THE EPU INDEX AS A TOOL OF STRATEGIC MANAGEMENT UNDER CONDITIONS OF UNCERTAINTY
Abstract
The article examines the nature of economic uncertainty as a key factor in the functioning of modern socio-economic systems in the 2020s. It is argued that global shocks, including the 2008 financial crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic, and the full-scale war in Ukraine, have led to a transition of the global economy into a state of permanent turbulence, where uncertainty is no longer a temporary phenomenon but becomes a systemic characteristic. The study systematizes the sources of uncertainty by distinguishing between exogenous and endogenous factors and demonstrates that the interaction of these factors creates a multiplicative effect that significantly complicates forecasting and strategic planning processes. Based on a retrospective analysis, the study substantiates the existence of a structural shift after 2008 and the transition to a new regime of heightened uncertainty. The limitations of the EPU index are identified, and the necessity of its combined use with other analytical tools is justified. The article also highlights the practical relevance of the EPU index for strategic management. It is shown that its use as a leading indicator enables more informed decision-making, adaptation of investment strategies, and enhancement of business resilience under conditions of uncertainty. A set of adaptive strategic measures aimed at risk minimization and increasing enterprise flexibility in a volatile environment is proposed. Furthermore, the study emphasizes the growing importance of integrating uncertainty metrics into corporate strategic planning systems. In particular, the use of forward-looking indicators such as the EPU index allows firms to better anticipate macroeconomic shocks and adjust their resource allocation accordingly. The paper also underlines the need for combining quantitative indicators with qualitative scenario analysis to improve the robustness of strategic decisions. In the context of Ukraine, where uncertainty is intensified by ongoing geopolitical risks, such an integrated approach becomes especially relevant for ensuring long-term sustainability and competitive positioning of enterprises.
References
Knight, F. H. Risk, Uncertainty and Profit. Boston : Houghton Mifflin, 1921. 381p. URL: https://www.loc.gov/resource/gdcmassbookdig.riskuncertaintyp00knig/?sp=38&st=image&r=-0.801,0.166,2.602,1.266,0
Keynes, J. M. The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. London : Macmillan, 1936. 403 p. URL: http://keynes-general-theory.com/generaltheory.pdf
Simon H. A. Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organizations. 4th ed. New York : The Free Press, 1997. 368 p. URL:https://www.scribd.com/document/73273094/Administrative-Behavior
Kahneman, D., Tversky, A. Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica.1979. Vol. 47, No. 2. P. 263–291. URL: https://web.mit.edu/curhan/www/docs/Articles/15341_Readings/Behavioral_Decision_Theory/Kahneman_Tversky_1979_Prospect_theory.pdf
Пуліна, Т., Шитікова Л., Змикало О. Шляхи активізації процесів інвестування інноваційної діяльності України в умовах російсько-української кризи. Управління змінами та інновації. № 4. 2022. С. 14-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32782/CMI/2022-4-3
Akerlof, G. A. The Market for “Lemons”: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 1970. Vol. 84, No. 3. P. 488–500. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1879431
Baker, S. R., Bloom, N., Davis, S. J. Measuring Economic Policy Uncertainty. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 2016. Vol. 131, No. 4. P. 1593–1636. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjw024
EconomicPolicy Uncertainty Index, URL: https://www.policyuncertainty.com (дата звернення: 15.03.2026).
Knight, F. H. (1921) Risk, Uncertainty and Profit. Boston : Houghton Mifflin, 381 p. Available at: https://www.loc.gov/resource/gdcmassbookdig.riskuncertaintyp00knig/?sp=38&st=image&r=-0.801,0.166,2.602,1.266,0
Keynes, J. M. (1936) The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. London : Macmillan,403 p. Available at: http://keynes-general-theory.com/generaltheory.pdf
Simon H. A. (1997) Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative Organizations. 4th ed. New York : The Free Press, 368 p. Available at: https://www.scribd.com/document/73273094/Administrative-Behavior
Kahneman, D., Tversky, A.(1979) Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica. Vol. 47, No. 2. P. 263–291. Available at: https://web.mit.edu/curhan/www/docs/Articles/15341_Readings/Behavioral_Decision_Theory/Kahneman_Tversky_1979_Prospect_theory.pdf
Pulina, T., Shytikova L., Zmykalo O. (2022) Shlyakhy aktyvizatsiyi protsesiv investuvannya innovatsiynoyi diyalʹnosti Ukrayiny v umovakh rosiysʹko-ukrayinsʹkoyi kryzy. [Ways to activate investment processes in innovative activity in Ukraine in the context of the Russian-Ukrainian crisis.] Upravlinnya zminamy ta innovatsiyi - Management of change and innovation, no. 4. pp. 14-19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.32782/CMI/2022-4-3 (in Ukrainian)
Akerlof, G. A. (1970) The Market for “Lemons”: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. Vol. 84, No. 3. P. 488–500. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1879431
Baker, S. R., Bloom, N., Davis, S. J.(2016) Measuring Economic Policy Uncertainty. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. Vol. 131, No. 4. P. 1593–1636. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjw024
Economic Policy Uncertainty Index. Available at: https://www.policyuncertainty.com
Copyright (c) 2026 М.А. Новіков

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

