Current glocalisation processes require the identification of priority areas for Ukraine’s further integration into the international economy. The right choice of direction, tools and forms of implementation allows the government to determine, justify and implement a competitive strategy for the country. The study aimed to determine the relationship between international economic integration and Ukraine’s global competitive power. Identifying Ukraine’s sectoral comparative advantages in trade with the EU and evaluating the index of the regional orientation of Ukraine for specific groups of goods and services made it possible to define the effects of economic collaboration with the European region. The assessment of the complementarity index of Ukrainian–European trade relations revealed that Ukraine and the European Union are main trading partners. Furthermore, the analysis of the mechanism of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the European Union proved that the agreement actively contributes to the growth of Ukraine’s global competitive power. Comparative analysis in historical retrospect revealed priority areas for improving the integration processes which help to form the main competitive advantages of the country.
The motivation for this paper comes from the recognition that our understanding of specialisation might be too simplistic and that the dichotomy of specialisation and diversification could be outdated not reflecting the richness of real complex economic and technological relations among industries. Drawing on a qualitative study of the Hamburg Aviation (HAv) cluster, this paper discusses the peculiarities of a cluster profile in the digital time – the age of Industry 4.0 (I4.0), touching upon the issues of cluster structure and the complexity of production, synchronising specialisation with diversification, branching, and bridging, and the I4.0 attributes facilitating complementarity. The final research proposal, which is empirically embedded in the studied context, states that related variety encompassing both ‘specialisation in diversification’ and ‘diversification within specialisation’ can be further developed by a blending process. This can lead to branching and is modulated by the universal character of the I4.0 and a problem-solving attitude. It takes the form of an additive (new entries) or multiplicative (spinoffs) evolution, and, ultimately, owing to the complementarity, it can provide sustainable competitive advantages.