DIAGNOSTICS OF INSTITUTIONAL RESILIENCE OF THE NATIONAL ECONOMY OF UKRAINE

The article provides an empirical assessment of the institutional resilience of Ukraine’s national economy over 2016–2025, distinguishing the measurable quality of institutional arrangements from the macroeconomic outcomes that arise under simultaneous internal and external shocks. The research draws on annual World Development Indicators series and the retrospectively harmonised Worldwide Governance Indicators 2026 dataset. Real GDP growth, average consumer-price inflation and the cumulative level of real output relative to 2021 are examined alongside regulatory quality, rule of law, control of corruption and government effectiveness. An auxiliary macroeconomic composite measure is calculated using explicitly specified reference limits and weighting assumptions; it is interpreted as a contextual indicator rather than a complete institutional resilience index. Separately, a regulatory-institutional sub-index is calculated as the equally weighted mean of three governance scores on the 0–100 scale, with government effectiveness retained as a distinct governance characteristic to prevent double counting. The results show that the regulatory-institutional sub-index increased from 0.4059 in 2016 to 0.4346 in 2025, although the trajectory was non-monotonic and its highest observed value was 0.4410 in 2019. The decline from 0.4385 in 2024 to 0.4346 in 2025 demonstrates the importance of examining componentlevel changes rather than relying exclusively on endpoint comparisons. The analysis also establishes that the return to positive real GDP growth after the 2022 contraction cannot be equated with a complete recovery of prewar productive capacity. Particular attention is paid to the differences between pandemic and wartime shocks, methodological revisions to governance indicators, uncertainty in perception-based measures, and breaks in financial time series. The interpretation of non-performing loans explicitly acknowledges the role of write-offs and changes in classification. It is argued that institutional resilience should be diagnosed through the combined examination of institutional quality, economic adjustment and recovery dynamics, while causal attribution requires additional econometric identification. The findings provide a reproducible empirical basis for identifying regulatory and coordination vulnerabilities and specifying priorities for national economic policy, without presenting a partial indicator as the full eight-component index.