Diana Zmicerevska

The article is devoted to the generalization and development of the terminology that is used to describe the essence and content of the concept “entrepreneurial university”. The results of the literature review allow us to present the concept “entrepreneurial university” in the form of a system of interrelated economic terms. Based on the analysis of search queries, using the databases of Scopus and Google Scholar, the publications that reveal the content of the concept “entrepreneurial university” were selected; the features and key characteristics of the definition of this concept by various authors were defined; the authors’ interpretation has been provided. The analysis of research in the field of university entrepreneurship, which currently covers 314 articles published in various scientific journals, allows us to inductively describe the dynamic process of university entrepreneurship based on the literature synthesis. The presented definition of “entrepreneurial university” concept is based on an analysis of the evolution of ideas about the subject of the entrepreneurship theory and modern scientific management approaches and allows establishing the semantic network that reflects the inner content of the concept “entrepreneurial university”.

Type of the article: Research Article

Abstract
The study tests whether e-government development is associated with the level of central-government investment and the size of the investment cut that accompanies fiscal consolidation. Two-way fixed-effects panel regressions are estimated for 134 economies across the twelve waves of the United Nations E-Government Survey between 2003 and 2024 (1,319 country-wave observations), with World Bank and International Monetary Fund (IMF) fiscal data. When the primary balance improves by at least one percentage point of GDP in a survey year, countries at the 25th percentile of the E-Government Development Index cut central-government investment by 0.94 percentage points of GDP, and those at the 75th by 0.20 (interaction β = 2.15 per index unit, p = 0.009). Above the upper quartile, the cut is indistinguishable from zero. Outside consolidation episodes, e-government development has no detectable association with investment levels, and the estimate rules out the negative cross-country gradient. The same pattern holds for the capital share of central-government spending and across alternative episode definitions, winsorized outcomes, leave-one-country-out, permutation, and placebo tests and two independent investment series; it is not separable from government effectiveness and weakens with country-specific trends and upper-tail trimming. Episodes achieved through revenue and current spending leave investment untouched at every level of the index; the attenuation reflects the composition of fiscal adjustment. The evidence casts e-government as a marker of the administrative capacity that keeps consolidation off the capital budget; if the association is causal, digital budget, procurement, and project-pipeline systems belong in place before adjustment begins.

Acknowledgment
The contribution of Liudmyla Zakharkina was prepared within the framework of the research project “GovTech for Ukraine: A Digital, Secure, Transparent, and Equitable State in Times of War and Post-War Reconstruction” (registration number 0126U000544), funded by the Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine. The other authors received no external funding for this study.