Risk Management - Geographical Risk on GCC Project

This report discusses the geographical risk on the GCC Railway project and its impact on transportation and development. It analyzes the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the risk and suggests strategic options for mitigation.

Running head: RISK MANAGEMENT- GEOGRAPHICAL RISK ON GCC PROJECT
RISK MANAGEMENT- GEOGRAPHICAL RISK ON GCC PROJECT
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author note

1RISK MANAGEMENT- GEOGRAPHICAL RISK ON GCC PROJECT
Table of Contents
Introduction: 4
Risk Identified: 4
Risk Analysis: 5
Qualitative analysis for the risk: 5
Quantitative analysis of the risk: 6
Risk response: 6
Conclusion: 7
References: 8

2RISK MANAGEMENT- GEOGRAPHICAL RISK ON GCC PROJECT
Introduction:
The report states about the GCC Railway line which has been planned to get initiated
from the city of Kuwait to the UAE which also had a further plan of getting extended on to
Muscat. Between Kuwait and Muscat the line has been proposed to move through the city of
Dammam in the Saudi Arabia. The project is expected to have a loop up to the Bahrain and
then to the Qatar which will then join the main line along with the branches made in the
junctions of Abu Dhabi and Dubai. Although there are many advantages of railways in the
country, there are several risks that are impacted in the project (Smith, 2015). This report
aims to discuss and identify the geographical risk that has affected the project.
Risk Identified:
The risk that has been identified in this report on the matter of the GCC Railway is the
geographical issues or the geographical risks that has created an impact on the project. The
line that is linking the East-West railways in the Saudi Arabia has geographical issues that
were identified during the use of the project. The rail transport in the GCC has the main
objective of transporting chemicals, petrochemical products, mineral ores and many more
fuel products. The geographical variance like the absence of the shipping ports due to its
location being the Middle East part of the country creates the absence of ports and railway
lines cannot reach to all the crucial parts of the countries. The GCC members are
geographically small (Bruno, Horvat and Raffaele, 2018). The distances can be attained by
the road transportation within four or five hours. Whereas, transportation cost including the
carriage charges seems to be calculated in loss unless it is minimum 500 km of journey to be
covered. The GCC countries mainly rely on the oil and gas production and business. The
pipelines are mainly used and hence it creates a risk on the railway project.

3RISK MANAGEMENT- GEOGRAPHICAL RISK ON GCC PROJECT
Risk Analysis:
The report states about the risk that is applicable on the Railway project of the Gulf
Cooperation Council which is an alliance of the six Middle East countries that comprises of
the Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Oman and Bahrain. The GCC
proposed the railway connections between the alliances. There are several advantages to the
project which will benefit them in the economical progression of the countries. The
transportation system will enhance the communication and transportation of the goods in a
very short time. But it has multiple disadvantages and risks that heavily impacts on the
development of the project. The geographical risk being one of the major barriers is
obstructing the enhancement of the project (Abdulqader, 2014). Constructions of the railway
tracks near the ports are not possible due to the geographical variance as the absence of the
feasible shipping facilities from the coastal areas needs the involvement of the road
transportation in order to load them in the railway carriages. This ultimately results in the lag
or delays in delivering the materials on time and also increases the cost of the product that
includes the various delivery and carriage charges.
Qualitative analysis for the risk:
The report states about the identified risk that is the geographical risk on the project
that has been initiated by the GCC aliased members. The project is based on the railway
connection that has been developed to create a link between the countries and cities for easy
movement and transportation of the goods that are valuable for the development of the
economical conditions of the countries. But the geographical factor affects the project in a
negative way. The geographical map of the countries clearly shows the variations in the
ecological area as they are mainly divided in to mountain, desert and marine coastal areas.
Building rail tracks near the coastal area is difficult and hence the goods are carried to the
railway carriages by the medium of road transportation (Landis et al., 2013). There is an

4RISK MANAGEMENT- GEOGRAPHICAL RISK ON GCC PROJECT
impact of double carriage charges for loading and unloading the materials. This causes a huge
delay in the delivery and creates issues and constraints’ on the distances. The passenger
transportation services for people and goods are limited in air transportations and road
transportations. There are other risks in the economical balance comprises of issues like the
transportation from one state to another. The transaction costs are getting double as the
loading and unloading impacts huge money for less than 500 km of distance. The geography
of the places have compelled the government to depend on the pipelines to transport the oil
which delays the development of the railways transports.
Quantitative analysis of the risk:
According to the plan proceedings of the GCC Authority in the railway project, the
authority body has planned and invested two hundred forty billion dollars for creating the
connection and the loop between the states for progressing their business model. The project
that has been initiated did not satisfy the requirements of the project. The project did not
enhance the profit that was expected (Sadiq, 2017). There was loss calculated by the
authorities as the main purpose of the railways systems were unable to satisfy. The
geographical conditions created problem which directly caused the quantitative loss in the
project.
Risk response:
Developing strategic options for the railway project authorized by the GCC members
is much critical as the problem that has been identified is the geographical risk that which has
lesser options to mitigate the factors (Lowe and Altrairi, 2013). The development of the
railway tracks near the coastal areas needs more strong foundations so that the road
transportations can be avoided completely.

5RISK MANAGEMENT- GEOGRAPHICAL RISK ON GCC PROJECT
Conclusion:
In this report it can be concluded that the project that has been initiated by the GCC
authorized bodies for the development of the railway track from Kuwait to Muscat has been
developed to gain more profits and easy transportation of the raw goods. This transportation
system also faces a risk that degrades the motive of the project. The geographical risks has
been identified and analysed in two categories which are qualitative and quantitative namely.
The mitigating response has also been discussed in the report.

6RISK MANAGEMENT- GEOGRAPHICAL RISK ON GCC PROJECT
References:
Abdulqader, K. S. (2014). GCC’s economic cooperation and integration: Achievements and
hurdles. Gulf Cooperation Council’s Challenges and Prospects, 34-46.
Bruno, L., Horvat, M., & Raffaele, L. (2018). Windblown sand along railway infrastructures:
A review of challenges and mitigation measures. Journal of Wind Engineering and Industrial
Aerodynamics, 177, 340-365.
Landis, W. G., Durda, J. L., Brooks, M. L., Chapman, P. M., Menzie, C. A., Stahl, R. G., &
Stauber, J. L. (2013). Ecological risk assessment in the context of global climate
change. Environmental toxicology and chemistry, 32(1), 79-92.
Lowe, J., & Altrairi, I. S. (2013, September). The Gulf cooperation council railway.
In Proceedings 29th Annual ARCOM Conference (pp. 2-4).
Sadiq, A. A. (2017). The Gulf Crisis and the Rising Uncertainty. The Arab World
Geographer, 20(2-3), 142-154.
Smith, K. (2015). Delivering the GCC's integrated railway. International Railway
Journal, 55(3).