**1. Introduction**

The implementation of Russian strategic goals in the field of geopolitics, the economic development of Northern territories and a surge in hydrocarbon and other mineral raw materials production today is closely related to the development of the Arctic. The Arctic region has enormous energy and mineral resources concentrated in large and unique deposits [1,2]. Experts estimate that 20–25% of the world hydrocarbon resources are located in the Russian Arctic zone and today about 80% of gas and 60% of oil from the total production of the country are produced there [3,4]. The Arctic mining complex is represented by deposits of iron, apatite, phosphorus, titanium, tungsten, copper, nickel, antimony, mercury, cobalt, gold, silver, platinum, rare metals and rare-earth elements [5,6].

The resource potential of the Russian Arctic is a national priority. The implementation of Arctic commodity projects will allow for the launch of innovative processes aimed at testing unique technological solutions and developing organizational and project management tools [7,8]. Among the most important tasks of Arctic hydrocarbon projects is the socio-economic development of northern territories, extended reproduction, and effective use of mineral and raw materials resources. Furthermore, the technological development of

industrial systems, ensuring the sustainability of natural ecosystems, and ensuring energy and national security of the country as a whole, are significant goals [9].

There are serious challenges and requirements for the implementation of oil and gas projects in the coordinated system, especially the area of region-industrial systemsecology [10,11]. Often, promising areas for oil and gas production are removed from points of consumption. In this case, the lack of transport and industrial infrastructure may delay making investment decisions on projects. In addition, such areas may be located in the territories of indigenous peoples. There is a small degree of geological exploration of existing deposits, which increases the risk for new projects. Difficult operational conditions require the introduction of advanced technological solutions [12]. It is also expedient to consider the environmental factor since the activities of oil and gas companies have a significant impact on the environment, including the fact that new projects should leave a low carbon footprint [13–15]. The existing institutional environment must also be optimized and must contribute to the intensification of investment activities in the region. Legislative initiatives need to be supported by long-term strategic planning that reflects an effective set of measures for the development of businesses, social environments, integration aspects and environmental balance mechanisms [16].

The long-term goals of the state on the development of the Arctic are connected with the creation of large-scale transport and logistics, power, information and communication systems, safety and environmental protection complexes. There is a need to develop social infrastructure facilities, stimulate R&D and increase demand for domestic technologies and equipment. It is expected to increase the geological study of the subsurface and increase the production of Arctic raw materials [17]. The indicated effects are planned to be obtained through the implementation of large investment projects, including the use of public-private partnership mechanisms. In this regard, sustainable regional development requires project participants to not only accumulate productive and financial resources, but also to take a specific approach. This approach allows for the development of industrial and infrastructural mineral-raw-material systems in conditions of high instability in energy markets and the objective complexity of solving technological and socio-economic problems [18,19].

An important element of effective regional development managemen<sup>t</sup> is indicative planning and monitoring aimed at quantitative measurement and control of target results. It is obvious that the relationship of new investment projects with regional goals, which has been repeatedly noted in strategic planning documents, requires an appropriate list of indicators. These indicators take into account not only the technological characteristics of industrial development, but also the impact on the regional economy, population, and the state of the environment. It is noted that the idea of sustainable development is acquiring particular relevance in the Arctic [20].

One of the main directions of the Russian Arctic fuel and energy complex development is the implementation of liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects. The importance of LNG production today is largely determined by the need to diversify Russian gas export markets [21]. The implementation of large-scale Arctic LNG projects creates substantial opportunities for using the mineral resource potential of the region with a course for comprehensive infrastructure development of remote Northern territories, inter-industry interaction, ecological, innovative and technological development [22].

The feasibility of the development of the LNG industry in the Arctic is determined by a number of factors. These factors include large gas reserves in the coastal zone, low average temperatures in the region, the relatively low cost of natural gas production, and a good geographical location relative to key markets. Combined, these variables determine the high competitiveness of Arctic LNG compared to the leading countries of the LNG market.

Currently, there is one large-capacity LNG plant operating in the Arctic region—Yamal LNG. Two more LNG projects are planned for implementation: Arctic LNG-2 and Ob LNG. Their main characteristics are shown in Table 1.

**Table 1.** Characteristics of Arctic LNG projects. Based on open data of operating companies. Budget efficiency is determined on the basis of discounting tax revenues to the regional budget for the period of project implementation.


The experience of the Yamal LNG project has shown that its results not only show the beginning of development of the South Tambey gas condensate field and an increase in the share of Russian LNG in the global market, but also the creation of a major transport hub in the town of Sabetta, including a seaport and international airport, a shift settlement, a fleet of gas tankers and icebreakers and the development of the first Russian liquefaction technology. Also, the contribution to the development of the Northern Sea Route is paramount [23]. The construction of communication lines has provided access to highspeed data transmission in several cities of the Far North, and the project has created a significant number of jobs. The functioning asset is a stable source of revenue to the federal and regional budgets. According to experts of the SKOLKOVO Energy Center, the development of the LNG industry in the Arctic has already had a grea<sup>t</sup> synergistic effect in the preparation of some projects in the field of coal, gold, non-ferrous and rare metal ore production, which indicates the impact of increasing the investment attractiveness of the region especially for foreign investors [24].

Therefore, it can be concluded that the implementation of LNG projects has an impact on both the development of the region and the development of related industries through the formation of demand for related products and services, which indicates the presence of pronounced external effects. Given the previously noted relationship between the results of large-scale industrial projects and the development goals of the Arctic region, such effects need to be quantified and systematized, creating the possibility of managing their achievement.

The purpose of this study is to develop and test a list of sustainability indicators for large-scale LNG production complexes in accordance with the needs of the region and business interests. To achieve this goal, it is necessary to answer the following research questions:


(4) What should the sustainability indicators in a project approach be, and how will it differ from a corporate level assessment?

#### **2. Theoretical Background for Defining the Concept of Project Sustainability**

The term "sustainable development" became widely used after the "Our Common Future" report was presented by the Brundtland Commission [25]. The report provided a classic definition of sustainable development, which refers to "a process of change in which the exploitation of resources, the direction of investments, the orientation of technological development, and institutional change are all in harmony and enhance both current and future potential to meet human needs and aspirations" [26].

Russia approved the "Concept of the Russian Federation's Transition to Sustainable Development", presenting its own vision of the idea of sustainable development. According to the document, sustainable development means "stable socio-economic development that does not destroy its natural basis". The purpose of the gradual transition was determined "to ensure in the long term, a balanced solution to the problems of socio-economic development and preservation of a favorable environment and natural resource potential, meeting the needs of present and future generations of people".

Sustainable development is seen as a paradigm for thinking about the future, in which environmental, social and economic aspects are balanced in an effort to improve the quality of human life [27]. At the same time, the development itself testifies to a certain dynamic process. The term "sustainability" is used to describe the state of the system and its general target vision [28].

The most common description of sustainability involves three interconnected pillars, encompassing economic, social and environmental factors [29]. The sustainability model in scholarly writing is often depicted through three intersecting circles: society, environment and economy, with sustainability at the intersection of these spheres [30]. A similar relationship underlies the idea of the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) proposed by John Elkington and is often identified with the acronym "3P" (People, Planet, Profit) [31,32].

The characteristics of the interpretation and approach to sustainability assessment depend on the level of economic activity within which the evaluation object is considered. The Schukina L.V. study suggested that the following levels of sustainable development should be identified [33]:


Despite the close relationship between the levels, each level has its own target trajectory of development. Sustainable development at the global level is focused on international partnerships to fight poverty and hunger, protect health and human rights, address climate change, preserve the biodiversity of the planet and its natural resources, prevent hostilities and protect the world's oceans [34].

At the national level, using the example of the Russian Federation, sustainable development involves ensuring national and environmental security, geopolitical interests, balanced development of economic sectors, resource availability, promotion of the wellbeing of the nation and realization of citizens' rights.

The components of sustainable development at the regional level include the stable functioning of industrial complexes, socio-economic and ecological systems of individual entities, comprehensive improvement of territories and settlements, provision of housing and communal services. These components create an impact on the population, industry, social, energy and transport infrastructure, improvement of well-being and the quality of local people's life, which ensures the preservation of culture and traditions [35].

Sustainable development of industry is determined by its competitiveness in domestic and foreign markets, innovation and technological potential, balanced functioning of production and economic units and their safety for the environment, efficiency of activity and the ability to provide necessary intra-industry proportions and connections [15,36].

Sustainable development at the level of economic entities (corporate level) includes the creation of effective economic results while respecting the safety of production cycles, ensuring a high level of quality of produced products, minimization of a negative impact on the environment, development, social support and protection of workers' rights, implementation of CSR programs and implementation of advanced resource managemen<sup>t</sup> practices [37–39].

Consequently, sustainable development goals and targets are largely defined by key challenges, opportunities, and constraints at each specific level. Sustainable development is closely linked to stakeholder theory, which is based on the principle of the harmonization of interests and expectations of direct and indirect participants in relation to ongoing processes [40,41]. Sustainable development of global and local systems is the result of interaction of the state, business and society in economic, social and environmental spheres [42]. Table 2 shows the main expectations of each group of stakeholders in relation to the three areas of sustainability.

**Table 2.** Challenges in social, ecology and economic spheres in the system of regional authorities –business-society.


An integral part of sustainable development is the sustainability assessment. According to Kates et al., the assessment of sustainability focused on providing decision makers the results of the analysis of global and local systems "nature-society" in the short and long term to help them determine what actions should or should not be taken in trying to make society more sustainable [43]. At the corporate level, sustainability indicators are also used in decision-making in addition to non-financial reporting. C. Searcy clarifies this application of assessment separately in board-level decision-making, corporate governance and supply chain managemen<sup>t</sup> [44]. The latter is especially relevant for the LNG industry with a long value chain (gas production, gas liquefaction, LNG transportation, LNG regasification), since the high total value of a product requires sufficient attention at every stage of its creation [45].

According to Wu & Wu, quantitative indicators clarify the meaning of sustainable development and allow for increasing the understanding of the complex interrelationships between the components of sustainability in practical terms, and thereby contribute to the development of science and practice of sustainable development [46]. When developing a list of sustainability indicators, it is necessary to specify which aspects of sustainability in the existing concept should be measured, which of the previously aspects not ye<sup>t</sup> considered should be added and how these properties should be related to each other.

Indicators arise from the content of value illustrated by the phrase "we measure what we are concerned about" and at the same time form that value, which is concurrently illustrated by the phrase "we are concerned about what we are measuring" [47]. Each developed indicator allows for the qualitative or quantitative evaluation of a specific characteristic of a system striving for sustainability. Grouped into independent lists, they reflect the totality of stakeholders' interests and make it possible to assess progress in realizing their expectations.

"Sustainability indicators do not guarantee results, but results are impossible without the use of indicators" [47]. This statement reveals the third important function of sustainability indicators which are indicative planning and monitoring (Figure 1).

**Figure 1.** The importance of sustainability indicators in managing stakeholder expectations.

As shown in the diagram above, the stated measured results of sustainable development that meet the interests of stakeholders become a commitment to implement them for the environment. And the owner of the process (in the case of a project, the operator of the project) must integrate the work of creating these results into the content of the initiative. Sustainability indicators are already becoming key performance indicators (KPIs), reflecting the degree of commitment to compliance and as a tool for monitoring. Thus, the implementation of the KPI stage in the Stage-gate project managemen<sup>t</sup> approach (the most common, since this approach allows to make investment decisions consistently, reducing risks) is a prerequisite for the transition between stages. For this, the KPI must be synchronized in accordance with the capabilities of the stage; the same KPI can be encountered at each stage of the project if the work, the quality of which it characterizes, is performed throughout the project. Regular monitoring of the KPI achievement status is carried out in the monitoring process, which is a key tool in ensuring the compliance of planned indicators with actual ones. Deviations identified during monitoring require an analysis of the causes of their occurrence, after which a cycle of corrective actions is launched.

The number of sustainability assessment tools developed and used today globally and locally is determined by hundreds of indicator and index lists [48]. Some of them are aimed at assessing specific areas of sustainable development, some sugges<sup>t</sup> an integrated assessment. Sustainability assessment systems are based on the concept of sustainability, which does not have a single generally accepted interpretation. For this reason, the estimated parameters in the methodologies are different, and often such texts first explain what the concept is based on, and then disclose the content of the assessment [49].

The most famous and frequently mentioned lists of indicators of sustainability are lists proposed by international organizations. Among them are the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD), Institute for European Environmental Policy, World Bank, European Environmental Agency, which are aimed primarily at assessing sustainable development at the global and national levels. Organizations such as S&P Global, Global 100, Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), and the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs (RSPP) are involved in the assessment of sustainable development at the micro level. At the moment, there is no single, generally accepted approach to assessing the sustainability.

## **3. Materials and Methods**

To address the research questions, open materials of analytical centers and specialized international organizations, the works of Russian and foreign scientists in the field of project managemen<sup>t</sup> theory, sustainable development, strategic management, as well as regulatory and methodological documentation on research issues were used. A complex approach to the development of a list of sustainability indicators was provided by the use of methods of synthesis, analogy, grouping, comparison, as well as tools for strategic analysis, investment assessment and socio-economic forecasting, using the method of forward and backward linkages. The content of the indicator list is based on the key principles of sustainability assessment noted in the works of a researchers mentioned above.

The Arctic zone of the Russian Federation, which includes the territories of nine constituent entities of the Russian Federation, has been allocated to a separate object of state administration [50,51]. According to the state program titled "Socio-economic development of the Arctic zone of the Russian Federation", it is planned to provide a comprehensive solution of strategic tasks through the implementation of three Sub-Programs. These include the "formation of support development zones and ensuring their functioning, creation of conditions for accelerated social and economic development of the Arctic zone of the Russian Federation", "development of the Northern Sea Route and provision of navigation in the Arctic", and the "creation of equipment and technologies of oil and gas and industrial engineering necessary for the development of mineral and raw materials resources of the Arctic zone of the Russian Federation". The names of subprograms reveal the priority areas of development in the region, and the indicators presented in the document clarify the content of the target results.

It is assumed that the dynamics of a number of indicators may be influenced by industrial complexes operating in the region. Thus, the intensification of production activities largely determines the improvement of macroeconomic indicators, as well as the growth of cargo turnover of the Northern Sea Route. Construction and modernization of industrial systems contributes to the growth of indicators characterizing innovative activity. As a result, it is possible to assess the contribution of industrial complexes to the socio-economic development of the region.

At the same time, each indicator list is aimed at a comprehensive assessment of the object to which it relates. In view of this, the unification of indicators is incorrect and an industrial project, even if it is focused on achieving regional goals, cannot be fully evaluated by the list of regional development indicators. This makes it necessary to develop separate list of indicators, taking into account the capabilities of projects and the interests of their stakeholders.

It should be noted that the assessment of indicators can be done in different ways (Table 3) [52–55].

Based on the analysis, it can be concluded that the assessment tool depends on the purpose of the analysis. The purpose of the analysis, in turn, can influence the list of indicators used, i.e., different indicator systems can be used for different analysis purposes. Their consistency in this case is determined by order, integrity in terms of analyzed characteristics coverage, connection with the final goal of the assessment and the presence of general principles in terms of the approach to the assessment.

In this study, the use of an assessment approach based on the calculation of an integral indicator is proposed in order to compare Arctic projects with each other. This approach is applicable in portfolio analysis and can be used for ranking projects. It allows for the formation of a conclusion about the priority of the project such as when making a decision to launch in conditions of limited resources. The construction of an integral indicator includes such stages as normalization, aggregation and weighting. These are aimed to bring indicators to a dimensionless form, to generalize indicators within individual groups and to differentiate the importance of each indicator in the overall set [56]. The project sustainability assessment algorithm used in this research is shown in the Figure 2.


**Figure 2.** The project sustainability assessment algorithm.

The project sustainability assessment process involves an analytical stage, during which the potential for creating results is analyzed. Understanding current needs will allow to create maximum value for the environment, but it should be noted that the term "current needs" is dynamic, which means that the needs of the environment may change. This indicates a need for sustainable development managemen<sup>t</sup> processes to function throughout the project, where sustainability indicators are reviewed and refined.

On this stage, special attention should be paid to approved strategies and programs that determine the current needs in the state-business-society system, as well as approved indicators for monitoring the implementation of these strategies and programs. Sources of information about needs in the external environment can be information from the media, as well as the use of various communication methods such as communication sessions, meetings, forums, conferences, etc.

On the next stage, it is necessary to analyze possibilities of LNG projects in solving urgen<sup>t</sup> problems on regional, sectorial and national levels and compare them with the threepillar conception of sustainability, structuring potential results in the fields of economy, social sphere and ecology.

The following stage involves forming a list of indicators. To do this, it is necessary to offer a quantitative characteristic for each potentially created result that corresponds to a certain interest (with units of measurement) and have previously formed requirements for its content. The requirements for the content of indicators determine the consistency of the list that they form. Furthermore, all the characteristics are grouped to reflect the completeness of the overall result assessment for each direction.

The next stage is weighting by spheres and groups. The individual areas of economy, ecology and social sphere may have an unequal number of indicators, and if not using weights, the assessment of each area may be distorted. Weighting within groups has the same goal. The philosophy of sustainable development is based on the principle of balance and equal coverage of the results in the aforementioned three areas. The same logic should be transposed to interest groups, which involves creating an alternative that provides maximum coverage in each interest group and will be more sustainable. In addition, even in strategic documents, goals may overlap. Indicators for these goals will give a higher value in total than for other goals. To avoid this, these indicators need to be aligned within groups. The weighting is based on the expert scores assigned for each indicator.

The final stage is to evaluate the project based on the developed list of indicators. Considering that each indicator has different scale and unit of measurement, it is necessary to use a normalization method aimed at reducing the indicators to a dimensionless form [56]. Since the purpose of the evaluation is to compare projects based on the principle of best matching their results to the needs of the environment, it is proposed to use the normalization method. In this case, each indicator correlates with a standard among alternatives. The benchmark in this case is the best value of the indicator among the projects under consideration. It should be noted that the benchmark can be both the largest and the lowest value of the indicator, for which it is necessary to have previously determined the orientation of each indicator.
