Building Back Better: Ukraine’s Ambitious Plans for a Resilient Future
Lesia Ogryzko (@Ogryzko_L) stands at the forefront of Ukraine’s reconstruction, and reform efforts, making her a pivotal voice in shaping the country’s future. As a board member of RISE Ukraine, she spearheads international collaboration on initiatives critical to the nation’s recovery. Her leadership extends further as Director of the Sahaidachnyi Security Center and a Visiting Fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations. Ogryzko’s extensive background in international relations and advocacy includes significant contributions through roles at the United Nations, USAID projects, and the Centre for Defence Strategies.
Ogryzko earned a Master’s degree in International Relations and Security Studies from the Institute of International Relations at Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv and a Master’s in European Public Affairs from Maastricht University in the Netherlands.
Ogryzko is a vocal proponent of innovative and sustainable solutions for Ukraine’s rebuilding. She has advocated for what many call Ukraine’s “Second Marshall Plan,” a monumental undertaking to address the $411 billion in damages assessed thus far, excluding regions still under occupation. The reconstruction effort focuses on decentralized energy, resilient infrastructure, and groundbreaking concepts such as underground schools, which aim to ensure security while fostering progress.
Ogryzko’s vision for Ukraine is rooted in modernization. She highlights the need to integrate green energy, strengthen security measures, and revamp social and economic systems to meet contemporary challenges. RISE Ukraine, a coalition of over 50 organizations, plays a vital role in these efforts, advocating for comprehensive reconstruction strategies and engaging with international partners.
In this interview, Ogryzko underscores the importance of donations, expertise, and military support in reducing long-term rebuilding costs and enhancing Ukrainian resilience. Her insights shed light on a nation’s determination not just to rebuild but to emerge stronger and more unified even as Russia continues its illegal war of aggression.
Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Reconstruction is a critical issue, yet a common misconception persists that many believe rebuilding begins only after the war ends. In reality, reconstruction starts the moment the first missile strikes. Repair and rebuilding plans are set into motion immediately. Given this, what scale of reconstruction are we talking about for Ukraine? Moreover, how do ambitious and visionary goals factor into modernizing Ukraine’s infrastructure during this process?
Lesia Ogryzko: The scale is truly enormous. We are talking about the largest reconstruction project since the end of the Second World War, often called the “Second Marshall Plan.” It will surpass anything we’ve seen since the original Marshall Plan.
The World Bank, in collaboration with the Ukrainian government and the European Commission, conducts a biannual process of assessing the damages inflicted by Russia on Ukraine. The most recent assessment estimates damages at $411 billion. However, this figure only includes territories that can be assessed, excluding those under occupation. Approximately 18% of Ukrainian territory, including Crimea and parts of Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia regions, is currently under Russian occupation.
Take Mariupol, a major city vital to Ukraine’s economy and home to a significant population. It is now under Russian occupation, and the catastrophic destruction inflicted on both the city and its residents is well-documented. The cost of reconstructing Mariupol alone is estimated to reach tens of billions. This highlights how the total damage figure significantly underestimates the true cost of reconstruction.
Regarding occupied territories such as Crimea, Luhansk, Donetsk, and parts of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson, damage assessments cannot yet include these regions. It’s a long and devastating list.
Jacobsen: How substantial will Ukraine’s reconstruction efforts need to be for its energy infrastructure, particularly given the recent escalation of attacks targeting this critical sector?
Ogryzko: Perhaps. However, I wouldn’t speculate on an exact percentage. In some places, the costs will be lower, while in others, they will be significantly higher. Nevertheless, the total figure will certainly rise, and a new round of assessments is expected to be published in the coming weeks. Without question, the updated number will be even higher.
Jacobsen: The scale of energy reconstruction will undoubtedly be massive. Can you elaborate on the extent of the damage and the strategies Ukraine is employing to rebuild this critical infrastructure?
Ogryzko: This remains one of the most pressing and challenging aspects of rebuilding.
Jacobsen: What specific challenges is Ukraine facing in the energy sector, and how is the nation working to address them?
Ogryzko: Energy reconstruction will indeed be massive. 80% of Ukraine’s thermal generation capacity and approximately one-third of its hydroelectric generation have been destroyed. Unfortunately, this has become a deliberate tactic of the Russians. Seeing that they cannot break Ukrainian resilience, they have resorted to a war of attrition. By targeting energy infrastructure, they aim to destroy energy production and weaken the economy, businesses of all sizes, and people’s basic living conditions.
In many parts of Ukraine, electricity is directly tied to water and heating systems. By disrupting energy supplies, the Russians are affecting access to essential goods and services that people rely on in the 21st century. According to recent figures, energy infrastructure is a key target, with civilian infrastructure being 60 times more likely to be attacked than military sites. So, the scale of energy reconstruction will be enormous.
Ukraine is adopting a smart and asymmetric approach to rebuilding its energy sector. Ukraine is focusing on a decentralized energy system instead of reconstructing the outdated, centralized Soviet-style energy system, which is energy-intensive, costly, and highly vulnerable during wartime. This approach emphasizes smaller energy grids and networks rather than rebuilding large, centralized power plants.
For example, in April, the Trippila power plant—one of the largest electricity providers for three Ukrainian regions, including Kyiv—was destroyed by Russian attacks. The turbines, generators, transformers, and other key infrastructure were annihilated. Such incidents highlight the vulnerability of centralized systems. By transitioning to decentralized systems, Ukraine can minimize disruptions and improve resilience.
Since March of last year, Ukraine has faced severe challenges due to targeted missile attacks, but we are experiencing a surge in innovative energy solutions. There is an investment boom in smaller, decentralized, and innovative energy technologies. Civic initiatives and Ukrainian businesses are leading the way in producing, distributing, and popularizing these modern solutions.
Jacobsen: It’s an immense challenge but also an inspiring one. How have the Ukrainian public and other stakeholders received this shift in focus?
Ogryzko: There’s much optimism despite the circumstances. Humour and resilience are key for survival in war. As we often say, war, while devastating, also brings opportunities for positive change. This shift in energy infrastructure is one such change. I live in Ukraine and witnessed firsthand how technology, innovation, and determination reshape the country incredibly.
Jacobsen: I attended a conference in Toronto on rebuilding Ukraine, where I spoke with a construction company focused on nonflammable core infrastructure. Are concepts like decentralization, reduced flammability, and other innovations prioritized to ensure buildings are more resilient against future attacks?
Ogryzko: Yes, exactly. This is part of what we call “smart reconstruction.” We see reconstruction not simply as rebuilding what was destroyed but as an opportunity to modernize Ukraine’s economy, urban planning, buildings, and social infrastructure.
One example is the decentralized energy system I mentioned earlier. Another is precisely what you noted—new approaches to construction materials and building designs incorporating nonflammable and resilient infrastructure. Another is how we approach education. We must consider the reality that many people have left Ukraine, and unfortunately, not everyone will return. At some point, we will need to honestly discuss Ukraine’s actual population and adapt our social infrastructure accordingly.
For instance, some regions may no longer need as many schools as before. If a region previously had five schools but now only has enough children for one or two, it makes no sense to rebuild all five. Moreover, schools and other social infrastructure near the Russian border are among the first targets of attacks.
Jacobsen: What strategies are being implemented to address the challenges of rebuilding educational infrastructure in such an unpredictable and volatile environment?
Ogryzko: We are rethinking the concept of schools entirely. Instead of focusing on traditional school buildings, we’re exploring how to ensure universal access to education through alternative means. This includes improving Internet access, enhancing online education systems, and even considering constructing underground schools to provide safer learning environments.
This concept of smart reconstruction acknowledges that Ukraine will remain in a state of war for a very long time—possibly years or even generations. Unfortunately, given our geopolitical situation and the reality of our “crazy neighbour,” we face dire security challenges not only for ourselves but also for our children and grandchildren.
Every aspect of reconstruction must be viewed through a security lens. This means investing in underground social infrastructure, ensuring access to decentralized energy, and strengthening our national identity, which is the backbone of our resilience. Smart reconstruction is not just about rebuilding—it’s about preparing for the future while addressing immediate needs.
Jacobsen: Given the continued presence of Russia as a neighboring threat, this is undoubtedly a new approach. What is RISE Ukraine’s most significant initiative to tackle the challenges ahead?
Ogryzko: RISE Ukraine is a great example of how Ukraine’s civil society has become one of the backbones of reforms and the reform agenda in Ukraine since the 2013–2014 Revolution of Dignity. We are the largest expert coalition on reconstruction in Ukraine, and our strength lies in the diversity of our expert communities.
More than 50 Ukrainian and international organizations are involved. These include experts in decentralization, anti-corruption, green energy, sustainable reconstruction, urban planning, and many other fields. The scope of our work is vast because rebuilding Ukraine impacts every aspect of its economy and society. To address this complexity, we provide an in-depth analysis of all these areas and conduct advocacy with international partners and the Ukrainian government.
We serve as a consolidated voice of Ukrainian civil society. Local and international stakeholders often consult us on issues related to reconstruction. We are the go-to organization for many questions concerning Ukraine’s recovery.
Jacobsen: Finally, how can individuals get involved and contribute? Are there opportunities to donate time, money, expertise, or other resources to support reconstruction efforts?
Ogryzko: The best way is to visit our website. You can browse our team section and contact any members listed, including board members like myself. I handle many of our international partnerships, but the rest of the team is equally approachable.
We are also looking to expand into a new area that we initially should have prioritized but now realize is crucial for any reconstruction: security and defence. This is an essential prerequisite for meaningful recovery.
I often share a favourite motto with our international partners: “The best reconstruction tomorrow is weapons for Ukraine today.” What we try to explain is the direct correlation between Ukraine’s security situation and the resources that will eventually be needed for reconstruction. The more we can mobilize for defence now, the less we need to spend on rebuilding later.
For those concerned with humanitarian or reconstruction efforts, do not avoid discussing military aid. It is not just about the military but about defending civilians, saving lives, and preventing further destruction. Ensuring security, such as closing the skies over civilian areas, is our most immediate humanitarian act.
Jacobsen: Lesia, thank you for your time and insights today. I truly appreciate the opportunity to speak with you.
Ogryzko: Thank you. It was a pleasure. Take care.