SYSTEMATIZATION OF THE MAIN ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISION MEASURES IN THE AGROINDUSTRIAL COMPLEX OF UKRAINE: A MODERN VIEW

Abstract

Problem setting. The article deals with the lack of legislative regulation of the supervision powers of public authorities in the field of agroindustrial complex of Ukraine. This is directly reflected in the lack of orderliness and declarative nature of the regulatory documents that would regulate these issues, regulate in detail the procedure for carrying out supervisory measures, and most of the existing rules are outdated. In this aspect, it is a question of devaluing the very essence of state surveillance and its appointment as one of the regulators of public relations. In this regard, it is important to determine the content of the category «supervision measures in the agroindustrial complex», to outline the main criteria of the categories «control» and «supervision» and to provide suggestions for improving the supervisory activities of controlling entities.

Target of research. The purpose of the study is the generalization of theoretical developments related to supervisory activities in the agroindustrial complex, delimitation of related categories that have a significant impact on the regulation of public relations in the agro sphere, identifying possible areas of improvement of regulatory support in the context of supervisory competence.

Analysis of recent researches and publications. The following scientists analyze separate aspects of the question in their researches: V. Averyanov, O. Bandurka, Y. Bytyak, V. Galunko, T. Kolomiyets, Sobakar A., V. Haraschuk, V. Lytovchenko and others.

Article’s main body. Characterizing separate supervisory activities in the field of agriculture, it is properly to identify their main features. Firstly, these measures are not related to the interference with the business activities of the enterprise. Secondly, they are generally carried out on a sample basis and are not continuous in nature. Thirdly, they serve as the basis for regulatory support of the field of agriculture, since the primary purpose of supervision is to analyse the state of economic activity and on the basis of the conducted monitoring of the implementation of preventive measures in order to prevent further offenses.

Thus, supervisory measures in the agroindustrial complex should be understood as the exercise by the supervisory authorities of their powers in the agroindustrial sphere, which is manifested in the systematic but not daily monitoring (including monitoring activities) of the activities of economic entities without direct intervention.

Conclusions and prospects for the development. The prospect of further research on this topic is evident, as by dividing the categories of supervision and control, outlining the limits of authority and reforming supervisory entities in the agroindustrial complex, as well as authorizing the administrative supervision measures under which should be understood by the supervisory authorities of their powers in the agroindustrial field, which is not systematic (including monitoring measures) in the activity of economic entities without direct intervention in such activities, we consider it essential to direct development of modern agroindustrial complex in the field of innovation and supervisory technologies.

A critical analysis of governmental innovations provided prerequisites for discussing the premature and over-radical nature of the government in the questions of administrative reform in the sphere of agroindustrial complex, emphasizing once again the importance of public opinion in public policy matters. In our view, the most optimal is the renewal of the Ministry of Agrarian Policy transferring some of its functions, which are clearly not within the competence of the Ministry, to other executive bodies implementing state policy in the field of agriculture.