Інноваційні механізми розвитку системи публічного управління та фінансового сектору в умовах цифровізації, Innovative Mechanisms for the Development of the Public Administration System and the Financial Sector under Digitalization

<jats:p>Digitalization has produced structural transformations of the financial sector, changing the composition of participants and the way the state interacts with them, and creating a need for innovative mechanisms of development. Their development is assessed through technology adoption indicators, while the quality of state policy remains unmeasured. The purpose is to classify these mechanisms by a single criterion and to determine the state of development of each group in Ukraine. The methods are conceptual analysis, typology, analysis of official statistics of the National Bank of Ukraine for 2024–2025, and comparison with Regulation (EU) 2022/2554. The public administration system and the financial sector are shown to be two sides of one managerial relation rather than subsystems of a single system, and this relation yields the criterion of division. Mechanisms are distinguished by which party bears the adjustment cost: the state's own capacity building, requirements imposed on market participants, and risk sharing. This is contrasted with the conventional separation of institutional, regulatory, technological and security mechanisms, which rests on differing criteria. This division is shown to be exhaustive, since the cost may be borne by the state, by market participants, or jointly. In Ukraine the development of these groups is asymmetric: the first group has reached high indicators, whereas the second, which requires supervisory capacity, lags behind. Indicators of digital payment adoption therefore characterise the first group only and cannot ground conclusions about state policy as a whole. The first group also deepens the dependence of settlements on digital channels, whereas the second limits the risk this dependence creates for state security in its financial and infrastructural component. The novelty lies in classifying mechanisms by adjustment costs and deriving an assessment criterion based on the least developed group rather than on aggregate adoption.</jats:p>