DECENTRALIZATION AND GLOCALIZATION OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION: NEW MODELS FOR REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Abstract
The article examines the interrelation between decentralization and glocalization processes in public administration as key drivers of the transformation of contemporary regional development models. It is argued that decentralization, while retaining its role as a fundamental institutional mechanism for the redistribution of powers and resources, is no longer limited to a purely administrative reform. Instead, it is increasingly embedded in broader governance transformations characterized by multi-level interaction among national, regional, and local actors.
The study demonstrates that the expansion of governance practices, the emergence of network-based forms of interaction, and the growing impact of global factors necessitate a reconsideration of decentralization within a wider analytical framework. In this context, decentralization is interpreted not as an isolated process but as an integral component of complex structural changes in public administration. It has been proven that the interaction between decentralization and glocalization facilitates the transition from hierarchical to network-based models of public governance, in which coordination, partnership, and the integration of different levels of government play a key role. The expediency of developing new models of regional development based on the combination of local resources with global opportunities, innovation, openness, and resilience to external challenges has been substantiated. It has been established that their effectiveness depends on the ability of territories to engage in strategic planning, attract investment, develop human capital, and implement modern management tools. It is concluded that the effectiveness of such models depends on the ability of regions to strengthen institutional capacity, enhance strategic planning, attract investment, and implement modern governance tools. The findings highlight the importance of aligning governance approaches across different levels and developing new mechanisms of interaction that ensure both global integration and the preservation of regional specificity.
References
2. Romanenko, K. M. (2010). Marketing as a technology of public administration: International experience. Public Administration: Theory and Practice, 1, 38–46 [in Ukrainian].
3. Romanenko, K., & Romanenko, M. (2025). Glocalization and good governance: Dialectical understanding of openness in the public sector through education. Dnipro Academy of Continuing Education Herald. Series: Public Management and Administration, 1(1), 78–86. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54891/2786-698X-2025-1-9 [in Ukrainian].
4. Cretu, F., Dobre, F., Moncea, M., & Manescu, C. O. (2024). European trends in local public administration: Adapting to globalization. European Journal of Sustainable Development, 13(3), 185. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14207/ejsd.2024.v13n3p185 [in English].
5. Horváth, T. M. (1997). Decentralization in public administration and provision of services: An East–Central European view. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 15(2), 161–175. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1068/c150161 [in English].
6. Orel, Y., Kulinich, O., Korniievskyi, S., Serohina, S., & Gryshko, L. (2024). The impact of decentralization on regional development in Ukraine: Challenges and opportunities in the post-war era. Amazonia Investiga, 13(80), 99–108. DOI: https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2024.80.08.9 [in English].
7. Petryshyn, O., Serohin, V., & Serohina, S. (2020). Glocalization and the decentralization of public power in Ukraine. International Comparative Jurisprudence, 6(2), 190–200. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13165/j.icj.2020.12.007 [in English].
ISSN
ISSN 
