Sitraer 7 (2008) 49-65 – Tr. 85

49

PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT IN AIR TRANSPORT:

BUILDING A PORTUGUESE CASE STUDY

Jorge Silva Beira Interior University, Aerospatial Sciences Department

Covilhã, Portugal

Rosário Macário Lisbon Technical University, Instituto Superior Técnico, CESUR

TIS.PT – Consultores em Transportes, Inovação e Sistemas, S.A.

Lisbon, Portugal

RESUMO Com base em dados publicados pela ICAO estima-se que em 2002, em todo o mundo, mais de 800

transportadoras aéreas tenham assegurado serviços regulares de transporte de passageiros, e que mais de 90

transportadoras aéreas tenham assegurado serviços regulares de transporte de mercadorias. Em 2002 o transporte

regular das companhias aéreas pertencentes aos 188 Estados contratantes da ICAO foi estimado em 1.620

milhões de passageiros e em 30 milhões de toneladas de mercadorias. Os principais 25 aeroportos mundiais

registaram em 2002 uma capacidade total de 1.020 milhões de passageiros. Muito embora este volume de tráfego

represente apenas 33% do total de passageiros transportados em todo o mundo, ele traduz uma assinalável média

diária de 110.000 passageiros por aeroporto. No seu conjunto, estes aeroportos asseguraram cerca de 10.8

milhões de movimentos de aeronaves, isto é, uma descolagem/aterragem a cada 73 segundos por aeroporto.

Entre 1991 e 2001 o transporte regular de passageiros assegurado pelas companhias aéreas europeias aumentou a

um ritmo de 3,5% ao ano. Em 2002 as companhias aéreas europeias registaram 643.840 milhões de passageiro-

quilómetro e 32.900 milhões de tonelada-quilómetro (mercadorias e correio). As transportadoras aéreas e os

aeroportos são dois elementos essenciais na cadeia de valor do negócio do Transporte Aéreo. Este trabalho

apresenta e analisa o desempenho dos principais aeroportos portugueses, e identifica as eventuais lacunas e as

possíveis soluções para as ultrapassar de forma, quer a melhorar a competitividade desses aeroportos quer a

reforçar a sua posição nas redes europeias de transporte aéreo.

ABSTRACT Based on figures published by ICAO, it is estimated that in 2002 more than 800 air carriers worldwide will

provide domestic and/or international scheduled passenger services, and more than 90 air carriers will operate

scheduled freight services. The total scheduled traffic carried by airlines of all (188) ICAO Contracting States in

2002 is estimated at about 390 billion tonne-kilometres. These airlines carried a total of about 1.620 million

passengers and 30 million tonnes of freight. The top 25 worldwide airports, in terms of total passenger’s

throughput, reported at about 1.020 million passengers in 2002. Their passenger traffic represents 33% of the

world total passenger throughput – an average of 110.00 passengers daily per airport. These airports combined

handled about 10.8 million aircraft movements – an average of one take-off/landing every 73 seconds per

airport. Over the 1991-2001 period, only scheduled passenger traffic (PKPs) of the European region airlines

increased at an average annual rate of 3.5%. During 2002, European airlines carried 263.720 thousands of

passengers, while PKPs performed 643.840 millions and freight/mail tonne-kilometres performed 32.900

millions. Air carriers and airports are two key elements in the Air Transport Business value chain. Therefore, this

work presents and analysis of the performance of the main Portuguese airports and identifies the performance

gaps and possible solutions to overcome these problems improving the competitiveness of Portuguese airports

and their position in the European Networks.

1. POSITIVE EFFECTS OF TRANSPORT

1.1. Introduction Any approach chosen to define its concept, the respective researchers reveals unanimous in

affirming that the infrastructures are potentially influent in the economic performance of the

regions, mainly because “(…) expanding the use of existing resources (labour, capital, etc.),

attracting additional resources (…), and making (…) economies more productive”, (Fox and

Porca, 2001:104). But such enthusiasm does not let us loose the well sense concerning the

matter. Izquierdo (1997:49) defends, even without to take in account the positives effects that

indirectly impose in the national economy, that “(…) las infraestruturas (…) no generan

Sitraer 7 (2008) 49-65 – Tr. 85

50

directamente, por sí mismas, desarrollo económico – y en concreto desarrollo regional –

siendo necesario para ello contemplarlas como un elemento del sistema territorial, dentro del

contexto más amplio de la ordenación del territorio”.

This position is also corroborated by the EIB - European Investment Bank, when it underlies

that the objective of the politics of regional development is to create the conditions for an

autonomous and supported growth of the per capita income of the less favoured regions,

allowing it to approach the one of the European average; adding that the infrastructure “(…)

contributes only indirectly to this aim: in itself, it has only a marginal multiplier effect, as

infrastructure use does not contribute significantly either towards increasing the national

product, the creation of permanent jobs or the transfer of technology, nor does it have an

impact as a purchaser on the other regional industries or services. (…) [I]nfrastructure may,

though, act as a catalyst in promoting development”, (EIB, 1998:9). The debate around the

relationship between regional development and, specifically, the infrastructures of transport is

not recent and has been one of all the preferred themes, either among the specialists in this

matter, or among the public in general. For some of them, such link became so obvious that

already does not deserve a special reference allowing, this way, not only to create the illusion

that the transport is simply a consequence of the demand, but also to minimize the impact of

any empirical evidence to this respect. In fact, it is possible to evidence, empirically, the

remarkable regularity verified in the last years, in a lot of countries, in the relationship

between the growth of the transport and the economic growth, which it is as relevant as we

know the successive changes – mainly technical ones, that the several modes have imposed to

the sector. In this context, in the possibility that the transport were only one way to reach

certain purpose, “(…) if it can be economised then we should expect to see a reduction in the

amount of transport necessary to achieve a given level of welfare”, (Vickerman, 2000:2).

In the opinion of Vickerman (2000:2) “(…) it appears that transport faces both a strong

positive income elasticity of demand and an overall price elasticity not far from unity. There

is a suggestion that in terms of both money and time budgets there are a given (proportional)

allocation to transport”. In fact, as it became more accessible and proportionally cheaper, now

it is possible to go even more far away in the same space of time and - also proportionally,

with the same budget. As society evolves it is more common to inhabit in a place far away

from that of work; “(…) even the telecommuter spends about the same time in the week

travelling as the daily commuter, taking the benefits of the telecommuting freedom to live in a

better area”, (Vickerman, 2000:2). Similarly, while in a recent past the vacation and leisure

places were restricted to a set of options, necessarily delightful but also relatively close to

those of residence, nowadays the destinations not rare are offered / choosed outside the

respective countries, inclusively in other continents. Simultaneously, also the transport of

goods faces remarkable changes on account of the companies which look for to wide the

markets, not only those for the supply of the raw materials but also those for the transaction of

the manufactured items.

In this context - and even weighing all the arguments, it is not easy to establish the true

essence of the relationship between the infrastructures of transport and the regional

development, mainly because we are facing two types of impacts, which Vickerman (1996)

thus classifies: non-spatial impacts - those occurring as an imposition in the economic activity

- in general, by the investment in infrastructures; spatial impacts – those occurring as a

consequence of different performances, in different places too, by the infrastructures itselves.

Sitraer 7 (2008) 49-65 – Tr. 85

51

1.2. Non-Spatial Effects 1.2.1. Investment and Productivity

The approach to the relationship between the infrastructures and the development on the basis

of the analysis of the effects imposed for such investments in the economic activity is,

perhaps, the most generalized and the most argued during the last years, mainly since the

arguments presented about this matter for Aschauer (1989, 1990). In the opinion of this

author, the impact of the infrastructures - acting in this particular as public goods, reflects

itself directly into the economy, raising the level of the economic activity and stimulating the

productivity of the private capital; and so, it must be modelled as an additional factor in the

general function of production. However, several critics emerge on account of the role played,

in this particular, by the public infrastructures, mainly because the respective initial impacts

“(…) would be to crowd out private investment by raising either or both the level of taxation

and the interest rate”, (Vickerman, 2000:7). For the same author this was, precisely, the main

reason of the softening of the public investment in infrastructures verified in many countries

in the decades of 70 and 80 of the XX century, which consequences re-echo itselves, still

today, in the quality of the services given for many of them.

However, when Aschauer (1989) used the function of production of Cobb-Douglas to esteem

the elasticity of the infrastructure - “(…) as an additional input to labour and private capital

(…)”, he found figures between 0.4 and 0.5, so high “(…) that the social rate of return would

be in excess of 100% on such investment”, (Vickerman, 2000:7); results that - even arguables,

seem to show how an investment of this nature can be itself an important source of economic

growth, exceeding in the long run any difficulty which, in the moment, can persist. In this

context, the attempts of restriction of the investment in infrastructures justified simply as

measures of budgetary control of the public sector can be, not only unproductives, but also

inconsequents in the attempt to mitigate eventual difficulties; in alternative, a wise forecast in

the public investment can induce the economic growth and the productivity of the private

sector “(…) and more than pay for itself in higher long run growth levels”, (Vickerman,

2000:8). But an approach like this one is not without critiques (Holtz-Eakin, 1993; Holtz-

Eakin and Schwartz, 1995; Holtz-Eakin and Lovely, 1996; Lau and Sin, 1997; Izquierdo,

2003) and at several levels: on the formulation of the model structure, variables and

parameters, on the significance of the correlations, on the evaluation of the real value of the

public infrastructure, etc..

For Izquierdo (2003:13) the results obtained in Spain - and, according to this author,

confirmed in other countries, not only show that the elasticities estimated by Aschauer (1989)

are too much high, but also that “(…) although significant, the impact of infrastructure

investment on productivity and economic growth is therefore not as high as previously

thought”. Therefore, “(…) the best that can be said with any confidence is that infrastructure

investment will have a modest positive contribution on economic growth, but that the more

accurately the opportunity costs are measured, the less attractive return infrastructure

investment offers than other types of public investment expenditure, especially education and

training to enhance human capital”, (Vickerman, 2000:8). This means that economic

estimation of benefits either are the result or impact stage will always be dependent on which

strategic objectives we are targeting and the opportunity costs of that choice. Quantitative cost

benefits approaches despite their rigour seem to fall short to support political decisions,

although they can be thought as sufficient to support the engagement of private investors.

Sitraer 7 (2008) 49-65 – Tr. 85

52

1.2.2. Transport and Market Integration

For an evaluation of the global impact of the transport in the market integration, we assume

that a reduction of the transport costs means, not only the incentive to exportation - and,

necessarily, the perspective of an increase of the income, but also the other face of the same

coin, e.g. the threat of more competitive imports, as accessibility is indeed a two way road -

imposing thus to the (local) industry a reorganization, an increase of efficiency, and a

reduction of the production costs. So the process described is absolutely similar to the one

verified when reduction - or elimination, of certains barriers between economic spaces occurs.

In both cases, the most optimistics forecasts collide with the reality: a reduction of the

transport costs transforms each territory in a positive way but leaving it eventually more

vulnerable to the exterior. To this respect Vickerman (2000:9) underlines some “(…)

important feedback effects in the system”: first, it is necessary to take in mind the impact of

the increase of the production in the markets - in case that these evidence bottlenecks; and

second, the increment of the economic activity by the reduction of the transport costs can lead

precisely to contrary effects of those initially desired - the inherent increase of the demand of

transport can lead to the congestion of some parts of the network justifying, in turn, the

increase of such costs (the effect of traffic inducement (Viegas, 2002) comes in support of this

argument).

1.2.3. Transport and Endogenous Growth

Many of the authors who mention the endogenous growth (Lopes, 1984; Paelinck and Kuiper,

1995; Reigado, 1998; Matos, 2000) admit that certain changes into this level can contribute

for the growth of the economy, “(…) rather than a shock to the system which shifts the level

upwards but ultimately leads to a return to an exogenously given underlying rate of growth”,

(Vickerman, 2000:9). So, the investment in infrastructures of transport will have a rebound

effect into: the processes of industrial reorganization - through, either the entrance and the exit

of companies, or the search of widened markets; the rhythm of transference of the innovation

and the technology - following up that of the exchange of information flows; the increment of

the factors which, in its set, concur for the competitiveness index.

However, a word of caution is also required here since underlying this rational is the

presumption that sectors using transport as productive factors are perfectly competitive and

thus almost immediately incorporate in price the variation of transport costs, which does not

happen always. The real value for the economy of any investment in transport infrastructures

can be directly measured “(…) by the willingness to pay for use of the transport system. Thus

appraisal of any transport improvement has only to measure accurately the transport demand

function and these transport benefits will be a complete and accurate measure of the full

economic value”, (Vickerman, 2000:10). However, there is more to it. In each industry the

willingness to pay for transport varies among the segments and cross subsidization of

transportation costs or of other productive factors by transportation costs exists. Calculation of

real effects of transport infrastructure is not as straightforward as presented by some authors.

1.3. Spatial Effects 1.3.1. Companies Competitiveness

Rietveld and Bruinsma (1998:360) argue that “(…) in the regional economic dynamics,

transport infrastructure improvements can have different impacts in firms. First, existing firms

might grow or decline; second, new firms may emerge; third, infrastructure improvements

may influence the relocation decision of existing firms”. Other authors (Forkenbrock and

Sitraer 7 (2008) 49-65 – Tr. 85

53

Foster, 1996; Cairncross, 1997; Banister and Berechman, 2000) argue that transport

infrastructures do not represent anymore a so important factor of localization as in the past,

due to in one hand the low costs of transport and, on in the other hand, the increasing

participation of information flows to the detriment of physical flows. Still others (Leitham,

McQuaid and Nelson, 2000; Preston, 2001; Holl, 2001), underline that the current industrial

reorganization - based in a competitiveness where the time factor is of capital importance,

made the distribution and the production systems more dependent of the transports and,

therefore, of the access to such infrastructures, mainly those of high quality standard. For

example, Smith and Florida show in 1994 that the Japanese companies of the automobile

sector which fixed itselves in the USA elected, as main factor of localization, precisely the

access to the highway.

To understand the rational at the core of this debate it is necessary to take in account the set of

effects through which the transport infrastructures impose themselves the organization of the

companies and in the respective space distribution and, therefore, in the standards of

development of the regions where they are implemented (Holl, 2004):

• of the location decision - the choice of the localization is one of the strategic decisions

of the companies. The economic approach based on the demand argues that, in

general, companies choose a localization from which they can reach the widest

possible market. Weber (1929), thinking about imperatives of minimization of the

costs, defends that the companies choose a localization according to the relative cost

to carry raw materials and manufactured items to a certain (central) market. There are

of course other influencing factors, such as the acquisition and the storage of stocks, or

taxes and lower costs of installation, cheaper or specialized man power;

• of the area of market and the level of competitiveness - “(…) a reduction in transport

costs can enable firms to increase their competitiveness and to expand their markets,

by lowering prices or profitably serving markets at greater distance where they were

formerly excluded on cost grounds”, (Holl, 2004:538). This can also induce

companies to widen the area where they traditionally operate. The emergent reactions

being dependent on the company and market maturity degree. Very dynamic and

specialised firms and those with potential to exploit economies of scale may be the

most likely to benefit from transport improvements by increasing their ability to sell

over a larger market area, (Holl, 2004);

• of the organization of the production and the structure of the supply - not rarely

transport is considered as “(…) an input factor in the production process (…)”,(Holl,

2004:539); in this particular, a reduction of the transport costs can reflect itself,

directly, in the planning of the production. As an example of the substitution effect,

Holl (2004:539) underlines the “(…) outsourcing, where lower transport costs can

make it economical for the firm to buy-in intermediate inputs that were formerly

produced “in house”;

• of the logistic – in general, the studies directly related with economic impacts of the

infrastructures of transport pay a special attention to the costs. Diamond and Spence developed

in the UK, in the year of 1989, a research in the theme of industrial location, concluding that for

some companies of this sector the transport costs represented, only, a small ratio of the total

devaluating costs. However, “(…) traditional cost estimates do not take into account attributes

like flexibility and reliability, nor indirect effects of how increased speed, flexibility and

reliability affect the scheduling and organisation of activities (…)”, (Holl, 2004:539).

Sitraer 7 (2008) 49-65 – Tr. 85

54

1.3.2. Transport and Labour Market

Holl (2004:540) underlines that “(…) there are potentially important effects from transport

improvements regarding the size of the regional labour market area and firm’s access to

specialised labour skills (…)”; an interaction that Vickerman (2000:15) verifies in two distinct

levels: “(…) first, labour is a major input to all activities and is, in most cases, locationally

specific in that it has to be physically present for the activity to take place. Secondly, transport

affects labour both as an input to production (commuting), and as an input to other activities

(social, leisure, etc.) which constitute the final demand for activities”. In a first reaction, the

area of work market increases: with the reduction of such costs, the workers can now move

themselves more far, at the same (total) cost. This mechanism induces, in general, a bigger

competitiveness in the local work market by the forces of other regions making - not rarely, a

reduction of the wages and/or an increase of the unemployment. But also it allows the local

workers the possibility to reach other markets, in other regions, “(…) which could have the

effect of bidding up wages as firms seek to retain staff”, (Vickerman, 2000:15). Besides, the

negative impacts of such mechanism into the job levels and wages are ambiguous and depend

on the specific characteristics of the job and of the man power in each region. In a second

reaction, it is expected the appearance of migration (residence speaking) phenomenons: a

decreasing of the costs of the commuting movements can transform the region in appraisal

more attractive for all of those who, even working outside it, look now to install themselves

there. In this particular, also the unexpected increment of the supply of man power can imply,

locally, some problems at the level of the wages and/or of the job; counterbalanced however -

and eventually, by emigration movements.

1.3.3. Transport and Real Estate Market

The impacts which a reduction of the costs of the transports, in general, and of the commuting

movements, in particular, can entail, allows the evidence on the complexity of the underlying

phenomenons: any action in that direction origins a set of reactions; which, in turn, interact

with the original actions generating new reactions; and thus successively - as in any dynamic

system (Rietveld, 1994). This justifies the answers given - and almost in simultaneous, for the

work and the housing markets, as a result of the implementation of a new infrastructure,

despite its dependency “(…) on the degree of slack in both of these markets which will

determine whether prices change rapidly or slowly”, (Vickerman, 2000:16). It is largely

recognized that the work market cannot be dealt independently from any others mainly that of

the housing - besides it appears, nowadays, each time more overlap with the increasing

importance imputed to the families where more than one of its elements works externally. On

the other hand, it is recognized the close relationship between the housing market and the

infrastructures of transport - evidencing the direct advantages which this market gathers from

there, perhaps even more than from that one of work. In this context, it is not difficult to

understand the correlation between both markets, neither the advantages / disadvantages that

balance / unbalance situations that can be produced between both.

According to Vickerman (2000), even it may happen that in the long run the restrictions to the

housing market, more than the migratory movements, transform itselves into the main drivers

for the commuting movements. In the opinion of Vickerman (2000) the UK study by

Cameron and Muellbauer, in 1998, underlines the influence that housing market has in the

migratory movements between regions and provides evidence that “(…) differential labour

market effects in contiguous regions lead to commuting being substituted for migration, and

for nearby regions there is a stronger labour market effect on commuting decisions and a

Sitraer 7 (2008) 49-65 – Tr. 85

55

stronger housing market effect on migration decisions”, (Vickerman, 2000:16). Furthermore,

this author (Vickerman, 2000:17) suggests that “(…) from the early work of von Thünen

(1826) this “trade-off” approach shows how the increased costs of access as one moves

further from a market centre lead to a reduction in the price which potential users will bid for

the use of land at a particular location. In equilibrium the total value of land rents in a market

will equal the sum of all the transport costs such that there is a clear link between the quality

of an area’s transport and the local price land”, which represents an important insight for the

valuation of soils.

2. NATIONAL AIRPORTS PERFORMANCE AND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT

2.1. Introduction The Principal Network of Portuguese Airports consists of those international aeronautical

infrastructures which most contribute to air transport figures: Lisbon (Portela), Oporto

(Francisco Sá Caneiro), Faro, Madeira, Porto Santo, Ponta Delgada (John Paul II), Santa

Maria and Lajes. In turn, the Secondary Network consists of those airports and aerodromes,

smaller and therefore which less contribute to those figures.

To characterize the Air Transport in Portugal we divided our research into the following three

steps: first, we analyzed data gathered by INAC, between 1950 and 2000, on aircraft

movements (landings and take-offs) passengers (embarking and disembarking) cargo and mail

(embarking and disembarking) in all the aeronautical infrastructures under the jurisdiction of

ANA (Lisbon, Faro, Oporto, Ponta Delgada, Santa Maria, Horta and Flores) and ANAM

(Madeira and Porto Santo); second, we analyzed the same data gathered simultaneously by

INAC and NAV, between 2001 and 2005, not only in all those mentioned aeronautical

infrastructures but also in Municipal Aerodromes of Cascais and Bragança, Aerodromes of

Corvo, Graciosa and São Jorge, and Airport of Pico; third, and with such data collected from

1950 to 2005, we forecasted the total of aircraft movements, passengers, cargo and mail for a

10 years period, e.g. from 2006 till 2015.

2.2. Air Transport between 1950 – 2000 As mentioned above we started to analyse data collected by INAC between 1950 and 2000,

concerning the total of aircraft movements (landings, followed by take offs) passengers

(individuals transported - excluding crew members and passengers in transit) cargo (goods

transported - including express freight and diplomatic bags, but excluding equipment for

flight completion, supplies, mail in general and luggage) and mail (all sealed bags sent by

CTT or any other authorized dealer, whatever its content) on all the aeronautical

infrastructures under the jurisdiction of ANA and ANAM, (Miguel and Silva, 2005).

Figure 1 shows that the total of aircraft movements increased from 15,655 in 1950 to 227,137

in 2000, e.g. 14.5 times; figure 2 shows that the total of passengers in the same period

increased 208.8 times, e.g. from 94,135 to 19,650,520; figure 3 shows that the total of cargo

increased from 607 tons in 1950 to 163,404 tons in 2000, e.g. 269.2 times; and figure 4 shows

that the total of mail increased 63.6 times in the same period, e.g. from 297 tons to 18,873

tons. For each item the most remarkable increase appeared in 1953 - 30.7% for the total (tons)

of mail, in 1954 - 23.1% for the total of aircraft movements, and in 1964 - 31.9% for the total

of passengers and 45.0% for the total (tons) of cargo.

Sitraer 7 (2008) 49-65 – Tr. 85

56

Figure 1: Total of Aircraft Movements, 1950-2000

Figure 2: Total of Passengers, 1950-2000

Figure 3: Total (Tons) of Cargo, 1950-2000

Figure 4: Total (Tons) of Mail, 1950-2000

During this period (1950 to 2000) there were some values which particularity we want to

underline. Thus, so figure 1 shows that in the beginning of the 60s there was a slight decline

of the aircraft movements due to the start of the Colonial War (in 1961); however, the same

conflict probably gave an important contribution to the increase of air transport figures in later

years. Both figures 1 and 2 show the increase of aircraft movements and passengers until

Sitraer 7 (2008) 49-65 – Tr. 85

57

1974 - the year of April Revolution, date from which those indicators dropped again. Since

1975 air transport figures grew again due to the ongoing process of decolonization too. Surely

in the 80s air transport benefited from the exploitation of new markets offered by the

accession of Portugal to the European Union (1986). In the 90s it should be noted that the

fruition of the Expo'98 in Lisbon led to increases of 14.3% of the total of aircraft movements

and 12.4% of the total of passengers.

It’s also necessary to emphasize that the development of the tourism industry is assuming

each year a growing importance for the improvement of air transport performance. In fact this

is one of the strongest sectors of the Portuguese economy in general, and of some regional

economies too. Really, Portugal has enjoyed either from the abundance of natural resources or

the excellence of it geographical location to attract even more tourists - as Faro and Funchal

Airports are (just) two examples. In turn, cargo and mail transported by air have not been

growing so regularly, as evidenced by some oscillations in both figures 3 and 4 - mainly

concerning the cargo case. In fact, air transport is not the main responsible in Portugal for

either imports or exports of goods. One expects that not only the perception of air mode

competitive advantages but also the synergies resulting from the inclusion in multimodal

networks may contribute to consolidate the image and importance of air freight transport in

the global economy markets.

2.3. The Case for 2001 – 2005 Period Afterwards we analysed data collected simultaneously by INAC and NAV, between 2001 and

2005, concerning the total of aircraft movements, passengers and cargo not only on all the

aeronautical infrastructures under the jurisdiction of ANA and ANAM mentioned above, but

also in Municipal Aerodromes of Cascais and Bragança, Aerodromes of Corvo, Graciosa and

São Jorge, and Airport of Pico, (Miguel and Silva, 2005).

Figure 5 shows that the total of aircraft movements, despite a slight slowdown in 2002

(249.690), increased from 253,838 in 2001 to 322,909 in 2005, e.g. 27.2%; figure 6 shows

that the total of passengers, although a decrease in 2002 (20.218.116), increased from

20,658,762 in 2001 to 23,707,784 in 2005, e.g. 14.8%; and figure 7 shows that the total of

cargo fell from 139,386,818 tons in 2001 to 126,422,303 tons in 2003 (-10.3%), but increased

subsequently reaching 136,012,950 tons in 2005 (7.6%) - however, this means that on the

whole (2001-2005) the total of cargo fell from 139,386,818 tons to 136,012,950 tons (-2.5%).

Figure 5: Total of Aircraft Movements, 2001-2005

Figure 6: Total of Passengers, 2001-2005

Sitraer 7 (2008) 49-65 – Tr. 85

58

Figura 7: Total (Tons) of Cargo, 2001-2005

2.4. Possible Scenarios between 2006 – 2015 Finally, and using data available from 1950 till 2005, we forecasted the total of aircraft

movements, passengers, cargo and mail for a 10 years period, e.g. from 2006 till 2015,

(Miguel and Silva, 2005).

There are several techniques for data forecast. However, but mainly because of the simplicity

of the method, we used the Analysis Tools Application for Microsoft Office Excel under

Windows XP to submit data concerning the total of aircraft movements, passengers, cargo and

mail, between 1950 and 2005, to several trend lines: linear, 2nd order polynomial and

exponential. To validate the line or the curve with the best fit thus obtained, we used the

variance explained proportion, e.g. the (highest) value of R2

(table 1).

� Table 1: Values of R

2

� Aircraft Movements � Passengers � Cargo � Mail

� Linear � 0,8516 � 0,8780 � 0,9432 � 0,9501

� 2nd Degree Polynomial � 0,9669 � 0,9896 � 0,9551 � 0,9763

� Exponential � 0,9769 � 0,9258 � 0,8681 � 0,9159

According with the values of R2 shown in table 1, the trend lines we got for the total of

aircraft movements, passengers, cargo and mail, between 1950 and 2005, are those

represented in figures 8, 9, 10 and 11.

� Figure 8: Exponential Trend Line for the Evolution

� of the Total of Aircraft Movements, 1950-2005

Sitraer 7 (2008) 49-65 – Tr. 85

59

� Figure 9: 2nd Degree Polynomial Trend Line for the

� Evolution of the Total of Passengers, 1950-2005

� Figure 10: 2nd Degree Polynomial Trend Line for the

� Evolution of the Total (tons) of Cargo, 1950-2005

� Figure 11: 2nd Degree Polynomial Trend Line for the

� Evolution of the Total (tons) of Mail, 1950-2005

However, we verified experimentally that some values forecasted through equations

previously indicated – the cases of the Evolution of the Total of Passengers (trend line 2nd

degree polynomial) and of the Evolution of the Total (tons) of Mail (trend line 2nd

degree

polynomial), were not compatible with the reality; for example, in 2006 the figures so

forecasted were - 612,903,086 (negative) and 4,300,280 tons (very high) - respectively.

Sitraer 7 (2008) 49-65 – Tr. 85

60

In the case of the Total of Passengers, and according to the (decreasing) values of R2 in table

1, we tried one after another firstly the exponential and secondly the linear trend lines -

without any improvement too. Therefore, in this particular we decided to use the FORECAST

function of the Analysis Tools Application for Microsoft Office Excel under Windows XP,

with data set covering the period between 1995 and 2005. In the case of the Total (tons) of

Mail, and also according to the (decreasing) values of R2 in table 1, we thought about to try

one after another firstly the linear and secondly the exponential trend lines. However, as we

obtained just for the first mentioned essay a set of acceptable results, in this particular we

choose precisely the linear trend line - as shown in figure 12.

� Figure 12: Linear Trend Line for the Evolution

� of the Total (tons) of Mail, 1950-2005

In summary, the equations (techniques) used to forecast values of the total of aircraft

movements, passengers, cargo and mail, between 2006 and 2015, were the following:

• Aircraft Movements: y = 2E-43e (0,0554x)

(R2 = 0,9769)

• Passengers: FORECAST (Analysis Tools, Microsoft Office Excel, Win XP)

• Cargo: y = 24,608x2-94165x+9E+07 (R

2 = 0,9551)

• Mail: y = 365,61x-715196 (R2 = 0,9501)

Thus, so we built not only table 3 correspondent to the Forecast of the Total of Aircraft

Movements, Passengers, Cargo and Mail, from 2006 to 2015, but also figures 13, 14, 15 and

16 correspondents (in that order) to the Total of Aircraft Movements, Passengers, Cargo and

Mail, Effectives and Forecasted, from 1950 till 2015.

� Table 3: Forecast of the Total of Aircraft Movements,

� Passengers, Cargo (tons) and Mail (tons), 2006-2015 � Year Aircraft Movements � Passengers � Cargo (tons) � Mail (tons)

� 2006 � 300.676 � 24.631.699 � 128.488 � 18.218

� 2007 � 317.772 � 25.631.993 � 133.075 � 18.583

� 2008 � 335.839 � 26.632.288 � 137.711 � 18.949

� 2009 � 354.934 � 27.632.583 � 142.396 � 19.314

� 2010 � 375.115 � 28.632.877 � 147.131 � 19.680

� 2011 � 396.443 � 29.633.172 � 151.915 � 20.046

� 2012 � 418.984 � 30.633.466 � 156.748 � 20.411

� 2013 � 442.807 � 31.633.761 � 161.630 � 20.777

� 2014 � 467.983 � 32.634.056 � 166.561 � 21.143

� 2015 � 494.592 � 33.634.350 � 171.542 � 21.508

Sitraer 7 (2008) 49-65 – Tr. 85

61

Figure 13: Total of Aircraft Movements,

Efectives and Forecasted, 1950-2015

Figure 14: Total of Passengers, Effectives

and Forecasted, 1950-2015

Figure 15: Total (Tons) of Cargo, Effectives

and Forecasted, 1950-2015

Figure 16: Total (Tons) of Mail, Effectives

and Forecasted, 1950-2015

3. AIR TRANSPORT SERVICES AND NEW ECONOMY ACTIVITIES

3.1. Introduction Perhaps a good criterion for measuring the success of an air transport system should be the

ability to use air travel as a competitive advantage in a global economy, (Button and Taylor,

2000).

Sitraer 7 (2008) 49-65 – Tr. 85

62

On one hand, air transport is an important issue for the success of tourism in a lot of regions,

mainly for two reasons: changes in technology affect both size and speed of aircrafts, and the

real cost of travel fell through low cost packages and tourist discounts. Thus, so “(…) as

market demand is highly elastic at the lower price level, this has led to a large increase in

demand (…)”, (Cole, 1998:430). On the other hand, air transport is also an important input for

the development of non-leisure-based industries all over the world, mainly for those which

promote interpersonal linkages. In fact, not only passenger air transport is crucial to some of

those industries, but also many of “(…) such firms also rely on a range of air freight services

to provide quality service to customers and to operate just-in-time production management”,

(Button and Taylor, 2000:209).

3.2. New Economy and Air Services Air transport is commonly used by all categories of business, but it became particularly

important for those categories engaged in what Button and Taylor (2000) call new economy

activities, e.g., business categories requiring for those companies involved easy inter-personal

contacts only possible with high-quality transport services. Thus, so these authors listed 125

new activities in the following 11 groups: IT Software, IT Services, Telecom Services,

Advanced Materials, Aerospace, Biotechnology, Energy and Environment, Electronics,

Transportation, Management and Services, and Technology Industrial Manufacturing.

The impact evaluation of these new services over the territories is not an easy task, (Barros,

2008; Halpern and Pagliary, 2008; Tapiador et al, 2008) mainly for two reasons: services

themselves may interact in several combinations, and territories themselves may react in

several ways too accordingly to its own endogenous characteristics, (Cole, 1998). However,

Button and Taylor (2000) consider these spatial and non-spatial impacts in terms of four

mainly effects:

• Primary effects: these are the direct and immediate benefits to a region for the creation

of new services and / or the expansion of others still existing. They may include the

need for some physical improvements over the local air infrastructure but they may

bring some local benefits too on account of the wages and incomes the workers and

companies consequently spend in the region. Although these are gains to the local

economy, they are of short term and usually limited in their order of magnitude;

• Secondary effects: these are the longer term effects. Usually they are linked with the

local economic benefits of the air service operations mainly due to the employment

involved directly with handling the aircraft, passengers and cargo. There are also very

important indirect secondary effects over the local economy concerning the on-going

income flow of air service operations in terms of employment and income in general

and taxation revenue for local authorities in particular. The secondary effects size over

the territories depends upon airport operations volume and nature;

• Tertiary effects: these are the effects over the local economy resultant of air transport

services at the disposal of both, individuals and companies. Usually, the development

of business activities require the use of transportation in general, but those engaged

with the new economy are surely involved with the air mode in particular, because

they need easy inter-personal contacts only possible with high-quality transport

services. Usually, these companies sets act as the basis for local economic

development, mainly for two reasons: they present a considerable geographical

Sitraer 7 (2008) 49-65 – Tr. 85

63

mobility, and they belong to an important growth sector;

• Perpetuity effects: as Aschauer (1989, 1990) underlines there are empirical evidences

that infrastructure investment reflects itself into the regional economy, by raising the

activity level and stimulating the productivity, thus acting as a catalyst for higher

economic growth in the appraisal area. Also some growth theories, like the

endogenous one, sustain that the regional economic growth, once started, becomes

self-sustaining and may inclusively accelerate. Thus, so the air transport services

development acting as a kick-start mechanism may set in progress larger and longer

term crossed regional economic development processes of wide scope and density,

leading no doubt to profitable scale economies.

Button and Taylor (2000) mention that a few empirical works has been conducted on the

linkages between the new economy activities and air transport services, much of them

involving interviews with local business agents In general, the associated results underline the

eventual existence of those services in the vicinity as an important decision factor in the

localization of the companies. However, that approach based on interviews may experiment

some practical difficulties, mainly because many respondents often fell themselves free to

prior support the idea of a positive link between the new economy activities and air transport

services as they have no direct costs to bear if these services appear or are expanded, but only

benefits. “An alternative is to use numerical methods and to focus purely on the more direct

effects of air services on a local economy, namely those associated with the airline service per

se and the multiplier implications of this for the local economy”, (Button and Taylor,

2000:215).

In conclusion, some authors reveals unanimous in stating that infrastructures are potentially

influent in the economic performance of the regions, mainly because the opportunities for

“(…) expanding the use of existing resources (labour, capital, etc.), attracting additional

resources (…), and making (…) economies more productive”, (Fox and Porca, 2001:104).

However, Izquierdo (1997:49) underlines that “(…) las infraestruturas (…) no generan

directamente, por sí mismas, desarrollo económico – y en concreto desarrollo regional –

siendo necesario para ello contemplarlas como un elemento del sistema territorial, dentro del

contexto más amplio de la ordenación del territorio”. Also the EIB (European Investment

Bank) argues that “(…) itself, it has only a marginal multiplier effect, as infrastructure use

does not contribute significantly either towards increasing the national product, the creation of

permanent jobs or the transfer of technology, nor does it have an impact as a purchaser on the

other regional industries or services. (…) [I]nfrastructure may, though, act as a catalyst in

promoting development”, (EIB, 1998:9).

4. CONCLUSIONS For a long time that attention is paid to the economic impact of transport systems over the

regional development, air infrastructures in particular. In general, the regional impacts

generated by the existence of an infrastructure, such as an airport, will be greater the more

services it offers and the wider the range of destinations it allows. However, this relationship

may be non-linear, mainly because from a commercial point of view airlines will provide

prior flights to the most attractive destinations than to the ones less important, (Silva, 2005).

The size and the endogenous characteristics are important too, as new economy activities will

be attracted easier to larger regions with a significant population amount and an important

Sitraer 7 (2008) 49-65 – Tr. 85

64

market area than to smaller ones sparsely populated and with a weak entrepreneurship

dynamic. Indeed, those territories not only offer a wider potentially suitable labor market but

also provide a larger one for goods and services produced. So the overall conclusion is that,

within limits, air transport stimulates further growth in the economy but it is also fostered by

the dimension of the hinterland itself, which adds to airport management a requirement of

strategic marketing, (Silva, 2005).

REFERENCES Aschauer, D. (1989) Is Public Expenditure Productive?, Journal of Monetary Economics, 23, 177-200.

Aschauer, D. (1990) Why Infrastructure is Important?, in A. Munnell (ed), Is there a Shortfall in Public Capital

Investment?, Conference Series No 34, Boston, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.

Barros, C. (2008) Technical Efficiency of UK Airports, Journal of Air Transport Management, 14, 175-178.

Banister, D. and J. Berechman (2000) Transport Investment and Economic Development, London, UCL Press.

Button, K. and S. Taylor (2000) International Air Transportation and Economic Development, Journal of Air

Transport Management, 6, 209-222.

Cairncross, F. (1997) The Death of the Distance. How the Communications Revolution Will Change Our Lives,

Harvard, Harvard Business School Press.

Cole, S. (1998) Applied Transport Economics. Policy, Management and Decision Making (2nd

Edition), London,

Kogan Page Limited.

Diamond, D. and N. Spence (1989) Infrastructure and Industrial Costs in British Industry, London, HMSO.

EIB (1998) Contribution of Major Road and Rail Infrastructure Projects to Regional Development,

Luxembourg, EIB.

Forkenbrock, D. and N. Foster (1996) Highway and Business Location Decisions, Economic Development

Quaterly, 10, 3, 239-248.

Fox, W. and S. Porca (2001) Investing in Rural Infrastructure, International Regional Science Review, 24, 1,

103-133.

Halpern, N. and R. Pagliary (2007) Governance Structures and the Market Orientation of Airports in Europe’s

Peripheral Areas, Journal of Air Transport Management, 13, 376-382.

Holl, A. (2001) Transport Infrastructure in Lagging European Regions, Ph.D. Dissertation, Sheffield, University

of Sheffield.

Holl, A. (2004) The Role in Firm’s Spatial Organization: Evidence from the Spanish Food Processing Industry,

European Planning Studies, 12, 4, 537-550.

Holtz-Eakin, D. (1993) State Specific Estimates of State and Local Government Capital, Regional Science and

Urban Economics, 23, 185-210.

Holtz-Eakin, D. and A. Schwartz (1995) Infrastructure in a Structural Model of Economic Growth, Regional

Science and Urban Economics, 25, 131-151.

Holtz-Eakin, D. and M. Lovely (1996) Scale Economies, Returns to Variety, and the Productivity of Public

Infrastructure, Regional Science and Urban Economics, 26, 105-123.

Izquierdo, R. (1997) Gestión y Financiación de las Infraestruturas del Transporte Terrestre, Madrid, Asociación

Española de la Carretera.

Izquierdo, R. (2003) Economic Impacts of Infrastructure Investment: the Spanish Infrastructure Plan 2000-2001,

in ECMT (ed), 16th

International Symposium on Theory and Practice in Transport Economics,

Budapest, ECMT.

Lau, S. and C. Sin (1997) Public Infrastructure and Economic Growth: Time Series Properties and Evidence,

Economic Record, 73, 125-135.

Leitham, S., R. McQuaid and J. Nelson (2000) The Influence of Transport on Industrial Location Choice: a

Stated Preference Experiment, Transportation Research A, 34, 515-535.

Lopes, A. (1984) Desenvolvimento Regional. Problemática, Teoria, Modelos, Segunda Edição, Lisboa,

Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian.

Matos, F. (2000) Ordenamento do Território e Desenvolvimento Regional, Tese de Doutoramento, Covilhã,

Universidade da Beira Interior.

Miguel, R. and J. Silva (2006) Transporte Aéreo em Portugal, Trabalho Final de Licenciatura em Engenharia

Aeronáutica, Covilhã, Universidade da Beira Interior, Departamento de Ciências Aeroespaciais.

Paelinck, J. and J. Kuiper (1995) Regional Development in Portugal, in Universidade da Beira Interior e Centro

de Estudos e Desenvolvimento Regional (eds), Seminário Investigação, Inovação e Desenvolvimento

Transfronteiriço III, Covilhã, UBI.

Sitraer 7 (2008) 49-65 – Tr. 85

65

Preston, J. (2001) Integrating Transport with Socio-economic Activity. A Research Agenda for the Millennium,

Journal of Transport Geography, 9, 13-24.

Reigado, F. (1998) XII Aniversário da Universidade da Beira Interior. Oração de Sapiência, Covilhã, UBI.

Rietveld, P. (1994) Spatial Economic Impacts of Transport Infrastructure Supply, Transportation Research A,

28A, 4, 329-341.

Rietveld, P. and F. Bruinsma (1998) Is Transport Infrastructure Effective? Transport Infrastructure and

Accessibility: Impacts on the Space Economy, Berlin, Springer-Verlag.

Silva, J. (2005) As Acessibilidades como Factor do Desenvolvimento de Regiões Periféricas. O Caso da Beira

Interior, Tese de Doutoramento, Lisboa, Universidade Técnica de Lisboa, Instituto Superior Técnico.

Smith, D. and R. Florida (1994) Agglomeration and Industrial Location. An Econometric Analysis of Japanese-

affiliated Manufacturing Establishments in Automotive-related Industries, Journal of Urban

Economics, 36, 23-41.

Tapiador, F., A. Mateos and J. Martí-Henneberg (2008) The Geographical Efficiency of Spain’s Regional

Airports: a Quantitative Analysis, Journal of Air Transport Management, 14, 205-212.

Vickerman, R. (1996) Location, Accessibility and Regional Development: the Appraisal of Trans-European

Networks, Transport Policy, 2, 4, 225-234.

Vickerman, R. (2000) Transport and Economic Growth, in Regional Science Association International (ed), 6th

World Congress of the RSAI, Lugano, RSAI.

Viegas, J. (2002) A Expansão de Infraestruturas: Efeitos Directos e Indirectos, Avaliação, Definição de

Prioridades, Lição proferida no âmbito da disciplina de Políticas e Financiamento de Transportes, do

Mestrado em Transportes, Lisboa, Instituto Superior Técnico.

Weber, A. (1929) A Theory of the Location of Industries, Chicago, Chicago UP.

AUTHORS’ ADDRESSES:

Jorge Silva, jmiguel@ubi.pt

Rosário Macário, rosariomacario@civil.ist.utl.pt