The directions for clustering of economic activities in Zakarpattya region are defined based on the empirical (survey) and econometric (clustering by k-means and tree-type clustering) approaches. The 7 fields are determined to form the clusters of the priority economic activities in Zakarpattya: agriculture, food processing, forestry, wood industry and furniture, machinery and tourism. It is proved that it is rationale to develop 4 clusters in the region: agricultural and food, tourism, machinery and wood industrial sector. Using the criteria of support intensity by local government in Zakarpattya to development of priority economic activities, level sub-regional clustering (13 districts and 5 cities of regional subordination) was done based on their 4 group-distribution. Application of this approach allowed to clearly differentiate and group the sub-regions by the number and degree of priority activities support. Thus, the appropriate analytical sample is 100%. The economic characteristics of each sub-regional group of clustering levels were generalized. The Level 1 cluster includes only 3 subregions, namely Mukachevo, Uzhgorod and Vynohradiv districts. They have the most of economic activities in Level 1 clusters – respectively 7, 6 and 5, and do not have any kind of activity that would take placed at the 4th level cluster. The 2nd level of the cluster include 5 sub-regions: Irshavsky, Tyachiv and Mizhhirya districts, Uzhgorod and Mukachevo cities, which possess the 1&2-nd priority activities in the 1st level of the cluster and have also activities in the 4th level of the cluster. Quantitatively, the largest group is the 3rd level of the cluster includes 6 sub-regions: Chop town, Velyky Berezny, Volivets, Perechyn, Beregovo and Svalyava districts. These units are generally characterized by one activity in the 1st and two activities in the 4th level of the cluster. The 4th level of the cluster includes 4 subregions (Khust city, Rakhiv, Beregovo and Khust districts), that have no priority activity in the 1st level and 2 to 4 priority economic activities in the 4th level of the cluster. The level clustering of subregions in Zakarpattya revealed a quantitative asymmetry in grouping of analytical units in regard to the support intensity by local authorities for the priority activities. It is worth to note, that at the phase of forming the new set of support to the priority economic activities the attention should be paid also to the above features of the cluster groups. 

clustering, priority activity, subregion, economic development tools to support economic development