A Decade of Reforms: Anniversary Discussion by Vox Ukraine

As part of the discussion “Encore for Reforms: A Meeting in the Theater,” held in the fall of 2024, our team, alongside representatives from the civic sector, friends, and colleagues, reflected on the past 10 years through the lens of reforms and counter-reforms. Participants included Vitalii Vavryshchuk, Head of the Department of Macroeconomic Research at the ICU Group; Hlib Vyshlinsky, Executive Director of the Centre for Economic Strategy; Viktoriia Vyhovska, Analyst at Vox Ukraine; Iryna Kosse, Leading Research Fellow at the Institute for Economic Research, and Olena Luniova, Advocacy Director at the ZMINA Human Rights Center. Below are the key points expressed during the discussion.

Economic resilience and institutional changes 

Thanks to the reforms implemented, Ukraine managed to avoid economic collapse even during the full-scale war. If the country had entered the war with the economic problems of 2014, our situation would have been significantly more challenging. 

Another significant shift over the past decade is that we have stopped searching for “unique national formulas” for reforms and have recognized that universally accepted rules work in our economy. 

Moreover, the involvement of new individuals from the business and civic sectors in Ministries and the National Bank has enhanced their reform-oriented mindset, a willingness to take responsibility, and a realistic assessment of their strengths and capabilities.

Despite the visible achievements of the past 10 years, we have faced—and continue to face—structural problems that will also impact prospects for recovery. We discuss these issues below. 

The main problem of Ukraine 

Before the full-scale invasion, Ukraine’s GDP had not yet returned to its 2013 level. Economic growth rates of 2–3% are insufficient for sustainable development. Experts emphasize that the primary issue remains the lack of internal motivation for a radical transformation of the economic system. Unfortunately, this problem persists regardless of changes in government. The second key issue is the enforcement of laws. Even the best laws will be ineffective if the country’s legal system cannot ensure implementation.

If the war ends and sufficient funds for reconstruction become available, there is a risk that the influx of investments could distract political actors from the need for systemic changes, redirecting their focus toward enhancing their own well-being.

European integration vector and institutional reforms 

Since the start of the Revolution of Dignity, significant progress has been made in institutional reforms, particularly in the judiciary and anti-corruption sectors. The Ukraine Facility Plan outlines around 70 reforms necessary for securing international aid, which align with the European Commission’s recommendations. 

These reforms span public administration, the anti-corruption sector, the judicial and law enforcement systems, business regulation and government support, the agro-industrial complex, education, healthcare, and social protection. A substantial portion of the work involves adopting new laws and amending existing ones to align Ukrainian legislation with European standards. However, Ukraine’s accession to the EU requires far more extensive changes, which will demand a large number of highly skilled professionals. 

At the same time, straightforward replication of European experience is not always feasible, especially in areas requiring specialized knowledge. For example, in the transport sector—one of the least advanced in implementing the Association Agreement—it is impossible to simply copy the practices of European railways due to differing market organization systems. This necessitates the development of unique solutions that account for local specifics. 

Moreover, European integration is not an end in itself. Its practical outcome must be the protection of the highest societal values: the right to life, dignity, and inviolability, which are always under threat during armed conflicts. 

Protection of rights and civil society

Since 2014, a substantial regulatory framework has been developed to support those affected by the war. While this is a positive step, the scale of the problems remains vast. One particularly pressing issue is “delinking”—severing ties between the state and citizens in occupied territories. Unlike IDPs, residents of occupied territories often remain “invisible” to the state, resembling refugees in this regard. Therefore, mechanisms must be developed to maintain connections with people the state has lost contact with due to the war. 

Significant progress has been made in human rights protection compared to 2014, particularly in responding to war crimes. It has become notably easier to obtain information from law enforcement agencies. However, the justice system is overwhelmed with investigations of numerous war crimes, and the difficulty of achieving justice continues to fuel distrust in law enforcement agencies. 

When examining reforms in each sector individually, the progress over the past decade may not seem particularly significant. Efforts to combat corruption, reform law enforcement, improve economic planning, strengthen public administration, and enhance military management still leave much to be desired.

In 2014, after Yanukovych fled, we inherited a country rife with nepotism, the absence of the rule of law, weak local governance, a severe economic crisis, and an enemy occupying our sovereign territory. Transforming any transitional economy into a European-style liberal democracy is a monumental challenge—made even more daunting under such conditions.

Yet, despite these hurdles, the full-scale invasion did not lead to the collapse of state governance. The country endured, thanks to the courage and dedication of the Defense Forces and the reforms implemented in recent years. Therefore, continuing these changes is an existential task that we both can and must accomplish.