CONCEPTUAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN REINTEGRATION AND POSTOCCUPATION TERRITORIAL RECOVERY IN UKRAINE WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF PUBLIC GOVERNANCE

Abstract

The article presents the results of a study examining the differences between the concepts of reintegration and territorial recovery in Ukraine through the lens of public governance. It has been established that these concepts, within contemporary academic discourse and public policy practice, represent distinct areas of state activity that differ in terms of content, objectives, and implementation instruments. Territorial recovery is primarily associated with the reconstruction of physical infrastructure, the restoration of economic activity, social services, and the institutional capacity of public authorities that have been damaged or destroyed as a result of hostilities and occupation. In contrast, reintegration is considered a comprehensive political and governance process aimed at restoring social ties, the legal framework, trust in state institutions, civic identity, and social cohesion among the population of de-occupied territories. A comparative analysis of the key characteristics of both processes was conducted according to such criteria as their essence, objectives, objects of influence, priority tasks, security dimension, and expected outcomes. The study demonstrates that these concepts are not mutually exclusive: recovery without reintegration may result in a situation where infrastructure is rebuilt but the population remains disconnected from the socio-political space, whereas reintegration without recovery complicates the return of residents and the restoration of normal living conditions. Particular attention is paid to the fact that reintegration policy should be viewed as a strategic direction of public governance transformation aimed at restoring the legitimacy of state authority, ensuring inclusive governance, and establishing sustainable mechanisms of interaction between the state and citizens. It is concluded that the conceptual distinction between the notions of “recovery” and “reintegration” is of significant importance for shaping Ukraine’s post-war development policy, determining the priorities of public authorities, and designing comprehensive programs for post-occupation settlement and sustainable territorial development.