Airport classification based on cargo characteristics

Air cargo has received little attention in airport research. In this paper, 114 airports are grouped according to their cargo business characteristics. Applying a hierarchical cluster analysis, the paper uses absolute (cargo tonnage) and relative measures (share of cargo work load units, of freighter movements and of international cargo) to establish the reliance of different airport types and groupings on air cargo. Eight distinct clusters are identified which show clear differences in the characteristics of the sample with regard to cargo activities. Geographic patterns of these airports are also revealed. For example, North American and European airports are characterised by features unique to these regions. Airports that are highly dependent on air cargo tend to benefit from a central location within networks of cargo airlines, while other airports with high cargo volumes generate these as a result of significant belly-capacity of passenger operations. Understanding the heterogeneity of cargo airports is important for future benchmarking studies in this field.     

Operational efficiency of Asia–Pacific airports

Airports are important drivers of economic development and thus under tremendous pressure from emerging competitors. However, few studies have analysed the operational efficiency of Asia–Pacific airports. This study therefore evaluated the operational efficiency of 21 Asia–Pacific airports between 2002 and 2011. A two-stage method was used: Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) to assess airport efficiency, followed by the second-stage regression analysis to identify the key determinants of airport efficiency. The first-stage DEA results indicated that Adelaide, Beijing, Brisbane, Hong Kong, Melbourne, and Shenzhen are the efficient airports. The second-stage regression analysis suggested that percentage of international passengers handled by an airport, airport hinterland population size, dominant airline(s) of an airport when entering global airline strategic alliance, and an increase in GDP per capita are significant in explaining variations in airport efficiency.     

Airports Council International, Greenport ’99 conference and exhibition – thinking green – strategies for balanced airport development in the next century, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 21–23 April, 1999

Airports Council International (ACI), ‘The Voice of the World’s Airports', is the only professional airport association in the world. ACI was formed in 1991 when the Airport Operator’s Council International (AOCI), the International Civil Airports Association (ICAA), and the Airport Associations Co-ordinating Council (AACC) merged to represent the world’s airports. ACI is based in Geneva, Switzerland with geographical regions in Africa, Asia, Europe, Latin America/Caribbean, North America, and the Pacific. Currently, ACIs membership consists of 528 members operating 1300 airports in more than 160 countries. ‘Greenport ’99’, the first conference of its kind, brought together organisations from around the world to discuss the future of airport development and its impact on the environment in the 21st century.     

Airports’ managerial human capital,ownership, and efficiency

Airport performance differences require a better understanding of the sources of efficiency and competitive advantages. Globalization drives the air transport industry into a more market-orientated business questioning the relationship between managerial decisions and airport performance. Aviation management studies do not consider managerial capabilities and skills since they are intangible exogenous factors that are difficult to assess. In this study, a stochastic frontier analysis is performed accounting for top managers' theoretical knowledge and experience enclosed as exogenous drivers of airports' efficiency. The model analyses 12 Polish airports from 2009 to 2017. The results show a diversity of airports with a different number of passengers as efficient. The top managers' experience, when gained in the same airport, has a positive impact on airports' technical efficiency. Airports having unstable management are more technically inefficient. Independently of the efficiency level, some airports change their management after the national elections, suggesting that managers are chosen by political interest rather than by their specialised knowledge or their prior experience in aviation management. The results suggest that more practical knowledge improve airports’ performance. Airports with a majority of government ownership that are the largest ones increase their efficiency significantly, suggesting that political decisions may be discriminatory in detriment of airports managed by regional and city authorities.     

Meetings facilities at airports

This paper investigates the extent to which airports act as venues, the importance that airports place on this type of activity, and whether it is certain categories of airport that are involved in this type of activity. Airports have always been a vital element of business travel in providing access to a destination where business can be conducted or where meetings, conferences and events can be held. In this situation it is largely the availability of air services at the airport that will attract passengers rather than the airport itself. However in recent years airports have become more than just facilitators of access and have developed infrastructure and services (’meetings facilities’) that allow them to become meeting venues in their own right.     

Analysis of ground access modes choice King Khaled International Airport, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

Airports are vital to the transportation system because air travel is the fastest means of transporting people and goods around the world. Airports also connect aviation systems with other modes of transportation.As a result, access modes to airports are critical to the aviation system, and studying air passenger decisions regarding mode choice is an essential part of airport management and system planning.Though there has been systematic analysis of car use to access airports, there has been less systematic attention to the use of the public transport system, especially the taxi service. The aim of this study is to identify King Khaled International Airport (KKIA) access mode characteristics and users, which has not been investigated previously concentrating on the mix between car and taxi using data collected specifically for this research.More than half (55.5%) of the travelers surveyed arrived at KKIA by private car; taxi and limousine passengers accounted for 42.2% of the sample. The Saudi Public Transit Company (SAPTCO), transported only 2.3% of the air passengers surveyed. These results are similar to findings for an airport in the United States and very different from findings for an airports in the East (e.g., Hong Kong).A binary logit model was developed to evaluate the access mode choice. It was found that income, luggage, travel access time, and nationality significantly affect mode choice.Results provide insight for improved planning of access to KKIA.     

Substitution and complementarity in aviation: airports vs airlines

In this paper a model concerning substitution and complementarity on the linkage between airport facilities and airlines from the viewpoint of pricing policy is formulated. This model is used to analyze whether airport pricing policies, e.g. to ensure cost recovery, are compatible with competition for transfer passengers. It is found that airports with a high volume of demand can pursue cost recovery and still be the most preferred hub. Airports with a low level of demand will not be the preferred hub, even if the larger airport charges higher taxes to recover costs.     

Segmentation of passenger preferences for using digital technologies at airports in Norway

Airports are increasingly focused on implementing digital technologies at key stages of the airport journey to enhance the passenger experience. However, passengers have different preferences. TwoStep Cluster Analysis is used to reveal the presence of distinct segments according to their preferences. The findings are based on a survey of 6082 passengers at airports in Norway. Three distinct segments are identified: those that prefer traditional manual processes, those that prefer automated technology-based processes, and those that prefer more personalised technology-based processes. Significant differences are revealed for each segment according to passenger and trip characteristics and opinions regarding how the use of digital technologies at airports impact on personal privacy and human dignity. The findings contribute to knowledge on passenger preferences at airports and can help to inform airport decision making.     

Waste management efficiency at UK airports

The aviation industry has a reputation for being a major polluter. Using primary data obtained directly from BAA this paper examines the ways in which BAA (formerly the British Airports Authority) has improved efficiency in the management of airport waste. The paper also considers why, despite these improvements, UK airports still lag behind some European airports in terms of environmental management. The paper concludes that the UK government needs to take a more pro-active role in promoting a more co-ordinated approach to environmental strategy across the industry.     

Privatization of airports in Asia

It has been claimed that Asia lags behind the rest of the world in the privatization of airports. At the same time, the air transport sector has been growing quickly and this has placed enormous pressure on airport infrastructure. This paper reviews the situation and finds that the private sector is involved extensively with new airports and the upgrading of existing airports in Asia. Although the models used to accommodate the private sector appear similar to those used elsewhere, governments in Asia have retained majority control in every case. Despite the fact that some governments say that efficiency is important to them, the most common and important motive in “privatization” in Asia is to mobilize a new source of finance. Airports remain high on the agenda of public policy. Governments are concerned about abuse of monopoly powers and they want to cross-subsidize regional airports, but they lack the institutional strengths to regulate effectively. By retaining majority control, however, governments risk losing the efficiency benefits of privatization. The paper explores the reasons why airports are such difficult cases to deal with and concludes that there is a greater need than ever to be able to compare the performances of airports.     

Measuring airport service quality: A multidimensional approach

Currently, airports are expected to be operated as self-sufficient service organizations providing efficient and high-quality services to a variety of customers. In this context, improving airport service quality (ASQ) has become paramount. However, due to the complexity of the airport service environment, an effective process of measuring and analyzing passenger perceptions of ASQ is not easily achieved. Generic scales for perceived service quality might not cover some particularities of the passenger–airport interaction. Furthermore, while some measurement practices have been developed within the airport industry, there has been only limited consideration for validity and reliability. These concerns are certainly relevant to avoid misinterpreting passenger perceptions. In view of these concerns, this paper has a twofold objective. First, to fit a measurement model for perceived ASQ built on typical service measures within the airport industry. Second, to test for the model's equivalence across groups of passengers. Sample data from an extensive survey applied at a major Brazilian airport was used for confirmatory factor analysis. The results suggested that a six-factor structure provides a meaningful multi-item measurement model for perceived ASQ. The model was validated for international and domestic departing passengers with respect to its factorial structure and metric invariance. The proposed measurement model could be considered an alternative for a multidimensional approach in the context of airport performance measurement regarding service quality. Finally, the findings from this research might contribute to the discussion on passenger perceptions of ASQ, particularly concerning its multidimensionality and the need to review current practices for ASQ analysis.     

Hub competition and travel times in the world-wide airport network

The aim of this work is to measure the competition between airport hubs based on an analysis of travel times in the world-wide airport network. By considering the minimum travel time required to connect each pair of airports, it is possible to create new measures of hub competition, separating the effects of hub position and temporal coordination. This analysis was carried out at the global level, considering all 232 airports with more than 3 million seats yearly offered in departure flights in 2008, and also in relevant geographic markets. The results show a high level of competition among the most important world airports, but the major airports of Europe have a geographical advantage in relation to world markets over the major American and Asian airports. We also show that airports located in different continents often compete for the same origin–destination markets. Geographical position appears to be the most important variable explaining hub performance. Secondary hubs show a higher degree of specialization towards specific markets.     

Brand perceptions of airports using social networks

The management of social media activities by airports is an emerging issue, and existing empirical literature on the measurement of brand perception in the airport industry is lacking. Usually, the measurement of brand perception is carried out by surveys, which are costly and rapidly become outdated. This study employs a newly developed algorithm to infer brand perceptions by mining the social connections of airports. Twitter accounts of 118 airports in the world are analysed by considering three emerging attributes in the airport industry: environment, disability and luxury. The paper shows how it is possible to identify the current positions of airports in the perception of the customers.     

Does a reward program affect customers’ behavioural intention of visiting the airport? A case study of Singapore Changi Airport

An understanding of the behavioural intentions of customers in visiting airports may help airport management to boost airport retail revenue (i.e. non-aeronautical revenue) by increasing customer spending at the airports. This study aims to examine the connection between airport reward programs and customers' behavioural intentions of visiting the airport, attempting to bring some benefits and credits for implementing reward programs in the airport sector by using Singapore Changi Airport as a case study. Two types of customer behavioural intentions (i.e. time spent at the airport and various purposes of visiting the airport) were investigated in the study to examine the effects of Changi Airport's reward program (i.e. Changi Rewards). An on-line survey was conducted, and the participants' responses were analysed via a structural equation modelling approach. The results showed that the attractive benefits of Changi Rewards could have a positive influence on arousing customers' intentions to engage with the programme. In addition, customers' intentions to engage with the programme can have a positive effect on increasing passengers' time spent at the airport and inducing customers to visit the airport for leisure purposes. Managerial implications to the airport sector are discussed.     

Impact of pandemic control over airport economics: Reconciling public health with airport business through a streamlined approach in pandemic control

Rapid aviation commercialisation and upsurge in worldwide affluence created a new avenue for disease proliferation across countries at an unprecedented rate. Epidemic and pandemic occurrences over the last decade demonstrate airports' role in disease transmission; while also exhibiting their importance as containment nodes. Tremendous amount of resources and effort are necessary to achieve the latter but inevitably, disrupt normal operations. The contrasting objectives between public health authorities and airport authorities result in compromising measures for both parties. Broadly similar controlling measures were adopted by various airports during outbreaks in the last decade. Their effectiveness have been analysed in terms of disease control; economic impact to airports were, however, not quantified. This paper concludes that more efficient airport pandemic control plans cause less severe economic impact on airports during pandemic and recommends a streamlined approach that improves overall effect of pandemic control while minimising economic impacts to airport businesses.     

Airport–airline interaction: the impact of low-cost carriers on two European airports

This paper uses case studies to look at the impact of low-cost airlines on two European airports. Low-cost airlines continue to exert an influence in air transport markets and small airports face pressures to compete for their business. The low-cost model motivates airlines to negotiate contracts that significantly reduce aeronautical revenues, leaving airports to compensate by seeking commercial revenues from the increase in passengers. This has consequences for the airports, their passengers and the relationship between the airport and its existing operators. It is found that it is important for airport management to see both passengers and airlines as customers and to understand the resultant revenue streams, before negotiating preferential contracts with low-cost carriers.     

Building an assessment model for measuring airport resilience

Airports are some of the most important facilities in any country's transportation system. It is important to protect such critical infrastructure from natural and manmade risks. However, it is difficult to build a risk prediction model based only on past statistical data. An experienced expert-based Multiple Criteria Decision-Making (MCDM) approach could be used to measure an airport's resilience and develop feasible protection strategies. This study proposes a novel assessment model for evaluating airport resilience. The model uses the Bayesian Best Worst Method (Bayesian BWM) to determine the optimal group weights of the criteria, and the modified Preference Ranking Organization Method for Enrichment Evaluations (modified PROMETHEE) technique to calculate the gap between each alternative and the aspiration level. The practicality and effectiveness of the model are demonstrated using Taiwan's airports as an example. In addition, sensitivity analysis and model comparisons are conducted to confirm the reliability of the proposed model. The results show that the proposed assessment system can effectively assist policy makers and airport security departments to formulate improvement strategies, thereby enhancing the resilience of this infrastructure.     

Current accounts of Japanese airports

The paper examines the current account of 41 major airports. When we exclude depreciation costs, only seven airports are profitable. When depreciation is excluded, only three airports are making profits. Airports managed by local governments are very difficult to sustain financially without subsidies. Airports with more than 5.2 million passengers are profitable when depreciation is taken into account, however most local airports have fewer than 2.5 million passengers. When depreciation costs are excluded, airports need at least 2.7 million passengers to be viable.     

Evaluating financial performance of commercial service airports in the United States

Studies on airport performance have focused primarily on productivity and operational efficiency. There are very few studies on airports’ financial viability and strength, especially those in the United States. Most of the U.S. commercial service airports are government-owned entities and operated for the service of the community rather than for profit, but expected to be financially self-sufficient and raise capital funds mainly through the bond markets. However, past studies of the financial performance of U.S. airports have relied on traditional profitability measures and financial efficiency measures that are more appropriate for airports owned and operated by for-profit entities. Based on the literature for non-profit organizations and the practices of credit rating agencies and government oversight bodies, this paper adopts six pertinent financial performance metrics to measure and compare the operational financial performance, leverage, and liquidity of 60 large and medium commercial service airports in the United States during the 2010–2017 period. The paper further examines factors that may affect airport financial performance. The results reveal that large hub airports have better liquidity while medium airports have better leverage during the study period. These results suggest that the effect of airport size on financial performance is inconclusive. Regression analysis shows that airports with high productive efficiency and those without a dominant carrier tend to have more surplus revenues for meeting their operational financial needs and capital spending and have better liquidity. The paper highlights the importance of using appropriate metrics to evaluate the financial performance of public sector entities and provides relevant information to bond investors. The devastating impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on airports accentuate the significance of leverage and liquidity. Therefore, the financial metrics discussed in this paper would help support public policy debates and allocate public funds to the airports.     

Size versus efficiency: a case study of US commercial airports

The paper presents a productivity analysis using data envelopment analysis (DEA) of 45 US commercial airports selected from the top 15 large, medium, and small hub airports. Financial and operational data, such as aircraft movements, number of airport gates, the annual number of enplaned passengers and runway capacity, is used. Initially, a DEA is deployed to analyze the efficiency and performance measures of airports within each group by comparing and cross-referencing them with each other. We then extend our analysis to identify those airports that are not efficient and are thus dominated by other airports that are more efficient.