Route Selection for Minerals’ Transportation to Ensure Sustainability of the Arctic

Abstract

The article addresses the issues of route selection for minerals’ transportation based on social, economic, and environmental factors to ensure sustainability in the Arctic. The case of the Tomtor deposit of rare earth metals in Yakutia is considered in the paper. The authors analyze its impact on traditional lands and the environment. To ensure sustainability and to optimize the natural resources’ use for route selection for minerals’ transportation in the Arctic, a system of criteria is proposed. It covers not only the cost of transportation and the distance from the deposit to the processing point, but also the damage to traditional lands of indigenous peoples, and environmental and social risks. An algorithm for choosing the optimal solution for the conservation of natural resources and traditional lands during the transportation of minerals is proposed. It depends on the developed criteria. The proposed approaches can be used during industrial development and investment in the Arctic to optimize the routes of mineral resources’ transportation.

1. Introduction

In the Russian Arctic, there are many projects on exploration and mining. The Russian Arctic strategy is aimed to ensure national security and defines key priorities in industrial development [1]. One of such important large investment projects is the Tomtor deposit of rare earth metal—niobium, whose reserves amount to 154 million tons of ore.

The Arctic industrial development changes the landscape but also impacts traditional lands and indigenous communities’ traditional economic activities (reindeer herding, hunting, fishing, and gathering). Negative impacts appear in land degradation and water/air pollution that it is impossible to use for their intended purpose. Here, we talk about traditional nature use. Another type of land destruction is connected with infrastructure development—roads construction—resulting in the decrease in traditional lands productivity and threats to reindeer herding. All of these factors are expressed through the concept of damage or lost profits to indigenous peoples.

According to the government report on the environment protection in Russia at the beginning of 2021, the total area of disturbed lands in the Arctic amounted to 231.6 thousand hectares. They were formed mainly as a result of mining activities (78.8%) and construction work (18.8%) [2]. The issues of the Tomtor deposit are closely related to the regional sustainable development, environmental security, and indigenous community development in the Arctic Yakutia as well as reflect the Yakutia Arctic strategy adopted in 2020 [3]. Therefore, it is crucial to develop policies for rational land use, including territories of traditional nature [4].

It should be emphasized that the laws of Russia and other Arctic countries recognize the unique legal status of indigenous peoples. This refers to the right of indigenous peoples to lands and natural resources in the areas where they live, as well as their traditional means of subsistence and ethnic group preservation. In the Russian Arctic, particularly in Yakutia, areas of the traditional natural use are being formed for indigenous culture and their traditional economic activities preservation. Nowadays, there are legal mechanisms to prevent indigenous economic rights violation due to industrial development. One of them is the so-called ethnological expertise or impact assessment as a form of indigenous communities’ support. There is comprehensive scientific research on lost profit and potential damage to indigenous peoples due to the investment project. At the final stage, the decision-making on the possibility of its realization (or not) must be approved. If the decision is positive, the monetary compensation and other measures of community development must be implemented.

The Tomtor deposit is expected to yield 200,000 tons of ore per year, with its ensuing transportation for processing [5,6]. Obviously, the implementation of this large-scale project in the Arctic will be fraught with numerous environmental and climate-related risks [7,8,9]. It will have an impact on the traditional lands and economy of indigenous peoples [10,11,12,13]. Risk management and distribution strategies are being deeply researched in science. Some of them are devoted to the transportation of rare earth metal ore with enhanced radiation background. For instance, Tanackov et al. examined the distribution of risks in the delivery of hazardous materials in logistics subsystems [14]. The Northern Sea Route ports could be involved in Tomtor ore transportation. It is important to evaluate the risk of accidents and the pollution from hazardous cargo in ports [15]. In addition, maritime supply chain risk assessment concerning Arctic extreme weather must be performed as well [16]. A risk-analysis-based routing methodology serves as the theoretical basis of the paper [17]. Similar approaches to selecting routes for transportation of dangerous goods, based on risk criteria, are considered in [18,19,20]. The study of Homayounfar is devoted to compromises between sustainability and efficiency in socioecological systems management [21].

Goldstein et al. [22] analyzed various cargo transportation routes using the cases of six coastal cities in Norway: Bergen, Bode, Hammerfest, Kirkenes, Narvik, and Tromsø, to assess their relative competitiveness. In this paper, various routes of cargo transportation (by sea, road, and rail) are analyzed. It is proposed to consider two indicators: transportation costs and generated CO₂ emissions. Modeling such emissions is proposed to be carried out depending on fuel consumption (distance traveled) for a given vessel (cargo and route) and ground transport. It is assumed that traffic along the Northern Sea Route (NSR) will increase over time. It is associated with more attention to the indigenous communities, ensuring environmental and climate security. Currently, sea transport is actively used in the areas of the Barents and Norwegian Seas, where extractive industries are carried out: hydrocarbon production (Bergen and Hammerfest) and iron (Kirkenes and Narvik). For these purposes, it will require the construction of new railway lines in the Arctic (Kirkenes), which connect ports with the main railway lines (Bode, etc.). It will entail additional costs.

At present, various options and schemes for transporting ore from the Tomtor deposit to the point of its primary processing are still under discussion. These options are characterized by the use of various types of transportation (winter roadways in tundra, shipping along the NSR and rivers, and railway). Employing various modes of transportation results in the violation of different areas of land resources that have various values. The radiation background of Tomtor ore and the local population’s concern add complexity to the decision-making on route transportation selection [22].

Based on the criterion of the traveled distance, the available options for ore transportation routes differ in prices. The article proposes the consideration, assessment, and selection of routes for the transportation of minerals from the deposit to the processing related to their impact on land resources, environment, and traditional crafts of indigenous peoples. It is important for all Arctic territories to address such issues while also analyzing multiple criteria at once [23,24]. Unlike diamond and gold mining, where the extracted raw materials are mainly processed on-site without causing significant damage to the land, the Tomtor deposit development is associated with the need to transport ore for further processing at specialized enterprises.

Routes for ore transportation have limitations related to geographical conditions:

-

Permafrost;

-

The possibility of ore transportation only in winter;

-

High river network and swampy soil;

-

Complex technical conditions for the construction of roads for ore transportation;

-

Different scales of impact on land and water resources in terms of adverse effects on the environment.

In addition, the location of the Tomtor deposit and possible ways of ore transportation affect the traditional lands and unique Arctic nature. The concerns of indigenous peoples on social risks (health, conflicts, phycological damage, etc.) must be reflected in the selection process. Such an approach supposes that along with purely economic factors (transportation costs), the criteria of social and environmental risks are considered.

The hypothesis of the study consists in choosing a route option for the minerals’ transportation in the Arctic using different types of transport (by winter road, sea, or railway). The costs of ore transportation may not be the main criterion in the routes selection process. The criteria of living conditions security and traditional lands conservation could be considered as well. The article defines natural and social risks as the potential of adverse changes that could result in losses for the environment and society (for example, damage from environmental pollution, and conflict situations). Damage to indigenous peoples is represented by lost profit, resource productivity decreasing traditional lands, income cutting, etc. Similarly, the planned activity impact on the peoples’ health is associated with costs increase for treatment, prescription medicines, health insurance, or relocation to other areas due to adverse changes in the environment. The article aims to develop an algorithm for choosing optimal solutions to protect land resources and indigenous economy during minerals’ transportation.

There is a strong need of research due to the current importance of supply chains, considering recent failures they have encountered [25,26]. The study is aimed at ensuring the sustainability of the environment, the economy, and the social sphere in the transportation of goods, including in the Arctic region.

2. Materials and Methods

According to research, the methods of project impact assessment on the ethnological environment were used [27]. It evaluates both positive and negative effects of planned activities, such as potential harm to traditional lands with further compensatory measures development [28].

To determine the potential harm to indigenous peoples, for example, in case of land infringement, methods of economic assessment of natural resources in the area of the planned activity were used [29]. In this case, the economic evaluation of natural resources is understood as the value of monetary assessment of natural goods. It can be obtained in the territories under consideration, including the products of traditional crafts. Such estimations can be based on the costs of production and extraction of products of traditional crafts, which are the benefits of using these products.

Route management models were used to assess risks and to select routes for the transportation of hazardous materials with minimization of accidents, environmental pollution, and the impact on the population [29,30]. The data are materials of the authors’ original research in the area of the deposit located in the Arctic Yakutia, official documents of local government, the authors’ calculations on the assessment of losses, and lost profits of indigenous peoples in the area of the planned activity. To identify local interests, preferences, and social problems during Arctic investment projects implementation, sociological methods and population surveys were used [31,32,33]. The economic effect of cargo transportation was not considered in detail in the article. Research is devoted to these issues [34,35]. The study considers several criteria, including economic, environmental, and social. As the calculation results show, the economic criteria could be not the main ones during option consideration.

Selection of options of the ore transportation is closely linked to the use of mapping methods. Mapping techniques were applied to produce geobotanical maps of potential routes for the transportation of minerals. It is necessary to assess the impact of the routes on traditional nature management. Such geobotanical maps include a thorough description of the available land resources, including places for hunting, reindeer herding, fishing, and gathering of berries and medicinal plants. On the basis of such maps and an evaluation of the resource productivity of affected lands, losses, and damages, lost profits of indigenous peoples are computed further on.

Rare-earth metals were found at the Tomtor field in 1959. It is located 400 km south of the Laptev Sea coast in the northwest of the Russian Republic of Sakha (Yakutia). In 2015, the geological exploration of this field was performed. The deposit map and potential routes of ore transportation to the processing sites are shown in Figure 1.

Specialized enterprises considered as potential locations for ore processing are located in:

-

Krasnokamensk (the Zabaikalsky region);

-

Angarsk (the Irkutsk region);

-

Seversk (the Tomsk region);

-

Zheleznogorsk (Krasnoyarsky region).

The territories of traditional nature use of indigenous peoples cover the entire territory including:

-

The Tomtor deposit itself;

-

Routes for the transportation of minerals (ore) from the deposit to ports on the coast (the Northern Sea Route).

It must be noted that both basic and alternative options of the ore transportation cover the land of traditional nature management where indigenous peoples engage in their traditional activities (reindeer husbandry, fishing, hunting, and gathering).

The task is to assess alternative routes’ priority through analysis in order to select the optimal one. It is suggested to carry out an expert evaluation of the alternatives. This could be conducted by criteria $j=1,2\dots$ for assessing the priority of routes [36], to determine priority options for ore transportation routes. These criteria should comprehensively cover the most important aspects when choosing the best route from the proposed alternatives:

-

The costs of building and operating the route;

-

The risk of contamination of the lands along which the transportation route passes;

-

The lost benefit from the impossibility of economic use of the lands along which the route passes;

-

Social risks, such as conflict of the indigenous population with transport enterprises, potential diseases, moral damage.

The composition and number of criteria may vary but in no way reduce the general applicability of the approach disclosed below. During the three-side discussion (company operating the field, local government, and the indigenous peoples), the following criteria were adopted:

-

Investments in the arrangement of the ore transportation route and the necessary infrastructure;

-

Amount of compensation for damage caused by transportation to indigenous peoples (cost of 1 ton of ore per 1 km);

-

Risk of contamination and disturbance of land during transportation in an emergency;

-

Social risks (risks of loss of health, and conflict situations).

Notably, the estimations of ore transportation solutions for each of the criteria are completed by various expert groups. The impact assessment was used for social risks, and the costs of investment for building infrastructure of the routes was made by qualified economists. The developed algorithm of choice of the best route of transportation was used for selecting an appropriate option from the six alternatives presented in

Table 1. Characteristics of routes for the transportation of ore from Tomtor field.

Route Composition			Length of a Route Sector	Mode of Transportation
No	Beginning of the Sector	End of the Sector
Route 1. The field—Krasnokamensk—Zabaikalsky Krai. 5050 km
1	The field	Settlement of Yuryung-Khaya	350	Road trains, winter road
2	Settlement of Yuryung-Khaya	Yakutsk	2000	River/sea vessels, by the Lena River
3	Yakutsk	Krasnokamensk	2700	Railway transport
Route 2. The field—Angarsk, the Irkutsk Region, 5500 km
1	The field	Settlement of Yuryung-Khaya	350	Road trains, winter road
2	Settlement of Yuryung-Khaya	Krasnoyarsk	4100	River/sea vessels along the Yenisei
3	Krasnoyarsk	Angarsk	1100	Railway transport
Route 3. The field—Seversk, the Tomsk Region, 5100 km
1	The field	Settlement of Yuryung-Khaya	350	Road trains, winter road (zimnik)
2	Settlement of Yuryung-Khaya	Krasnoyarsk	4100	River/sea vessels along the Yenisei
3	Krasnoyarsk	Seversk	650	Railway transport
Route 4. The field—Zheleznogorsk, Krasnoyarsk Krai, 4350 km
1	The field	Settlement of Yuryung-Khaya	350	Road trains, winter road
2	Settlement of Yuryung-Khaya	Zheleznogorsk	4000	River/sea vessels along the Yenisei
Route 5. The field—Krasnokamensk via the port of Khatanga, port of Nakhodka, Zabaikalsky Krai, 10,680 km
1	The field	The port of Khatanga, Krasnoyarsk Krai	186	Road trains, winter road
2	The port of Khatanga	The Northern Sea Route, recipient port in the Far East—Nakhodka	7300	River/sea vessels, by the Lena River, then by the Northern Sea Route
3	The port in the Far East- Nakhodka	Krasnokamensk	3194	Railway

.

To calculate the cost of ore transportation, such costs were determined per 1 container and per 1 ton per 1 km of track (

Table 2. Costs of ore transportation from the Arctic regions by various modes of transport, USD/km.

Type of Transport	Transportation Costs (USD of 1 Container)	Transportation Costs (USD of 1 Ton of Ore per 100 km)
Sea shipping	0.15	0.75
Transportation by river transport “land-sea”	0.66	3.30
Railway	0.35	1.75
Road transport (transportation of ore along the winter road)	2.8	14.00

Note: compiled by (Ivanova P. Yu., Potravnaya E. V., 2020) [37], calculations of the authors.

).

For the transportation of goods by winter road, sea, river, and railway, standard containers are used (on the winter road, containers of 20 tons are used).

At the same time, the annual costs of creating a winter road are not taken into account, i.e., laying roads in winter (clearing snow), using machinery (bulldozers) to maintain the road in working condition, as well as the costs of storing ore in places of transshipment (port—ship, port—railway). The main mass of ore will be transported along the winter road and stored at the places of transshipment. The analysis shows that the costs of sea transportation are significantly lower than those of land transportation for the same transported goods (LNG, container, etc.).

The calculations are based on the planned production of 200 thousand tons per year and their transportation from the deposit. Transportation by winter road is possible only at the cold season of the year, and equipment of special storage sites and ore transshipment is necessary for storing cargo. It will require additional costs. The shipping transportation by the Northern Sea Route is also subject to certain restrictions. It will require the involvement of an icebreaker fleet to escort cargo.

Finally, the routes for all options of ore transportation will affect the traditional lands and indigenous communities (Olenek and Anabar districts of Yakutia, Taimyr in the Krasnoyarsk region). Their lost profit should be included in the costs of transportation as any option of transportation impacts the quality of life and traditional economic and social activities of the indigenous peoples [38,39]. Based on accumulated vast authors’ experience in impact assessment during field work in 2015–2021 in the Arctic indigenous communities, we propose the consideration of the lost profit of the indigenous peoples as follows: losses of traditional crafts (reindeer husbandry, hunting, fishing, and gathering) as a result of a decrease in the resource productivity of the traditional lands relative to the total area of the fields being developed [40]. This loss ratio was USD 250/km². The value of this standard was determined on the basis of:

-

An economic assessment of the resource productivity of the traditional lands;

-

Determination of the potential gross income of the local population due to the development of reindeer husbandry, hunting, fishing, and gathering in this area.

This standard of losses to indigenous peoples is proposed to be used to determine the costs of ore transportation along traditional lands. The total amount of losses is determined by the product of this standard on the area of the way around the winter road being laid. The area of the way along the winter road route is defined as the product of the width of the way, equal to 3.4 km, by the length of the route (taking into account the direct withdrawal of the territory for the road and the stress zone for animals near the highway and other infrastructure facilities). For routes 1, 2, 3, and 4, the amount of such additional costs associated with compensation for losses to the local population will be:

350 km × 3.4 km × USD 250 = 297,500 dollars/year.

For route 5, the amount of compensation costs for damages to indigenous peoples will be: 186 km × 3.4 km × USD 250 = 158,100 dollars/year.

The total cost of transportation of annual ore (Z_i) during the year on separate routes is calculated by the equation:

$$Z_j=Q\times {\displaystyle \sum _{i=1}^4\left(L_{ij}\times S_i\right)}+L_{1j}\times C\times V$$

(1)

where $L_{ij}$—the distance of ore transportation along the j-th route using the i-th transportation option (i = 1—winter road; i = 2—by the Northern Sea Route; i = 3—by river; i = 4—by rail), km;

$S_i$—the cost of ore transportation using the j-th transportation option, USD/t;

$Q$—the annual volume of ore transportation, t/year;

$C$—the standard of losses to indigenous peoples as a result of violation of the lands of traditional nature management during the transportation of ore by road (winter road), USD/year per 1 sq²;

$V$—the width of the corridor around the winter road being laid during transportation along the winter road, which is laid in the calculation of compensation for lost benefits to the indigenous population, km.

Table 3. Estimation of the cost of transporting ore from the deposit for processing along various routes.

Route	Transportation Distance, km/Cost of Transportation of 1 Ton of Cargo, USD				Total Costs, USD/t
	Winter Road	NSR	River Shipping	Railway
1. Tomtor—Krasnokamensk, Trans-Baikal area	350/49	-	2000/66.0	2700/47.3	162.3
2. Tomtor—Angarsk, Irkutsk region	350/49	-	4100/135.3	1100/19.3	203.6
3. Tomtor—Seversk, Tomsk region	350/49	-	4100/135.3	650/8.4	195.7
4. Tomtor—Zheleznogorsk, Krasnoyarsk region	350/49	-	4000/132.3	-	181.0
5. Tomtor—Nakhodka-Krasnokamensk, Trans-Baikal area	186/26	7300/54.8	-	3194/55.9	136.7

shows the costs of transporting goods from the deposit to the processing site along various routes.

Thus, the total costs of transporting ore by any options include compensation for losses to the indigenous peoples (

Table 4. Total costs of transporting ore along various routes, taking into account compensation for losses to the local population for the negative impact on traditional fisheries, thousand USD.

Route	Costs of Transportation (USD)	Total Costs (USD, Compensation Included)
1. Tomtor—Krasnokamensk, Trans-Baikal area	32,450.00	32,747.50
2. Tomtor—Angarsk, Irkutsk region	40,710.00	41,007.50
3. Tomtor—Seversk, Tomsk region	39,135.00	39,432.50
4. Tomtor—Zheleznogorsk, Krasnoyarsk region	36,200.00	36,497.50
5. Tomtor—Nakhodka-Krasnokamensk, Trans-Baikal area	27,337.00	27,495.10

).

The risk of land damage during transportation in an emergency and social risks are characterized by high uncertainty and are evaluated by experts. Thus, the highest transportation costs of 200,000 tons of ore per year are on route 2, and the lowest on route 5.

It should be noted that in order to assess the priority of the selected cargo transportation routes, social risks can be considered. They are associated with the danger of ore transportation related to an increased level of radiation on public health. The risks of emergency during loading and unloading operations, or transportation of dangerous cargo along the winter road were also considered. Such emergencies could be natural, climatic, and ecological factors, e.g., climatic changes (permafrost thawing).

For the expert evaluation, they usually use special scales based on lexical assessments, which are transformed into quantitate estimates in the form of triangular fuzzy numbers represented by the number $\widehat{a}=\left(a^{\min },a^{av},a^{\max }\right)$ in general terms [37]. In this research, the expert evaluation was based on the scale of the experts’ lexical statements presented in

Table 5. The scale of the procedure of the expert evaluation of route options of the transportation of minerals from Tomtor field.

Number of Answer k	Option of the Expert’s Answer	Quantitative Assessment of the Expert’s Answer
		${\mathit{a}}_{\mathit{k}}^{\mathbf{min}}$	${\mathit{a}}_{\mathit{k}}^{\mathit{a}\mathit{v}}$	${\mathit{a}}_{\mathit{k}}^{\mathbf{max}}$
1	Very high	1.00	1.00	2.25
2	High or very high	1.00	2.25	3.50
3	High	2.25	3.50	4.75
4	Medium or high	3.50	4.75	6.00
5	Medium	4.75	6.00	7.25
6	Low or medium	6.00	7.25	8.50
7	Low	7.25	8.50	9.75
8	Very low or low	8.50	9.75	11.00
9	Very low	9.75	11.00	11.00

.

The evaluation scale given above and the transition from linguistic assessments to fuzzy quantitative estimations make it possible to reduce expert errors. There is sufficient freedom of choice of the answer in the evaluation scale for experts—a certain variant of the lexical assessment can be chosen. In Table 5, k is given by odd numbers of answers. In case of doubt, the expert can choose an intermediate variant (given by even numbers of answers). Fuzzy triangular numbers are used to transition from linguistic assessments to quantitative ones. These numbers intersect and allow for the leveling off of expert assessments’ errors. Figure 2 depicts a graphical interpretation of the applied fuzzy scale.

Experts should select one of the nine answers in regard to their own experiences and understanding of the consequences of decisions they intend to take. Notably, the scale provides for the options of answers with even numbers, which experts should choose in case of doubt between neighbor options. For instance, if an expert hesitates over an answer to the question on social risks between options “medium” and “low”, they would choose an intermediate option “low or medium”.

The right section of Table 5 presents quantitative assessments proposed for processing the results provided by the experts. An algorithm of ranking of alternative routes focused on choosing the best option was developed on the basis of the expert assessments provided. In the developed algorithm, the multi-criteria ranking is based on fuzzy criteria values [41].

To choose the best alternative route based on a system of criteria is the task of Multi-criteria Decision-making Models (MCDMs). To solve the problem of assessing the priority of alternative ore transportation routes, taking into account the criteria system, a number of methods have been developed (paired comparisons, the method of order preference by similarity with the ideal solution—TOPSIS, the process of analytical hierarchy—AHP, Elimination and selection, translating reality—ELECTRE, etc.) [42,43]. The method of pairwise comparison is most often used. When processing fuzzy matrices of paired comparison, they used the approach described in the paper of Wang, Yang, and Hua [44]. A method has been developed for the transition from fuzzy numbers to clear estimates [45].

The notation is introduced:

j is the number of the route option;

$Z_j$—investments for the implementation of the route option (criterion 1);

$S_j$—annual transportation costs of 200 thousand tons of ore and compensation to the population when using route option j (criterion 2);

${\widehat{R}}_{lj}=\left(R_{lj}^{\min },R_{lj}^{av},R_{lj}^{\max }\right)$- expert assessment of the risk of contamination and disturbance of land resources during transportation of the extracted mineral resource in an emergency, provided by expert l $\left(l=1,2,\dots m\right)$ for route j (criterion 3);

${\widehat{V}}_{lj}=\left(V_{lj}^{\min },V_{lj}^{av},V_{lj}^{\max }\right)$- expert assessment of social risk provided by expert l for route j (criterion 4).

The calculation algorithm provides for the possibility of setting different priorities of the criteria used:

${\alpha }_1$—priority of investments for the implementation of the route;

${\alpha }_2$—priority of annual transportation costs of 200 thousand tons of ore and compensation to the population;

${\alpha }_3$—priority of the risk of contamination and disturbance of land resources during transportation of the extracted mineral resource in an emergency situation;

${\alpha }_4$—priority of social risk.

In this case, the sum of the priority criteria should be equal to one. Experts are recommended to assess the priority using a lexical scale (Table 5) with subsequent defuzzification of the obtained estimates and normalization according to the equation:

$${\alpha }_f=\frac{\left(m^{-1}{\displaystyle \sum _{l=1}^m{a}_{lf}^{\min }}+2m^{-1}{\displaystyle \sum _{l=1}^m{a}_{lf}^{av}}+m^{-1}{\displaystyle \sum _{l=1}^m{a}_{lf}^{\max }}\right)}{{\displaystyle \sum _{f=1}^4\left(m^{-1}{\displaystyle \sum _{l=1}^m{a}_{lf}^{\min }}+2m^{-1}{\displaystyle \sum _{l=1}^m{a}_{lf}^{av}}+m^{-1}{\displaystyle \sum _{l=1}^m{a}_{lf}^{\max }}\right)}}, f=1,2,3,4$$

(2)

where $\left(a_{lf}^{\min },a_{lf}^{av},a_{lf}^{\max }\right)$—quantitative expert assessment of the criterion $l=1,2,\dots m$, $f=1,2,3,4$ in accordance with Table 5.

The algorithm for evaluating the priority of routes using the pair-wise comparison method requires four steps:

Step 1. Fuzzy estimates for the third and fourth criteria are determined based on averaging expert estimates for routes $j=1,2,\dots 5$:

$${\widehat{R}}_j=\frac{1}{m}\left({\displaystyle \sum _{l=1}^m{\widehat{R}}_{lj}}\right), j=1,2,\dots 5$$

(3)

$${\widehat{V}}_j=\frac{1}{m}\left({\displaystyle \sum _{l=1}^m{\widehat{V}}_{lj}}\right), j=1,2,\dots 5$$

(4)

where ${\widehat{R}}_j$ and ${\widehat{V}}_j$ are the obtained fuzzy estimates of the third and fourth criteria, i.e., ${\widehat{R}}_j=\left(R_j^{\min },R_j^{av},R_j^{\max }\right)$ and ${\widehat{V}}_j=\left(V_j^{\min },V_j^{av},V_j^{\max }\right)$, respectively.

Step 2. Clear estimates of the third and fourth criteria are determined based on the defuzzification method:

$$R_j=0.25\left(R_j^{\min }+2R_j^{av}+R_j^{\max }\right), j=1,2,\dots 5$$

(5)

$$V_j=0.25\left(V_j^{\min }+2V_j^{av}+V_j^{\max }\right), j=1,2,\dots 5$$

(6)

Step 3. The formation of a matrix of paired comparisons accumulating all four criteria is carried out according to the rules:

$$A_{jj}=1, j=1,2,\dots 5;$$

(7)

$$\begin{gathered} A_{jk}={\alpha }_1\frac{Z_j}{Z_j+Z_k}+{\alpha }_2\frac{S_j}{S_j+S_k}+{\alpha }_3\frac{R_j}{R_j+R_k}+{\alpha }_4\frac{V_j}{V_j+V_k}, j=1,2,\dots 4; \\ k=2,3,\dots 5; \end{gathered}$$

(8)

$$A_{kj}=1-A_{jk}, j=1,2,\dots 4; k=2,3,\dots 5.$$

(9)

Step 4. Calculation of priority of alternative transportation routes:

$$P_j=\frac{5-{\displaystyle \sum _{k=1}^5{A}_{jk}}}{{\displaystyle \sum _{j=1}^5\left(5-{\displaystyle \sum _{k=1}^5{A}_{jk}}\right)}}, j=1,2,\dots 5$$

(10)

The priorities obtained by Equation (6) are normalized and, in total, equal to one. If the five routes under consideration are of equal importance, their priorities will be equal $\frac{1}{5}=0.20$. Therefore, routes with the maximum priority, which is higher than the given value, are preferred.

The developed algorithm makes it possible to take into account the errors of experts by using fuzzy numbers and to conduct a multi-criteria assessment of the priority of routes in terms of their impact on land resources during ore transportation. In this respect, all applied criteria are expected to be coequal.

3. Results

The research found that the shortest route is provided for the ore transportation through the territory of Yakutia. The estimated length of the westbound route toward the Krasnoyarsk region is 186 km. In terms of construction of the eastward path toward the Lena River, the estimated length of the route in the frozen tundra could be 439 km. Moreover, the route should not include the use of rivers for ore transportation. Such a road shall neither be built in the inhabited areas nor affect specially protected natural areas. The local general public spoke out against the transportation of ore along the Lena River.

According to the results of the public discussion of the project, the company abandoned the option of transporting ore along the Lena River and defined a new concept that minimally affects the territory. Many residents of Oleneksky and other districts of the region are concerned that the transportation of radioactive ore will negatively affect land and water resources, the ecosystem of the region as a whole, as well as the health of the local population.

There are also alternative routes for ore transportation, for example, the delivery of ore by a winter truck to the port point Prilenskoye and then by river transport along the Lena River. However, at the same time, there are significant environmental risks when transporting ore by river. The disputed route of ore transportation is its transportation through the settlement of Kachikattsy. Although, from an economic point of view, it is the most attractive for a mining company, residents of this village opposed the transportation of radioactive ore through their locality due to the risks of environmental pollution. If ore transportation facilities are located in this area, according to local residents, they will not buy products in stores if they come from this polluted area.

One of the alternative options for ore transportation includes its transportation by the Northern Sea Route through the port of Yuryung-Khaya on the Anabar River. At the same time, there are also significant environmental risks for the river and adjacent territories. According to one of the options, the transportation of ore along the winter highway to the port of Khatanga in the Krasnoyarsk Territory is being considered. For this purpose, it is planned to develop the port’s transport infrastructure and transport ore further by ships along the Northern Sea Route to processing sites. When implementing this ore transportation route, it is important to preserve the objects of traditional crafts of the indigenous peoples of the North in the Taimyr Dolgan-Nenets district, because Dolgans, Nenets, Nganasans, and other indigenous peoples live in Khatanga, Dudinka, and other settlements of Taimyr.

The priorities of the criteria were evaluated by experts from Table 5 and processed according to Equation (2), allowing to establish: ${\alpha }_1=0.3$; ${\alpha }_2=0.4$; ${\alpha }_3=0.2$; ${\alpha }_4=0.1$. The results of processing at step 1 according to Equations (3) and (4) of expert assessments of criteria 3 (emergency and emergency risk) and 4 (social risks) are shown in

Table 6. Results of expert assessments processing of the criteria “Emergency and emergency risk“ and ”Social risks“.

Criteria		Values of Criteria by Routes
		j = 1	j = 2	j = 3	j = 4	j = 5
Emergency and emergency risk ${\widehat{R}}_j$	$R_j^{\min }$	7.67	8.08	5.38	4.33	1.63
	$R_j^{av}$	8.92	9.33	6.63	5.58	2.88
	$R_j^{\max }$	9.96	10.58	7.88	6.83	4.13
Social risks ${\widehat{V}}_j$	$V_j^{\min }$	4.75	8.08	6.21	3.92	1.00
	$V_j^{av}$	6.00	9.33	7.46	5.17	1.63
	$V_j^{\max }$	7.25	10.58	8.71	6.42	2.88

.

To transport ore, a railway line can be built from the deposit to the port of Khatanga on the shore of the Arctic Ocean, which looks very expensive in the conditions of permafrost and climatic conditions of the North. Estimates of the first two criteria (investments in the arrangement of the ore transportation route and the necessary infrastructure; transportation costs of 1 ton of ore per 1 km, taking into account compensation) for the selection of the transportation route are given earlier. The last two criteria are determined on the basis of defuzzification at step 2 by Equations (5) and (6) and are given in

Table 7. The value of criteria for the transportation of ore on separate routes according to the criteria under consideration.

Criteria	Values of Criteria by Routes
	j = 1	j = 2	j = 3	j = 4	j = 5
Investment to the project $Z_j$, thousand USD	17,928	17,928	17,928	17,928	30,285
Transportation and compensation costs (annual) $S_j$, thousand dollars/year	32,747.5	41,007.5	39,432.5	36,497.5	27,495.1
Emergency and emergency risk $R_j^{}$	8.86	9.33	6.63	5.58	2.88
Social risks $V_j^{}$	6.00	9.33	7.46	5.17	1.78

.

As a result of calculations (steps 3 and 4 of the algorithm), estimates of the preference of routes were obtained (Figure 3).

The fifth route with an estimate of 0.23, which exceeds the average level of 0.2 of the same significance of routes, turned out to be the most preferred. The obtained result shows the significance of the assessments carried out, first, to the social and environmental results, i.e., minimizing environmental damage and preserving the conditions of traditional life and traditional activities of the indigenous peoples of the North. At the same time, investments and current costs when using the selected route are assumed by mining companies.

4. Conclusions

The estimates show that the most favorable route for the processing of ore in economic terms is the route from Krasnokamensk, Zabaikalsky Krai via the port of Khatanga along the Northern Sea Route. Considering the routes by the Lena as environmental and social risks, the Yenisei and the Ob rivers should be excluded from the selection process.

Therefore, in view of all economic, ecological, and social factors, route 5 is of the highest priority in terms of ore transportation to the port of Khatanga, followed by vessels along the Northern Sea Route to the port of destination in the Far East, and further on by rail to the processing site in Krasnokamensk. This is the longest route and very expensive. However, it allows the interests to be harmonized and conflicts to be prevented between the mining company and the local population concerning the negative impact on land resources, natural systems, and traditional crafts.

A similar approach was implemented in Russia during the design and construction of an oil pipeline in the area of Lake Baikal. It could have a negative impact on land resources and threaten the ecosystem of the lake—a UNESCO World Natural Heritage Site. The pipeline route was moved from the shoreline inland. Though this change caused significant cost escalation, it ensured environmental security of Lake Baikal and the conditions for sustainable development of the local population.

As the construction of a route for ore transportation in the Arctic tundra runs through traditional lands, the indigenous peoples insist on impact assessment. Such an approach is provided to ensure the interests of tribal communities during industrial development of the Arctic [46]. The distribution of rental income may serve for generating economic and social benefits. For instance, the federal government charges sundry payments for subsoil use and the mining resources extraction tax. The regional government of Yakutia and the local government of Oleneksky district would hold shares in the mining company, while the indigenous community “Chymara” carrying out its activities in the area of the field development would receive annual financial contributions from the gross product of the company [47].

To reduce and to compensate for the negative impact of the ore transportation project on the population, traditional crafts, and the environment, it is proposed to use the funds of the compensations, which is formed by financial resources for damages to indigenous peoples [48]. Thus, the article considers the issues of ensuring sustainable development during transportation of minerals in Yakutia. The methods and algorithm proposed by the authors for choosing the optimal solution for the transportation of minerals in accordance with the criteria considered allow preserving the traditional crafts of the indigenous peoples of the North, reducing negative impacts on the environment and public health, which is of theoretical and practical importance.

Given the fragile Arctic nature, the implementation of such a large-scale project, in the event of an emergency during the transportation of hazardous raw materials, can cause negative environmental and social consequences. For example, an emergency diesel fuel spill in 2020 near Norilsk caused losses to the indigenous population, and could have a negative impact on the land and water resources of Taimyr and on the natural systems of the Kara Sea [49].

The proposed approach to the selection of route transportation of minerals has a universal character and can be used in other Arctic regions, or even non-Arctic countries, e.g., in Ecuador for gold deposits development to minimize the impact on land and water resources, or in Bolivia for silver deposits development [50].