BUSINESS INFORM JOURNAL.

УКР

ENG

Search:

REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE

KV #19905-9705 PR dated 02.04.2013.

FOUNDERS

RESEARCH CENTER FOR INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROBLEMS of NAS of Ukraine (KHARKIV, UKRAINE)

ROR

EDRPOU 05481984

According to the decision No. 802 of the National Council of Television and Radio Broadcasting of Ukraine dated 14.03.2024, is registered as a subject in the field of print media.
ID R30-03156

PUBLISHER

Liburkina L. M.

CATALOG

Methodological Foundations for Developing Scenarios of the Impact of Dominant Infrastructure Changes on Population Quality-of-Life Resilience
Khaustova V. Y., Kyzym M. O., Reshetnyak O. I., Trushkina N. V.

Khaustova, Viktoriia Ye. et al. (2026) “Methodological Foundations for Developing Scenarios of the Impact of Dominant Infrastructure Changes on Population Quality-of-Life Resilience.” Business Inform 8:41–63.
https://doi.org/10.32983/2222-4459-2026-8-41-63

Section: Research Methodology in Economics

Article is written in Ukrainian
Downloads/views: 4

Download article (pdf) -

UDC 338.2:338.4:330.5

Abstract:
The relevance of the study is determined by growing economic, technological, security, environmental, and climate-related uncertainty, under which the condition of infrastructure systems and their ability to maintain critical services directly affect the living conditions of the population. The aim of the article is to develop methodological foundations for constructing alternative scenarios of the impact of dominant infrastructure changes on population quality-of-life resilience under prolonged external threats and uncertainty, taking into accounts the possibilities for adapting modern approaches to the conditions of Ukraine. The information base of the study comprises scientific publications selected from the Scopus database across five thematic areas, as well as reports by leading international organizations and analytical materials. The study employs structured content analysis, comparative and system approaches, scenario analysis, critical uncertainty analysis, structural and logical analysis, and scientific synthesis. As a result, international approaches to scenario planning for infrastructure transformations were summarized, and the possibilities for their adaptation to the conditions of Ukraine were identified. A functional structure of the scenario environment was proposed, distinguishing long-term trends, manageable internal factors, structural vulnerabilities, critical uncertainties, external shocks and threats, and institutional and resource constraints. A ten-stage procedure for scenario development was designed to provide a consistent transition from defining scenario conditions and the evidence base to constructing alternative trajectories, followed by their parameterization, stress testing, assessment of consequences, monitoring of early signals, and substantiation of managerial decisions. A typology of inertial, adaptive, transformational, and crisis scenarios was substantiated. These scenarios differ according to the way the system functions and the relationship between external pressure, internal vulnerability, and available capacities, rather than according to a conventional “better–worse” scale. A system of criteria for scenario assessment was developed, covering the quality of scenario design, structural capacities, system resilience, resilience of critical services, and dynamic and socioeconomic consequences. It was substantiated that infrastructure transformation cannot automatically be equated with increased resilience, since decentralization, digitalization, and technological modernization can reduce some vulnerabilities while simultaneously creating new dependencies and risks. The scientific novelty of the study lies in integrating scenario planning, critical uncertainty analysis, cross-sectoral dependencies, and human-centered assessment within a single methodological framework. The practical significance of the proposed approach lies in its potential use by public authorities, critical infrastructure operators, and investors to test decisions under alternative conditions, identify capacity shortfalls, monitor transitions between scenario trajectories, and maintain an acceptable level of critical services for the population.

Keywords: national economy; dominant infrastructure changes; scenario planning; scenario analysis; scenario environment; alternative scenarios; critical uncertainties; external threats; infrastructure resilience; population quality-of-life resilience; critical services; cross-sectoral dependencies; structural vulnerabilities; adaptive capacities; stress testing; managerial decisions.

Tabl.: 7. Bibl.: 40.

Khaustova Viktoriia Ye. – Doctor of Sciences (Economics), Professor, Director, Research Center for Industrial Problems of Development of NAS of Ukraine (2 floor 1-a Inzhenernyi Ln., Kharkiv, 61166, Ukraine)
Email: [email protected]
Kyzym Mykola O. – Doctor of Sciences (Economics), Professor, Corresponding Member of NAS of Ukraine, Chief research scientist, Department of Industrial Policy and Energy Security, Research Center for Industrial Problems of Development of NAS of Ukraine (2 floor 1-a Inzhenernyi Ln., Kharkiv, 61166, Ukraine)
Email: [email protected]
Reshetnyak Olena I. – Doctor of Sciences (Economics), Associate Professor, Head of, Sector of Industrial Policy and Innovative Development of the Department of Industrial Policy and Energy Security, Research Center for Industrial Problems of Development of NAS of Ukraine (2 floor 1-a Inzhenernyi Ln., Kharkiv, 61166, Ukraine)
Email: [email protected]
Trushkina Nataliia V. – Candidate of Sciences (Economics), Senior Research Stuff Member, Senior Research Fellow, Sector of Industrial Policy and Innovative Development of the Department of Industrial Policy and Energy Security, Research Center for Industrial Problems of Development of NAS of Ukraine (2 floor 1-a Inzhenernyi Ln., Kharkiv, 61166, Ukraine)
Email: [email protected]

List of references in article

Abdoli S., Habib F. & Babazadeh M. (2018). Making spatial development scenario for south of Bushehr province, Iran, based on strategic foresight. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 20, 1293–1309. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-017-9940-x
Alikaei S. & Bakhtiar Nasrabadi A. (2025). Towards a Resilient Urban Future: Implementing Risk-Sensitive Physical Urban Planning in Tehran’s Earthquake-Prone District 10 Based on Scenario Building Technique. International Journal of Environmental Research, 19, Article 236. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41742-025-00873-w
Ba?uls V. A. & Turoff M. (2011). Scenario construction via Delphi and cross-impact analysis. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 9(78), 1579–1602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2011.03.014
Cabinet Office. (2026). National Risk Register 2026. London: HM Government. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-risk-register-2026
Cabinet Office. (2021). Government Response to the National Infrastructure Commission Report “Anticipate, React, Recover: Resilient Infrastructure Systems”. London: HM Government. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/government-response-to-the-national-infrastructure-commission-report-anticipate-react-recover-resilient-infrastructure-systems
Cappellano F., Matti C. & Vidmar M. (2026). Building anticipatory capacity for transformative resilience: Lessons from UK and EU applying strategic foresight in grand societal challenge-oriented regional policy. Technology in Society, 88, Article 103453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2026.103453
Caramuta C., Grosso A. & Longo G. (2026). Mitigating uncertainty due to the Red Sea Crisis: A scenario development application to the Port of Trieste, Italy. Case Studies on Transport Policy, 23, Article 101703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2025.101703
Carneiro J., Loureiro D., Cabral M. & Covas D. (2024). Integrating Uncertainty in Performance Assessment of Water Distribution Networks by Scenario Building. Water, 7(16), Article 977. https://doi.org/10.3390/w16070977
Chermack T., Crawford M., Haigh N., Phadnis S., Ram?rez R. & Schoemaker P. (2026). Scenario Planning for Strategic Decision-Making, Learning, and Managing Uncertainty. California Management Review, 3(68), 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/00081256261432933
Clark S. S., Seager T. P. & Chester M. V. (2018). A capabilities approach to the prioritization of critical infrastructure. Environment Systems and Decisions, 38, 339–352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-018-9691-8
Davis C. A. (2021). Understanding Functionality and Operability for Infrastructure System Resilience. Natural Hazards Review, 1(22), Article 431. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000431
Dean S. & Quin C. (2021). NSW Critical Infrastructure Resilience Strategy Guide: A Focus on Outcome Strategy 3: Improved Community Resilience. Sydney: Resilience NSW. https://data.nsw.gov.au/data/dataset/3-19286-nsw-critical-infrastructure-resilience-strategy-guide
Dhakal S. & Zhang L. (2023). A Social Welfare-Based Infrastructure Resilience Assessment Framework: Toward Equitable Resilience for Infrastructure Development. Natural Hazards Review, 1(24), Article 597. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000597
Dharmadasa K., Kulatunga U. & Eranga I. (2025). Significance of critical infrastructure development in post-disaster resettlement in Sri Lanka. International Journal of Construction Management, 3(25), 312–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2024.2320972
Dutta M., Herreros-Cantis P., McPhearson T., Mustafa A., Palmer M. I., Tosca M., Ventrella J. & Cook E. M. (2025). New York City 2100: Environmental justice implications of future scenarios for addressing extreme heat. Landscape and Urban Planning, 254, Article 105249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2024.105249
EU–NATO Task Force on the Resilience of Critical Infrastructure. (2023). Final Assessment Report. Brussels: NATO. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/news_216631.htm
Hallegatte S., Rentschler J. & Rozenberg J. (2019). Lifelines: The Resilient Infrastructure Opportunity. Washington, DC: World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1430-3
Henry D. & Ramirez-Marquez J. E. (2012). Generic metrics and quantitative approaches for system resilience as a function of time. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 99, 114–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2011.09.002
Khaustova V. Ye. & Trushkina N. V. (2025). Metodychnyi pidkhid do vyznachennia dominant infrastrukturnykh zmin u zabezpechenni rezylientnosti yakosti zhyttia naselennia Ukrainy [Methodological approach to determining the dominants of infrastructure changes in ensuring the resilience of the quality of life of the population of Ukraine]. Visnyk Skhidnoievropeiskoho universytetu ekonomiky i menedzhmentu, 2 (34), 198–220. https://doi.org/10.58253/2078-1628-2025-2(34)-014
Khaustova V. Ye., Kyzym M. O., Reshetniak O. I. & Trushkina N. V. (2026). Kontseptualni zasady vyznachennia dominant infrastrukturnykh zmin u zabezpechenni rezylientnosti yakosti zhyttia naselennia [Conceptual foundations for determining the dominants of infrastructure changes in ensuring the resilience of the quality of life of the population]. Ahrosvit, 10, 86–96. https://doi.org/10.32702/2306-6792.2026.10.86
Kyzym M. O., Khaustova V. Ye., Reshetniak O. I. & Trushkina N. V. (2025). Vplyv strukturnykh infrastrukturnykh zmin na zabezpechennia rezylientnosti yakosti zhyttia naselennia: teoretychni aspekty [Impact of structural infrastructure changes on ensuring the resilience of the population's quality of life: theoretical aspects]. Efektyvna ekonomika, 12. https://doi.org/10.32702/2307-2105.2025.12.12
Kyzym M. O., Khaustova V. Ye., Reshetniak O. I., Popovych M. V. & Yudenko Ye. V. (2025). Poniattia «rezylientnist yakosti zhyttia naselennia»: sutnisne napovnennia ta skladovi [The concept of “resilience of the population's quality of life”: essential content and components]. Problemy ekonomiky, 3, 235–254. https://doi.org/10.32983/2222-0712-2025-3-235-254
Landuyt D., Broekx S., Engelen G., Uljee I., Van der Meulen M. & Goethals P. L. M. (2016). The importance of uncertainties in scenario analyses – A study on future ecosystem service delivery in Flanders. Science of the Total Environment, 553, 504–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.02.098
Mikovits C., Rauch W. & Kleidorfer M. (2018). Importance of scenario analysis in urban development for urban water infrastructure planning and management. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 68, 9–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2017.09.006
OECD Publishing (2024). Compendium of Good Practices on Quality Infrastructure 2024: Building Resilience to Natural Disasters. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/54d26e88-en
OECD Publishing. (2024). Adapting Infrastructure to Changing Climatic Conditions: The Case of the Philippines. https://doi.org/10.1787/a4c3f35a-en
OECD Publishing (2024). Infrastructure for a Climate-Resilient Future. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/a74a45b0-en
Pant R., Barker K. & Zobel C. W. (2014). Static and dynamic metrics of economic resilience for interdependent infrastructure and industry sectors. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 125, 92–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2013.09.007
Radeljak Kaufmann P. (2016). Integrating factor analysis and the Delphi method in scenario development: A case study of Dalmatia, Croatia. Applied Geography, 71, 56–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2016.04.007
Roach E. L. & Al-Saidi M. (2021). Rethinking infrastructure rehabilitation: Conflict resilience of urban water and energy supply in the Middle East and South Sudan. Energy Research & Social Science, 76, Article 102052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.102052
Scott C. A., Bailey C. J., Marra R. P., Woods G. J., Ormerod K. J. & Lansey K. (2012). Scenario planning to address critical uncertainties for robust and resilient water-wastewater infrastructures under conditions of water scarcity and rapid development. Water, 4(4), 848–868. https://doi.org/10.3390/w4040848
Sircar I., Sage D., Goodier C., Fussey P. & Dainty A. (2013). Constructing Resilient Futures: Integrating UK Multi-Stakeholder Transport and Energy Resilience for 2050. Futures, 49, 49–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2013.04.003
Sun W., Bocchini P. & Davison B. D. (2022). Overview of Interdependency Models of Critical Infrastructure for Resilience Assessment. Natural Hazards Review, 1(23), Article 535. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)NH.1527-6996.0000535
Sunitiyoso Y., Wicaksono A., Pambudi N. F., Rahayu W. A., Nurdayat I. F., Hadiansyah F., Nuraeni S. & Muhammad A. A. (2023). Future of mobility in Jakarta Metropolitan Area: A Multi-Stakeholder scenario planning. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 19, Article 100810. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2023.100810
Tasoulas V., Skiadaresis G., De Maleville A., Favino R., Redecker C., Sangiorgi M., Sfalagkiaris C. E., Puie M., Montalti E., Tripeni M. & Galariotis I. (2026). Strengthening European Union’s Future Disaster Resilience: A Strategic Foresight Study Identifying Priority Capabilities and Emerging Technologies towards 2040. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/8720215
United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction (UNDRR). (2022). Principles for Resilient Infrastructure. https://www.undrr.org/publication/principles-resilient-infrastructure
Van der Brugge R. & de Winter R. C. (2024). Delta Scenarios 2024: outlook on water in the Netherlands – main report. Delft: Deltares. https://www.deltares.nl/en/news/delta-scenarios-2024
Vesnic-Alujevic L., Muench S. & Stoermer E. (2023). Reference Foresight Scenarios of the Global Standing of the European Union in 2040. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. https://doi.org/10.2760/490501
Volkery A. & Ribeiro T. (2009). Scenario planning in public policy: Understanding use, impacts and the role of institutional context factors. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 9(76), 1198–1207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2009.07.009
Yang Y., Mou Y. & Wang B. (2025). Resilient Preventive Dispatch Considering Load Priority and Interdependence of Critical Infrastructures. IET Smart Grid, 1(8), Article e70012. https://doi.org/10.1049/stg2.70012