Mechanisms for comparing and harmonising qualifications in vocational education in the context of European integration

This systematic conceptual review examines mechanisms for comparing and harmonising qualifications in vocational education within the context of European integration, with particular attention to Ukraine's post-war recovery and integration trajectory. Drawing on analysis of scholarly literature (2021-2025), foundational research, and European regulatory instruments, the study develops a four-category classification of harmonisation mechanisms: framework mechanisms (European Qualifications Framework, National Qualifications Frameworks), instrumental mechanisms (Europass, ECVET, ESCO, digital credentials), procedural mechanisms (recognition procedures, ENIC-NARIC networks), and methodological approaches (learning outcomes analysis, stakeholder consultation). The analysis identifies three European harmonisation models - the general recognition system, automatic recognition for sectoral professions, and temporary mobility provisions - and documents persistent barriers to effective qualification recognition, including structural differences in qualification architectures, procedural complexity, and employer scepticism toward foreign credentials. Theoretical interpretation through neo-institutional, human capital, policy transfer, and varieties of capitalism perspectives reveals that framework-level alignment, while necessary, is insufficient for meaningful harmonisation; substantive implementation requires attention to institutional context, stakeholder engagement, and labour market realities. For Ukraine, the findings indicate that effective integration requires prioritising sectoral alignment in strategic domains, investing in recognition infrastructure, and maintaining contextual sensitivity in adapting European frameworks. The study contributes to scholarship by providing a systematic mechanism classification, demonstrating the value of theoretical integration, engaging critically with qualification framework debates, and offering evidence-based recommendations for countries navigating post-conflict qualification system integration.