The article is devoted to the development of a resilient model of rural community attractiveness based on the integration of local identity, digital openness, and civic participation. The study presents the results of an interdisciplinary analysis grounded in the synthesis of concepts such as cultural capital, strategic governance culture, digital inclusion, and participatory administration. The proposed model combines strategic planning, participatory governance, and digital representation as core drivers of socio-economic resilience and local development capacity. The empirical part is based on case studies of Ukrainian communities (Baranivka, Pyriatyn, Slavutych) and international examples (Quanzhou, China; Großräschen, Germany; Setúbal, Portugal; Vallsten, Finland). A comparative analysis of governance strategies, development approaches, and tools for the institutionalization of cultural identity is conducted. The study identifies three key components of community attractiveness–identity, participation, and strategic culture–and illustrates their interaction using structured tables and graphic models. Based on the results, the model is shown to be analytically relevant for local strategic planning, particularly in the context of decentralization, digital transformation, and post-war recovery. The model may serve as an analytical framework for assessing territorial capacity and can be implemented in local governance practices.
- 1. Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Stanford University Press. https://monoskop.org/images/b/b9/Bourdieu_Pierre_The_Logic_of_Practice_1...
2. Council of Europe. (2021). Intercultural cities: Policy models. Case study: Wallsten. https://www.coe.int/en/web/interculturalcities
3. Duxbury, N., Hosagrahar, J., & Pascual, J. (2016). Why must culture be at the heart of sustainable urban development? Agenda 21 for Culture. https://agenda21culture.net/documents/why-culture-heart
4. Hauser, E. (2014). Comparative research: Theories, methods and practices. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 17(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2013.820623
5. Mossberger, K., Tolbert, C. J., & McNeal, R. S. (2008). Digital citizenship: The internet, society, and participation. MIT Press. https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/digital-citizenship
6. Newman, M. (2010). Networks: An introduction. Oxford University Press. https://global.oup.com/academic/product/networks-9780199206650
7. Shen, J. (2022). Urban heritage and governance in China: The case of Quanzhou. Cities, 129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103858
8. Smart Rural 21. (2023). Case study: Großräschen, Germany. https://www.smartrural21.eu/smart-rural-21/villages/grossraeschen/
9. URBACT. (2023). Citizen participation in cultural planning: Setúbal case. https://urbact.eu/good-practices/setubal
10. Yin, R. K. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. Sage Publications. https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/case-study-research-and-applications/bo...
11. DOBRE Program. (2023). *Baranivska community: Experience of strategic development*. [https://decentralization.gov.ua/uploads/library/file/758/dobre\_baranivka.pdf](https://decentralization.gov.ua/uploads/library/file/758/dobre_baranivka...)
12. U-LEAD with Europe Program. (2024). *Index of transparency of local self-government*. [https://prozorilog.org/reports](https://prozorilog.org/reports)
13. Center for Innovation Development. (2023). *Slavutych strategy*. [https://www.cdi.org.ua/slavutych-strategy](https://www.cdi.org.ua/slavutych-strategy)
14. Hrynenko, A. M., & Kyryliuk, V. V. (2017). Social capital: The essence and genesis of its interpretation. *Social and Labour Relations: Theory and Practice, 2*, 321–328.
15. Shulzhyk, Yu. O., Kvasnii, Z. V., Melnyk, O. A. P., & Stroghush, Yu. B. (2025). Digital transformation of territorial communities of Ukraine: Challenges and prospects. *Current Issues of Economic Sciences, 8*. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14942699