• International Journal of Technology (IJTech)
  • Vol 16, No 6 (2025)

Synergy-Based Multi-Domain Risk Integration for Critical E-Government Infrastructure: The MuSyRI Framework and Policy Implications

Synergy-Based Multi-Domain Risk Integration for Critical E-Government Infrastructure: The MuSyRI Framework and Policy Implications

Title: Synergy-Based Multi-Domain Risk Integration for Critical E-Government Infrastructure: The MuSyRI Framework and Policy Implications
Yuri Chernenko, Olena Borodina

Corresponding email:


Cite this article as:
Chernenko, Y., & Borodina, O. (2025). Synergy-based multi-domain risk integration for critical e-government infrastructure: The musyri framework and policy implications. International Journal of Technology, 16 (6), 2143–2159.


12
Downloads
Yuri Chernenko Department of Doctoral Studies, International University of Business and Law
Olena Borodina Faculty of Management, Public Administration and Marketing, Kyiv University of Market Relations
Email to Corresponding Author

Abstract
Synergy-Based Multi-Domain Risk Integration for Critical E-Government Infrastructure: The MuSyRI Framework and Policy Implications

This study aims to develop and validate the MuSyRI early-warning index for critical e-government infrastructure. This study introduces the Multi-Domain Synergistic Resilience Index (MuSyRI), a bounded [0–1] metric that identifies nonlinear, compound risks across operational, financial, regulatory, and cyber domains in critical e-government infrastructure. MuSyRI explicitly integrates domain-specific resilience factors to modulate synergy-driven escalation. A multiple-case study of four anonymised organizations – a housing-services agency, a specialized construction firm, a water-tech startup, and a partially state-owned energy – water utility – validates MuSyRI. ERP-BPMS logs are converted into fuzzy sub-indices and aggregated via a Cascading Amplification Function (CAF) to capture concurrent moderate hazards and offset by a resilience term. Parameters were calibrated using Delphi panels, genetic algorithms, and expert elicitation. MuSyRI detects overlapping medium-level risks 1–4 weeks earlier than standard additive approaches. Early synergy alerts enabled proactive interventions, reducing housing-service disruptions by 8%–12% and boosting pilot adoption in the water-tech case by 12%–15%. Resilience offset curtails overestimation and preserves policymakers’ and managers’ interpretability. Unlike linear or unbounded fuzzy methods, MuSyRI formally integrates a nonlinear synergy function with domain-specific resilience into one bounded index. Consequently, it offers an actionable early warning framework for multi-domain oversight, resource prioritization, and digital governance reforms in e-government ecosystems. 

Critical infrastructure; E-government; Multi-domain risk; MuSyRI; Synergy-based index

References

 Akbari Ahmadabadi, A., & Heravi, G. (2019). Risk assessment framework of ppp-megaprojects focusing on risk interaction and project success. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 124, 169–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.03.011

Arvidsson, B., Johansson, J., & Guld?aker, N. (2021). Critical infrastructure, geographical information science and risk governance: A systematic cross-field review. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 213, 107741. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2021.107741

Beckers, F., & Stegemann, U. (2013). A risk-management approach to a successful infrastructure project [Viewed 14 May 2025]. https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/operations/our-insights/a-risk-management-approach-to-a-successful-infrastructure-project

Bentahar, A., & Rifai, A. (2022). Risk and risk management in the public sector: A theoretical contribution. Journal of Economics, Finance and Management Studies, 5(9), 2492–2506. https://doi.org/10.47191/jefms/v5-i9-03

Berawi, M., Leviakangas, P., Muhammad, F., Sari, M., Gunawan, Yatmo, Y., & Suryanegara, M. (2019). Optimizing search and rescue personnel allocation in disaster emergency response using fuzzy logic. International Journal of Technology, 10(7), 1416. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v10i7.3709

Boni, M., Faiella, A., Gazzola, V., & Pergalani, F. (2025). A multi-hazard and multi-risk assessment methodological approach to support civil protection planning in wide areas. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 119, 105343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2025.105343

Božovic, M., Mihajlovic, E., & Zivkovic, S. (2020). Risk management in the context of multi-risk assessment. Facta Universitatis, Series: Working and Living Environmental Protection, 161(3), 161–169. https://doi.org/10.22190/FUWLEP1903161B

Cai, B., Xie, M., Liu, Y., Liu, Y., Ji, R., & Feng, Q. (2017). A novel critical infrastructure resilience assessment approach using dynamic Bayesian networks. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1890(1), 040043. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5005245

Carpignano, A., Grosso, D., Gerboni, R., & Bologna, A. (2021). Resilience of critical infrastructures: A risk assessment methodology for energy corridors. In V. Rosato & A. Di Pietro (Eds.), Issues on Risk Analysis for Critical Infrastructure Protection. IntechOpen. https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.94755

Chang, J., Yin, Z., Zhang, Z., Xu, X., & Zhao, M. (2023). Multi-disaster integrated risk assessment in city range—a case study of Jinan, China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(4), 3483. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20043483

Dudauri, T. (2022). Peculiarities of integrated risk management. Economics, 105(6–8), 112–123. https://doi.org/10.36962/ecs/105/6-8/2022-112

Falco, G., Noriega, A., & Susskind, L. (2019). Cyber negotiation: A cyber risk management approach to defend urban critical infrastructure from cyberattacks. Journal of Cyber Policy, 4(1), 90–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/23738871.2019.1586969

Farrington, S. (2016). Enterprise risk management powers up at utilities [Viewed 14 May 2025]. https://www.risk.net/commodities/energy/2473744/enterprise-risk-management-powers-utilities

Gopalakrishnan, S., & Sankaranarayanan, S. (2023). Cooperative security against interdependent risks. Production and Operations Management, 32(11), 3504–3520. https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.14047

Hallegatte, S., Rentschler, J., & Rozenberg, J. (2019). Lifelines: The resilient infrastructure opportunity. World Bank Group. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1430-3

Hendra, F., Mohammad, R., Amrin, A., Maarop, N., & Zagloel, T. (2024). Systematic literature review of risk assessment techniques, standard and guidelines for railway. International Journal of Technology, 15(4), 1148. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v15i4.6384

Hochrainer-Stigler, S., Trogrli? Saki?, R., Reiter, K., Ward, P., De Ruiter, M., Duncan, M. J., … Gottardo, S. (2023). Toward a framework for systemic multi-hazard and multi-risk assessment and management. iScience, 26(5), 106736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2023.106736

Jandhana, I., & Agustini, H. (2024). Performance evaluation of the industrial resilience index by using cross-correlation method. International Journal of Technology, 15(5), 1462. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v15i5.5599

Jandhana, I., Nurcahyo, R., & Zagloel, T. (2018). Resilient structure assessment using cobb-douglas production function: The case of the Indonesian metal industry. International Journal of Technology, 9(5), 1061. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v9i5.1862

Jiwei, L., Kang, T., Kong, R., & Soon, S. (2019). Modelling critical infrastructure network interdependencies and failure. International Journal of Critical Infrastructures, 15(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJCIS.2019.096557

Kelic, A. (2019). Cyber risk in critical infrastructure. ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, 46(2), 72–75. https://doi.org/10.1145/3305218.3305243

Labaka, L., Hernantes, J., & Sarriegi, J. (2016). A holistic framework for building critical infrastructure resilience. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 103, 21–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.11.005

Larsson, A., & Große, C. (2023). Data use and data needs in critical infrastructure risk analysis. Journal of Risk Research, 26(5), 524–546. https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2023.2181858

Lin, J., & Pan, T.-C. (2022). Modelling of multi-sectoral critical infrastructure interdependencies for vulnerability analysis. Disaster Prevention and Resilience, 1, 2. https://doi.org/10.20517/dpr.2021.05

Mahama, H., Elbashir, M., Sutton, S., & Arnold, V. (2022). Enabling enterprise risk management maturity in public sector organisations. Public Money and Management, 42(6), 403–407. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2020.1769314

Menoni, S., Galderisi, A., Carrion, D., & Gerosa, C. (2024). Cross-sectoral and multilevel dimensions of risk and resilience management in urban areas enabled by geospatial data processing. Sustainability, 16(19), 8712. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16198712

Mohebbi, S., Zhang, Q., Wells, E. C., Zhao, T., Nguyen, H., Li, M., … Ou, X. (2020). Cyber-physical-social interdependencies and organisational resilience: A review of water, transportation, and cyber infrastructure systems and processes. Sustainable Cities and Society, 62, 102327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102327

Moussa, A., Ezzeldin, M., & El-Dakhakhni, W. (2024). Predicting and managing risk interactions and systemic risks in infrastructure projects using machine learning. Automation in Construction, 168, 105836. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2024.105836

Murasov, R., Nikitin, A., & Meshcheriakov, I. (2024). Mathematical model of risk assessment of the operation of critical infrastructure objects based on the theory of fuzzy logic. Social Development and Security, 14(5), 166–174. https://doi.org/10.33445/sds.2024.14.5.17

National Infrastructure Advisory Council (NIAC). (2010). A framework for establishing critical infrastructure resilience goals: Final report and recommendations (Tech. rep.). U.S. DHS. https://www.cisa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/niac-critical-infrastructure-resilience-final-report-09-08-09-508.pdf

National Institute for Strategic Studies (NISS). (2021). The state critical infrastructure protection system in the national security and defense sector: Analytical report (English ed.). NISS. https://niss.gov.ua/sites/default/files/2021-02/english-version-cip-dopovid-1.pdf

National Institute of Standards and Technology. (2020). NIST privacy framework: A tool for improving privacy through enterprise risk management, version 1.0. https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.CSWP.01162020

Nweke, L., & Wolthusen, S. (2021). A holistic approach for enhancing critical infrastructure protection: Research agenda. In J. Abawajy et al. (Eds.), International Conference on Emerging Applications and Technologies for Industry 4.0, 220–228. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-80216-5_16

OECD. (2019). Good governance for critical infrastructure resilience. https://doi.org/10.1787/02f0e5a0-en

Petit, F., Verner, D., Phillips, J., & Lewis, L. (2018). Critical infrastructure protection and resilience – integrating interdependencies. In A. Masys (Ed.), Security by Design, 193–219. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78021-4_10

Prasetya, B., Tampubolon, B., & Yopi, Y. (2023). Role of risk management and standardization for supporting innovation in new normal based on lessons learned during pandemic COVID-19. International Journal of Technology, 14(5), 954. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v14i5.5299

Rød, B., Lange, D., Theocharidou, M., & Pursiainen, C. (2020). From risk management to resilience management in critical infrastructure. Journal of Management in Engineering, 36(4). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000795

Sakic Trogrlic, R., Ma, L., Torresan, S., Ciurean, R., … Padron-Fumero, N. (2024). Challenges in assessing and managing multi-hazard risks: A European stakeholders’ perspective. EGU General Assembly 2024, Abstract EGU24-3843. https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu24-3843

Samanis, E., Gardiner, J., & Rashid, A. (2022). Adaptive cyber security for critical infrastructure. 2022 ACM/IEEE 13th International Conference on Cyber-Physical Systems (ICCPS), 304–305. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCPS54341.2022.00043

Sambowo, A., & Hidayatno, A. (2021). Resilience index development for the manufacturing industry based on robustness, resourcefulness, redundancy, and rapidity. International Journal of Technology, 12(6), 1177. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v12i6.5229

Saruniene, I., Martišauskas, L., Krikštolaitis, R., Augutis, J., & Setola, R. (2024). Risk assessment of critical infrastructures: A methodology based on criticality of infrastructure elements. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 243, 109797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2023.109797

Schlosser, C., Frankenfeld, C., Eastham, S., Gao, X., Gurgel, A., McCluskey, A., Morris, J., Orzach, S., Rouge, K., Paltsev, S., & Reilly, J. (2023). Assessing compounding risks across multiple systems and sectors: A socio-environmental systems risk-triage approach. Frontiers in Climate, 5, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2023.1100600

Scolobig, A., Komendantova, N., & Mignan, A. (2017). Mainstreaming multi-risk approaches into policy. Geosciences, 7 (4), 129. https://doi.org/10.3390/geosciences7040129 

Theoharidou, M., Kotzanikolaou, P., & Gritzalis, D. (2011). Risk assessment methodology for interdependent critical infrastructures. International Journal of Risk Assessment and Management, 15 (2-3), 128–148. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJRAM.2011.042113

Trifunovi´c, D. (2020). Elements of critical infrastructure resilience. National Security and the Future, 20 (1-2), 51–61. https://doi.org/10.37458/nstf.20.1-2.6

Uwe, B.-R., & Gerber, B. (2019). Smart cities and the challenges of cross domain risk management: Considering interdependencies between ict-security and natural hazards disruptions. Economics and Culture, 16 (2), 106–116. https://doi.org/10.2478/jec-2019-0026

Ward, P. (2022). Myriad-eu: Towards disaster risk management pathways in multi-risk assessment [Conference Abstract, Presentation ID: EGU22-9323]. EGU General Assembly 2022, EGU22–9323. https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu22-9323

Ward, P., Daniell, J., Duncan, M., Dunne, A., Hananel, C., Hochrainer-Stigler, S., Tijssen, A., Torresan, S., Ciurean, R., Gill, J., Sillmann, J., Couasnon, A., Koks, E., Padr´on-Fumero, N., Tatman, S., Tronstad Lund, M., Adesiyun, A., Aerts, J. C. J. H., Alabaster, A.,. . . de Ruiter, M. (2021). Invited perspectives: A research agenda towards disaster risk management pathways in multi-(hazard-)risk assessment. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 22 (4), 1487–1497. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2021-326

Wells, E., Boden, M., Tseytlin, I., & Linkov, I. (2022). Modeling critical infrastructure resilience under compounding threats: A systematic literature review. Progress in Disaster Science, 15, 100244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pdisas.2022.100244

Woods, M. (2022). Risk management in the public sector. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315208336-8   

Yin, R. (2018). Case study research and applications: Design and methods (6th). Sage Publications. Zhang, P., Zhang, Z.-J., & Gong, D.-Q. (2025). A full domain decision model for robust risk control based on minimum linkage space and copula bayesian networks. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 260, 111046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2025.111046

Zhang, X. (2022). Understanding innovation policy governance: A disaggregated approach. Review of Policy Research, 39 (3), 303–329. https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12456

Zogheib, C., & Mahetaji, K. (2024). Cross-domain information integration in government: Hierarchies and responsibilities. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 61 (1), 469–480. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.1043

Zuo, F., Zio, E., & Yuan, Y. (2022). Risk-response strategy optimisation considering limited risk-related resource allocation and scheduling. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 148 (11). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0002392