PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP IN THE FIELD OF INFORMATION SECURITY AS A TOOL FOR STRENGTHENING NATIONAL SECURITY

Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology 15th December 2025. Vol.103. No.23 © Little Lion Scientific ISSN: 1992-8645 www.jatit.org E-ISSN: 1817-3195 9724 PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP IN THE FIELD OF INFORMATION SECURITY AS A TOOL FOR STRENGTHENING NATIONAL SECURITY ANATOLII ZINENKO1*, NATALIIA KRASNOSTANOVA2, OLGA LUGACH3, INNA KULCHII4, OLEKSANDR ORLOVSKYI5 1PhD student at the Interregional Academy of Personnel Management, Ukraine 2PhD in Economics, Associate Professor at the Department of Management, Finance and Business Technologies, Institute of Public Service and Administration, Odesа Polytechnic National University, Ukraine 3PhD student at the Department of Local Self-Government and Territorial Development, Institute of Public Service and Administration, Odesа Polytechnic National University, Ukraine 4PhD, Associate Professor, Head of the Department of Public Management, Administration and Law at the National University “Yuri Kondratyuk Poltava Polytechnic”, Ukraine 5Professor at the Chernihiv Polytechnic National University, Ukraine E-mail: 1anaitmeloyan09[email protected]om, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] ABSTRACT Public-private partnerships (PPPs) are successfully used in international practice to strengthen national security, in particular, in the defence sector, which makes the development of this method of public-private interaction relevant in Ukraine. The aim of the study was to assess the impact of PPPs on socio-economic and security aspects in lowand middle-income countries and integrate the experience of leading countries. The research employed the methods of statistical, correlation, and regression analysis. The results of the study showed a significant positive impact of PPP investments on the military strength, logistics, and fire safety of lowand middle-income countries. However, the research did not reveal any significant impact of such investments on ensuring cybersecurity, which requires increased attention from governments to this area. The analysis of the experience of leading countries identified key positive examples of the use of PPPs in the defence and cybersecurity sectors. Key obstacles to the development of PPPs in the cybersecurity sector as an important component of information security were revealed. Priority areas for the development of PPPs in the field of cybersecurity were outlined. The results of the study gave grounds to provide recommendations for Ukraine, which can be used in practice for improving the legislative framework and developing strategies to strengthen national security. The prospects of further research may be the development of proposals for the development of PPPs in the defence sector of Ukraine through the use of specialized platforms for international coordination and information exchange. Keywords: Public-Private Partnership, National Security, Information Security, Cybersecurity, Infrastructure, Logistics, Sustainable Development. 1. INTRODUCTION The term “public-private partnership” is applicable to various models of interaction between the public sector, private sector entities, nongovernmental organizations, and cooperatives. The use of PPPs is advisable in view of costeffectiveness, focus on core activities, innovation, timeliness of implementation, long-term maintenance, diligence and risk sharing [1]. Moreover, PPPs have been recognized as one of the key instruments for achieving a number of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), in particular, SDG 8, SDG 9, SDG 11, SDG 17 [2]. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology 15th December 2025. Vol.103. No.23 © Little Lion Scientific ISSN: 1992-8645 www.jatit.org E-ISSN: 1817-3195 9725 The PPP model is used in various sectors, in particular, logistics, energy, construction, information and communication technologies (ICT), etc. [3; 4]. In many countries, PPPs contribute to strengthening national security both in peacetime and in armed conflicts, being effectively used in the defence sector [5; 6]. In the United States of America (USA), PPPs play a key role in the development of innovative defence technologies, while in the EU countries they are used to finance joint projects on cyber defence and defence modernization [7; 8]. In the United Kingdom (UK), which is one of the leaders in the development of PPPs, cooperation between the public and private sectors contributes to the digitalization of security infrastructure and the development of cyber intelligence. In many countries, the use of PPPs in the defence sector is regulated by special legislative acts or directives. Much attention is paid to ensuring cybersecurity and confidentiality, and PPP procedures are adapted to the specific requirements of defence activities [9]. This allows the use of PPPs even in the most sensitive areas, such as the protection of critical infrastructure. Ensuring national security is not reduced to defence aspects, but this direction is the most relevant for countries at war [10]. The use of PPPs in the defence sector of Ukraine is an objective requirement of today, when the country is at war and needs additional resources and expertise [11]. At the same time, the development of PPPs in Ukraine faces a number of problems, most of which are related to the lack of a clear legal framework for its application in the defence sector [13]. Existing legislative requirements do not meet current realities, the interaction between the state and the private sector is hampered by bureaucracy, lack of motivation and trust, and the absence of conditions for fair competition. Furthermore, the legislation does not take into account the real practice of interaction between the state and the private sector, such as volunteering. In the context of the issue under research, it is also worth noting that there is no special law in the legislation that would regulate the features of PPPs in the field of information security. This study contains an analysis of the impact of PPP investments on socio-economic and security aspects in lowand middle-income countries, including Ukraine. This ensured the comparability of the results and the relevance of the conclusions for Ukraine. The aim of the study was to analyse the impact of PPPs on socio-economic and security aspects in lowand middle-income countries and integrate the experience of leading countries. The aim involves the fulfilment of the following research objectives: - Study the correlation between the volume of investment in PPPs and socioeconomic and security indicators of lowand middle-income countries; - Conduct a regression analysis of the impact of investment in PPPs on socioeconomic and security indicators of the countries; - Provide recommendations based on the integration of the experience of leading countries. The analysis conducted in the study involved testing the hypothesis that PPPs have an impact on strengthening the national security of the specified countries. The results confirmed the effectiveness and identify the key aspects that PPPs affect in the context of supporting the national security of countries. The study also analysed the experience of leading countries to develop recommendations based on successful practice. The novelty of the research is the identification of key aspects of national security that PPPs affect in lowand middle-income countries using mathematical modelling. The novelty is also the recommendations provided for the development of PPPs under martial law based on the integration of the results of mathematical analysis and the experience of leading countries. The study fills the gaps in previous research by providing empirical evidence on the impact of PPPs on socio-economic and security indicators in lowand middle-income countries, which are still poorly studied. The study also suggests universal directions for the development of PPPs, allowing the results to be extended to other countries, not limited to individual regions. This study expands on previous work by systematically comparing empirical results with international literature on PPPs in security and information protection. By aligning and contrasting our findings with existing research, the manuscript ensures that readers can evaluate the validity of the results independently, without the need to consult earlier related publications. Technical analysis of PPPs in the field of information security requires taking into account indicators of infrastructure reliability, bandwidth of ICT networks and efficiency of cryptographic protocols. A comparison of international practices shows that countries with high levels of digitalisation invest in secure data centres, while middle-income countries focus on incident monitoring and response systems. This approach suggests different levels of maturity of PPP models. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology 15th December 2025. Vol.103. No.23 © Little Lion Scientific ISSN: 1992-8645 www.jatit.org E-ISSN: 1817-3195 9726 The novelty of this study lies in presenting empirical evidence on how PPP investments influence key security indicators in lowand middleincome countries. Unlike earlier approaches, the analysis applies regression models to quantify effects on logistics, military strength, and fire safety. Another novel aspect is the identification of the limited role of ICT-based PPPs in cybersecurity, despite their recognized importance. By combining statistical modelling with international comparison, the study offers a fresh perspective on PPPs under wartime and developing-country conditions. 2. LITERATURE REVIEW A number of studies have identified PPP as an effective tool for strengthening national security, including information security. The authors [13] noted that PPP is considered as a solution to a number of problems related to security management, in particular, the protection of critical infrastructure from threats in wartime. Researchers believe that the development of PPP in Ukraine involves optimizing legislation and developing a transparent PPP mechanism. However, the authors’ recommendations mainly concern only the legislative aspects of increasing the effectiveness of PPP. The researcher [11] analysed international experience in implementing PPP and noted that not all PPP models are designed for the specifics of the defence and security sector. Therefore, some of these models can be implemented only under conditions of effective control and supervision of private partners. In contrast to this view, the author [14] insists on the need to consolidate society to ensure the national security of Ukraine in wartime. The researcher considers it obvious to use all possible resources to strengthen the country’s defence capabilities and resilience. At the same time, he emphasizes the need to improve the legislative framework by taking into account current realities and interests of all stakeholders. However, the mentioned studies lack empirical evidence of the impact of PPP on increasing defence capabilities and national security. The scientists [15] also believe that PPP is in the sphere of strategic interests of Ukraine and agree that the key problems of PPP development derive from imperfect legislation. Among the key problems, the researchers note the absence of a law on cybersecurity of critical information infrastructure. However, their study lacks a deep analysis of other areas of increasing the effectiveness of PPP, in addition to optimizing legislation. The authors [16] considered PPP as a key tool for ensuring the national security of the state. The researchers consider the full transition of PPP to online procedures to be the main direction for improving its administrative and legal regulation. The researchers' works provide an important theoretical basis for understanding the problems of PPP in Ukraine, but they lack empirical evidence of the effectiveness of PPP in the defence sector. The problems identified by the researchers mainly relate to the legislative framework, without taking into account other problematic aspects. Other researchers have also noted the value of PPPs in the security and defence sector. The authors [17] reveal the benefits of PPPs in the security sector – increasing efficiency, effectiveness, improving relationships, creating learning opportunities, etc. However, the study is based on data from Belgian security actors, which limits the applicability of the findings to lowand middle-income countries. The study [18] explains that PPPs are the future of defenсe transformation, but the study focuses on the examples of Italy and Israel only. The specifics of the security environment and the level of development of cooperation with the private sector in these countries do not allow extrapolation of the results of the work to other countries. The authors [19] and [20] examine the key objectives and risks of PPPs in ensuring the resilience of critical infrastructure. The main risks are: corruption, disasters of various origins, wars, terrorism, sabotage, overspending, lack of coordination, inadequate supervision, etc. However, the researchers’ conclusions are based on the analysis of literature, without being supported by empirical analysis. The researcher [21] noted the effectiveness of PPP in infrastructure development using the case of India as a developing country. However, the study does not explore how PPP affects other aspects of ensuring national security. The author [22] provides data on the role of PPPs in national cybersecurity strategies of NATO countries. However, the study does not determine how the effectiveness of such strategies and the level of cybersecurity provision actually change through PPPs. The authors [23] and [24] explored the role of PPPs in strengthening protection against cyber threats in European countries. The authors [23] focused on EU countries, [24] — on the Western Balkans. The researchers concluded that PPPs are effective in improving cybersecurity for both leading and less developed countries. However, the researchers’ results may have limited applicability to other countries due to regional specifics. Technical analysis of the literature demonstrates the lack of a unified approach to evaluating the effectiveness of PPPs in the field of cyber protection. Some studies use quantitative metrics, including Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology 15th December 2025. Vol.103. No.23 © Little Lion Scientific ISSN: 1992-8645 www.jatit.org E-ISSN: 1817-3195 9727 Mean Threat Detection Time (MTTD) and Mean Response Time (MTTR). Others limit themselves to legal analysis without considering network security performance indicators. This creates a gap between theoretical findings and the practical evaluation of results. The literature review shows that despite a significant number of studies on the impact of PPPs on national security and defence, there is a lack of empirical evidence of such an impact in the works. Most of the studies focus on a single region or country, which limits the applicability of the results to other states. This indicates the need to continue the research, as they were not enough to deeply understand the actual impact of PPP investments on national security. The first part of the author’s study involves analysing the impact of PPPs on socioeconomic and security indicators of countries with low and medium levels of development based on empirical data from the countries. The second part of the study identifies universal directions for the development of PPPs in the field of information security using the example of developed countries, thereby filling the identified gaps. 3. METHODOLOGY 3.1. Research design The first stage of the study was the selection of indicators and countries for analysis, as well as the collection and cleaning of data. The second stage was data analysis using appropriate mathematical methods for a sample of lowand middle-income countries. The third stage involved a statistical analysis of indicators of developed countries using the example of some European countries and highlighting universal directions for the development of PPPs. The fourth stage involved drawing conclusions and providing recommendations based on the results of the study. 3.2. Sample The main sample of countries included the states with low and medium levels of development, which makes the results of the analysis more relevant to Ukrainian realities. An additional criterion for selecting countries was the availability of data on the volume of investments in PPP projects and other relevant indicators. As a result, the main sample included 33 countries: Albania, Algeria, Argentina, Bangladesh, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Cambodia, China, Colombia, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Georgia, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Nicaragua, North Macedonia, Pakistan, Paraguay, Philippines, Russian Federation (RF), Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Tunisia, Ukraine. The additional sample included some developed European countries — Belgium, Germany, France, the Netherlands, the UK. The choice of these countries is justified by their leading positions in terms of the volume and number of PPP projects in the defence sector, which indicates their successful experience that can be adapted by less developed countries. The selection of indicators for the main sample of countries was formed by: - the volume of cumulative investments in PPP projects for 1999–2023; - socio-economic and security indicators for 2025 [25; 26; 27]. The time lag between investment and performance indicators makes it possible to assess the delayed effect of PPP on the socio-economic and security state of countries. The choice of a long-term analysis period (1999–2023) is determined by the nature of defence projects, which are often implemented over 10–20 years. A shorter period would not reflect the full impact of PPPs and could distort the results because of temporary crises. The chosen time interval also allows for a more accurate identification of long-term trends and cycles. The following indicators were analysed for an additional sample of countries (developed European countries): - ratio of investments in PPP projects in the ICT sector to other areas [25]; - total value and number of PPP projects in the defence sector in European countries since 1994 [28]; - structure of types of defence PPP projects by value [1]; - structure of types of defence PPP projects by number [1]. 3.3. Methods The paper employed a statistical analysis to compare the studied middleand low-income countries in terms of the volume of investment in PPPs. Statistical analysis was also used to study the structure and comparison of data on PPPs in developed countries. The method of correlation analysis identified which socio-economic and security indicators are closely correlated with the volume of investment in PPPs in lowand middleincome countries. The method of regression analysis was used to analyse the impact of investment in PPPs on socio-economic and security indicators. The quality of the models was checked by the F-test of model significance and tests for multicollinearity (Variance Inflation Factor (VIF)), heteroscedasticity Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology 15th December 2025. Vol.103. No.23 © Little Lion Scientific ISSN: 1992-8645 www.jatit.org E-ISSN: 1817-3195 9728 (Breusch-Pagan), autocorrelation (Durbin-Watson), and normality of residuals (Shapiro-Wilk). To improve the study accuracy, correlation models were tested for multicollinearity using VIF, and the adequacy of regression models was tested using the F-test. In addition, a residue analysis was carried out using the Shapiro-Wilk test to confirm normality. This made it possible to guarantee the statistical stability of the obtained results and exclude accidental data distortions. The study design follows a quantitative, crosscountry comparative approach using secondary data for 1999–2023 PPP investments and 2025 outcome indicators. Concepts of interest were operationalized into measurable indicators. Public–private partnership (PPP) investment was defined as the cumulative financial value of completed projects reported in the World Bank PPP database. Logistics was captured through the international logistics performance index. Military strength was measured using the Global Firepower composite score, inverted to reflect greater strength with lower index values. Fire-risk quality was operationalized via the FM Global Resilience Index. Cybersecurity was assessed through international indices of cyber maturity and exposure. This operationalization ensured comparability across countries and allowed regression modelling of the hypothesized effects. 3.4. Hypotheses and conceptual model The authors test the overarching hypothesis that public–private partnership (PPP) investment strengthens national security–relevant capacities in lowand middle-income countries via infrastructure and capability effects with a time lag. We specify four testable hypotheses: H1 (Logistics): higher cumulative PPP investment is associated with higher logistics performance. H2 (Military strength): higher cumulative PPP investment is associated with greater military strength (noting the inverse scale of the index). H3 (Fire risk quality): higher cumulative PPP investment is associated with higher fire-risk quality. H4 (Cybersecurity): higher cumulative PPP investment is associated with higher cybersecurity maturity. The conceptual model assumes PPP investment operates through proximate channels -modernization of assets, maintenance financing, contractor knowhow, and risk-management practices - leading to improvements in logistics, readiness, and safety. Effects are moderated by country context (governance capacity, conflict intensity, and the share of ICT within PPPs) and lagged due to project implementation cycles. The therefore relate 1999– 2023 cumulative PPP investment to 2025 outcome indicators to capture delayed impacts. Linear models estimate the direction and magnitude of association, with diagnostics for specification and residual behaviour as reported above. 4. RESULTS Assessing the impact of PPP investments on socioeconomic and security factors in lowand middleincome countries The level of PPP development, as well as the approaches to its implementation, vary significantly across countries. Key differences include different approaches to legislative definition and regulation, varying degrees of private sector involvement, and different priority sectors. This may be the result of a variety of factors, including available economic opportunities, government priorities, institutional capacity, investment attractiveness, etc. Accordingly, the volume of investment in PPPs varies significantly, as evidenced by statistical data on the amount of investment in PPP projects (Figure 1). Figure 1: Top 10 countries surveyed by total investment in PPP projects for 1999-2023 Source: calculated and graphed by the author based on [25] 39492.52 40288.276 47761.55101 60985.61 68559.287 69546.362 110335.76 232818.915 328517.2401 380296.196 0 100000 200000 300000 400000 Turkey Colombia Mexico Russian Federation China Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology 15th December 2025. Vol.103. No.23 © Little Lion Scientific ISSN: 1992-8645 www.jatit.org E-ISSN: 1817-3195 9729 The criterion for inclusion in the sample of the studied countries was belonging to lowand middleincome countries. Therefore, Figure 1 does not include such world leaders in the field of PPPs as, for example, the UK. This approach ensured better comparability of countries and the relevance of the analysis results for Ukraine. Figure 1 shows Brazil, China and India had the highest level of investment in PPPs that among lowand middle-income countries. PPP projects in these countries are implemented mainly in the transport and infrastructure sectors, and the energy sector. As noted above, the development of PPPs in countries can be determined by various factors. However, it is also possible to assume an inverse relationship: the volume of PPPs can affect various macroeconomic indicators. This assumption can be tested by analysing the relationship between the volume of investment in PPPs and a number of macroeconomic indicators. This will give grounds for making assumptions about the impact of PPP development (depending on its financing) on various political, economic, social, security, and other aspects. Table 1 presents the results of the correlation analysis between the volume of investment in PPPs for the sample of studied countries and selected macroeconomic indicators. Table 1: Results of the correlation analysis between the volume of investment in PPPs for the sample of studied countries and socio-economic and security indicators Indicator Sum of Total Investment Productivity 0.154686 Health Expenditure 0.120125 Education 0.060655 Inflation 0.077231 Political Risk -0.18815 Control of Corruption 0.159332 Energy Intensity -0.26097 GHG Emissions -0.02085 Water Stress 0.032532 Urbanization Rate -0.13802 Logistics 0.603578* Internet Usage 0.028331 Climate Risk Exposure -0.24501 Climate Risk Quality 0.099337 Climate Change Exposure -0.2327 Seismic Risk Exposure 0.292776 Fire Risk Quality 0.446485* Cybersecuirty 0.341872* Military Strength -0.53917* Source: calculated by the author based on [25; 26; 27] *statistically significant relationship The results of the correlation analysis show that there is a statistically significant moderate and medium relationship between the investment volume and the Logistics, Fire Risk Quality, Cybersecurity, Military Strength indicators. A “minus” sign in front of the correlation rate with Military Strength is explained by the fact that this indicator is inverse: the lower the value, the higher the military strength. Accordingly, it can be stated that the relationship with all indicators is in fact direct: the growth of PPP investments is accompanied by the development and improvement of indicators. It can be assumed that the development of relevant areas that are critical for national security (logistics, fire safety, cybersecurity, Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology 15th December 2025. Vol.103. No.23 © Little Lion Scientific ISSN: 1992-8645 www.jatit.org E-ISSN: 1817-3195 9730 military strength) depends to a certain extent on PPP investments. A more in-depth analysis of the relationship between these indicators was carried out using the multiple linear regression method. The dependent indicators in the regression models were Logistics, Fire Risk Quality, Cybersecurity, Military Strength, and the independent indicator was the volume of investment in PPPs. Table 2 presents the results of the regression analysis. Table 2: Results of the regression analysis of the impact of the total volume of investment in PPPs Coefficients Std Err LCL UCL t Stat p - value H0 (5%) VIF TOL Beta Dependent variable – Military Strength; R = 0.5392, Adjusted R - Squared = 0.2678 Intercept 1.6334 0.1616 1.3038 1.9630 10.1068 2.4851E - 11 Rejected Sum of Total Investment - 0.000006 1.6013E - 6 - 8.9737E - 6 - 2.4420E - 6 - 3.5645 0.0012 Rejected 1.0000 1.0000 - 0.5392 Dependent variable – Logistics; R = 0.6036, Adjusted R - Squared = 0.3438 Intercept 27.3129 2.3953 22.4276 32.1981 11.4026 1.2752E - 12 Rejected Sum of Total Investment 0.0001 2.3733E - 5 5.1629E - 5 0.0001 4.2149 0.0002 Rejected 1.0000 1.0000 0.6036 Dependent variable – Fire Risk Quality; R = 0.4465, Adjusted R - Squared = 0.1735 Intercept 25.4742 4.1117 17.0883 33.8602 6.1955 7.0440E-7 Rejected Sum of Total Investment 0.0001 4.0739E - 5 3.0094E - 5 0.0002 2.7782 0.0092 Rejected 1.0000 1.0000 0.4465 Source: calculated by the author based on [25; 26; 27] The model for Cybersecurity did not reveal a statistically significant relationship between the variables and was excluded from further analysis. In contrast, the models for Military Strength, Logistics, and Fire Risk Quality showed that the amount of investment in PPPs can have a statistically significant impact on the dependent variables. It should be noted that the resulting models have moderate explanatory power, and therefore their use for predicting the dependent indicator is limited. However, the models provide an idea of the strength and direction of the influence of the independent variable on the dependent indicators. Moreover, they show to what extent the change in the level of these indicators can be explained by the volume of investment in PPPs. So, the following conclusions can be drawn from the results of the regression analysis: - an increase in investment in PPP by $1 million causes an increase in the Logistics indicator by 0.0001, with the change in the amount of investment explaining more than 34% of the variation in this indicator; - an increase in investment in PPP by $1 million causes an increase in the Military Strength indicator by 0.000006, with the change in the investment volume explaining about 27% of the variation in this indicator; - an increase in investment in PPP by $1 million causes an increase in the Fire Risk Quality indicator by 0.0001, with the change in the investment volume explaining about 17% of the variation in this indicator. So, the volume of investment in PPPs in in lowand middle-income countries plays a significant role in the development of logistics, increasing military strength, and ensuring fire safety. However, despite the identification of a certain correlation with cybersecurity, the impact of the volume of investment in PPPs on this indicator was not confirmed by regression analysis. Cybersecurity is a critically important component of information security, as it prevents malicious interference in information systems and ensures the protection of classified data. Accordingly, the results of the analysis show that despite the significant role of PPPs in ensuring certain aspects of national security, the information security sector remains underrepresented among investment priorities. Figure 2 shows the ratio of total investment in PPPs in the studied countries to investment in ICT projects. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology 15th December 2025. Vol.103. No.23 © Little Lion Scientific ISSN: 1992-8645 www.jatit.org E-ISSN: 1817-3195 9731 Figure 2: Ratio of investment in PPP projects in the ICT sector to investment in other PPP projects Source: calculated and graphed by the author based on [25] Figure 2 shows that the share of investments in PPP projects in the ICT sector is only 3%. It should be noted that ensuring information security may involve investments in other areas (critical infrastructure, energy, etc.). However, ICT projects are one of the key indicators of digital development to counter information threats. The low share of such projects in total investments in the PPP sector confirms that ensuring information security, in particular, cybersecurity, is not a priority for PPPs. International experience in using PPPs in the defence sector The results of the analysis of the impact of PPP investments on the socio-economic and security indicators of lowand middle-income countries should be analysed through the prism of the experience of developed countries. In particular, the case of European countries will help to identify the prerequisites for the successful implementation of large PPP projects in the field of infrastructure, cybersecurity, and defence. First of all, it is worth noting that not all European countries are actively developing PPPs, especially in the defence sector. Figure 3 shows PPP investments in the defence sector for the Europe’s leading countries in this field. Figure 3: Total value and number of PPP projects in European countries in the defence sector for 1994-2021, milliard euros Source: graphed by the author based on [28] 1658390.373 97% 51785.52 3% Other Investment Sum of Total Investment in ICT 0.06 1.85 0.401 0.385 15.367 1 532 42 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Belgium France Germany Netherlands United Kingdom Total value of PPP projects Number of PPP projects Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology 15th December 2025. Vol.103. No.23 © Little Lion Scientific ISSN: 1992-8645 www.jatit.org E-ISSN: 1817-3195 9732 Figure 3 shows that the UK is the absolute leader among European countries in terms of investment in PPPs and the total number of PPP projects in the defence sector. The country’s successful projects in the field of cybersecurity include the Industry 100 (i100) and the Cyber Security Information Sharing Partnership (CiSP). The i100 ensures the integration of talent from the public and private sectors into the work of the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), identifying systemic vulnerabilities and reducing the impact of cyberattacks. CISP is a platform for cybersecurity professionals in the United Kingdom, where they can collaborate on cyber threat information in a secure and confidential environment. Moreover, the UK’s experience proves that private sector participation is possible even in the creation of the most sensitive military infrastructure. An example of this is the headquarters of the UK’s Intelligence, Security and Cybersecurity Agency [1]. The technical distribution of projects in the PPP area shows a different cost structure between countries. High-cost infrastructure facilities dominate the UK, while France and Germany have a greater focus on digital data exchange platforms. Comparative analysis shows that the increase in the share of ICT projects correlates with a higher index of cyber stability of the state. In general, infrastructure and equipment are the main categories of expenditure for which PPPs are commonly used in the security and defence sector in European countries. However, long-term maintenance costs are usually included in the PPP agreement, so the potential for PPPs is greater than infrastructure costs alone [1]. Figure 4 shows the distribution of defence PPP projects by value in European countries. Figure 3 shows that the largest shares of investment in PPP projects in the defence sector are for the construction of premises, equipment, headquarters. The share of ICT is 10%, which is a significantly higher value compared to lowand middle-income countries. Figure 4 shows the distribution of PPP projects in the defence sector of European countries by number. As Figure 4 illustrates, the largest shares of investment in PPP projects in the defence sector are directed for the construction of premises, equipment, headquarters. The share of ICT is 10%, which is a significantly higher value compared to lowand middle-income countries. Figure 5 shows the distribution of PPP projects in the defence sector of European countries by number. Figure 4: Types of PPP projects in the field of defence in European countries by cost Source: graphed by the author based on [1] Figure 5: Types of PPP projects in the field of defence in European countries by number Source: graphed by the author based on [1]