, they can place significant pressure on natural ecosystems.

Linear infrastructure divides natural habitats, interrupts animal migration routes, increases the risk of wildlife fatalities on roads, and reduces the ecological connectivity of territories. In European practice, this is regarded as one of the key factors in habitat fragmentation.

Illustrative in this context is the updated Spanish technical document “Prescripciones técnicas para el diseño de pasos de fauna, vallados perimetrales y otras medidas para favorecer la biodiversidad en infraestructuras de transporte.” It emphasizes that transport facilities should be viewed not merely as engineering structures, but as landscape elements that can either intensify the fragmentation of natural areas or, conversely, contribute to restoring ecological connectivity.

For Ukraine, this approach is highly relevant. The reconstruction of roads, bridges, railway infrastructure, and the development of forested areas must take into account not only transport logic, but also the needs of biodiversity, natural corridors, water systems, and landscape integrity.

Ecoducts — Not a Standalone Structure, but Part of a System

In public discourse, ecoducts are often perceived as standalone “bridges for animals.” In reality, the modern European approach is considerably broader.

An ecoduct or wildlife crossing works effectively only when it is part of an integrated system. This system includes:

• correct site selection based on animal migration routes;
• fencing that guides wildlife toward safe crossings;
• adapted drainage structures, bridges, culverts, and viaducts;
• natural vegetation along approach areas;
• restrictions on noise and light impacts;
• ongoing monitoring of structure use by animals;
• regular maintenance and repair of damage.

The Spanish document illustrates precisely this approach: measures are divided into several groups — wildlife crossings, perimeter fencing, systems for helping animals exit enclosed sections, sensor signaling, roadside vegetation management, and measures specifically for birds, amphibians, bats, pollinators, and other faunal groups.

This is an important reference point for Ukraine. If ecological solutions are included only as a formality — without analysis of actual natural corridors and without technical follow-through — their effectiveness will be limited. If, however, they become part of systemic planning, such solutions can simultaneously reduce wildlife mortality, improve road safety, and strengthen the ecological resilience of territories.

From European Experience to Ukrainian Instruments

UST experts treat the topic of ecoducts and green infrastructure not as a narrow nature conservation issue, but as part of Ukraine’s broader process of adapting to European rules and standards.

The report “On the Integration of Environmental Aspects into the Development of Forest and Transport Infrastructure in the Context of Meeting EU Requirements” emphasizes that Ukraine needs not isolated solutions, but a coherent system:

First, the integration of ecological criteria into transport infrastructure planning. Wildlife crossings, ecological corridors, the preservation of wetlands, forest areas, and natural migration routes must be considered at the planning stage — not after a project has already been approved.

Second, the alignment of transport, forest, and nature conservation policy. Forest territories frequently serve as ecological corridors. Therefore, the development of forest infrastructure — construction of roads, forest tracks, bridges, and transport hubs — must be coordinated with biodiversity conservation goals.

Third, adaptation of European technical approaches to Ukrainian conditions. Ukraine must take into account its own natural zones, fauna species, infrastructure condition, the consequences of war, community needs, and future reconstruction projects.

Fourth, the creation of practical tools for authorities and designers. This includes methodological guidelines, technical requirements, criteria for selecting ecoduct locations, monitoring approaches, and inter-agency coordination mechanisms.

Why This Matters for Communities and the State

Green infrastructure is not only about nature conservation. It is also about safety, planning quality, cost-effectiveness, and the long-term resilience of territories.

For communities, it means the ability to develop territories without destroying the natural framework. For the state — fulfilling European integration commitments and raising the quality of infrastructure projects. For business — more predictable regulations and reduced environmental risks. For the conservation sector — a practical tool for biodiversity preservation.

This topic takes on particular significance in the context of post-war reconstruction. If Ukraine rebuilds its infrastructure according to the old logic — without accounting for ecological connectivity — this could entrench new barriers for nature for decades to come. If green infrastructure principles are integrated from the outset, reconstruction can become an opportunity for more modern, safer, and ecologically balanced development.

The analytical report prepared by UST experts is intended to serve as a foundation for further professional dialogue among state authorities, communities, road services, the forestry sector, conservation institutions, scientists, and international partners.

This is not just about building individual ecoducts. It is about establishing in Ukraine a new approach to infrastructure development — one in which transport accessibility, economic recovery, road safety, and nature conservation do not contradict one another, but work together within a unified policy.

• 1
• 2
• …
• 4
• 5