Institutional innovation and regional governance for balanced interregional cooperation development: the case of Namangan, Uzbekistan
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16314416Keywords:
regional cooperation, institutional governance, economic connectivity, conflict management, Uzbekistan, Namangan region and resilience.Abstract
This article provides a comprehensive analysis of the dynamic institutional framework and interregional economic
linkages within Uzbekistan, with a focused case study on the Namangan region. It critically examines the pivotal role of
institutional coordination, governance resilience, and advanced conflict resolution mechanisms in shaping sustainable
and robust regional cooperation amid ongoing economic transition. Drawing upon a rigorous assessment of contemporary
challenges, exemplary domestic practices, and comparative insights from international conflict management models, this
study formulates evidence-based strategic recommendations to enhance inclusive economic integration and long-term
regional stability. The findings contribute significantly to the fields of institutional economics, regional development policy,
and governance, offering valuable implications for academics, policymakers, and practitioners engaged in fostering
resilient and balanced regional growth in transition economies.
References
1. North, D.C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press.
2. Rodríguez-Pose, A. (2013). Do institutions matter for regional development? Regional Studies, 47(7), 1034–1047.
3. Libman, A., & Vinokurov, E. (2012). Holding-Together Regionalism: Twenty Years of Post-Soviet Integration. Palgrave
Macmillan.
4. Dadabaev, T. (2018). Identity and Regional Integration in Central Asia: Rethinking the Politics of Regionalism. Lexington
Books.
5. Bohr, A. (2020). Uzbekistan’s Political Transformation: Authoritarian Renewal and Societal Change. Chatham House
Research Paper.
6. Orlova, A.V. (2017). Management: Basics of Conflict Resolution and Business Negotiation. Gomel: Francisk Skorina
State University.
7. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions and Organizations Across
Nations. SAGE Publications.
8. Thomas, K. W., & Kilmann, R. H. (2007). Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument. CPP, Inc.
9. Government of Uzbekistan. (2023). National Strategy for Regional Development 2022–2026. Tashkent.
10. World Bank. (2022). Uzbekistan: Enhancing Interregional Economic Connectivity. Washington, DC.
11. OECD. (2021). Multi-level Governance Reforms in Eurasia. Paris.
12. UNDP Uzbekistan. (2023). Building Institutional Resilience in Regional Development. Tashkent.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 YASHIL IQTISODIYOT VA TARAQQIYOT
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.