Determination of Weighting Coefficients of Functional Components and Indicators for the Comprehensive Assessment of the Effectiveness of State Border Protection Construction
Abstract
Purpose. To determine the weighting coefficients of the functional components and indicators of the comprehensive assessment system for the effectiveness of state border protection configuration using the expert assessment method and to substantiate approaches to selecting the form of their subsequent aggregation.
Method. Expert assessment involving 89 specialists in state border protection was applied. The significance of 40 indicators grouped into operational, resource, engineering and technical, and preventive components was assessed using a discrete scale from 0.1 to 1.0. Mean expert ratings, functional component coefficients, and coefficients of variation were calculated, followed by two-level normalization of the weights.
Results. Weighting coefficients were determined for 40 indicators and four functional components. The operational (K₁ = 0.530) and engineering and technical (K₃ = 0.527) components received the highest coefficients. The normalized component weights ranged from 0.221 to 0.277. The overall expert-assessment consistency index was 16.8%. The risk of compensability inherent in additive aggregation was substantiated, along with the appropriateness of using less compensatory aggregation forms. Multiplicative aggregation reduces the degree of compensation, whereas limiting aggregation implements the strictly non-compensatory “weakest-link” principle across components.
Theoretical implications. The four-level hierarchical assessment system was further specified, providing a methodological basis for developing an integral effectiveness indicator.
Practical implications. The obtained weights can be used as a conditionally stable component of the assessment methodology and to substantiate resource allocation priorities.
Originality. The weights were determined empirically based on a survey of 89 specialists, with quantitative consistency assessment and two-level normalization.
Research limitations / future research. The robustness of the weights regarding expert sample composition, assessment scale, and border-section type requires further verification. The methodology should subsequently be tested using data from a specific border detachment.
Article type. Original Research Article.
Downloads
References
Karklina-Admine, S., Cevers, A., Rudzitis, N., Gaveika, A., Gasparėnienė, L., & Auzins, A. (2026). Methodological solution for sustainable common security risk management at the external border. Sustainability, 18(4), Article 1713. https://doi.org/10.3390/su18041713.
Pérez-Lombard, L., Ortiz, J., Maestre, I. R., & Coronel, J. F. (2012). Constructing HVAC energy efficiency indicators. Energy and Buildings, 47, 619–629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.12.039.
Androshchuk, O. S., & Hrinchenko, V. V. (2021). Rozrobka analitychnoho metodu analizu efektyvnosti okhorony derzhavnoho kordonu iz zastosuvanniam ymovirnisno-statystychnoho pidkhodu [Development of an analytical method for analysing the effectiveness of state border protection using a probabilistic-statistical approach]. Systemy obrobky informatsii, 1(164), 6–11. https://doi.org/10.30748/soi.2021.164.01. [in Ukrainian].
Burbela, S., Mysyk, A., & Zhuravel, V. (2022). Metodyka roboty shtabu prykordonnoho zahonu z pidhotovky do operatyvno-sluzhbovoi diialnosti na richkovii diliantsi derzhavnoho kordonu [Methodology of a border detachment headquarters' work in preparing for operational and service activities on a river section of the state border]. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats Natsionalnoi akademii Derzhavnoi prykordonnoi sluzhby Ukrainy. Seriia: Viiskovi ta tekhnichni nauky, (33), 24–41. [in Ukrainian].
Vlasiuk, V. V., & Poliakov, V. Yu. (2022). Pokaznyky ta kryterii efektyvnosti dlia otsiniuvannia mozhlyvosti vykonaty boiove zavdannia pokhidnoiu okhoronoiu shchodo nedopushchennia raptovoho napadu protyvnyka na pidrozdil Natsionalnoi hvardii Ukrainy pid chas zdiisnennia marshu [Indicators and an effectiveness criterion for assessing a march-security element's ability to prevent a surprise enemy attack on a National Guard of Ukraine unit during a march]. Naukovyi visnyk Kyivskoho instytutu Natsionalnoi hvardii Ukrainy, (1), 55–62. https://doi.org/10.59226/2786-6920.1.2022.55-62. [in Ukrainian].
Zhuk, S. M. (2013). Metodychni osnovy otsinky efektyvnosti vykonannia zavdan viddilamy prykordonnoi sluzhby, shcho diiut u hirsko-lisystii mistsevosti [Methodological basis for assessing the effectiveness of task performance by border service units operating in mountainous and forested terrain]. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats Natsionalnoi akademii Derzhavnoi prykordonnoi sluzhby Ukrainy. Seriia: Viiskovi ta tekhnichni nauky, 2(60), 68–77. https://doi.org/10.32453/3.v60i2.1118. [in Ukrainian].
Zalozh, V. V., Hluzdan, O. P., & Hluzdan, V. P. (2019). Naukovo-metodychnyi aparat otsiniuvannia efektyvnosti systemy upravlinnia orhanu Derzhavnoi prykordonnoi sluzhby Ukrainy [Scientific and methodological apparatus for assessing the effectiveness of the management system of a State Border Guard Service of Ukraine authority]. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats Natsionalnoi akademii Derzhavnoi prykordonnoi sluzhby Ukrainy. Seriia: Viiskovi ta tekhnichni nauky, 80(2), 84–103. https://doi.org/10.32453/3.v80i2.192. [in Ukrainian].
Zalozh, V. V., Mykhailiuk, Yu. O., & Ovcharenko, V. V. (2023). Metodychnyi pidkhid shchodo formuvannia systemy pokaznykiv i kryteriiv vyznachennia stanu protydii nelehalnii mihratsii na diliantsi vidpovidalnosti orhanu okhorony derzhavnoho kordonu [Methodological approach to forming a system of indicators and criteria for determining the state of counteraction to illegal migration in the area of responsibility of a state border protection authority]. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats Natsionalnoi akademii Derzhavnoi prykordonnoi sluzhby Ukrainy. Seriia: Viiskovi ta tekhnichni nauky, 2(91), 35–45. https://doi.org/10.32453/3.v91i2.1412. [in Ukrainian].
Kyrylenko, V. A., & Salii, A. O. (2021). Obgruntuvannia kryteriiu otsinky yakosti orhanizatsii okhorony derzhavnoho kordonu [Substantiation of the quality-assessment criterion for the organisation of state border protection]. Chest i zakon, 1(76), 18–24. https://doi.org/10.33405/2078-7480/2021/1/76/229497. [in Ukrainian].
Lutskyi, O. L., Bilovskyi, O. S., Bratko, A. V., Burbela, S. V., & Mysyk, A. B. (2022). Otsiniuvannia efektyvnosti operatyvno-sluzhbovoi diialnosti orhaniv okhorony derzhavnoho kordonu [Assessing the effectiveness of the operational and service activities of state border protection authorities]. Sciences of Europe, (86), 37–44. https://doi.org/10.24412/3162-2364-2022-86-2-37-44. [in Ukrainian].
Maltsev, A., & Maniakov, I. (2026). Metodolohichni zasady vyboru ekspertnoho otsiniuvannia efektyvnosti pobudovy okhorony derzhavnoho kordonu [Methodological basis for selecting an expert assessment of the effectiveness of state border protection construction]. Natsionalni interesy Ukrainy, 3(20), 523–535. https://doi.org/10.52058/3041-1793-2026-3(20)-523-535. [in Ukrainian].
Maniakov, I., & Mazur, V. (2025). Perspektyvni napriamky doslidzhen otsiniuvannia efektyvnosti pobudovy okhorony derzhavnoho kordonu [Perspective directions of research on assessing the effectiveness of building state border protection]. Natsionalni interesy Ukrainy, 3(8), 209–218. https://doi.org/10.52058/3041-1793-2025-3(8)-209-218. [in Ukrainian].
Maniakov, I. (2025). Formuvannia kompleksnoi otsinky efektyvnosti pobudovy okhorony derzhavnoho kordonu [Formulating a comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of state border protection]. Natsionalni interesy Ukrainy, 10(15), 270–282. https://doi.org/10.52058/3041-1793-2025-10(15)-270-282. [in Ukrainian].
Mysyk, A. B., & Bilovskyi, O. S. (2020). Model otsiniuvannia urazlyvosti prykordonnoi diialnosti shchodo zahrozy orhanizovanoi zlochynnosti [A model for assessing the vulnerability of border activity to the threat of organised crime]. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats Natsionalnoi akademii Derzhavnoi prykordonnoi sluzhby Ukrainy. Seriia: Viiskovi ta tekhnichni nauky, 2(83), 179–189. https://doi.org/10.32453/3.v83i2.566. [in Ukrainian].
Ovchar, M., Servatiuk, V., Mahas, H., & Katerynchuk, I. (2022). Metodychni pidkhody shchodo otsinky efektyvnosti systemy pidtrymky pryiniattia rishen na okhoronu derzhavnoho kordonu [Methodological approaches to assessing the effectiveness of the decision-support system for state border protection]. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats Natsionalnoi akademii Derzhavnoi prykordonnoi sluzhby Ukrainy. Seriia: Viiskovi ta tekhnichni nauky, 4(89), 185–202. https://doi.org/10.32453/3.v89i4.1285. [in Ukrainian].
Samoilenko, O. O., & Diahel, D. A. (2023). Model formuvannia systemy pokaznykiv ratsionalnoho rozpodilu syl i zasobiv prykordonnykh pidrozdiliv u mizhnarodnykh punktakh propusku dlia avtomobilnoho spoluchennia v umovakh voiennoho stanu [A model for forming a system of indicators for the rational distribution of forces and means of border units at international motor-traffic checkpoints under martial law]. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats Natsionalnoi akademii Derzhavnoi prykordonnoi sluzhby Ukrainy. Seriia: Viiskovi ta tekhnichni nauky, 3(92), 111–125. https://doi.org/10.32453/3.v92i3.1413. [in Ukrainian].
Stavytskyi, O., & Makarov, S. (2019). Osnovni pidkhody shchodo otsinky urazlyvosti systemy okhorony derzhavnoho kordonu [Basic approaches to assessing the vulnerability of the state border protection system]. Zbirnyk naukovykh prats Natsionalnoi akademii Derzhavnoi prykordonnoi sluzhby Ukrainy. Seriia: Viiskovi ta tekhnichni nauky, 2(80), 167–185. https://doi.org/10.32453/3.v80i2.197. [in Ukrainian].
Saisana, M., Saltelli, A., & Tarantola, S. (2005). Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis techniques as tools for the quality assessment of composite indicators. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 168(2), 307–323. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-985X.2005.00350.x.
Nardo, M., Saisana, M., Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S., Hoffman, A., & Giovannini, E. (2005). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: Methodology and user guide (OECD Statistics Working Paper No. 2005/03). OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/533411815016.
Greco, S., Ishizaka, A., Tasiou, M., & Torrisi, G. (2019). On the methodological framework of composite indices: A review of the issues of weighting, aggregation, and robustness. Social Indicators Research, 141(1), 61–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1832-9.
Munda, G., & Nardo, M. (2009). Noncompensatory/nonlinear composite indicators for ranking countries: A defensible setting. Applied Economics, 41(12), 1513–1523. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840601019364.
Frish, S., Talmor, I., Hadar, O., et al. (2025). Enhancing consistency of AHP-based expert judgements: A new approach and its implementation in an interactive tool. MethodsX, 14, Article 103341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2025.103341.
Holloway, S. (2010). Measuring the effectiveness of border management: Designing KPIs for outcomes. World Customs Journal, 4(2), 37–54.
Willis, H. H., Predd, J. B., Davis, P. K., & Brown, W. P. (2010). Measuring the effectiveness of border security between ports-of-entry. RAND Corporation. ISBN 978-0-8330-4977-3.
Thekdi, S. A., & Aven, T. (2021). A risk-science approach to vulnerability classification. Risk Analysis, 41(8), 1289–1303. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13637.
He, Z., & Weng, W. (2021). A risk assessment method for multi-hazard coupling disasters. Risk Analysis, 41(8), 1362–1375. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13628.
Abstract views: 9 PDF Downloads: 4
Copyright (c) 2026 Іван Маняков, Володимир Мороз
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
