Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
Box 2.1
Forms of airport ownership
• Airport fully owned and operated by a private company - for example, the airports of
the BAA plc: Heathrow, Gatwick, Stansted and others.
• Airport owned by government and by private company - for example, Vienna,
Copenhagen and some of the New Zealand airports.
• Airport owned and operated by government but set up as a separate entity, financially
self-sufficient and working to commercial objectives - for example, Schiphol in
Amsterdam; Aer Rianta Irish Airports; Manchester, UK.
• Airport owned by government but developed and operated by a private concession
on a long-term lease basis. Examples include La Paz, Bolivia; Australian airports (17 air-
ports on 50-year leases).
• Joint venture with airline to develop a terminal or part thereof - for example, Munich
Airport has entered a joint venture where the two parties will develop, finance and
operate a new terminal. Other examples include JFK Terminal 4; Eurohub, Birming-
ham, UK.
•
Airport ground infrastructure owned by state government; terminals operated, leased,
or developed by airlines. This is a common model in the US.
•
Build, operate, transfer (BOT) - for example, the new Athens Airport, opened in
2001, was built by a consortium that included Hochtieff and ABB.
I
MPLICATIONS
OF
CHANGING
OWNERSHIP
OF
AIRPORTS
Advantages and disadvantages
There are various advantages and disadvantages to different forms of airport owner-
ship. Generally, the introduction of commercial objectives (such as maximization of
revenue and minimization of costs) and the involvement of private firms to build,
operate or own airports have relieved the public sector of the huge financial burden
of investment and has enabled development to take place. The nature of the owner-
ship structure determines who reaps the financial rewards and bears the operating
and financial risks.
The pace and scale of airport development has been driven by the new ability of
airport owners to invest and develop. There has also been a trend for management
to seize development opportunities as they arise. This has placed increased pressure
on the planning system and raises policy questions regarding the compatibility of
development with plans for long-term capacity growth.
Increase in commercial activity
Commercial objectives have led to airports being viewed as revenue generators, a
role beyond the traditional definition of an airport as a modal transfer point for air-
line, freight and passenger operation. The comment of a staff member at a European
airport that the operation was no longer an airport but 'a shopping mall with a run-
way beside it' reflects this change of role (Humphreys, 1999). Airports have diversi-
fied their businesses and increased their focus on non-aeronautical sources of
revenue (Barrett, 2000; Parker, 1999). In the future, airports may seek to maximize
returns to their shareholders by diversifying into other activities in preference to
expanding their existing facilities.
