IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/idn/wpaper/wp212025.html

Risk Management In Digital Central Bank: Strengthening The Transformation Of Idcb

Author

Listed:
  • Cicilia Anggadewi Harun

    (Bank Indonesia)

  • Danny Hermawan

    (Bank Indonesia)

  • Citra Amanda

    (Bank Indonesia)

  • Annes Nisrina Khoirunnisa

    (Bank Indonesia)

Abstract

Amid the rapid progression of the digital transformation era, central banks are increasingly expected to not only harness emerging opportunities but also navigate and manage the growing complexity of associated risks in an effective and systematic manner. This study aims to identify and analyze optimal risk mitigation strategies within the context of digital transformation, employing a systems thinking approach and the Bayesian Network (BN) method. The risks analyzed are categorized into five main types: technological, financial, regulatory, cultural, and operational risks. We surveyed the officers in charge in IT risk mitigation to indicate the initial level of optimal risk mitigation for the high classification and medium classification as a starting point and to gain the parameters for the dynamics. Operational risk emerges as the most dominant factor influencing mitigation effectiveness, thereby underscoring the need to prioritize strong internal governance arrangements. This is followed by technological risk, which is an inseparable aspect of the digital transformation process, thus requiring the strengthening of infrastructure and cybersecurity. Scenario analysis using expert judgment can simulate an increase in optimal mitigation by strengthening six key risk nodes. Furthermore, a combination of low technological risk, enhanced system security, low third-party risk, and reduced cybersecurity vulnerabilities is shown to be the most influential set of factors driving effective mitigation. These findings underscore the importance of structured and sustainable mitigation strategies, particularly in strengthening digital security systems and operational risk management, to ensure a secure and sustainable digital transformation within central banks, or public institutions in general.

Suggested Citation

  • Cicilia Anggadewi Harun & Danny Hermawan & Citra Amanda & Annes Nisrina Khoirunnisa, 2025. "Risk Management In Digital Central Bank: Strengthening The Transformation Of Idcb," Working Papers WP/21/2025, Bank Indonesia.
  • Handle: RePEc:idn:wpaper:wp212025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://publication-bi.org/repec/idn/wpaper/WP212025.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2025
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Senge, Peter M. & Sterman, John D., 1992. "Systems thinking and organizational learning: Acting locally and thinking globally in the organization of the future," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 137-150, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Soraya Tanure & Carlos Nabinger & João Luiz Becker, 2015. "Bioeconomic Model of Decision Support System for Farm Management: Proposal of a Mathematical Model," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(6), pages 658-671, November.
    2. Nicholas C. Georgantzas & Evangelos G. Katsamakas, 2008. "Information systems research with system dynamics," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 24(3), pages 247-264, September.
    3. Thomas A. Tsalis & Ioannis E. Nikolaou, 2017. "Assessing the Effects of Climate Change Regulations on the Business Community: A System Dynamic Approach," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(6), pages 826-843, September.
    4. Lalani, Baqir & Aminpour, Payam & Gray, Steven & Williams, Meredith & Büchi, Lucie & Haggar, Jeremy & Grabowski, Philip & Dambiro, José, 2021. "Mapping farmer perceptions, Conservation Agriculture practices and on-farm measurements: The role of systems thinking in the process of adoption," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    5. Miragliotta, Giovanni, 2006. "Layers and mechanisms: A new taxonomy for the Bullwhip Effect," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 365-381, December.
    6. Hosang Jung & Sukjae Jeong, 2018. "The Economic Effect of Virtual Warehouse-Based Inventory Information Sharing for Sustainable Supplier Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-19, May.
    7. Shuang Lin & Tan Zhengtang, 2026. "AI Literacy Scale for Undergraduate Design Students: Development and Validation," SAGE Open, , vol. 16(2), pages 21582440261, June.
    8. Tanure, Soraya & Nabinger, Carlos & Becker, João Luiz, 2013. "Bioeconomic model of decision support system for farm management. Part I: Systemic conceptual modeling," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 104-116.
    9. Keilhacker, Michael L. & Minner, Stefan, 2017. "Supply chain risk management for critical commodities: A system dynamics model for the case of the rare earth elements," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 349-362.
    10. Federico Cosenz & Guido Noto, 2016. "Applying System Dynamics Modelling to Strategic Management: A Literature Review," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 703-741, November.
    11. Paich, Mark. & Sterman, John., 1992. "Boom, bust and failures to learn in experimental markets," Working papers 3441-92., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    12. Pasaoglu, Güzay, 2011. "Using the decentralized and liberalized electricity market microworld (LEMM) as an educational tool," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 187-199, January.
    13. repec:mgs:ijoied:v:1:y:2015:i:1:p:17-26 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Ariane Berthoin Antal & André Sobczak, 2014. "Culturally Embedded Organizational Learning for Global Responsibility," Post-Print hal-01074565, HAL.
    15. Whitney R. Garney & Kelly L. Wilson & Kristen M. Garcia & Daenuka Muraleetharan & Christi H. Esquivel & Mandy N. Spadine & Sonya Panjwani & Kobi V. Ajayi, 2022. "Supporting and Enabling the Process of Innovation in Public Health: The Framework for Public Health Innovation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-11, August.
    16. Grace Yeeun Lee & Ian Bernard Hickie & Jo-An Occhipinti & Yun Ju Christine Song & Salvador Camacho & Adam Skinner & Kenny Lawson & Samuel J. Hockey & Adriane Martin Hilber & Louise Freebairn, 2022. "Participatory Systems Modelling for Youth Mental Health: An Evaluation Study Applying a Comprehensive Multi-Scale Framework," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-18, March.
    17. Andreas Größler & Frank H. Maier & Peter M. Milling, 2000. "Enhancing Learning Capabilities by Providing Transparency in Business Simulators," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 31(2), pages 257-278, June.
    18. Pradeep Rai & Sosheel S. Godfrey & Christine E. Storer & Karl Behrendt & Ryan H. L. Ip & Thomas L. Nordblom, 2025. "Unravelling Regenerative Agriculture’s Sustainability Benefits and Outcomes: A Scoping Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-19, January.
    19. Marika Tammeaid & Petri Virtanen & Jens Meyer, 2022. "Leadership meta-skills in public institutions," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 2(7), pages 1-16, July.
    20. Rodrigo Lozano & Michelle Y. Merrill & Kaisu Sammalisto & Kim Ceulemans & Francisco J. Lozano, 2017. "Connecting Competences and Pedagogical Approaches for Sustainable Development in Higher Education: A Literature Review and Framework Proposal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-15, October.
    21. repec:bcp:journl:v:9:y:2025:i:10:p:8036-8044 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Lukas, Bryan A. & Hult, G. Tomas M. & Ferrell, O. C., 1996. "A Theoretical Perspective of the Antecedents and Consequences of Organizational Learning in Marketing Channels," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 233-244, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • F55 - International Economics - - International Relations, National Security, and International Political Economy - - - International Institutional Arrangements
    • G32 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Financing Policy; Financial Risk and Risk Management; Capital and Ownership Structure; Value of Firms; Goodwill

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:idn:wpaper:wp212025. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Shinta Fitrianti or Jimmy Kathon (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/bigovid.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.