Comprehensive security of transport infrastructure facilities

The Russian Federation operates an extensive transport infrastructure network comprising over 100,000 facilities of various types: bridges, tunnels, overpasses, road and railway stations. Each of these facilities is of strategic importance for ensuring the country’s transport security and requires comprehensive protection against potential threats of various kinds. Providing complete physical protection for all transport infrastructure facilities (hereinafter referred to as TIF) against all possible threats is a practically unfeasible task, primarily due to economic inexpediency and colossal financial costs. Consequently, the primary task becomes identifying priority facilities requiring enhanced attention in terms of security. To effectively manage the security of critical facilities, the development of a specialized system is proposed. This system would enable: tracking the current security status of facilities; promptly responding to changes in security threats; adapting protective measures in accordance with the current situation; and planning security enhancement measures based on the analysis of new risks. Implementing such a system will create a flexible and adaptive transport infrastructure protection framework capable of promptly responding to emerging threats and ensuring the necessary level of security for the most significant facilities.

Purpose. Development of a comprehensive, multi‑level system for ensuring the security of TIF, capable of effectively countering modern threats and promptly adapting to changing conditions.

Methods. The research involved analyzing the existing TIF categorization system, followed by the development of a hierarchical facility security assessment system and the creation of a mathematical framework for calculating resilience indicators.

Results. The research yielded the following outcomes: a multi‑level hierarchical system for assessing facility security was developed; a comprehensive mathematical framework for calculating resilience indicators was created; a software solution for security management was proposed; and key performance indicators for the system were defined. Practical significance. The study’s practical significance lies in creating a system that enables: real‑time monitoring of facility security status; prompt identification of vulnerabilities and implementation of mitigation measures; generating a priority list of facilities for security system modernization; optimizing resource allocation for security provision; and establishing a unified security monitoring system. The developed system ensures an increased level of transport infrastructure security; reduced response time to threats; optimized security costs; improved coordination among various security services; capability for operational planning of measures; and transparency in security management.

Conclusion. Implementing the proposed system will create a dynamic transport security management framework capable of promptly adapting to new threats and ensuring the necessary level of protection for critical TIF. The research results can be used in modernizing existing security systems and creating new TIF protection systems, as well as serving as a tool for managerial decision‑makingin the face of natural and man‑made threats.

1. Arefyeva E. A Method for Assessing the Effectiveness of Activities to Implement the State Program on Protection of Population and Territories from Emergencies, Provision of Fire Safety and Safety of People on Water Bodies. Civil Security Technology 2016;13(4):38-44. EDN: WYPLCP. (in Russ.)

2. Oltyan I., Arefyeva E., Kotosonov A., Vereskun A.V., Rydel A. Methodology for Systematic Effectiveness Evaluation of the State Policy in the Field of the Population and Territories Protection from Natural and Man-Made Emergencies Priority Tasks Implementation. Civil Security Technology 2020;17(4(66):30-37. DOI: 10.54234/CST.19968493.2020.17.4.66.5.30 EDN: FEQQEU. (in Russ.)

3. Arefyeva E., Prus Yu., Kotosonov A. An approach to Assessing Sustainability Indicators of the Population life Support Systems. Civil Security Technology 2024;21((82):63-69. EDN: QIDWVL. (in Russ.)

4. Arefyeva E., Muravieva E., Kotosonov A., Poltoranov D., Kuzmin A. Analysis of Approaches and Methods for the Formation of Integral Risk Indices When Working with Safety data Sheets of the Territory of the Constituent Entities of the Russian Federation. Civil Security Technology 2023;20(3(77):50-58. EDN: BXGJCJ. (in Russ.)

5. Kotosonov A., Arefyeva A., Prus Yu. Integral Indicators of Natural and Man-Made Risk Emergencies in Geographically Distributed NaturalTechnical Systems. Civil Security Technology 2024;21(1(79):27-33. EDN: TYGRSU. (in Russ.)

6. Oltyan I.Y., Arefyeva E.V., Kotosonov A.S. Remote assessment of an integrated emergency risk index. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Construction, Architecture and Technosphere Safety. Sochi: IOP Publishing; 2020. Vol. 962. Pp. 042053. DOI: 10.1088/1757-899X/962/4/042053 EDN: XJGGYQ. (in Russ.)

7. Voronin A.A., Prus Yu.V. [Mathematical recognition of emergency situations using sensor systems and interaction with emergency response services]. In: Kalashnikov A.A., Kulba V.V, editors. Proceedings of the XXXI International Conference Security Management of Complex Systems. IPU RAS Publishing; 2023. Pp. 400-406. DOI: 10.25728/iccss.2023.74.55.055 EDN: KWAZTQ. (in Russ.)