Tetiana Tsyhankova, Iryna Bezverkha


The article examines past and present changes in the system of commercial diplomacy of Ukraine in the context of external and internal, old and new challenges. The aim of the study is to propose recommendations for the improvement of existing model and to identify lessons learned from Ukrainian experience that could be useful for developing countries. The relevancy of the study is conditioned by the need to enhance the effectiveness of Ukraine’s commercial diplomacy in the face of existing challenges. The applied methodology is a combination of methods used for theoretical and empirical research (observation, comparison, analysis and synthesis, system and structural analysis). We found that present distorted organizational set-up of Ukraine’s commercial diplomacy is the result of the uncompleted process of integration of management of international economic relations to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. We argue that the introduction of a unified model is untimely but can be considered as promising in a more distant future. Ukraine’s experience shows that without necessary prerequisites (a certain level of economic development and role in international relations, which require clear strategic vision and effective coordination of traditional and commercial diplomacies) and proper implementation, the introduction of the unified model is unlikely to lead to the desired outcome. Results of the analysis also indicate that the promotion of export and investment needs further impetus. Suggested recommendations address both organizational and practical aspects of Ukraine’s commercial diplomacy. Their implementation would have a positive impact on the style and effectiveness of Ukraine’s commercial diplomacy and, therefore, competitiveness of the national business.


commercial diplomacy, economic diplomacy, export promotion, investment promotion, international trade, trade globalization, trade policy, trade missions, Ukraine.

Full Text:



Berridge, G. R. (2014). International Politics. Routledge. 264 p.

IWP. (2016). Ukraine's Foreign Policy Audit: Recommendations for Ukraine's Foreign Policy Strategy. (Publication). Kyiv: Institute of World Policy. 62 p.

Kopp, H. W. (2004). Commercial Diplomacy and the National Interest. Washington, DC: American Academy of Diplomacy / BCIU. 141 p.

Kostecki, M., & Naray, O. (2007). Commercial Diplomacy and International Business. In Discussion Papers in Diplomacy. Netherlands Institute of International Relations ‘Clingendael.’ Retrieved from

Meléndez-Ortiz, R., & Samans, R. (2016). The E15 Initiative: Strengthening the Global Trade and Investment System in the 21st Century. Geneva: ICTSD and World Economic Forum. 698 p.

OECD, WTO & World Bank Group. (2014). "Global Value Chains: Challenges, Opportunities, and Implications for Policy". Report prepared for the G20 Trade Ministers Meeting Sydney, Australia, 19 July 2014 (Publication). 53 p. Retrieved from:

Okano-Heijmans, M. (2011). Conceptualizing Economic Diplomacy: The Crossroads of International Relations, Economics, IPE and Diplomatic Studies. The Hague Journal of Diplomacy, 6(1): 7–36.

Rana, K. S. (2002). Bilateral Diplomacy. New Delhi: Manas Publications. 283 p.

Seringhaus, F. H. R., & Botschen, G. (1991). Cross-National Comparison of Export Promotion Services: The Views of Canadian and Austrian Companies. Journal of International Business Studies, 22(1): 115–133.

World Bank. (2017). World Integrated Trade Solution (WITS). Retrieved October 29, 2017, from

WTO. (2017a). Trade recovery expected in 2017 and 2018, amid policy uncertainty [Press release]. Retrieved October 29, 2017, from

WTO. (2017b). World Trade Statistical Review 2016. Geneva: WTO. 165 p. Retrieved from:



  • There are currently no refbacks.

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