The purpose of the article is to synthesize existing theoretical and methodological provisions and form a complex of conceptual foundations regarding the establishment of a state policy to ensure the high-technological entrepreneurship.
In the course of the research, methods were used: grouping - to identify the theoretical and methodological provisions of the formation of tools and means of state policy ensuring the high-technological entrepreneurship; analysis and synthesis - to distinguish the basic approaches to state regulation in the analyzed field that can be adapted for the Ukrainian economy; theoretical generalization - in order to improve the conceptual foundations of the state policy of forming the high-technological entrepreneurship.
The urgency of the formation and implementation of the state policy of providing the high-technological entrepreneurship in the conditions of globalization and strengthening of international competition is substantiated. The urgency of generalization and refinement of theoretical and methodical principles of the formation of instruments of state policy ensuring high-technological entrepreneurship is strengthened. A number of classical and modern instruments of state policy providing high-technological entrepreneurship are offered. It is indicated by their advantages and disadvantages. The matrix of the formation and selection of state policy instruments for providing high-technological entrepreneurship was developed. Ensuring the high-technological entrepreneurship in the global environment as a complex and systemic process that requires the formation of a suitable environment, natural motivation of subjects, public readiness, the establishment of institutional and economic conditions, etc., is determined by a number of direct and indirect factors that are important to be able to track and explore. A "chain" of the formation of high-technological entrepreneurship was constructed, within which framework factors were determined that determine it. Particular attention is paid to the sequence of ensuring the high-technological entrepreneurship, which is formed from the stages: the formation of competitive potential, the implementation of competitive advantages, ensuring competitiveness, achieving a competitive separation.
A new approach to the formation of the state policy instruments for ensuring the high-technological entrepreneurship is developed, which is characterized by the fact that instruments are formed using a matrix, the quadrants of which include a combination of instrument groups (soft, financial-economic, regulatory) and key areas of state policy in the technological field competitiveness.
The introduction of the approach developed in the study of identifying the instruments of state regulation in the field of ensuring the high-technological entrepreneurship allows public administrations, depending on the peculiarities of a particular country and the current stage of innovation and technological development, to choose the most optimal and effective instruments of state policy, the introduction of which is oriented on the system strengthening the high-technological entrepreneurship.
1. Haque I. (1991). International competitiveness: interaction of the public and private sectors. EDI Policy Seminar held in Seoul. Retrieved from: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/905911468739480564/pdf/multi-p.... [in English].
2. Smits R., Kuhlmann S. (2004). The rise of systemic instruments in innovation policy. International Journal of Foresight and Innovation Policy, 5, 14-32. [in English]. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJFIP.2004.004621
3. Flanagan K., Uyarra E., Laranja M. (2011). Reconceptualising the policy mix' for innovation. Retrieved from: https://www.escholar.manchester.ac.uk/api/datastream? publ.PDF. [in English]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.02.005
4. Policy Mix Peer Reviews (2008). The report of the CREST Policy. Mix Expert Group. Retrieved from: http://ec.europa.eu/invest-in-research/pdf/download_en/2008_ 1499_deliverable_web.pdf. [in English].
5. Borrás S. (2011). Policy learning and organizational capacities in innovation policies. Science and Public Policy, 38(9), pр. 725-734. [in English]. https://doi.org/10.3152/030234211X13070021633323
6. Fedulova L. I. (2010). Tekhnolohichna polityka v systemi stratehiyi ekonomichnoho rozvytku [Technological policy in the system of economic development strategy]. Ekonomika i prohnozuvannya, 1, 20-38. [in Ukrainian].
7. Dehtyarʹova I. O. (2010). Instrumenty innovatsiynoho rozvytku rehionu: zarubizhnyy ta vitchyznyanyy dosvid [Instruments of innovation development of the region: foreign and domestic experience]. Derzhavne upravlinnya: teoriya ta praktyka, 1. Retrieved from: http://www.nbuv.gov.ua/e-journals/Dutp/2010_1/txts/10diovdz. pdf. [in Ukrainian].
8. Butenko O. A. (2009). Formuvannya derzhavnoyi innovatsiynoyi polityky [Formation of state innovation policy]. Investytsiyi: praktyka ta dosvid, 1, 21-24. [in Ukrainian].
9. Hladynetsʹ N. YU. (2011). Kontseptualʹni zasady formuvannya mekhanizmu rehulyuvannya innovatsiynoyi diyalʹnosti v rehioni [Conceptual principles of forming a mechanism for regulating innovation activity in the region]. Naukovyy visnyk Uzhhorodsʹkoho universytetu, 33 (1), 74-79. [in Ukrainian].
10. Vasylʹtsiv T. H., Lupak R. L. (2017). Priorities and Tools of the State Regional Policy of Import Substitution in the Market of Ukraine's Consumer Goods. Stratehichni priorytety, 3 (44), 105-113.