R-ECOMONY, 2018, 4(2), 51–58 doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 51 www.r-economy.ru Online ISSN 2412-0731 Original Paper FOR CITATION Kitonsa, H. (2018) Drone technology for last-mile delivery in Russia: a tool to develop local markets. R-economy, 4(2), 51–58. doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 FOR CITATION Китонса, Х. (2018) Использование дронов на последнем этапе доставки: инструмент для развития местных рынков. R-economy, 4(2), 51–58. doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 Drone technology for last-mile delivery in Russia: a tool to develop local markets Haula Kitonsa Ural Federal University, Ekaterinburg, Russia; email: kitsxauxkissule@gmail.com ABSTRACT As the popularity of online shopping increases, last-mile delivery is gain- ing more and more attention of e-commerce companies. One of the viable solutions to maximizing the benefits of such delivery and cutting its costs is the usage of the rapidly developing drone technology. However, drone de- livery is associated with a number of safety and privacy, which makes legis- lators uneasy about permitting the commercial use of drones. In this paper, we compare the drone regulations applied in various countries with those of Russia and analyze the criteria used to develop such regulations. Six general approaches are thus outlined: officially banning commercial drone operation; making it virtually impossible for drone operators to acquire the necessary registration and license; allowing to fly drones in exceptional cases over re- stricted areas; prohibiting to fly drones beyond the pilot’s line of visual sight; allowing to fly drones if standard requirements are met; and, finally, following the substantial precedent principle. This analysis shows us the possible strat- egies Russia could adopt to regulate commercial drone usage. It is thus sug- gested that Russia should follow the example of Rwanda and China and allow to experiment with drone delivery in rural areas, where the risk to people’s lives and property in case of drone malfunction are lower than in urban areas. KEYWORDS drone technology, last-mile delivery, drone delivery, e-commerce, legal framework Использование дронов на последнем этапе доставки: инструмент для развития местных рынков Х. Китонса Уральский федеральный университет, Екатеринбург, Россия; email: kitsxauxkissule@gmail.com РЕЗЮМЕ По мере роста популярности онлайн-покупок, проблема заключитель- ного этапа доставки привлекает всё больше внимания компаний, зани- мающихся электронной коммерцией. Одним из наиболее перспектив- ных и наименее затратных решений является использование быстро развивающейся технологии беспилотных летательных аппаратов. Тем не менее, доставка с помощью дронов связана с рядом вопросов без- опасности и конфиденциальности, что мешает законодателям свобод- но разрешить коммерческое использование беспилотных летательных аппаратов. В этой статье сравниваются нормы, применяемые в разных странах, и анализируются критерии, используемые для разработки та- ких правил. Таким образом, излагаются шесть общих подходов: офи- циальное запрещение коммерческой эксплуатации беспилотных ле- тательных аппаратов; практически полная невозможность получения необходимой регистрации и лицензии; разрешение на полеты лишь в исключительных случаях и по специальным зонам; запрет полётов вне поля зрения пилота; разрешение полетов при исполнении стандартных требований; и, наконец, следование прецедентам. Этот анализ пока- зывает нам возможные стратегии, которые Россия могла бы принять для регулирования использования коммерческих дронов. В результате предлагается, чтобы Россия следовала примеру Руанды и Китая и по- зволила экспериментировать с доставкой беспилотных летательных ап- паратов в сельских районах, где риск жизни людей и имущества в случае неисправности дрона ниже, чем в городских районах. КЛЮЧЕВЫЕ СЛОВА дроны, заключительный этап доставки, доставка с помощью дронов, электронная коммерция, правовые вопросы http://doi.org/10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 http://doi.org/10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 mailto:kitsxauxkissule@gmail.com mailto:kitsxauxkissule@gmail.com 52 www.r-economy.ru R-ECOMONY, 2018, 4(2), 51–58 doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 Online ISSN 2412-0731 Introduction In 2016, the on-line expenditure on phys- ical goods on the Russian e-commerce market amounted to approximately $16.3 billion, includ- ing estimated $4.3 billion of foreign e-commerce sales, with 80% of parcels and small packages coming from China [1]. The market estimates were speculated to top $17.1 billion in 2017, ac- cording to (AKIT) Association of Online Retail Companies. In total, 360 million shipments (both domestic and cross-border) resulted in average spending of 2,500 rbs per e-shopper [2]. Online purchases and home delivery have become widely spread because they are less detrimental for the environment and require less effort on the part of the customer [3]. Together with the growing In- ternet sales, the growing demand in the delivery industry is also growing. The majority of online shopping companies in Russia currently rely on third parties (private carriers). The leading com- pany is the Russian Post, which accounts for 99% of deliveries in the country due to its large post- al network. There are also such services as DPD, SDEK, SPSR-Express, Pony Express and IML Courier [2] whereas some companies offer their own delivery to the customer’s location without any third-parties involved. Figure 1 shows a forecast for retail e-com- merce sales in Russia for the period from 2015 to 2018. There is a gradual increase in sales, which are expected to reach 30.91 billion U.S. dollars by the end of 2018. 2015 2016 2017 2018 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 20,30 23,40 26,88 30,91 Sa le s in b ill io n U .S . d ol la rs Figure 1. Forecast retail e-commerce sales in Russia from 2015 to 2018 Source: e-Marketer, Statistic 2017 Figure 2 demonstrates various types of goods purchased from different online stores in 2016. It is evident that Russian online stores, like Ulmart. ru, Wildberries.ru, Mvideo.ru, AliExpress.ru and Avito.ru, surpassed their counterparts with a share of over 35% as a result of Russian cus- tomers’ preference of Chinese and foreign on- line stores. Most of the goods were compara- 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 A pp ar el ,fo ot w ea r Ph on es , s m ar tp ho ne s, ta bl et s H ou se ho ld a nd ga rd en g oo ds C hi ld re n' s go od s El ec tr on ic d ev ic es (v id eo , a ud io , p ho to ) Sp or tin g go od s D es kt op , l ap to ps H an dm ad e go od s C os m et ic s, p er fu m es A ut o pa rt s Sm al l a pp lia nc es C on st ru ct io n m at er ia ls Fu rn itu re M aj or a pp lia nc es Pe t p ro du ct s Fo od . D ri nk s, a lc oh ol H ea lth g oo ds Sh ar e in a ll on lin e bu ye rs , % Russian online stores Chinese online stores Other international online stores Figure 2. Types of goods purchased from different online stores in 2016 in Russia Source: GFK RUS and Yandex market data, 2016 http://doi.org/10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 R-ECOMONY, 2018, 4(2), 51–58 doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 53 www.r-economy.ru Online ISSN 2412-0731 tively light and, therefore, could be effectively delivered by a drone. As a rule, carriers serving on-line shopping web-sites have to deliver one or several small packages to the customer’s ad- dress [4]. The new, increasingly popular strategy is to ship products directly from the seller to the customer by skipping drop-offs at retail stores [5]. Comparison between online and conven- tional shopping has been the core focus of most previous papers concentrating on the grocery retail sector[6]. In the traditional shopping sup- ply chain, goods are delivered to a store for cus- tomers to pick them up. Typically, the process of online shopping consists of three stages: placing an order, processing the order and delivery. Each of these stages is vital for ensuring effective cus- tomer services at the expense of potential cus- tomers [7]. Considering all the phases, starting from the order being placed to home delivery by the seller, logistics providers and transportation companies have found that last-mile delivery to be not only complicated but also expensive [8]. Concerns have been expressed about the rapid growth of home deliveries and their efficiency, which might diminish the net benefits from on- line shopping [9]. In this study, we are going to focus on the third stage, order delivery. Last-mile delivery In logistics, last-mile delivery refers to deliv- ering a customer’s order to his or her doorstep [10]. Logistics providers [11] face different chal- lenges, including the following: – traffic congestions in downtown areas; – environmental issues caused by inefficient routes in rural areas; – increased delivery costs; – as customers are now more prone to pur- chasing small quantities of goods, cases of failed deliveries (orders are delivered when no one is at home) have become more frequent as well as the return of unwanted goods [12]. In the traditional shopping system, custom- ers are responsible for picking up their orders and bringing them home, whereas in online shopping, most of the work is done by retailers, who deliver customers’ orders to their respective addresses sometimes within relatively short time slots [4]. Trying to address the above-described issues, carriers may resort to such options as collabora- tive delivery, like Colis-voiturage for heavy ship- ments. Moreover, Amazon is preparing to launch an Uber-style system1 for road transport. There has recently been an increase in the usage of self-employed couriers [4]. The major online re- tailers now rely on third-party courier networks such as the Russian Post [2]. Other alternatives include drones (JD.com2), autonomous robots (Swiss Post), green deliveries by boat, e-bikes3 or on foot deliveries and electric buses (wholesale brand Métro). Sainsbury is planning to switch to electric vans for its on-line shopping delivery by 2010 [13]. The drone technology, which is able to tra- verse difficult terrains, reduce labour costs and replace fleets of vehicles, proves to be a viable option [14]. It is recommended as one of the best possible solution to the challenges faced by the companies providing last-mile delivery. The drone technology has the potential to signifi- cantly reduce the delivery costs and save time re- quired to deliver packages. Moreover, drones are less expensive to maintain, they are not limited by the established infrastructure, such as roads, and generally involve less complex obstacle avoidance scenarios as compared to the traditional delivery vehicles such as trucks [15]. There is an opinion that since drones do not need to make frequent stops on the way, they will provide an even faster direct service [16; 17]. This way, packages will no longer have to be individually delivered to cus- tomers by couriers. This idea is so alluring that large companies have embarked on developing and testing delivery models considering all the safety precautions in order to obtain permits to use drones for last-mile delivery. International experience of drone delivery The twenty-first century has witnessed an ad- vancement of drone technology and a number of major companies have engaged in drone testing [18]. In 2012, Silcon Valley startup Tacopter [19] made headlines when it publicly announced its plans to launch a delivery service of tacos with- in the city of San Francisco via unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). In 2013, Amazon [20] claimed that it was designing a drone delivery program called Prime Air to deliver packages within just thirty minutes. In September 2016, an Ameri- 1 Postal Record (2017). Delivery by Uber? 2 Josh Gartner (2017). Drone Delivery program Fact Sheet. 3 Somit Sen (2017). Maharashtra to push for e-bikes for delivery of food, goods. http://doi.org/10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 54 www.r-economy.ru R-ECOMONY, 2018, 4(2), 51–58 doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 Online ISSN 2412-0731 can based logistics company UPS [19] tested a medical supply drop to an island off the coast of Massachusetts; the same month, as a part of Alphabet Inc’s drone delivery initiative, burritos were sent to students of Virginia Tech. In 2013, Deutsche Post DHL [22], a logistics company in Germany, also started its Parcelcopter project. In March 2016, the largest convenience chain 7-Eleven [23] and a drone startup Flirtey made a drone delivery in Reno, Nevada, which was the first such delivery to be approved by the avia- tion authorities (FAA). In April 2016, a Japanese e-commerce giant Rakuten4 tested its drone on the golf course where players were able to use their phones to request new golf balls or refresh- ments to be delivered to them. Table 1 Applications of the drone technology by market category Asset manage- ment Aerial sur- veying Cine- matog- raphy Video marke- ting Other Power line inspections Forestry management Films Real estate Fire scene inspections Railway line in- spections Geophysical surveys Docu- menta- ries Tourism destina- tions Insurance claims Oil pipeline inspections Land use planning News Property develop- ment Crash scene inspections Wind turbine in- spections Mapping Sporting events Сom- mercials Monitoring marine wildlife Agriculture Anti-piracy operations Border controls Flood doc- umentation Research Source: Rich, C. (2015). In November 2016, Flirtey and Domino’s Piz- za Enterprises Ltd5 delivered pizzas from Dom- ino’s stores to customer homes in New Zealand as a part of Enterprise’s ongoing drone delivery testing. Since mid-March 2017, Swiss Post [24] has successfully been conducting drone flights in Lugano, testing the transportation of laboratory 4 Reuters (April 26, 2016). Japan’s Rakuten Demonstrates “First Commercial Drone Delivery Service in the World”. Re- trieved from http://toyokeizai.net/articles/-/115632. 5 Flirtey (Nov 15, 2016). Flirtey Launches World’s First Pizza-By-Drone Commercial Trials, Delivers Domino’s Pizza to Customer Homes. samples between two Ticino hospitals. In Rus- sia, in June 2014, Dodo Pizza6 became the first company to make a trial deployment of a drone in last-mile delivery. In June 2017, one of Rus- sia’s major banks Sberbank7, successfully tested cash delivery from their cash handling center to a cash-in-transit van. The Table 1 above shows that the drone tech- nology has a wide range of applications, some of which are still waiting to be realized. Legalization of drone delivery in Russia Despite the struggle to develop the drone technology models for commercial use, compa- nies cannot proceed without permission from the corresponding regulatory bodies [23]. The questions to be addressed in this respect are as follows: should the technology be permitted at all? Should society permit the development of such a technology, which is likely to threaten people’s privacy? If the development of this tech- nology is unstoppable, should there be a regu- latory framework so that only authorized indi- viduals or legal entities could use it for socially acceptable purposes? [25]. Let us now compare the existing legal framework in Russia with those of other countries. In order to decide on the legal framework to regulate drone use we need to consider the fact that drones can be used for criminal ends, for example, to smuggle weapons and drugs or as a weapon. Moreover, there is a number of privacy issues associated with drones as they can carry video equipment and thus can be used for ille- gal surveillance. It is also essential to decide who should be authorized to operate drones as it re- quires certain skill and experience while drones can be dangerous to people and objects in their vicinity. Commercial drone regulations are different in various countries, which either choose to ben- efit from the development of this technology or to restrict it for safety reasons [25]. Legal regulators around the world are toiling to keep up with the rapidly evolving technology with unlimited capa- bilities which may be perceived as threatetning the traditional norms and values [27]. 6 LENTA.RU (June 25, 2014). Dial-a-drone! Syktyvkar pizzeria begins unmanned deliveries. 7 Sputnik news. (June 16, 2017). Retrieved from https:// sputniknews.com/science/201706161054695960-russia-sber- bank-drone/. http://doi.org/10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 http://toyokeizai.net/articles/-/115632 https://sputniknews.com/science/201706161054695960-russia-sberbank-drone/ https://sputniknews.com/science/201706161054695960-russia-sberbank-drone/ https://sputniknews.com/science/201706161054695960-russia-sberbank-drone/ R-ECOMONY, 2018, 4(2), 51–58 doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 55 www.r-economy.ru Online ISSN 2412-0731 Table 2 Laws regulating the use of commercial drones in different countries Features Australia1) Canada2) UK3) China4) New Zealand5) USA6) Russia7) Regulatory body Civil Aviation Safety Authori- ty (CASA) Transport Can- ada (TC) Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) Civil Aviation Administra- tion of China (CAAC) Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand (NZCAA) Federal Avia- tion Adminis- tration (FAA) The Federal Air Transport Agency (FATA) Maximum altitude Controlled air- space – 120m / 400ft – Out- side – No limit Max 300ft Max 120m / 400ft > 120m / 400ft approval required Max 120m / 400ft > 120m / 400ft approval (CAAC) Max 120m / 400ft > 120m / 400ft approval required 121m / 400ft Not specified Maximum take- off weight < 2kg / 4.4lbs > 2kg / 4.4lbs < 25kg / 55lbs > 25kg / 55lbs permission required Not specified 0 ≤ 1.5kg, 1.5 ≤ 4kg, 1.5 ≤ 7kg, 7 ≤ 25kg, 15 ≤ 116kg, 25 ≤ 150kg >5,700kg (agricultural) 25kg / 55lbs < 25kg / 55lbs > 25kg / 55lbs permission required 30kg / 66lbs BVLOS flights Not allowed – Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Not allowed Competence statement / license < 2kg / 4.4 lbs = Registration required > 2kg /4.4lbs = Operators certificate + RPA required Com- mercial flight – 5 days notice > 1kg ≤ 25kg Re- quired (Urban) > 20kg ≤ 150kg CAA license required < 250 g/.55lbs – Real name registration > 7kg/15lbs – <116kg (CAAC) license Not required > 0.55lbs Re- quired < 30kg – Not required > 30kg – Re- quired Night time and bad weather Special approval Not allowed Special approval Special approval Special approval Special approval Not allowed and a watcher required Labeling re- quirements Not required but recom- mended Not required Not required but recom- mended Not required Not required Required Required Air traffic con- trol notification Required in controlled airspace >4lbs – Re- quired > 15lbs – Re- quired in con- trolled airspace Required Required in controlled airspace – Required Drone liability insurance Not required but recom- mended Required, $100,000 Not required but highly rec- ommended Not required Not required Not required but recom- mended Required Pilot certifica- tion < 4lbs None > 4lbs Requires manufacturer conducted training course Above 18 years of age – Ground school Training (commercial)/ basic certificate for UAS and ground school < 116kg, re- quired Knowledge of airspace restric- tions Above 16 years of age Required Drone ban zones State institutes; Federal author- ity construc- tions; Regional authority con- structions; Airport control zones (CTR); Vehicles, Boats, Buildings, People Hospitals; Operation sites of police, military, search- and rescue forces State institutes; Federal author- ity construc- tions; Regional authority con- structions; 9 km from Airport control zones (CTR); Minimum 150m/500ft from crowds and 90m from built up areas hospitals; Operation sites of police, mili- tary, search and rescue forces State institutes; Federal author- ity construc- tions; Regional authority con- structions; Airport control zones (CTR); Minimum 150m/500ft from crowds and built up areas hospitals; Operation sites of police, mili- tary, search and rescue forces State institutes; Federal author- ity construc- tions; Regional authority con- structions; Airport control zones (CTR); Crowds of people Hospitals; Operation sites of police, mili- tary, search- and rescue forces *DJI drones- programmed not to take off in No-fly zones State institutes; Federal author- ity construc- tions; Regional authority con- structions; Airport control zones (CTR); National Parks; Crowds; Private Property (only with per- mission of the owner); Hospitals; Operation sites of police, mili- tary, search- and rescue forces State institutes; Washington; Federal author- ity construc- tions; Regional authority con- structions; Airport control zones (CTR); Crowds of people (not specified); Hospitals; Operation sites of police, military, search- and rescue forces State institutes; Moscow krem- lin, Red Square; Federal author- ity construc- tions; Regional authority con- structions; Airport control zones (CTR); Crowds of people; Military instal- lations, power plants Sourse: 1) Australia UAV. Retrieved from https://www.casa.gov.au/operations/standard-page/how-become-safe-rpa operator?w- cms%3astandard%3a%3apc=pc_101985; 2) Transport Canada – drone safety. Retrieved from http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/stan- dards/general-recavi-uav-2265.htm?wt.mc_id=1zfhj#safety; 3) Civil Aviation Authority – cap393. Retrieved from http://publicapps.caa. co.uk/docs/33/cap%20393_aug2016.pdf; 4) China’s new drone regulations. Retrieved from http://www.caac.gov.cn/index.html; 5) CAA of Newzealand. Retrieved from https://www.caa.govt.nz/rules/rule_consolidations/part_101_consolidation.pdf; 6) FAA drone regulations. Re- trieved from http://www.faa.gov/uas/media/part_107_summary.pdf; 7) Federal Air Transport Authority. Retrieved from http://www.favt.ru. http://doi.org/10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 https://www.casa.gov.au/operations/standard-page/how-become-safe-rpa operator?wcms%3astandard%3a%3ap https://www.casa.gov.au/operations/standard-page/how-become-safe-rpa operator?wcms%3astandard%3a%3ap http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/standards/general-recavi-uav-2265.htm?wt.mc_id=1zfhj#safety http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/civilaviation/standards/general-recavi-uav-2265.htm?wt.mc_id=1zfhj#safety http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/cap%20393_aug2016.pdf http://publicapps.caa.co.uk/docs/33/cap%20393_aug2016.pdf http://www.caac.gov.cn/index.html https://www.caa.govt.nz/rules/rule_consolidations/part_101_consolidation.pdf http://www.faa.gov/uas/media/part_107_summary.pdf; http://www.favt.ru 56 www.r-economy.ru R-ECOMONY, 2018, 4(2), 51–58 doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 Online ISSN 2412-0731 There are six main parameters common- ly used as standards for drone regulation at the national level: maximum altitude; VLOS and BVLOS flights; licensing; flying drones at night time or in bad weather; pilot certification; and drone banned zones. As we can see, all countries have bodies reg- ulating drone operation. The requirements differ depending on drone capability, payload, mass, altitude, application, operator’s license level and flight area. Operation of drones beyond the visu- al line of sight (BVLOS flights) is not allowed in most countries and it is accompanied by a set of requirements concerning the maximum altitude and the restricted distance from a crowd of peo- ple. Labeling is an optional requirement in many countries but it is obligatory in Russia. To use recreational drones no license, insur- ance, registration or certification is required. The rules are much stricter regarding commercial drone applications: for example, the air traffic control notification is required in all countries; flights are either banned or highly restricted in certain areas, for example, airport control zones, state institutions, power plants and so on. Flying drones at night or in bad weather conditions also usually requires a special permission whereas in Russia it is prohibited and requires presence of a watcher. Thus, Russian drone laws are very much in line with those of other countries, with only a few exceptions: – drone operators must have a watcher at all times to monitor the flight and drones must not be operated beyond the visual line of sight; – the air traffic control must be notified prior to the flight with a detailed flight plan to be pro- vided (in other countries, it is only required in controlled airspaces); – a drone has to be labeled for the purpose of identification; – at the moment, no maximum flight altitude is specified but this issue will undoubtedly soon be addressed and limits will be set. There are six general approaches [27] to na- tional commercial drone regulation varying across countries: 1. Outright ban: countries that prohibit any commercial drone operation (for example, Mo- rocco, Argentina, and Cuba). 2. Effective ban: countries that officially allow commercial drone application but the licensing and registration procedures make it virtually im- possible to obtain a legal permission (for example, Algeria, Belarus, and Egypt). 3. Drones must not be operated beyond the visual line of sight, which limits the potential of drone usage (for example, Belgium, Croatia, and Thailand). 4. Permission can be given in exceptional cas- es to carry out drone testing within restricted ar- eas (for example, Brazil, Canada, and Germany). 5. Commercial drone operation is permitted as long as the standard requirements (registration, licensing, and insurance) are met (for example, Sweden, Norway, and Iceland). 6. Substantial precedents: these countries fol- low the substantial precedent principle regarding drone regulations and monitor the results of the strategies adopted by other countries. Conclusion As we have shown above, the development of last-mile delivery is currently facing a series of chal- lenges, which can be met with the help of drones. However, in many countries, including Russia, drone delivery is prohibited. In Russia, a drone must not be operated beyond the visual line of sight, which considerably limits the possibilities of using drones for last-minute delivery. Moreover, the air traffic control must be notified prior to any flight. A more productive approach would be to de- velop regulations to enable society benefit from the drone technology and at the same time to ensure safe usage of drones and protect people’s privacy. In such countries as Rwanda and China, drone operation is permitted beyond the pilot’s vi- sual line of sight, which enhances the development of drone delivery (Rwanda was the first country to permit commercial drone delivery in the world). Although legal regulators in both countries have issued a green pass to drone delivery, there are still strict restrictions to be met, for example, deliver- ies must only be carried out in rural, not densely populated areas. This is done to reduce the risk level in case of any drone malfunction. Drone laws in Russia and other countries are being constantly amended and, in general, the governments seek to broaden the specter of opportunities for com- mercial drone delivery. The approach adopted in Rwanda and China, that is, the usage of drones for delivery in rural areas, might prove to be quite ef- fective in Russia as well. What Russian legislators could start with is, for instance, permitting ex- periments with drone delivery in the countryside since the risk level in such areas is low. http://doi.org/10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 R-ECOMONY, 2018, 4(2), 51–58 doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 57 www.r-economy.ru Online ISSN 2412-0731 References 1. Khare, A. (2016). Consumer shopping styles and online shopping: An empirical study of In- dian consumers. Journal of Global Marketing, 29(1), 40–53. 2. Timofeeva, A. (2017). E-commerce market research and strategy recommendations. Case study: Russian Post North-West macro-region business unit in Saint-Petersburg. HAAGA-HELIA University of Applied Sciences. Retrieved from http://www.theseus.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/130226/Timofe- eva_Alisa.pdf ?sequence=1. 3. Royal Mail (2007). Home Shopper Tracker. London: RAPID Marketing Services. 4. Edwards, J. B., McKinnon, A. C., & Cullinane, S. L. (2010). Comparative analysis of the carbon footprints of conventional and online retailing: A “last mile” perspective. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 40(1/2), 103–123. doi: 10.1108/09600031011018055. 5. Joerss, M., Schröder, J., Neuhaus, F., Klink, C., & Mann, F. (2016). Parcel Delivery: The Future of Last Mile. McKinsey & Company. 6. Cairns, S., Sloman, L., Newson, C., Anable, J., Kirkbride, A., & Goodwin, P. (2004). Smarter choices-changing the way we travel. London: Published by the Department for Transport. Retrieved from http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1224/1/1224.pdf. 7. Campbell, A. M., & Savelsbergh, M. W. (2005). Decision support for consumer direct grocery initiatives. Transportation Science, 39(3), 313–327. doi: 10.1287/trsc.1040.0105. 8.  Savelsbergh, M. W. P. & Goetschalckx M. (1994). A Comparison of the Efficiency of Fixed Versus Variable Vehicle Routes. Journal of Business Logistics, 16(1), 163–187. 9. Romm, J. (2002). The internet and the new energy economy. Resources, conservation and re- cycling, 36(3), 197–210. 10. Gevaers, R., Van de Voorde, E., & Vanelslander, T. (2011). Characteristics and typology of last-mile logistics from an innovation perspective in an urban context. In Macharis, C. & Melo S. (Eds) City Distribution and Urban Freight Transport: Multiple Perspectives (pp. 56–71). Edward Elgar Publishing. doi: 10.4337/9780857932754.00009. 11. Donkovtceva, O. (2017). E-commerce in Russia. Challenges and opportunities for foreign dig- ital service providers. Case: Channel pilot solutions GMBH. Karelia University of Applied Sciences. Retrieved from http://www.theseus.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/139844/Donkovtceva_Olga.pdf ?se- quence=1&isAllowed=y. 12. Skiver, R. L., & Godfrey, M. (2017). Crowdserving: A Last Mile Delivery Method for Brick- and-Mortar Retailers. Global Journal of Business Research, 11(2), 67–77. 13. Sainsbury (2007). First electric vans to hit road with green shopping. Company News. Re- trieved from www.j-sainsbury.co.uk/index.asp?PageID¼418&subsection¼&Year¼2007&News- ID¼893 (accessed 9 October 2008). 14. Haidari, L. A., Brown, S. T., Ferguson, M., Bancroft, E., Spiker, M., Wilcox, A. & Lee, B. Y. (2016). The economic and operational value of using drones to transport vaccines. Vaccine, 34(34), 4062–4067. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.06.022. 15. Dorling, K., Heinrichs, J., Messier, G. G., & Magierowski, S. (2016). Vehicle routing problems for drone delivery. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics: Systems, 47(1), 70–85. doi: 10.1109/TSMC.2016.2582745. 16. Limer, E (2015) Amazon says its drones will deliver in 30 minutes or less: If they are legal- ly permitted to, anyway. Retrieved from https://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/drones/a16074/ amazon-drones-30-minutes-or-less/. 17. Applin, S. A. (2016). Deliveries by Drone: Obstacles and Sociability. In Custers B. (Eds) The Future of Drone Use. Information Technology and Law Series (pp. 71–91). T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague. doi: 10.1007/978-94-6265-132-6_4. 18. Clarke, R. (2016). Appropriate regulatory responses to the drone epidemic. Computer Law & Security Review, 32(1), 152–155. http://doi.org/10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 http://www.theseus.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/130226/Timofeeva_Alisa.pdf?sequence=1 http://www.theseus.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/130226/Timofeeva_Alisa.pdf?sequence=1 http://doi.org/10.1108/09600031011018055 http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/1224/1/1224.pdf http://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.1040.0105 http://doi.org/10.4337/9780857932754.00009 http://www.theseus.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/139844/Donkovtceva_Olga.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y http://www.theseus.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/139844/Donkovtceva_Olga.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y http://www.j-sainsbury.co.uk/index.asp?PageID¼418&subsection¼&Year¼2007&NewsID¼893 http://www.j-sainsbury.co.uk/index.asp?PageID¼418&subsection¼&Year¼2007&NewsID¼893 http://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2016.06.022 http://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.2016.2582745 https://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/drones/a16074/amazon-drones-30-minutes-or-less/ https://www.popularmechanics.com/flight/drones/a16074/amazon-drones-30-minutes-or-less/ http://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6265-132-6_4 58 www.r-economy.ru R-ECOMONY, 2018, 4(2), 51–58 doi: 10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 Online ISSN 2412-0731 19.  Gilbert, J. (2012). Tacocopter aims to deliver tacos using unmanned drone helicopters. Re- trieved from https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/23/tacocopter-startup-delivers-tacos-by-un- manned-drone-helicopter_n_1375842.html. 20. Woolf, N., & Gibson, S. (2016). Amazon to test drone delivery in partnership with UK government. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jul/25/amazon-to-test-drone-deliv- ery-uk-government. 21. Bamburry, D. (2015). Drones: Designed for product delivery. Design Management Review, 26(1), 40–48. 22.  Scott, J., & Scott, C. (2017). Drone delivery models for healthcare. In Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 3297–3304). IEEE, Hilton Waikoloa Village, Hawaii. doi: 10.24251/HICSS.2017.399. 23. Widener, M. N. (2016). Local Regulating of Drone Activity in Lower Airspace. Boston Uni- versity Journal of Science & Technology Law, 22, 239. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2732845. 24. Swiss Post. (2017). Swiss Post drone to fly laboratory samples for Ticino hospitals Communica- tion dated. Retrieved from https://www.post.ch/en/about-us/company/media/press-releases/2017/ swiss-post-drone-to-fly-laboratory-samples-for-ticino-hospitals. 25. Wright, D. (2014). Drones: Regulatory challenges to an incipient industry. Computer law and security report, 30(3), 226–229. 26.  Lotz, A. (2015). Drones in Logistics: A Feasible Future or a waste of effort. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1215&context=honorsprojects. 27. Finn, R. L., & Wright, D. (2016). Privacy, data protection and ethics for civil drone practice: A survey of industry, regulators and civil society organisations. Computer Law & Security Review, 32(4), 577–586. doi: 10.1016/j.clsr.2016.05.010. Information about the author Haula Kitonsa – Researcher, Graduate School of Economics and Management, Ural Federal Uni- versity, University (19, Mira St., 620002, Ekaterinburg, Russia); email: kitsxauxkissule@gmail.com http://doi.org/10.15826/recon.2018.4.2.008 https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/23/tacocopter-startup-delivers-tacos-by-unmanned-drone-helico https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/23/tacocopter-startup-delivers-tacos-by-unmanned-drone-helico https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jul/25/amazon-to-test-drone-delivery-uk-government https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jul/25/amazon-to-test-drone-delivery-uk-government http://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2017.399 http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2732845 https://www.post.ch/en/about-us/company/media/press-releases/2017/swiss-post-drone-to-fly-laboratory-samples-for-ticino-hospitals https://www.post.ch/en/about-us/company/media/press-releases/2017/swiss-post-drone-to-fly-laboratory-samples-for-ticino-hospitals https://scholarworks.bgsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1215&context=honorsprojects http://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2016.05.010 mailto:kitsxauxkissule@gmail.com