Selectionofriskresponsestrategy (method) isdoneusing the risk materiality/manageability matrix. Risk materiality/manageabilitymatrixgives an idea of possible priority strategiesfor risk response in the context of risk level materiality and risk manageability.

The scheme of response method selection using the risk materiality/manageability matrix is presented in the (fig. 14).

Figure 14. Presentation of priority risk response strategy (method) selection



Riskmanageabilityis assessed by expert judgement using the criteria with reference to influence area and company control, possible impact and control of risk factors (table 15)

Table 15.Risk response matrix.

Critical			Customer/Investor did not make planned scheduled financing of the supplier Customer/Investor did not make planned scheduled financing of the infrastructure owner Customer/Investor did not make planned scheduled financing of the carrier 2 Customer/Investor did not make planned scheduled financing of the carrier 3 Customer/Investor did not make timely delivery contract Customer/Investor did not make timely cargo storage and transshipment agreement Customer/Investor did not make timely transportation agreement
Significant	Due to climatic factors Carrier 3 cannot transfer Physical resources in planned volumes at target date Due to climatic factors Infrastructure owner cannot transfer Physical resources to Carrier 2 in planned volumes at target date Due to climatic factors Carrier 2 cannot accept Physical resources in planned volumes at target date Due to climatic factors Carrier 2 cannot transport Physical resources in planned volumes at target date Due to climatic factors Carrier 3 cannot accept Physical resources in planned volumes at target date Due to climatic factors Construction Contractor cannot execute works in planned volumes at target date Force-major for Carrier 2 Force-major for supplier Force-major for Carrier 1 Force-major for Infrastructure owner	Infrastructure owner did not supply Physical resources in planned volumes at target date Carrie 2 did not transport Physical resources in planned volumes at target date Due to improper coordination and lack of timely data Carrier 3 cannot accept Physical resources in planned volumes at target date Carrier 3 did not transport Physical resources in planned volumes at target date Due to improper coordination Infrastructure owner is not ready to accept Physical resources in planned volumes at target date Carrier 1 did not supply Physical resources in planned volumes at target date (moreover due to delay of shipment) Due to improper coordination and lack of timely data Carrier 2 cannot accept Physical resources in planned volumes at target date Due to poor qualification of Carrier 2 the physical resources were partially or completely damaged Carrier 2 provided Physical resources of poor quality Due to improper process coordination Carrier 3 transported physical resources to a wrong destination point Carrier 3 provided Physical resources of poor quality Due to poor qualification of Construction Contractor the physical resources were partially or completely damaged Due to lack of coordination Carrier 3 transported physical resources to a wrong destination point	Customer/Investor did not make timely contraction agreement Customer/Investor did not make financing of Construction Contractor in planned volumes at target date Customer/Investor did not make timely transportation agreement
Minor	Due to climatic factors the Physical resources, stored or reshipped at the Infrastructure owner, were partially or completely damaged 1 Commercial risks of supplier Commercial risks of Carrier 1 Commercial risks of Infrastructure owner Commercial risks of Carrier 2 Commercial risks of Carrier 3 Commercial risks of Construction Contractor Due to climatic factors the Physical resources, transported by Carrie 3, were partially or completely damaged Force-major for Carrier 3 Force-major for Construction Contractor Intended counter-effort of 3 parties against Carrier 1 Intended counter-effort of 3 parties against Infrastructure owner Intended counter-effort of 3 parties against Carrier 2 Intended counter-effort of 3 parties against Carrier 3 Intended counter-effort of 3 parties against Construction Contractor	Supplier did not submit Physical resources in time Due to improper coordination and lack of timely data Infrastructure owner cannot transfer Physical resources in planned volumes at target date Carrier 2 is not ready to accept Physical resources in planned volumes at target date Infrastructure owner supplied cargo of poor quality (defective) Carrier 3 is not ready to accept Physical resources in planned volumes at target date Due to improper process coordination Carrier 2 transported physical resources to a wrong destination point Construction contractor is not ready to accept Physical resources in planned volumes at target date Due to poor qualification of Carrier 3 the physical resources were partially or completely damaged Carrier 1 supplied physical resources (partially) of poor quality (defective) Infrastructure owner (station/port) is not ready to accept Physical resources in planned volumes at target date Due to improper coordination and lack of timely data Construction contractor cannot accept Physical resources in planned volumes at target date
	Low	Medium	High



Conditions for risk response strategy (method) application as well as possible list of risk management measures, which can be implemented within application of risk response strategy (method), are listed in the table16.

To implement the selected risk response method (except for risk acceptance) the risk management measures should be developed, ensuring implementation of the selected response method. List of risk management measures, which can be implemented within application of risk response strategy (method)is presented in the table 16.

Table 16.Risk response strategies (methods)

Response method	Application conditions	Examples of risk control measures
Avoidance	Red area risk (matrix top right corner) of the risk matrix; Use of other response methods is impossible or makes no sense for a number of reasons	Rejection of business, process or execution of part of works (under the project); Change of requirements to scope and terms of works; Rejection of cooperation with contractors, suppliers, materials and technologies, and other
Decrease	Red or yellow area risk; Risk can be decreased by means of risk decreasing measures; Use of decreasing strategy makes more sense than application of other strategies.	Process regulation, increase of procedure control; Execution of additional processes; Creation of security barriers and protection systems; Careful choice of equipment, technologies, materials; Selection and training of staff, differentiation of duties, confirming liability, limitation of authorities, access restriction.
Transfer	Red or yellow area risk in the risk matrix; Risk can be assessed quantitatively, there are counter parties ready to accept the risk for reasonable remuneration; Risk transfer method makes more sense than use of other strategies.	Insurance; Outsourcing; Alteration of contract conditions.
Acceptance	Yellow or green area risk in the risk matrix; Use of other control strategies for yellow area risks is not possible	Cover of losses from current monetary assets or borrowings; Back up; Self-insurance.

Thepresentstudyfocusesonrisks, appearing andrising as a result of thesupplyscheme optimization, described in section 2.2. Upon analyses and estimation of possible measures for control and compensation of their negative effect, we can assess the financial costs of elimination inclusively(See calculation in annex 5).

Upon results of assessment of risk elimination costs, arising due to optimization of the supply chain, the additional costs for offsetting which is 172,752,798 rubles andabout3% (See calculation in annex 5) of the transportation logistics costs (5,256,338,000 rubles). Optimization of the supply chain for the 1st part of the Cross-country gas pipeline “Power of Siberia” gives 10% cost saving for transportation logistics.Thus, thereispositiveeconomiceffectresultingfromthesupply scheme optimization.

Nevertheless,itshouldbenoted, thatcontinuous risk monitoring is of great importance for implementation of logistical support projects in pipeline construction, as well as the follow-up of balance (ratio) of cost saving due to optimization and inevitable increase and occurrence of new related risks, causing extra expenditures.

- On the one side, it is necessary to settle a block of tasks addressing optimization of inventory stocks, studied in the 1st chapter of the present paper, within assessment of specific character of logistics for the international Oil and gas construction objects.

- On the other side, control of costs and deadlines should assume continuous follow-up of risk component, caused by such optimization, for each separate construction site and cost of its management/offsetting.

Forexample, economiceffectofexcessiveoptimizationwith regard to logistic component will be reduced to zero due to increase of other project costs. Moreover, someofthemostrisk-relateddecisionscanmake it business unviable altogether. Onthecontrary, reasonableoptimizationsaves substantial volume of inventories and life capabilities.

2.5 Monitoringofrisksandstatus of risk control measures

Monitoring ofrisksandstatusofriskcontrolmeasures (hereinafter - riskandmeasuresmonitoring) assumes regular update of data on risks and status of risk control measures, and is done by means of assessment of the current risk level and the residual risks level. Monitoring of risks and measures allows to:

- Identify new risks;

- Maketimelyrevaluation of risk materiality;

- Analyze efficiency of measures taken for risk management;

- Accumulatedataonmaterialized risks;

- Accumulatedata (experience) formakingdecisions on risk assessment, selection of methods and ways of risk management

- Riskandmeasuresmonitoringtarget is reasonable guarantee that:

- allrisksareundercontrol;

- newrisksaretimelyidentified;

- risks are offset by adequate response methods and risk management measures;

- the deadlines for riskmanagementmeasuresare kept;

- resource provision of risk management measures is efficient;

- risk assessment takes regard of occurred substantial changes of factors

- Control system is arranged under the below principles:

- maximum focus on key project risks and separate parts of logistic chain;

- updateofreportingdataon risk management

Risk control is based on the inherent risk matrix, implying analyses and assessment of detected logistical risks of the project (fig.15) and the residual risk matrix (fig.16). Comparison of inherent and residual risks matrix allows visualization of risk management results, identification of number of the most relevant risks, which are not managed efficiently or require development and implementation of additional risk management measures by the time of the risk matrix arrangement.

Figure 15.Risk response presentation

Figure 16.Residual risk matrix presentation



Based on analyses of the inherent risks matrix, presented in figure 16., we conclude that 3 groups of risks (yellow area) are deemed to be a threat and require attention on behalf of the Management and response in order to decrease up to acceptable level. As above stated, the yellow matrix area contains risks, requiring management measures with economic efficiency principle applied, the green area shows risks of no substantial threat for objective achievement.

Example of the residual risks matrix is presented in figure 16. Upon results of reassessment and analyses the residual risks matrix depicts risks after applicationoftheirmanagementmeasures. Asallthestudiedlogisticalrisksoftheproject (arisingorincreasingasaresultofsupplyschemeoptimizationandtransportationlogisticscostssaving)arelocatedintheyellowandgreenareasoftheriskmatrixuponresultsoftheperformedanalyses, andassumeacceptanceasoneoftheresponsestrategiesinclusively, namelycoveringoflossesfromthecurrentmonetaryassetsorborrowings, orreservationofextrasources, calculated and included into the total costs of risk elimination, it is fair to say that upon results of risk management and minimization measures applied, the allocation of risks within the acceptable limits in the green area can be achieved.



Conclusion

Within the framework of this study to solve the tasks it was performed the followingtheset of steps:

- Review of domestic and foreign approaches to definition of logistics and supply chains management

- Analyses of specific character of the supply chain management in international oil and gas construction objects. Finally, the list of features, typical of such scale projects, was defined:

- Individuality and uniqueness of every construction site,

- Temporary character of infrastructural objects and working places,

- Lack of specialized warehouse in the construction site,

- Significant uncertainty factor,

- High level of cooperation.

- Review of different approaches to definition and classification of logistic costs in construction, as well as their cost cutting by way of supply chains optimization. The task for supply scheme optimization was completed based on the 1st site of construction of the international gas pipeline “Power of Siberia”. As a result we have got cost saving for Material Resources transportation in the amount of 10% of the transportation logistics budget.

- Review of approaches to definition of logistical risks, their identification, classification and analyses methods. Following the results of the studied methodologies, we suggested and tested the analytical logistical risks identification model (risks, arising and increasing due to supply chain optimization). Based on the 1st site of construction of the international gas pipeline “Power of Siberia” within the suggested model we identified (and consequently developed individual classifier of the project logistical risks), as well as performed preliminary risk assessment in the context of their occurrence probability and level of negative effect. Further we suggested the response procedures for elimination of negative effect of every risk and estimated their cost.

Comparison of achieved economy on MR transportation in the amount of 10% of the transportation logistics budget (due to supply chain optimization) and costs of the related logistical risks elimination in the amount of 3% of the same budget. Finally, we have not onlytested hypothesis that,optimization of the supply chain inevitably leads to an increase in logistics risks and as a result to a reduction in savings, and assessment of relevant logistics risks gives an opportunity to define limits of rational Supply Cain cost optimization, but also confirmed the economic feasibility of the transportation scheme optimization on the one part, and the importance of continuous risk component control, caused by such optimization, on the other part.

During the project logistical risks assessment, the author interviewed the top-managers of all companies - parties of the supply chain (See the questions of interview in annex 6)

Thedevelopedandtestedmodel, aswellasthe methods, proposedinthepresentpaper, canbeusedforanalysesofdecision practicability in the transportation logistics optimization sphere (in the context of economy/risk analysis) for the strategic construction projects at international level.

Limitations and Further development

Hereunderwetookanaimtoanalyzethestrategyofcostsavingforlogisticsoftheinternationalconstructionobjectbymeansofsupplyschemeoptimizationwithdueregardofincreaseandoccurrenceofnewlogisticalrisks, causingextracostsforeliminationofnegative effect.

Thekeyrestraint of the study is focus on logistical risks, occurring and increasing as a result of optimization

Thepresentpaperdoesnotcoversocial-economicandpoliticalaspects, implying occurrence of budget increase or schedule overrun risks.

Theappliedsenseofthepresentpaperistheweightedestimateofsupply chains optimization practicability in the international construction objects in the context of increasing and new arising risks.

Thepresentstudyandtheanalyticalmodel,developedhereunder,canbefurtherenlargedthroughreviewofdependence on reputational and consequent commercial risks, caused by cost optimization for logistics and construction in the international oil and gas construction object. Asaresult, itisfairtospeakabouttheeconomicfeasibility and applicability of cost saving optimization in the context of the risk component at international level within the enterprise development strategy.



References

Books

1. Christopher M. Understanding Supply Chain Risk: A Self-Assessment Workbook. Department for Transport-Crantield University, Cranfield University - 2003, 54 p.

2. Cleden D. Managing project uncertainty. Abingdon: Ashgate Publishing Group, 2009.

3. Cleland, D.I., Gareis, R. Global Project Management Handbook: Planning, Organizing, and Controlling International Projects, 2nd Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2006.

4. Gould F.E, Joyce N.E, Construction project management. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2002.

5. Nagorny V.P., Globa V.M. Main Pipelines: Study Guide, in Nagorny V.P. (ed.). Kiev. Institute of Geophysics, 2012

6. Багиева М.Н., Ценина Т.Т. Риски в коммерческой деятельности: Учебное пособие - СПБ.: Изд-во СПбГУЭФ, 2004

7. Балабанов И.Т. Риск-менеджмент.-М.: Финансы и статистика, 1996.

8. Бочкарев А.А. Планирование и моделирование цепи поставок. Альфа-Пресс, 2008г. - 192с.

9. Бродецкий Г.Л. , Гусев Д.А., Елин Е.А. Управление рисками в логистике. - Учебное пособие. Изд-во «Академия», 2010., 192 с.

10. Бродецкий Г.Л. Моделирование логистических систем. Оптимальные решения в условиях риска - М.: Изд-во «Вершина», 2006 г., 376 с.

11. Бродецкий Г.Л. Управление рисками в логистике. - М.: Издательский центр «Академия», 2010., 192 с.

12. Бродецкий Г.Л. Экономико-математические методы и модели в исследованиях логистики. Потоки событий и системы обслуживания. - Учебное пособие, Изд-во «Академия», 2009. - 272 с.

13. Гаррисон А., Ван Гок Р. Логистика. Стратегия управления и конкурирования через цепочки поставо. пер. 3-го англ. изд. - М.: Дело и Сервис, 2010. - 368с.

14. Гатторнa Дж. Управление цепями поставок: Справочник издательства Gower/ Под ред. - М.: ИНФРА-М, 2008.

15. Джонсон Д.С. и др. Современная логистика. - М.: Вильямс, 2002г. - 343 с.

16. Дикман, Л. Г. Организация строительного производства : учебник для строительных вузов / Л. Г. Дикман. - 6-е изд., перераб. и доп. - М. : АСВ, 2009. - 608 с

17. Долгов А.П., Рыбнов Е.И. Логистика снабжения и запасов в строительстве: стратегии, методы, модели. - М.: Изд-во АСВ; СПб.: СПбГАСУ, 2003. - 232 с.

18. Дыбская В.В., Зайцев Е.И., Сергеев В.И., Стерлигова А.Н. Логистика: интеграция и оптимизация бизнес-процессов в цепях поставок. - М.: Эксмо, 2008, 944 с.

19. Дыбская В.В., Сергеев В.И. Логистика в 2-х частях: Учебник для бакалавриата и магистратуры. - М.: Юрайт, 2016. - ч.1 - 317с., ч. 2 - 341с.

20. Жаворонков Е.П. Эффективность логистики в строительстве. - М.: КИА центр, 2002. - 136 с.

21. Кеменов А. В. Логистика строительного комплекса: проблемы теории и практики: Монография. - М.: Издательский дом «Экономическая газета», 2012. - 320с.

22. Кристофер М. Логистика и управление цепочками поставок. Пер. с англ. - Спб.: Питер, 2004. 316с.

23. Линдерс, Майкл Р., Фирон, Харольд Е. Управление снабжением и запасами. Логистика. - СПб.: Виктория плюс, 2003. - 579с.

24. Лукинский В.С., Лукинский В.В., Плетнева Н.Г. Логистика и управление цепями поставок: учебник и практикум для академического бакалавриата. - М.: Юрайт, 2016. - 359с.

25. Миротин Л. Б., Сергеева В. И., Основы логистики: Учеб. пособие.-- М.: ИНФРА-М, 2000. -- 200 с.

26. Миротин Л.Б., Эффективность логистического управления: Учебник для вузов . -- М.: Издательство «Экзамен», 2004. - 448 с.

27. Некрасов, А.Г. Основы менеджмента безопасности цепей поставок: учеб. пособие/ А.Г. Некрасов.- МАДИ.- М., 2011.-130 с.

28. Нив Г.Р. Пространство доктора Деминга: Пер. с англ. - М: МГИЭТ (ТУ), 1996. 344 с.

29. Плетнева Н.Г. Управление рисками в логистике: учебное пособие / Н. Г. Плетнева. - СПб. : Изд-во СПбГЭУ, 2014. - 124 с.

30. Построение цепочки создания стоимости: Пер. с англ. - 2-е изд. - М.: ООО «Юнайтед Пресс», 2009. - 261с. (Серия «Классика Harvard Business Review»).

31. Сергеев В.И. Управление цепями поставок. - Учебник для бакалавров и магистров. - М.: Юрайт, 2014. - 479с.

32. Сергеева В.И. Корпоративная логистика в вопросах и ответах. Изд. 2-е пер. и доп. - М.: ИНФРА-М,2013. - 634с.

33. Стаханов В.Н., Ивакин Е.К. Логистика в строительстве: Учебное пособие. - М.: Изд-во ЇПРИОР?, 2001. - 176 с.

34. Сток Дж.Р., Ламберт Д.М. Стратегическое управление логистикой: Пер с 4-го англ. Изд. - М.: ИНФРА-М, 2005, XXXII, 797 с.

35. Шапиро Дж. Моделирование цепи поставок / Пер. с англ. под ред. В.С. Лукинского. - СПб.: Питер, 2006. 720с. (Серия «Теория менеджмента»).

36. Шатт Джеффри Г. Управление товарным потоком: руководство по оптимизации логистических цепочек. Пер. с англ. - Минск: Гривцов Паблишер, 2008. - 352с.

Articles

37. Baccarini D., Archer R., (2001) The risk ranking of projects: a methodology. International Journal of Project Management, 19 (3)

38. Cavinato, Joseph L. (2004) Supply chain logistics risks; From the back room to the board room. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 34 (5).

39. Chopra, S., Sodhi, M.S. (2004) Managing Risk to Avoid Supply-Chain Breakdown. MIT Sloan Management Review, 46(1).

40. Christopher M., Lee H. (2004) Mitigating Supply Chain Risk Through improved Confidence. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 34 (5).

41. Christopher M., Peck H. (2004) Building the Resilient Supply Chain. The International Journal of Logistics Management. 15 (2).

42. Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals. (2013) Supply Chain Management: Terms and Glossary

43. Darnall, R. Preston, J.M. (2010) Project Management from Simple to Complex. Flat World Knowledge, Inc.

44. Dziadosz A. (2013) The influence of solutions adopted at the stage of planning the building investment on the accuracy of cost estimation, Procedia Engineering 54.

45. Fuchs H., Wohinz J. W. (2009) Risk Management in Logistics Systems, Advances in Production Engineering & Management. - 4.

46. Hauser L.M., (2003) Risk-adjusted supply chain management. Supply Chain Management Review. № 7 (6).

47. Ivanov D., Tolkacheva V., Arkhipov A., Sokolov B. (2016) Stability analysis in the framework of decision making under risk and uncertainty. In: Proceedings of the 7. International Conference on Virtual Enterprises.

48. Juttner U. (2005). Supply Chain Risk Management Understanding the Business Requirements from a Practitioner Perspective. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 16.

49. Juttner, U., Peck, H., & Christopher, M. (2003). Supply Chain Risk Management: Outlining an agenda for future research. International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, 6 (4)

50. Kapliсski O., (2010) Risk analysis of construction projects: From risk identification to contingency timetable. The Fourth International Conference on Structural Engineering, Mechanics and Computation.

51. Kapliсski O., (2013) Risk Management of Construction Works by Means of the Utility Theory: a Case Study. Procedia Engineering 57.

52. Khashman TT (2013) Supply chain management. The humanitarian bulletin, 10;

53. Kuchta D., Skorupka D., (2012) Project risk management taking into consideration the influence of various risk levels based on linguistic approach. World Scientific Proc. Series on Computer Engineering and Information Science. 7

54. Marcinkowska E., Rejment M., (2006) Effect of risk on economic efficiency of overcladding system. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 12 (3)

55. Peck, H. (2006). Reconciling supply chain vulnerability, risk and supply chain management. International Journal of Logistics Research and Applications, 9 (2)

56. Ponis S.T., Koronis E. (2012) Supply chain resilience: definition of concept and its formative elements. The journal of applied business research. 28 (5).

57. Ponmaarov S.Y., Holcomb M.C. (2009) Understanding the concept of supply chain resilience. International Journal of Logistics Management. 20 (1).

58. Raz T., Michael E., (2001) Use and benefits of tools for project risk management. International Journal of Project Management 19

59. Rice J.B., Caniato F. (2003) Building a secure and resilient supply network. Supply Chain Management Review 7 (5).

60. Singhal P., Agarwal G., Mitta, M.L. (2011). Supply chain risk management: review, classification and future research directions. International Journal of Business Science and Applied Management. 6 (3).

61. Sokolov S.M., Shemyakin S.A. (2011) “The choice of pipeline routes and field roads in Western Siberia”, NEFTYANOE HOZIAYSTVO. 3;

62. Supply Chain Management Faculty at the University Of Tennessee (2014) Managing Risk in the global supply Chain. Report Global Supply Chain Institute.

63. Tummala V., Rao M., Burchett J. F., (1999). Applying a Risk Management Process (RMP) to manage cost risk for an EHV transmission line project. International Journal of Project Management. 17 (4).

64. Zhang G., Zou P.X.W., (2007) Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process Risk Assessment Approach for Joint Venture Construction Projects in China. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management 133 (10).

65. Zhang H. and Xing F., (2010). Fuzzy-multi-objective particle swarm optimization for time-cost- quality tradeoff in construction. Automation in Construction. 19, (8)

66. Адамов Н., Ермолов С. (2013) Модель повышения эффективности логистических процессов за счет минимизации критического времени проекта. РИСК: Ресурсы, информация, снабжение, конкуренция. 4.

67. Адамов Н., Ермолов С. (2013) Модель повышения эффективности логистических процессов за счет сокращения сопутствующих накладных расходов. РИСК: Ресурсы, информация, снабжение, конкуренция. 3.

68. Арский А.А. (2014) Управление внешними рисками логистических систем. Стратегии бизнеса. 1.

69. Арский А.А. (2014) Управление современными логистическими рисками. Управленческие науки в современной России. 2.

70. Белановский С.А. Глубокое интервью: Учебное пособие.. - М.: Никколо-Медиа, 2001 - 320 C.

71. Бородулина С.А., Соколов В.К. (2015) Классификация затрат при построении логистических цепей доставки. Логистика и управление цепями поставок 2 (67).

72. Брынцев А. Н. (2010) Логистическое поле как фактор рационального формирования строительного рынка России. Механизация строительства. 9.

73. Будрина Е.В. (2001) Проблема выявления, идентификации и оценки логистических рисков. Материалы международной конференции «Логистика в современном бизнесе». М.: Изд-во ГУ - ВШЭ, Международный центр логистики.

74. Дорохина Е. (2009) Некоторые аспекты управления оперативными рисками в строительной индустрии. РИСК: Ресурсы, информация, снабжение, конкуренция.1.

75. Дорохина Е. (2009) Риски строительных предприятий: актуальные вопросы управления. РИСК: Ресурсы, информация, снабжение, конкуренция.. № 1.

76. Иванов Д.А., Иванова М.А. (2008) Управление Событиями в Цепях Поставок. Логистика и управление цепями поставок. 6 (29).

77. Кичаева, Т.Ю. (2012) Причинно-следственный механизм реализации логистического риска и его классификация. Вестн. Самар. гос. экон. ун-та.10.

78. КОРНЕЕВА О.Н., (2018) Оптимизация логистики строительных проектов нефтегазовой отрасли посредством выбора модели материально технического обеспечения. Логистика и управление цепями поставок 1 (84)

79. Кривошеев А.Ю. (2014) Логистические риски организации смешанных перевозок в международных цепях поставок. Современные аспекты экономики. 5 (201).

80. Кулаговская Т.А. (2014) Управление логистическими рисками промышленных предприятий. Экономика, управление и инвестиции.1 (3).

81. Кулаговская Т.А., (2012) Анализ и оценка рисков в процессе управления товарно-материальными запасами. Вестник Северо-Кавказского гуманитарного института. 4.

82. Левина Т.В. (2015) Формирование системы управления логистическими рисками в цепях поставок строительных организаций, Дисс. на соиск. к.э.н. - М.: ИТКОР.

83. Левина Т.В., (2014) Актуальные задачи управления логистическими рисками. Логистика и управление цепями поставок 3.

84. Лукинский В. С., Плетнева Н. Г., Шульженко Т. Г. (2011)Теоретические и методологические проблемы управления логистическими процессами в цепях поставок. СПб. : СПбГИЭУ,.

85. Лукинский В.С., Чурилов Р.Л. (2012) Проблемы оценки надежности цепей поставок. Логистика и управление цепями поставок. 2.

86. Плетнева Н. Г., Власова Н. В. (2009) Развитие логистики в строительстве: особенности, перспективы, методы принятия решений. Проблемы современной экономики 2 (30).

87. Плетнева Н.Г.(2006) Анализ рисков логистики и цепей поставок: подход к классификации и алгоритм принятия решений. Вестник ИНЖЭКОНа. Серия: Экономика. Вып.4(13). СПб.: СПбГИЭУ.

88. Плетнева, Н. Г. (2013)Управление рисками в логистике на основе методологии контроллинга. Вестник ИНЖЭКОНа. Серия: Экономика. 6 (65).

89. Проценко О.Д., Цакаев А.Х., (2011) Методические аспекты оценки экономической эффективности управления логистическими рисками. Вопросы инновационной экономики. 5.

90. Сергеев В.И. (2007) Новое видение системы контроллинга логистических бизнес-процессов в цепи поставок. Логистика и управление цепями поставок.5,.

91. Сергеева В.И. Логистика. Практическая энциклопедия. М.: МЦФЭР, 2007, 1440 с.

92. Совета депутатов муниципального образования “Посёлок Пеледуй” Ленского района Республики Саха. (2006) Правила землепользования и застройки территории муниципального образования «Поселок Пеледуй» Ленского района Республики Саха (Якутия);

93. Сосунова Л.А., (2012) Систематизация рисков в логистических процессах строительства. Вестник Самарского государственного экономического университета.2 (88).

94. Стерлигов К., (2006) Механизмы управления рисками в логистике. Логистика&система, 4

95. Троилин В.В. Тыртышный Н.Н., (2012) Логистические риски в сфере перевозок грузов морским транспортом в Российской Федерации. Управление экономическими системами: электронный научный журнал.

96. Яхнеева И.В., (2011) Оценка издержек управления рисками логистических систем. Институты и механизмы инновационного развития: мировой опыт и российская практика, материалы Международной научно-практической конференции.

97. Яхнеева И.В., (2012) Организация управления рисками в цепях поставок. Экономическая система XXI века: новые подходы к управлению предприятиями, отраслями, комплексами.

98. Яхнеева И.В., (2013) Теория и методология управления рисками в системах поставок: автореф. дис. докт. экон. наук.

Internet resources

99. Gazprom official site http://www.gazprom.com/about/production/projects/pipelines/built/ykv/;

100. Yktimes.ru. (2013) В якутском поселке Витим построят причал выгрузки нефтепродуктов http://www.yktimes.ru/%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B8/v-yakutskom-poselke-vitim-postroyat-prichal-vyigruzki-nefteproduktov/

Annex

For the construction of one kilometer of a gas pipeline 1 thousand tons of pipe is required.

Table 1 Delivery cost of materials and equipment to the pipe-welding bases according to plan

Name	Unit	Sector 1 Chayanda	Sector 2	Sector 3	Sector 4	Sector 5	Sector 6	Sector 7	Sector 8	Port Lensk	Total
Volume of cargo transported	ton	25000	26000	26000	26000	26000	26000	26000	26000		207
Distance to the pipe welding base	km		182	156	130	104	78	52	26	20
The delivery cost of required volume of cargo to the pipe-welding base	thousand rubles	231 478	207 272	174 148	141 024	107 900	74 776	41 652	8 528		986 778

Table2 Delivery cost of materials and equipment to the pipe-welding bases according to proposed model

Name	Unit	Vitim/ Peleduy	Sector 1 Chayanda	Sector 2	Sector 3	Sector 4	Sector 5	Sector 6	Sector 7	Sector 8	Port Lensk	Total
Volume of cargo transported	ton		30000	29000	18000	26000	26000	26000	26000	26000		207
Distance (Vitim/Lensk) to the pipe welding base	km	153	30	29	148	130	104	78	52	26	20
Distance (Peleduy) to the pipe welding base		19	_	_	_	_	_	_	_	_	_
The delivery cost of required volume of cargo to the pipe-welding base	thousand rubles		75 276	124 433	120 564	141 024	107 900	74 776	41 652	8 528		694 153

In accordance with the initial data, we cannot start construction in the first year. This is due to the need to prepare a construction site (clearing the forest belt, mobilizing the contractors, creating a temporary technological infrastructure).That is why we have a choice for the first year, to accumulate a pipe on green field (in the taiga) on temporary storage bases or not to accumulate and build from two ends.Storage in port of Lensk and in temporary facilities ongreen field is technologically related operations. The cargo is gradually being delivered to the port of Lensk along the river during the summer navigation period. From Lensk to temporary facilities ongreen field it can be moved only in winter (By temporary winter road).

Table 1 Cost of temporary storage of all materials and equipment according to plan

Name	Unit	Quantity
The price of temporary storage of 1 ton of cargo in a warehouse in Lensk per day	rubles per day	8
Volume of the first consignment of stored cargo	ton	160 000
Term of temporary storage of the first consignment of cargo in a warehouse in Lensk	day	150
The cost of temporary storage of the first consignment of cargo in a warehouse in Lensk	thousands rubles	192 000
Volume of the second consignment of stored cargo	ton	62 000
Term of temporary storage of the second consignment of cargo in a warehouse in Lensk	day	150
The cost of temporary storage of the second consignment of cargo in a warehouse in Lensk	thousands rubles	74 400
The price of temporary storage of 1 ton of cargo in to temporary facilities on green field	rubles per day	4
Volume of the first consignment of cargo stored in to temporary facilities on green field	ton	160 000
Term of temporary storage of the first consignment of cargo in temporary facilities on green field	day	365
The cost of temporary storage of the first consignment of cargo in temporary facilities on green field	thousands rubles	233 600
Total cost of temporary storage of all volume of cargo	thousands rubles	500 000



Table 2 Cost of temporary storage of all materials and equipment according to proposed model

Name	Unit	Quantity
The price of temporary storage of 1 ton of cargo in a warehouse in Lensk per day	rubles per day	8
Volume of stored cargo	ton	160 000
Term of temporary storage of cargo in a warehouse in Lensk	day	150
The cost of temporary storage of cargo in a warehouse in Lensk	thousand rubles	192 000
The price of temporary storage of 1 ton of cargo in storage facilities in Vitim/ Peleduy	rubles per day	4
Volume of stored cargo	ton	62 000
Term of temporary storage of 1 ton of cargo in storage facilities in Vitim/ Peleduy	day	150
The cost of temporary storage of cargo in storage facilities in Vitim/ Peleduy	thousand rubles	37 200
Total cost of temporary storage of all volume of cargo	thousand rubles	229 200

Table 1 Shipping cost according to plan

Name	Unit	Quantity
Volume of cargo transported by river to port Lensk	ton	222 000
The cost of transportation by river to port Lensk	rubles per ton	16 980
The cost of delivering of cargo from the railway station in Ust-Kut by river transport to port Lensk	thousand rubles	3 769 560

Table2 Shipping cost according to proposed model

Name	Unit	Quantity
Volume of cargo transported by river to port Lensk	ton	160 000
The cost of transportation by river to port Lensk	rubles per ton	16 980
The cost of delivering of cargo from the railway station in Ust-Kut by river transport to port Lensk	thousand rubles	2 716 800
Volume of cargo transported by river to Vitim/ Peleduy	ton	62 000
The cost of transportation by river to Vitim/ Peleduy	rubles per ton	15 400
The cost of delivering of cargo from the railway station in Ust-Kut by river transport to Vitim/ Peleduy	thousand rubles	954 800
Total cost of transportation by river	thousand rubles	3 671 600



Table 1Total costs of supplying according to plan

Name	Unit	Costs
The delivery cost of required volume of cargo to the pipe-welding base	thousand rubles	986 778
Total cost of temporary storage of all volume of cargo	thousand rubles	500 000
The cost of delivering of cargo from the railway station in Ust-Kut by river transport to port Lensk	thousand rubles	3 769 560
Total costs of supplying pipe-welding bases by required materials and equipment	thousand rubles	5 256 338

Table 2Total costs of supplying according to proposed model

Name	Unit	Costs
The delivery cost of required volume of cargo to the pipe-welding base	thousand rubles	694 153
Total cost of temporary storage of all volume of cargo	thousand rubles	229 200
Total cost of transportation by river	thousand rubles	3 671 600
Construction of temporary storage facilities in Vitim/ Peleduy	thousand rubles	150 000
Total costs of supplying pipe-welding bases by required materials and equipment	thousand rubles	4 744 953

As the above mentioned supply chain is mostly sensitive to plan non-execution by Carrier 2 due to specifics of additional resources involvement (vessels are rented prior to the whole navigation period), and one vessel transports 1% of all supplied Physical resources per route, the minimum orderable cargo quantity is the quantity, transported by one vessel with ordinary loading, equal to 200 tons. Thus, risks are quantified through this quantity.

Since thepresentstudyfocusesonrisks, appearing and rising as a result of thesupplyscheme optimization, described in subchapter 2.2 we analyze and estimate possible measures for control and compensation of their negative effect, and can assess the financial costs of elimination inclusively. The effect of non-relevant due to optimization risks were excluded from analysis.

№	Risk	Subject or source of risk	Risk level	Risk response level	Risk management measures	Cost of risk offsetting	Change resulting from supply scheme optimization	Offsetting costs/management cargo 1 (rubles)	Offsetting costs/management cargo 2 (rubles)
5	Supplier didn't deliver Physical Resources in time	Carrier 1	Minor	Acceptance transfer	1. Reservation (Forward arrangement of reserve stock equal to 3% of the total cargo volume) (stored with the supplier) 2. Change of contract conditions (Penalties under the contract for obligation default)	Cost of 1 ton of Physical Resources * total cargo volume * % reserve stock * intrinsic value of money*risk occurrence probability	Increasing	7153920	1620000
6	Infrastructure owner (Station/port) is not ready to Physical Resources in planned volume on target date	Carrier 1	Minor	Acceptance transfer	Change of contract conditions (Penalties under the contract for obligation default)	0	Increasing	0	0
10	Carrier 1 didn't supply Physical Resources on target date in planned volume (more often due to delay of dispatch)*	Infrastructure owner	Substantial	Decrease / transfer / Acceptance	Cover of losses by current monetary assets or borrowings (emergency delivery of part of the reserve stock at express freight rate)	2* cost of Physical Resources	Increasing	79488000	18000000
17	Due to improper coordination Infrastructure owner is not ready to accept Physical Resources on target date in planned volume	Infrastructure owner	Substantial	Decrease / transfer / Acceptance	Cover of losses by current monetary assets or borrowings (Progressive rate for storage of the present cargo lot)	Storageandreshipment cost* 1,25	Increasing	248400	56250
19	Due to improper process coordination and lack of timely data the Infrastructure owner cannot transfer Physical Resources on target date in planned volume	Infrastructure owner	Substantial	Decrease / transfer / Acceptance	Cover of losses by current monetary assets or borrowings (Progressive rate for reshipment of the present cargo lot)	Storage and reshipment cost * 1,25	Increasing	99360	22500
21	Carrier 2 is not ready to accept Physical Resources on target date in planned volume	Infrastructure owner	Substantial	Decrease / transfer / Acceptance	Change of contract conditions (Penalties under the contract for obligation default)	0	Increasing	0	0
22	Infrastructure owner by his fault did not supply Physical Resources on target date in planned volume	Carrier 2	Substantial	Decrease / transfer / Acceptance	Change of contract conditions (Penalties under the contract for obligation default)	0	Increasing	0	0
28	Carrier 3 is not ready to accept Physical Resources on target date in planned volume 2 2	Carrier 2	Minor	Acceptance transfer	Change of contract conditions (Penalties under the contract for obligation default)	0	Increasing	0	0
32	Due to improper process coordination and lack of timely data Carrier 2 cannot accept Physical Resources on target date in planned volume 3 2	Carrier 2	Substantial	Decrease / transfer / Acceptance	Cover of losses by current monetary assets or borrowings (transportation at express freight rate)	2* transportation cost	Increasing	13248000	3000000
34	Due to improper process coordination Carrier 2 transported Physical Resources to a wrong destination point 1 3	Carrier 2	Minor	Acceptance	Cover of losses by current monetary assets or borrowings (transportation at express freight rate)	2* transportation cost	Increasing	5299200	1200000
35	Carrier 2 didn't transfer Physical Resources on target date in planned volume 3 2	Carrier 3	Substantial	Decrease / transfer / Acceptance	Change of contract conditions (Penalties under the contract for obligation default)	0	Increasing	0	0
42	Construction contractor is not ready to accept Physical Resources on target date in planned volume 1 2	Carrier 3	Minor	Acceptance transfer	Change of contract conditions (Penalties under the contract for obligation default)	0	Increasing	0	0
45	Due to improper process coordination and lack of timely data Carrier 3 cannot accept Physical Resources on target date in planned volume 4 2	Carrier 3	Substantial	Decrease / transfer / Acceptance	Cover of losses by current monetary assets or borrowings (transportation at express freight rate)	2* transportation cost	Increasing	21196800	4800000
48	Due to improper process coordination Carrier 3 transported Physical Resources to a wrong destination point 3 2	Carrier 3	Substantial	Decrease / transfer / Acceptance	Change of contract conditions (Penalties under the contract for obligation default)	0	Increasing	0	0
49	Carrier 3 didn't transfer Physical Resources on target date in planned volume 3 2	Construction contractor	Substantial	Decrease / transfer / Acceptance	Change of contract conditions (Penalties under the contract for obligation default)	0	Increasing	0	0
51	Customer/Investor didn't make financing on target date in planned volume 3 2	Construction contractor	Substantial	Decrease / transfer	Cover of losses by current monetary assets or borrowings (involvement of resources from other objects or borrowed resources)	9% (WACC or short-term bank loan) * cost of transportation services	Increasing	0	0
57	Due to improper process coordination and lack of timely data Constructional contractor is not ready to accept Physical Resources on target date in planned volume 1 2	Construction contractor	Minor	Acceptance	Cover of losses by current monetary assets or borrowings (payment under overtime rate)	2* cost of services	Increasing	39744	9000
59	Due to improper process coordination Carrier 3 Physical Resources to a wrong destination point 3 2	Construction contractor	Substantial	Decrease / transfer / Acceptance	Cover of losses by current monetary assets or borrowings (payment under overtime rate)	2* cost of services	Increasing	13248000	3000000

Offsetting cost for cargo 1 (140,856,048 rubles) + Offsetting cost for cargo 2 (31,896,750 rubles) = 172,752,798 rubles

Questions for Interview

1. What risks do you see for your company as for a participant of the supply chain of the first site of Power of Siberia main pipeline construction project?

2. How do the listed by you risks in your opinion relate to the risks for the project as a whole?

3. How do you assess the probability of the listed by you risks?

4. Please estimate the level of negative consequences for the project from each of the listed risks on a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 is minor and 5 is critical?

5. What measures do you think should be taken to prevent, manage or compensate the consequences of each risk listed by you?

Размещено на Allbest.ru

...