National Research Tomsk Polytechnic University, Tomsk, Russia:
I. V. Sharf, Associate Professor, Candidate of Economic Sciences, irina_sharf@mail.ru
A. A. Mikhalchuk, Associate Professor, Candidate of Physico-Mathematical Sciences

Trofimuk Institute of Petroleum Geology and Geophysics, Siberian Branch, Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk, Russia:

I. V. Filimonova, Leading Researcher, Doctor of Economic Sciences

The strategic objective of energy security is associated with the necessity of continuous monitoring of geologic survey efficiency in resource-producing territories. Efficiency of replacement is defined by not only historical and geographical conditions of hydrocarbon resource base development, but also institutional, engineering, energy, and macro-economic conditions of subsurface users’ management that requires qualitatively new approaches towards evaluation of exploration activity efficiency. The aim of our research is to analyze the efficiency of replacement at the regional level by calculating the coefficient of static engineering efficiency based on Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and dynamic efficiency based on Malmquist Productivity Index. To analyze replacement processes, the regions similar in quality characteristics of hydrocarbon resource base, role of oil-and-gas complex in gross regional product and industry have been chosen. Such RF oil-producing territories include Volga Republics (Tatarstan and Udmurt), Samara Oblast as well as Western-Siberian Tomsk Oblast and KhMAD-Yugra. In this case the latter differ from the former in transportation logistics and climate conditions of production. As a result of research four strongly marked periods were revealed: crisis, post-crisis, before-sanction, sanction, and aftersanction periods, which all the regions had passed differently that is supported by, firstly, the results of ranking in terms of obtained values of static efficiency into leaders, mediators, and outsiders; secondly, linear trends in dynamic efficiency. An increase in disbalance in subsurface resource management was stated in the territories, Tomsk Oblast having the lowest level of replacement processes. In all the territories the policy of oil production intensification is realized to the detriment of reserve replacement that leads to decrease in long-term production.
The study was supported by the Russian Foundaton for Basic Research, Grant No. 18–010–00660A: Conceptual Approaches to the Paradigm of Sustainable and Well-Baanced Subsoil Management Considering Specific Mineral Reserves and Industrial Structure towards Long-Term Social and Economic Develioment in an Oil-Producing Region.
Grant No. 18–310–20010: Scientific Baseline for Solving Urgent Multi-Disciplinary Probelsm of Efficient Oil-and-Gas Industry Development in Russia at Transition to a New Subsoil Management Paradigm: Institutional, Regional, Raw Material and Ecological Aaspects.

1. Available at: http://docs.cntd.ru/document/902130343 (accessed: 11.01.2019).
2. Sharf I. V. Evolution of Reproduction Paradigm for Hydrocarbon Resource Base. Zhurnal ekonomicheskoy teorii. 2018. Vol. 15, No. 2. pp. 325–334.
3. Agoshkov M. I. (Ed.). Economy of mineral reserves and geological exploration. 2^nd enlarged and revised edition. Moscow : Nedra, 1976. 333 p.
4. Bjørndal E., Bjørndal M., Pardalos P. M., Rönnqvist M. Energy, Natural Resources and Environmental Economics. Series: Energy Systems. Berlin : Springer-Verlag, 2010. 521. p.
5. Mohn K. Arctic Oil and Public Finance: Norway ’s Lofoten Region and Beyond. The Energy Journal. 2019. Vol. 40, No. 3. pp. 199–226.
6. Misund B. Exploration vs. acquisition of oil and gas reserves: Effect on stock returns. Cogent Economics & Finance. 2018. Vol. 6. 1443368
7. About the state and use of mineral resources of Russian Federation in 2016 and 2017 : state report. Moscow : LLC «Mineral-Info», 2018. 372 p.
8. Kontorovich A. E., Eder L. V., Filimonova I. V., Mishenin M. V., Nemov V. Yu. Oil industry of major historical centers of the Volga-Ural petroleum province: past, current state, and long-run prospects. Russian Geology and Geophysics. 2016. Vol. 57, No. 12. pp. 1653–1667.
9. Kontorovich A. E., Eder L. V., Filimonova I. V., Nikitenko S. M. Key Development Problems of the Power of Siberia Project. Regional Research of Russia. 2018. Vol. 8, Iss. 1. pp. 92–100.
10. Boyarko G. Yu., Zolotenkov Ya. V. Reproduction rate of mineral resources as the efficiency index of geological exploration. Gornyi Zhurnal. 2018. No. 1. pp. 37–42. DOI: 10.17580/gzh.2018.01.06
11. Available at: http://docs.cntd.ru/document/499058008 (accessed: 11.01.2019).
12. Bao Hanrui, An Xun. Reliability Test on Oil Field Efficiency with DEA. Energy Procedia. 2011. Vol. 5. pp. 1473–1477.
13. Tsapenko M. V. Synthesis of global assessments of comparative efficiency of the innovative potential of the region. Ekonomicheskie nauki. 2015. No. 5(126). pp. 53–58.
14. Virabyan S. N. Measuring the effectiveness of mergers and acquisitions: features of the application of the DEA method. Effektivnoe antikrizisnoe upravlenie. 2017. No. 4(103). pp. 58–65.
15. Strogonov M. S. Methodology of factorial evaluation of regional innovation potential using DEAtechnologies. Vestnik Zabaykalskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. 2017. Vol. 23, No. 11. pp. 101–108.
16. Ratner S. V. Dynamic problems of estimation of ecological-economic efficiency of regions based on basic models of data envelopment analysis. Grand system control : Collected papers. Moscow : IPU RAN, 2017. No. 67. pp. 81–106.
17. Mohd Afjal. Total factor productivity growth analysis of selected Indian oil and gas companies: a Malmquist productivity index approach. EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Review. 2018. Vol. 6, Iss. 1. pp. 53–62.
18. Jafari Y. Malmquist Productivity Index for Multi Time Periods. International Journal of Data Envelopment Analysis. 2014. Vol. 2, No. 1. pp. 315–322.