Siberian transport corridors, especially river systems, provide transit freight traffic from Asia to Europe from the 18th century. Even in the 19th century, a unique geographical position of Russia contributed to the organization of different projects concerning transcontinental logistic corridor linking the Siberian rivers and their canals. The article presents a comparative analysis of the conditions for ensuring transit traffic along the Siberian rivers in the late 19th century. The example is the construction of the Ob-Yenisei Canal in the current economic situation in Russia. The author attempts to answer the question whether the reasons that put river transport in the "high-risk group" are systemic, historical, or they are the consequence of wrong management at the end of the 20th century. The purpose of the article is to determine the level of solutions or solvability of the problems that hindered the development of water transport in the late 19th-early 20th century. In addition, the authors are trying to evaluate the competitiveness of river transport in the modern conditions of increasing pressures on Siberian transport infrastructure. The paper identified three clusters of the systemic problems of Siberian water transport-design-technological, organizational and natural-geographic. The results have shown that the solution of technological and management issues, as well as lower costs of operation of water transport did not lead to an increase in the volume of traffic freights along the Siberian rivers. Economic, natural and geographical factors became the most important for the solution of technical problems.

Abstract. The most famous historical project of transport infrastructure in Siberia is the Ob-Yenisei Canal. It was implemented at the end of the 19th century, however it was considered a failure and closed. A continuing interest in the ɋanal's construction and the circumstances of its origin demonstrates the special place of the Ob-Yenisei Canal in Russian historical memory. One of the causes of the construction's failure was the decision to reduce the size of the Ob-Yenisei Canal in the final draft. The article is devoted to identifying the reasons that influenced the decision to change the Canal's size, which determined the lack of capacity. The results showed that engineers were not satisfied with the results of research and looked for opportunities of additional reconnaissance. A number of economic indicators was impossible to detect without carrying out construction work. The authors concluded that the engineers allowed cutting the volume of construction works at the first stage, which was not due to the economy. It was connected with the ambition to collect information on the cost of building, living conditions and scale of labor organization in the taiga-unpopulated area without significant expenses. Developers wrongly relied on the subsequent modernization and expansion of the Canal.

No abstract

Abstract. The paper examines the impact of public-political factors on the regional sustainable development in the light of the historical experience of the Siberian cities during the Russo-Japanese war (1904)(1905). Based on the analysis of archival materials and publications in the Siberian printed press at the beginning of the 20 th century, the authors have identified the reasons why the sustainable development of the largest Siberian cities was hindered at that period. The construction of the railway eliminated the problem of transport links with Siberian cities; however it made them dependent on external supply of goods. Local Siberian production declined with the advent of cheap imported goods; warehouse infrastructure reduced due to the uselessness; the alternative modes of transport could not compete with the railroad and left the main traffic directions. The Russo-Japanese war began in 1904 and left Tomsk, Krasnoyarsk and Irkutsk without transport service for nearly eighteen months, since cargo railway transportation which was not related to the supply of the army, was discontinued. Siberian cities were in сatastrophic conditions: food prices increased several times, hospitals worked without pharmaceuticals, urban construction was stopped. Historical examples of unsatisfactory supply of cities under the influence of intense public and political factors demonstrate that sustainable urban development is impossible without the diversification of the sources and means of subsistence. Diversification is proved to be necessary, it can guarantee the use of the transport and economic infrastructure in the interests of the city in unexpected situations.