Bottlenecks at the Departure Concourse of Airports for the 2014 World Cup

worldcup_brazil-213x300By Giovanna Miceli Ronzani and Anderson Ribeiro Correia

Brazil will be hosting two important international events: FIFA soccer world cup – 2014 and the Summer Olympic games in 2016. Since several international tourists will be traveling to and within Brazil, the airports must be prepared for these additional passengers. One of the main bottlenecks of Brazilian airports is the emplaning hall, as will be presented in this article.
Download PDF

Advertisements

Aerotropolis: The Way We’ll Live Next by John D. Kasarda and Greg Lindsay

John Kasarda’s work on airports and the aerotropolis is certainly not new. For over a decade, he (re-)publishes books and articles: mostly case studies based on his airport consultation work. His new book is written by journalist Greg Lindsay who followed the aerotropolis guru on its way to consulting jobs. Lindsay took the time to write down in a smooth way what is in Kasarda’s mind – and probably wherefore he couldn’t find time. Joint by the praising reviews in The Wall Street Journal and other journals and magazines, it paves the way to a wider audience than the insiders of airport area development.

Download PDF

Public Participatory GIS in urban planning around a Major Gateway of Latin America

participation-300x224By Gustavo Sobreiro Santos, Rogéria de Arantes Gomes Eller, Emmanuel Antonio dos Santos

In Brazil, there is a lack in urban planning on aircraft noise impacted areas. People living around airports are often not aware of land use restrictions that are determined by different levels of government. This study aims to develop a Web-Based Public Participatory GIS. This model can aid both people and authorities to minimize conflicts between airport and population by providing more confident information in real time. Keywords: Aircraft noise, GIS, Urban planning, Public Participation.

Please download article here.

Brazil Needs a Much More Modern Airport Infrastructure Model

GRUBy Respicio A. Espirito Santo Jr.1, Erivelton Pires Guedes2, Dorieldo Luiz dos Prazeres3, Rogerio Pecci Filho4

During the AIRPORT EVOLUTION LATIN AMERICA 2011 conference in São Paulo on May 11th‐12th what many suspected became true: neither Infraero nor the federal authorities in Brasilia have a “Plan B” to the current torrent of various bottlenecks and very low level of service at major Brazilian airports for the short‐term (neither for the FIFA Soccer World Cup of 2014). And this was confirmed by the evasive responses given by the representative of Infraero during the before mentioned event when specifically asked about this matter.

Also, the lecturers agree on the fact São Paulo needs urgently a new airport. As a matter of fact, considering that nothing real has been done and officially confirmed by the government at the time of writing, common sense suggests that – as strange as it may sound – probably there is also no “Plan A” as well. Complementing it, GRU’s Terminal 3 is “being designed” and “the project is on time” since the late 90s when the then‐president of Infraero “confirmed” that it would be operational “in the next few years”. Twelve or more years have passed, domestic enplanements in Brazil have more than doubled since then but there isn’t a single brick of GRU’s T3 put in place. Considering the above plus all the past mis‐sayings and long‐lasting undefined issues, a question arises: Is there any strategic planning culture at Infraero and at the higher government levels regarding airport infrastructure?

In order to collaborate with the debate, the authors have written this 2‐page article highlighting a series of relevant aspects to be raised in the discussion. These aspects were built up on a simplified bullet‐point format.
What the Brazilian government (and the Brazilian society) should be looking for in terms of airport infrastructure and airport management to effectively modernize the current slow‐pace, centralized and monopolistic model:

a) Safety and security (this must always be the starting point, no matter in the world where the airport is located).
b) Agility and flexibility for planning, operations and management decisions.
c) Multi/plural and systemic approaches and expertise.
d) A continuous flow of (and large amounts of) capital/investments.
e) Direct competition between airports.
f) Modern, future‐thinking management and operational practices.
g) A very high level of service (in all terms) for passengers, companions, visitors, and all other airport customers.
h) Pro‐active and direct partnerships plus coordinated planning, operations and execution between the airport operator, airlines, border control and immigration authorities, law enforcement, transit and transportation authorities, environmental authorities, health authorities, etc.
i) The airport as a social, cultural and economic multiplier for its catchment area.
j) The airport as a multi‐service provider for the Brazilian society, the economy and the aviation industry.

Looking at the above, concessions of airports to private consortiums, authorizations to private firms built and operate private airports, and wise public‐private partnerships (PPPs) immediately come into the debate. We could sum these three as “privatization” options. Following this way, it is possible to list the potential reasons for privatization as:

a) To encourage more efficient and commercial operations.
b) To reduce/minimize government bureaucracies.
c) To secure financing and building of airport infrastructure on a faster pace.
d) To access international expertise.
e) To provide a wider share of ownership.
f) To provide funds for governments (and for non‐profitable airports).
g) To increase flexibility, speed and wider‐view approaches in daily, tactical and strategic decision making.
h) To install or increase direct competition within the airport system (between airports).
i) To indirectly promote airline competition.
j) To turn the airport into a true social catalyzer and economic multiplier.
k) To turn passengers, companions, visitors, airlines, catchment area businesses, etc. into customers and not simple “users”.

However union representatives and other individuals will argue that major airport management and operation is a “strategic” and “sovereign” activity that cannot be passed on to private firms. Besides this, it is common to hear that Infraero is “the largest airport operator in the world” and its critical problems are not internal, but a result of some “unreasonable” federal regulations and very rigid oversight by the TCU, the Brazilian parallel of the U.S. General Accountability Office.

In response to the above, not only there are several much more “strategic” and “sovereign”‐related services that have been privatized in Brazil (telecommunications and water distribution/treatment, just to mention two of a set that could be labeled as “truly strategic”), but there is a set of conveniently forgotten aspects that are never raised by the ones against any sort of privatization:

a) Infraero‐managed airports do not belong to Infraero.
b) Infraero is a state‐owned and state‐controlled company guided by federal government policies, not otherwise!
c) As a direct result of the above, Infraero does not have the right to claim or to input any ‘political pressure’ regarding its preference to manage this or that airport.
d) Infraero is not a concessionary; it is a firm that represents the federal government for airport operation and management.
e) Infraero’s full cross‐subsidy model is not well seen by ICAO.
f) Other state‐owned and state‐controlled organizations are immersed in highly competitive and open markets (like Petrobras, Banco do Brasil, etc. and operate very successfully!), therefore – if faced by strong private airport operators – Infraero should not fear anything.
g) Just as mentioned above, other once 100% state‐controlled and state‐run sectors – much more “strategic” than airports – have been “privatized” in Brazil and the level of service to the general public has been overwhelmingly enhanced if compared to when operated by state firms.

But in order to achieve any significant success in any future airport privatization model (either concessions of the entire airport, or just the passenger terminals, or several PPPs, or authorizations), several aspects must be very well taken care of and special attention must be focused on:

a) The regulator (in the Brazilian case the National Civil Aviation Agency, ANAC) must be strong, proactive, system wide‐thinking/planning, neutral and independent from the government.
b) The regulator must elaborate a wise, thorough and comprehensive (yet uncomplicated) bidding process and the concession/privatization contract itself.
c) The concession contract must contain a future expansion plan for at least a 20‐year horizon.
d) The concession contract must introduce the obligation of an extensive array of plausible, measurable and to‐bepublicized and to‐be‐monitored indicators (social, economic, environmental, etc).
e) The concession contract must impose a set of present and future environmental obligations and responsibilities.
f) The concession contract must impose and state the terms of establishing direct and continuous society/community participation and how it would function as an “outside controller” and a “guardian” of specific
terms of the concession contract itself.

Though privatizing some of its major airports, Brazil would introduce direct competition between airports; with competition comes efficiency and much better services to the public, companions, visitors and to the airlines. Besides privatizing, the federal government could also turn a few major airports to its home States to operate and manage (São Paulo‐Congonhas/CGH would be a clear potential example). By doing this, more competition would take place. And the expectation with all this new competition is that Infraero will definitely be a much better organization.

Many people in Brazil ask “Why privatize?” But the question to be thoroughly answered should be: “Why not?!”

1 Corresponding author: respicio@poli.ufrj.br respicio@institutocepta.org
2 D.Sc. in Transportation Engineering, eriveltonguedes@gmail.com
3 MBA in Air Transport Regulation, dorieldo@hotmail.com
4 rogerio.pecci@gmail.com

Ready for Take-Off? Financing New High-Tech Ventures in the Aviation Industry. The case of the Mainport Innovation Fund.

mainport_innovation_fund“In the rapidly evolving airline industry, emerging technologies could play an increasingly critical role in the delivery of real and perceived customer value” (Taneja, 2010). Taneja, the author of highly interesting books on the aviation business like “Airline survival kit” (2003), “Simpli-Flying” (2004) and “Flying ahead the airplane” (2008) pointed out that innovation is of major relevance for the aviation industry worldwide. Innovation means that new products, services, processes and business models will be introduced successfully to the market. In the field of aviation innovation can be related to the aircraft (e.g. new materials used, avionics and engine technologies) but not necessarily. Innovation is also the introduction of check-in kiosks at airports, new revenue models of the low-cost carriers, the use of social media by airlines and techniques for the decrease of perceived ground noise.  In this short article we discuss why it is not easy to bring an innovative product or service to the market related to the aviation business. But we describe also a venture capital fund initiated in The Netherlands that will support emerging technologies in this domain and speed up innovation: the Mainport Innovation Fund. The introduction of this fund could decrease the hurdles of starting entrepreneurs in the aviation business.

Download PDF

 

See also the below presentation held by Ignaas Caryn, director Innovation & Venturing at KLM, about the Mainport Innovation Fund (in Dutch):

Airport Punctuality, Congestion and Delay: The Scope for Benchmarking

Airport performance benchmarking increasingly requires level-of-service (LoS) indicators for afair comparison among members of the same peer group. For a true performance analysis such inclusion of quality measures is necessary to differentiate airports with similar pure output quantities, i.e. number of aircraft movements. Since variation of scheduled times versus actual times could substantially cause accumulating operating costs for carriers and could furthermore pose the risk and inconvenience of missed connections for the passengers, this article examines determinants of flight delays at airports, and thereby developing performance indicators such as slot capacity utilization, queueing time and punctuality. The essence of underlying phenomena in queueing theory such as Little’s Law, arrival and departure distributions, and cumulative throughput and demand diagrams are briefly explained. This work’s aim is the exploration of ways of measuring and observing performance quality from actual flight schedules with a focus on usability for subsequent airport benchmarking and traffic modeling.


Investigating Airports’ Market Power

airline_gameBy Volodymyr Bilotkach and Andreas Polk

The ongoing liberalization process in aviation affects all segments of the industry. Nowadays we are used to thinking about airlines as competitive firms as if the industry had not been regulated, and airlines had never been state-owned monopolies. But liberalization is more than that. It also affects the upstream production stages, such as the provision of ground-handling services or the supply of airport infrastructure. Whereas the former services are liberalized to a certain extent, airports are subject to regulation in most countries. The argument made here is that airports are regional monopolies and – as they provide necessary infrastructure to the airlines – they need to be regulated. But do airports in fact have market power? And if so, does market power exist with respect to all services an airport provides? If we were asked to evaluate whether a particular airport has market power, how are we to proceed with the analysis? In order to address these questions, it is necessary to apply general economic ideas to the context of the aviation industry. Due to particularities of airport markets, this is not a straightforward task. To address these issues, we first discuss how the assessment of market power of airports relates to the institutional contexts of the hosting countries. We then turn to some of what we think are the most important economic issues for the assessment of the market power of airports, and how these factors might affect the analysis of market power in a particular context of an airport under review.

Download PDF

 

 

%d bloggers like this: