Risk Register¶
Risks specific to the KRG Digital Real Estate & Municipality Platform. Each risk is scored on likelihood (15) and impact (15), producing a risk score (L I). Risks with score >= 12 are critical.
8.1 Risk Matrix¶
| # | Risk | Likelihood | Impact | Score | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 | Legacy property data quality paper deeds are damaged, incomplete, contradictory, or missing | 5 | 5 | 25 | Phase 0 property records assessment across all 4 governorates. Multi-pass OCR + human review. Quarantine system for unresolvable records. Accept that some records will need in-person verification. |
| R2 | Legal framework delays laws enabling digital property transfers, digital signatures for deeds, and electronic records admissibility are not passed in time | 4 | 5 | 20 | Engage legal advisors in Phase 0. Draft legislation early. Design system to work in parallel with paper until laws pass. Run pilot under ministerial decree if parliamentary process is slow. |
| R3 | GIS data accuracy digitized parcel boundaries do not match reality on the ground | 4 | 4 | 16 | Field verification program: surveyors validate a sample of digitized parcels. Community feedback mechanism for citizens to flag boundary errors. Clearly mark confidence levels on GIS data. |
| R4 | Surveyor / GIS specialist shortage insufficient qualified GIS professionals to digitize parcels at required pace | 4 | 4 | 16 | Start GIS training program in Phase 0. Partner with universities for internship pipeline. Consider outsourcing initial bulk digitization to specialized GIS firms. Use satellite imagery to accelerate rough digitization. |
| R5 | KRG-Road dependency shared interoperability platform is delayed, or external systems (Civil Status, Tax, Notary) are not ready for integration | 3 | 5 | 15 | Design all integrations with graceful degradation. Core property services work standalone without KRG-Road (manual identity verification fallback). Engage KRG-Road team early. Formal SLAs for integration readiness. |
| R6 | Citizen adoption property owners and real estate professionals continue using paper processes despite digital availability | 3 | 4 | 12 | Awareness campaigns (TV, social media, mosques). In-person training at service centers. Incentivize digital: faster processing, lower fees for online transactions. Gradual mandatory transition (soft deadline hard deadline). |
| R7 | Security breach / data leak unauthorized access to property records, ownership data, or transaction details | 2 | 5 | 10 | Zero-trust architecture, RBAC, encryption at rest and in transit, SIEM monitoring, quarterly penetration testing, immutable audit trail. (See Security Model, Section 7 of Blueprint.) |
| R8 | Staff resistance property office staff resist digital transformation, preferring existing manual processes | 3 | 3 | 9 | Involve staff early in design. Hands-on training before launch. Show how system makes their job easier. Address job security concerns directly system augments, does not replace. Incentive structure for top adopters. |
| R9 | Infrastructure reliability power outages, network failures, or datacenter issues affecting system availability | 2 | 4 | 8 | We consume shared datacenter infrastructure (dual power, redundant network). Service centers have UPS + 4G failover. Design for degraded-mode operation (essential services continue during partial outages). |
| R10 | Budget overrun development costs exceed estimates due to scope creep or unforeseen technical challenges | 3 | 3 | 9 | Fixed-scope phases with clear deliverables. 15% contingency allocated. Monthly budget reviews. Change control process for any scope additions. |
| R11 | Vendor lock-in dependency on specific technology vendors creates long-term cost and flexibility risks | 2 | 3 | 6 | All core components are open-source (PostgreSQL, Keycloak, Kafka, Kubernetes). No proprietary cloud dependencies. Full documentation and knowledge transfer during Phase 4. |
| R12 | Duplicate / conflicting ownership claims multiple people claim ownership of the same parcel during digitization | 4 | 4 | 16 | Flag all parcels with conflicting claims for legal review. Do not auto-assign ownership when disputed. Create dispute resolution workflow integrated with courts. Report disputed parcels to leadership for prioritization. |
| R13 | Political / institutional changes changes in KRG government priorities, leadership, or ministry structure | 2 | 4 | 8 | Design platform to be ministry-agnostic (it serves property sector, not a single ministry). Ensure contract terms survive government changes. Build broad stakeholder coalition. |
8.2 Risk Heat Map¶
mermaid quadrantChart title Risk Heat Map x-axis Low Impact --> High Impact y-axis Low Likelihood --> High Likelihood quadrant-1 Critical Immediate action quadrant-2 Monitor High likelihood quadrant-3 Accept Low priority quadrant-4 Mitigate High impact R1 Legacy Data: [0.95, 0.95] R2 Legal Delays: [0.95, 0.75] R3 GIS Accuracy: [0.75, 0.75] R4 GIS Staff: [0.75, 0.75] R5 KRG-Road Dep: [0.95, 0.55] R12 Ownership Disputes: [0.75, 0.75] R6 Adoption: [0.75, 0.55] R10 Budget: [0.55, 0.55] R8 Staff Resist: [0.55, 0.55] R7 Security: [0.95, 0.35] R9 Infrastructure: [0.75, 0.35] R13 Political: [0.75, 0.35] R11 Vendor Lock: [0.55, 0.35]
8.3 Risk Review Process¶
- Monthly: Project manager reviews all risks, updates likelihood/impact scores based on new information
- Per phase gate: Full risk review before approving phase transition
- Trigger-based: Any new risk identified by any team member is logged within 24 hours
- Escalation: Risks with score >= 15 are reported directly to KRG steering committee