- Email: [email protected]
Airport Choice
C H A P T E R
7 Airport Choice Tim RYLEY Griffith University, Nathan, Brisbane, QLD, Australia C H A P T E R 7.1 Introduction
83
7.2 The Role of Airports in the Aviation System
84
7.3 Methodologies to Determine Choice for Air Transport Applications
85
7.4 Air Transport Applications With a Focus on Airport Choice for Tourists 7.4.1 Choice Modelling Case Studies 7.4.2 Clustering Market Segments of Tourists
O U T L I N E 7.4.3 Airport Catchment Areas 7.4.4 Airport Region Strategic Planning 7.4.5 Technology Developments
87 87 88
7.5 Conclusions
88
References
89
86 86 87
7.1 INTRODUCTION Individual travel motivations, particularly for leisure trips, relate to aspects such as location of friends and relatives, social commitments, flexibility of travel, and preferences for a particular surface access mode and airline. Aggregate leisure travel demand can change for a range of reasons including air fare fluctuations, specific events such as terrorism attacks, and wider trends of holiday destination preferences. Tourism opportunities for individuals have increased following the global rise in low-cost carriers. Typically, tourists can travel more cheaply and to more destinations. As secondary airports around metropolitan areas have developed, so travellers have a wider range of airports to choose from. Individual travellers can be grouped according to distinct market segments that behave differently in response to price changes, typically split into business (further split into ‘routine’ and ‘urgent’) and leisure (further split into ‘holidays’ and ‘visiting friends and relations’) passengers. Therefore this chapter refers to the ‘holidays’ or leisure component of the traveller market segment. Whilst the focus is primarily on leisure travel, it is acknowledged that there is sometimes a blurring between the leisure and business traveller dichotomy. An example is when an individual goes on a trip which covers both categories, say a week at a business event followed by a week-long holiday in the same location (see Chapter 3). This chapter discusses the factors influencing the tourist choice of airport. Following this introduction on the background tourist choice concepts, the airport context is summarised. Underpinning methodologies that can determine choice for air transport applications are reviewed, before discussion on a series of themes relating to air transport applications that have a focus on airport choice for tourists: the role of airport catchment areas, airport region strategic planning, and possible impacts of technology development. The focus within the chapter is on individuals as tourists and the underlying choices they make relating to air travel. Leisure travellers typically respond differently accordingly to a range of factors, and one is life stage that as
Air Transport—A Tourism Perspective. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-812857-2.00007-5
83
© 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
84
7. Airport Choice
individuals they go through. Four specific life stages that affect air travellers were identified in Davison and Ryley (2013): prefamily, family with children, empty nesters when children have left home, and retirement. Having children appears to be the life stage with the greatest effect on travel behaviour, as travellers have to be more organised, well planned, and less flexible with the choice of holiday destinations. This contrasts with the prefamily leisure travellers that comprise market segments such as young people wanting to party, student backpackers, and dual income couples. Life stage-based market segments will typically exhibit certain tourism behaviours. For instance, tourists in retirement are still more likely than other segments to use travel agents, package holiday offerings, travel from a local airport, and return to previous holiday destinations. There are differences between the types of tourist trip people take, from weekend breaks, through to traditional 2 week summer holidays, and to longer term travelling such as student gap years. The type of tourist trip affects the destinations. A survey of East Midlands’ residents of the United Kingdom (Davison and Ryley, 2010) focused on eight of the most popular low-cost carrier destinations. The destination types covered mainly weekend breaks (Berlin and Prague), a mix of weekend and week-long holidays (Edinburgh, Dublin, and Rome), and mainly weeklong holidays (Malaga, Alicante, and Faro). A further interesting insight from this work is evidence of tourists trading between city destinations so that, for example, once they have visited one such as Rome they will then try another such has Prague. The opportunities afforded by low-cost air travel have enabled many of the population in the United Kingdom to be able to make international leisure trips. A Civil Aviation Authority report (Civil Aviation Authority, 2006) examined the impact of low-cost carriers in the United Kingdom, including the types of people who benefit. There was growth in low-cost carrier-based leisure travel between 1995 and 2005 across all socioeconomic groups, but it was greater for the higher socioeconomic groups. The amount of travel by the lowest socioeconomic groups increased from 1.8 million United Kingdom leisure passengers in 1995 to 3.0 million in 2005, but the share decreased slightly from 8.7% to 7.7%. The range of aviation choices that tourists face need to be conceptualised, from the time they consider a holiday up to and including when they actually travel. Such choices include: Which origin airport to fly from? Which destination airport to land at? How to get to these airports via surface transport? Which airline to travel with? For some aviation choices there may be only one option, for example, if there is only one airline flying between the origin and destination airports (sometimes perceived within an airport-pair choice framework). There is still a choice in this, whether to take this flight or the default option of not travelling. A further choice option available in some situations is whether the individual could take an alternative transport mode to flying, most typically high-speed rail (see Chapter 6). The two key characteristics affecting most air travel choices are cost and time (see some of the aviation choice reference examples such as Hess and Polak, 2005, and Proussaloglou and Koppelman, 1999). In addition, tourists value distances to and from the airports in relation to the holiday origin and destination. Passengers are interested in door-to-door travel time not just the duration of the flight. The complexity increases if public transport is used for either surface access trip, as tourists also have to get to and from the public transport mode. Surface access modes of public transport options include taxi, bus, and rail. The travel behaviour issues for airport access are different from other surface transport contexts. For instance, when accessing airports individuals will often not use public transport as they have to take bags with them. A further complication is that surface access trips involve other individuals that can affect the tourist air travel choice process. Principal amongst them are meet-and-greet individuals, people travelling to and from airports to see off or welcome back an air traveller, typically a family member or friend.
7.2 THE ROLE OF AIRPORTS IN THE AVIATION SYSTEM The main focus in this chapter is on individual tourist responses as a function of demand, but there are also links to the supply side, i.e. what is on offer to the traveller. The level of supply in an airport context covers a range of interrelated factors such as the underlying cost and availability of fuel, the types of aircraft available at the airport, the application and use of technology, airport management approaches, and airport capacity development and constraints (Kazda and Caves, 2007). Airport development starts initially with an ad hoc single airport for a city. Over time further secondary airports are built, often for technical and political reasons. There are some currently city airport systems with two airports, a traditional large airport together with a smaller secondary one. Typical European airport systems examples include Frankfurt versus Hahn, Barcelona versus Gerona, and Brussels versus Charleroi.
II. BEFORE TRAVELLING: CHOOSING TRANSPORT MODES, AIRLINES, AND AIRPORTS
7.3 Methodologies to Determine Choice for Air Transport Applications
85
Whilst there is development of individual airports, typically through their own Master plans, ideally wider strategic planning is required for city regions of two or more airports to ensure a more efficient use of resources and a better provision of air services. It can be hindered by airports in one system having different owners, for example, Brussels Airport (Brussels Airport Company) and Charleroi (‘Brussels South’, Government of Wallonia), where there is no overarching strategic policy body. There are now many distinct multiairport regions around the world, and airports within the system tend to complement and compete with each other. de Neufville and Odoni (2013) identify 31 metropolitan regions in the world that generate more than 15 million originating passengers. The largest five regions, in order, are London, Tokyo, New York, Paris, and Los Angeles. For the largest region, London, the development of secondary airports has evolved to enable certain airports to have particular low-cost carriers and to serve certain markets: Gatwick (African and South American destinations), Stansted (Ryanair with a focus on low-cost carriers), Luton (EasyJet with a focus on holiday charters), and London City (access to financial district). Airports vary in terms of public and private ownership, and opportunities for growth in terms of surrounding space available and the planning process. Their focus varies across different countries and regions of the world, as documented in Caves and Gosling (1999). One example is airports in Germany, where there is a lengthy planning process often constrained by an influential environmental lobby. Another example is the Greek airport system, which has a tourism and social trip focus, and many airports have strong local authority control. Many tourism-based airports are focused primarily on inbound or outbound leisure travellers, as demonstrated by consumers near Northern European ‘outbound’ airports taking summer sun holidays via Southern European ‘inbound’ airports. Some airports do attempt to attract both inbound and outbound leisure travellers. One example, Cardiff International Airport, is likely to always predominate with outbound Welsh travellers going on holiday, but has been trying to build up Cardiff as a city-based tourist attraction (Davison et al., 2010). de Neufville and Odoni (2013) outline how some major airports develop specific terminals with a sole focus on low-cost carriers and thereby primarily leisure travellers, such as Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport (terminal 3). These ‘budget terminals’ are often in stark contrast to high specification and expensive terminals that house legacy carriers, although it does not necessarily mean that airport charges will differ between terminals. As shown previously, some multiairport systems such as London (Luton) and Frankfurt (Hahn) have this scaled up with airports specifically dedicated to low-cost carrier services. The economic viability of airports remains important, even following a period of growth in most regions worldwide. Airport income tends to be split into aeronautical and nonaeronautical revenue streams. Airports attempt to make as much income as possible from travellers via nonaeronautical revenue, typically through retailing and parking ventures. The desire of an airport to build shopping malls and generate parking revenue is an interesting tension when there are environmental as well as economic priorities.
7.3 METHODOLOGIES TO DETERMINE CHOICE FOR AIR TRANSPORT APPLICATIONS This section reviews a couple of underpinning methodologies that can be used to determine choice for air transport, discrete choice modelling, and market segmentation. The first methodology is the development of discrete choice models, a widely accepted technique originating from economic consumer theory that has been used in transport research since the 1970s (see Ben-Akiva and Lerman, 1985; Louviere et al., 2000). The choices are deemed to be discrete because individuals make choices from a set of mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive alternatives. In an aviation example, the destination airport choice for a holiday would be made from a discrete set of airport alternatives. Quantitative data input to these choice models can either come from available revealed preference data or from specifically designed stated preference survey experiments, which enable the mental processes of consumers to be considered. Modelling based on stated preferences also has the advantage of enabling the analysis of hypothetical scenarios under experimental conditions. Stated preference-based discrete choice models can be utilised to predict consumer behaviour and forecast what travellers do under changed circumstances. For example, what will happen to demand if all air fares increase by 10%, or if journey time to and from the airport falls by 20%? However, forecasts generated from stated preference data can be subject to bias, typically if respondents state something in the experiment but act differently in practice. Initial air travel choice modelling examples tended to focus on flight choice (Proussaloglou and Koppelman, 1999; Mason, 2000), airline choice (Hensher et al., 2001), and airport choice (Brooke et al., 1994; Hess and Polak, 2005).
II. BEFORE TRAVELLING: CHOOSING TRANSPORT MODES, AIRLINES, AND AIRPORTS
86
7. Airport Choice
Over time the models have taken on more complicated structures to take account of increasing complex behavioural aspects. For example, Hess et al. (2013) incorporate the three choices of airport, airline, and surface access transport mode into one nested model structure. The second methodology concerns market segmentation, assuming that a market as a whole does not consist of homogeneous individuals. Typically, a market is segmented using the exploratory, statistical technique of cluster analysis and according to demographic variables such as age, gender, and income. These are the type of variables examined together with transport data and air travel characteristics, which can identify aviation-related passengers who share similar attitudes and characteristics, and future policy can be targeted accordingly. Cluster analysis has been applied to a range of aviation market segmentation examples, including Davison and Ryley (2013) and Budd et al. (2014). Some of the air travel discrete choice model examples also consider market segments, typically splitting the output according to the leisure and business traveller dichotomy, such as Brooke et al. (1994), or by using survey data solely targeting a particular market segment, such as business travellers in Mason (2000). There are complexities associated with individual decision-making and behaviour that make applications, such as air transportation and tourists, difficult to analyse and model. For instance, discrete choice models have an assumption of rational decision-making which is not always the case. In addition, cluster analysis can seem to be simplistic and not take account of complexities such as within-segment variations, atypical consumers, and the way that people can change segment over time. A further assumption of both methodologies is that individuals act independently, whereas in reality they typically make decisions linking with other people, say family and friends close to them. The emergence of social media in recent years has reinforced this influence and associated techniques such as social network analysis offers opportunities to examine the relationships between individual decision-makers. It has recently been applied to transport examples (e.g. Ryley and Zanni, 2013), and so could be expanded into air transport and tourism research. The quality of data collected is important for the outcomes of the methodological techniques to be applied, whether it is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Collecting new and original aviation data can mean that some difficulties arise if it is undertaken at an airport. Security procedures mean that it can be hard to access an airport, and the survey locations within terminals need to be considered to ensure a sample without bias. For instance, surveys need to be undertaken across a full section of terminals and departure gates to ensure a representative range of destinations are covered. They should also cover wider periods of time, as behaviour often changes across days of the week as well as months and seasons over a year. Having the data collection effort away from airports, say direct targeting of households, can be easier and ensure a wider cross-section of the population, although some of the sample may be infrequent flyers or individuals who have never flown (for a discussion of these groups, see Chapter 4). Recent technological developments, such as information recorded on mobile devices and the associated big data capability will enable a greater quantity and a higher quality of data, and enable more advanced methodologies and improves outcomes for air transport and tourism applications. Despite the opportunities offered by big data, sample representativeness will still need to be ensured and appropriate analytical techniques applied in order to make the most of the expanded data.
7.4 AIR TRANSPORT APPLICATIONS WITH A FOCUS ON AIRPORT CHOICE FOR TOURISTS This section provides more focus on themes bringing together air transportation applications with a focus on airport choice for tourists. Initially, the methodologies applied (choice modelling and clustering market segments) are considered, before a range of relevant themes are discussed. These cover the role of airport catchment areas, airport region strategic planning, and possible impacts of technology development.
7.4.1 Choice Modelling Case Studies Many studies focus on tourists within the more general leisure trip market segment, as opposed to business travellers. One example is the stated preference choice modelling study by Proussaloglou and Koppelman (1999), based on telephone survey data of respondents in Chicago and Dallas. They developed a choice framework consisting of air carrier, flight schedule, and fare class and determined that leisure trip-makers have a lower willingness to pay for airline offerings, such as a frequent-flyer programme, than business travellers. A stated preference choice modelling study of business travellers by Mason (2000) provided insights into leisure trip-makers. It was demonstrated that business travellers from small-to-medium companies are attracted to low-cost carriers, showing that it is not just leisure trip-makers using this airline type. II. BEFORE TRAVELLING: CHOOSING TRANSPORT MODES, AIRLINES, AND AIRPORTS
7.4 Air Transport Applications With a Focus on Airport Choice for Tourists
87
A number of more specific airport choice studies have been undertaken, again covering business and leisure travellers. A particularly interesting case study is for the multiairport region of San Francisco (Hess and Polak, 2005). They studied the following three San Francisco airports (using 1995 data): San Francisco International (15 million passengers, 56%), Oakland International (7.7 million passengers, 29%), and San Jose Municipal (4.2 million passengers, 16%). There three significant attributes affecting choice are fare, frequency, and access journey time. Those not significant are access journey cost, flight time, number of operators on route, aircraft size, and airport on-time performance. Results were further split by resident and visitor passenger, in addition to the leisure and business traveller dichotomy. One outcome identified was a higher relative desire for greater daily flight frequencies by visitor leisure travellers than resident leisure trip-makers.
7.4.2 Clustering Market Segments of Tourists Passengers naturally have a strong preference for the nearest airport, but passengers do trade between airports, especially if they have had a good previous experience. Parking costs and departure time can be more influential than flight cost, as shown by survey results split by market segment within Davison and Ryley (2010) from residents of the East Midlands region of the United Kingdom. The ‘employed frequent flyers’ and ‘less mobile low earners’ showed a particular preference for an early flight, whereas the more price sensitive ‘retired annual holiday makers’ preferred lower parking costs. As also documented in Davison and Ryley (2010), these market segments have tourism preferences. ‘Retired annual holiday makers’ and ‘retiring frequent flyer’ segments did not mind returning to locations they have visited before and had been discouraged from flying due to recent changes in airport security. ‘Frequent flyer’ segments were demonstrated to be least satisfied by destinations from nearest regional airport and more likely to holiday abroad rather than in the United Kingdom. Perhaps a future trend could be the promotion of holidaying domestically rather than abroad (the so-called staycation—see Davison and Ryley, 2016 for further discussion), to infrequent flyers on environmental or financial grounds, if the cost of air travel increases.
7.4.3 Airport Catchment Areas Passengers are willing to travel long distances to access airports, as documented by Ryley and Davison (2008). Most residents of the East Midlands region of the United Kingdom have used the local airports (East Midlands Airport, 88% and Birmingham International Airport, 79%), but it is of interest that many have also travelled further to access the London airports (Heathrow, 67%; Gatwick, 63%; Luton, 58%; and Stansted, 44%). This is typically a journey of between 1 and 2 h travel time, with all London airports over 80 miles away. Many airports such as those in London now have large overlapping catchment areas. The spatial dimension of this has been demonstrated visually by 120-min mapping (using isochrones) of selected UK airports (Wiltshire, 2018). Thelle and Sonne (2018) have demonstrated that almost two-thirds of Europeans live within a two-hour drive of at least two airports, further demonstration of overlapping catchment areas accordingly and a high degree of choice in a dynamic airport system. Catchment areas can be measured by a range of indicators, for example, distance, travel time, and travel cost, and there is scope for further spatial analysis of this concept. The catchment areas of airports are important from both an economic and environmental perspective. Future faster connections for passengers, say through a new public transport line or road building scheme, can lead to an increased airport catchment area. Depending on the type of surface access transport opportunities, the split can be more environmentally friendly and promoted accordingly. In determining future UK airport expansion between Heathrow and Gatwick airports (in the end Heathrow was recommended by the Government-appointed Commission), both airports presented plans with improved environmental surface access modal share, through further or newly developed public transport routes via High-Speed Rail and other train/bus service developments, to increase the catchment area (Ryley and Zanni, 2015b).
7.4.4 Airport Region Strategic Planning Aviation strategic planning is often undertaken by regional policy makers in order to ensure efficient airport development. Recommendations for policy makers in the Australian state of Queensland (Donnet et al., 2018), which has tourism as one of the main industries, are based on US State examples. The States of Florida (CFASPP—Continuing Florida Aviation Systems Planning Process) and California (CASP—California Aviation System Plan) plans have clearly defined aviation strategies that assist integrated surface transport systems and funding allocations. II. BEFORE TRAVELLING: CHOOSING TRANSPORT MODES, AIRLINES, AND AIRPORTS
88
7. Airport Choice
The study by Donnet et al. (2018) also identifies a clear airport hierarchy within Queensland, split between the North and South East regions of the State, the latter being the main focal point. The underlying concern behind the investigation is that the primary airport in Queensland, Brisbane, faces strong competition from the two major international airports of Sydney and Melbourne, which have strong State-based support. The tourism decision-making of passengers, including their airport entry point to Australia whether Sydney, Melbourne, or Brisbane, can therefore strongly influence national and regional aviation policy-making. Any national airport hierarchy includes global and regional airports, and in different circumstances these airports complement and compete with each other. As a United Kingdom example, the regional airports of Cardiff International Airport and Bristol Airport compete with each other to some extent where their catchment areas overlap, but also have the shared goal of attracting local consumers whilst competing against the global London airports of Heathrow and Gatwick (Davison et al., 2010). As shown by a survey-based study of passengers at the UK airport of Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield (Ryley and Zanni, 2015b), smaller regional airports are particularly focused on leisure travel, typically to summer sun destinations. These leisure travel-based airports are also more reliant on car-based travel, which tends to be the quickest and cheapest mode of transport. There tends to be a real or perceived lack of public transport alternatives. Whilst reducing private car journeys may yield environmental benefits, such strategies are largely at odds with commercial pressures to maximise the revenue potential of airport parking.
7.4.5 Technology Developments Technological developments influence the airport choice of tourists. The potential of three technological innovations to reduce carbon emissions for airport surface access journeys was evaluated by Ryley et al. (2013). First, telepresence was considered, whereby relatives or friends could say goodbye to a traveller from home rather than travel to an airport to drop-off or pickup a passenger. Telepresence provides an alternative solution to face-to-face interactions, with remote communication between people with access to telepresence suites of dynamic video, motion-sensitive cameras, and surround sound. One suite could be located at home, the other at an airport, and they offer a more realistic three-dimensional experience than standard television viewing. Indeed, telepresence images are already being used at some airports for wayfinding. Telepresence may be a feasible technology for the year 2020 as market presence increases and installation and usage costs decrease. Second, techniques to encourage public transport use, more environmentally friendly than motor vehicles, were investigated using the RFID (radio-frequency identification) tagging of luggage so that the bags could travel separately from passengers. This could assist tourists from being reliant on car-based travel, although security concerns still need to be overcome. Third, software could be developed to encourage ride-sharing, which could reduce the number of vehicles travelling to and from airport and knock-on effects such as congestion and pollution. This type of software is already available, but personal concerns of sharing travel with others need to be overcome for some population segments. These surface access examples illustrate the way that technology can change the tourist traveller experience at airports across a number of ways, with a range of economic, environmental, and social benefits.
7.5 CONCLUSIONS The focus of this chapter has primarily been on individuals and the tourism choices they make, largely related to air travel. There is a complex combination of choices that tourists have to make incorporating surface access transport modes, airlines, and airports (origin and destination). A multidisciplinary approach has been applied to the study of air travel-related tourist choices, principally from microeconomics (choice modelling), marketing (cluster analysis), and planning (airport region strategic planning). Many relevant studies focus on tourists within the traditional wider leisure trip-maker category, often contrasted against business travellers. The growth in secondary airports, in response to demand principally driven by leisure travel, has provided a greater choice for consumers in terms of origin and destination airports, as well as tourism destinations in a dynamic system. It has also encouraged tourists to travel further to access the origin airport in their home country. The main focus within this chapter has been on airports within the air transportation and tourism system. Most airports focus on either tourist departures or arrivals, but some locations do focus on both, whether single-airport cities such as Cardiff or multiairport regions such as San Francisco. Airports have the challenge to compete and complement each other within a regional and national hierarchy, and this should be planned in order to make it an II. BEFORE TRAVELLING: CHOOSING TRANSPORT MODES, AIRLINES, AND AIRPORTS
REFERENCES
89
efficient system. Airports also need to be aware of technological developments, as illustrated in this chapter, in order to stay competitive and offer an attractive airport experience for leisure travellers. This airport choice examination has highlighted some interesting and relevant further research opportunities. Air travel choices are becoming increasingly complex, and modelling should further respond accordingly to incorporate more origin and destinations options to the choice set of travellers. In addition, there should be more of a focus on spatial analysis. When considering the geography of where travellers live, the question of the individuals benefiting from the leisure travel advancements comes to the fore, that the opportunities should be available across all sections of society and not just the wealthy elite. Perhaps amongst the airport system response in an increasingly competitive environment there should be a renewed focus on state support for regional and less competitive airports.
References Ben-Akiva, M., Lerman, S., 1985. Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand. MIT press, Cambridge. Brooke, A.S., Caves, R.E., Pitfield, D.E., 1994. Methodology for predicting European short-haul air transport demand from regional airports. J. Air Transp. Manag. 1, 37–46. Budd, T.M.J., Ryley, T.J., Ison, S.G., 2014. Airport ground access and private car use: a segmentation analysis. J. Transp. Geogr. 36, 106–115. Caves, R.E., Gosling, G.D., 1999. Strategic Airport Planning. Pergamon, Oxford. Civil Aviation Authority, 2006. No-frills Carriers: Revolution or Evolution? A Study by the Civil Aviation Authority. The Stationery Office, Norwich. Davison, L.J., Ryley, T.J., 2010. Tourism destination preferences of low-cost airline users in the East Midlands. J. Transp. Geogr. 18 (3), 458–465. Davison, L.J., Ryley, T.J., 2013. The relationship between air travel behaviour and the key life stages of having children and entering retirement. J. Transp. Geogr. 28, 78–86. Davison, L.J., Ryley, T.J., 2016. An examination on the role of domestic destinations in satisfying holiday demands. J. Transp. Geogr. 51, 77–84. Davison, L.J., Ryley, T.J., Snelgrove, M., 2010. Regional airports in a competitive market: a case study of Cardiff International Airport. J. Airport Manag. 4 (2), 178–194. de Neufville, R., Odoni, A., 2013. Airport Systems. Planning, Design and Management, second ed. McGraw-Hill, New York. Donnet, T., Ryley, T.J., Lohmann, G., Spasojevic, B., 2018. Developing a Queensland (Australia) aviation network strategy: lessons from three international case studies. J. Air Transp. Manag. 73, 1–14. Hensher, D.A., Stopher, P.R., Louviere, J.J., 2001. An exploratory analysis of the effect of numbers of choice sets in designed choice experiments: an airline choice application. J. Air Transp. Manag. 7, 373–379. Hess, S., Polak, J.W., 2005. Mixed logit modelling of airport choice in multi-airport regions. J. Air Transp. Manag. 11, 59–68. Hess, S., Ryley, T.J., Davison, L.J., Adler, T., 2013. Improving the quality of demand forecasts through cross nested logit: a stated choice case study of airport, airline and access mode choice. Transportmetrica A Transp. Sci. 9 (4), 358–384. Kazda, A., Caves, R.E., 2007. Airport Design and Operations. Emerald, Bingley. Louviere, J.J., Hensher, D.A., Swait, J.D., 2000. Stated Choice Methods. Analysis and Application. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Mason, K.J., 2000. The propensity of business travellers to use low cost airlines. J. Transp. Geogr. 8, 107–119. Proussaloglou, K., Koppelman, F.S., 1999. The choice of air carrier, flight, and fare class. J. Air Transp. Manag. 5, 193–201. Ryley, T.J., Davison, L.J., 2008. UK air travel preferences: evidence from an East Midlands household survey. J. Air Transp. Manag. 14 (1), 43–46. Ryley, T.J., Zanni, A.M., 2013. An examination of the relationship between social interactions and travel uncertainty. J. Transp. Geogr. 31, 249–257. Ryley, T.J., Zanni, A.M., 2015b. A passenger perspective of surface access issues at a regional airport in the UK: the case study of Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield. Int. J. Aviat. Manag. 2 (3/4), 241–255. Ryley, T.J., Elmirghani, J., Budd, T., Miyoshi, C., Mason, K., Moxon, R., Ahmed, I., Qazi, B., Zanni, A., 2013. Sustainable development and airport surface access—the role of technological innovation and behavioural change. Sustainability 5 (4), 1617–1631. Thelle, M.H., Sonne, M.L.C., 2018. Airport competition in Europe. J. Air Transp. Manag. 67, 241–248. Wiltshire, J., 2018. Airport competition: reality or myth? J. Air Transp. Manag. 67, 232–240.
II. BEFORE TRAVELLING: CHOOSING TRANSPORT MODES, AIRLINES, AND AIRPORTS
7 Airport Choice Tim RYLEY Griffith University, Nathan, Brisbane, QLD, Australia C H A P T E R 7.1 Introduction
83
7.2 The Role of Airports in the Aviation System
84
7.3 Methodologies to Determine Choice for Air Transport Applications
85
7.4 Air Transport Applications With a Focus on Airport Choice for Tourists 7.4.1 Choice Modelling Case Studies 7.4.2 Clustering Market Segments of Tourists
O U T L I N E 7.4.3 Airport Catchment Areas 7.4.4 Airport Region Strategic Planning 7.4.5 Technology Developments
87 87 88
7.5 Conclusions
88
References
89
86 86 87
7.1 INTRODUCTION Individual travel motivations, particularly for leisure trips, relate to aspects such as location of friends and relatives, social commitments, flexibility of travel, and preferences for a particular surface access mode and airline. Aggregate leisure travel demand can change for a range of reasons including air fare fluctuations, specific events such as terrorism attacks, and wider trends of holiday destination preferences. Tourism opportunities for individuals have increased following the global rise in low-cost carriers. Typically, tourists can travel more cheaply and to more destinations. As secondary airports around metropolitan areas have developed, so travellers have a wider range of airports to choose from. Individual travellers can be grouped according to distinct market segments that behave differently in response to price changes, typically split into business (further split into ‘routine’ and ‘urgent’) and leisure (further split into ‘holidays’ and ‘visiting friends and relations’) passengers. Therefore this chapter refers to the ‘holidays’ or leisure component of the traveller market segment. Whilst the focus is primarily on leisure travel, it is acknowledged that there is sometimes a blurring between the leisure and business traveller dichotomy. An example is when an individual goes on a trip which covers both categories, say a week at a business event followed by a week-long holiday in the same location (see Chapter 3). This chapter discusses the factors influencing the tourist choice of airport. Following this introduction on the background tourist choice concepts, the airport context is summarised. Underpinning methodologies that can determine choice for air transport applications are reviewed, before discussion on a series of themes relating to air transport applications that have a focus on airport choice for tourists: the role of airport catchment areas, airport region strategic planning, and possible impacts of technology development. The focus within the chapter is on individuals as tourists and the underlying choices they make relating to air travel. Leisure travellers typically respond differently accordingly to a range of factors, and one is life stage that as
Air Transport—A Tourism Perspective. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-812857-2.00007-5
83
© 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
84
7. Airport Choice
individuals they go through. Four specific life stages that affect air travellers were identified in Davison and Ryley (2013): prefamily, family with children, empty nesters when children have left home, and retirement. Having children appears to be the life stage with the greatest effect on travel behaviour, as travellers have to be more organised, well planned, and less flexible with the choice of holiday destinations. This contrasts with the prefamily leisure travellers that comprise market segments such as young people wanting to party, student backpackers, and dual income couples. Life stage-based market segments will typically exhibit certain tourism behaviours. For instance, tourists in retirement are still more likely than other segments to use travel agents, package holiday offerings, travel from a local airport, and return to previous holiday destinations. There are differences between the types of tourist trip people take, from weekend breaks, through to traditional 2 week summer holidays, and to longer term travelling such as student gap years. The type of tourist trip affects the destinations. A survey of East Midlands’ residents of the United Kingdom (Davison and Ryley, 2010) focused on eight of the most popular low-cost carrier destinations. The destination types covered mainly weekend breaks (Berlin and Prague), a mix of weekend and week-long holidays (Edinburgh, Dublin, and Rome), and mainly weeklong holidays (Malaga, Alicante, and Faro). A further interesting insight from this work is evidence of tourists trading between city destinations so that, for example, once they have visited one such as Rome they will then try another such has Prague. The opportunities afforded by low-cost air travel have enabled many of the population in the United Kingdom to be able to make international leisure trips. A Civil Aviation Authority report (Civil Aviation Authority, 2006) examined the impact of low-cost carriers in the United Kingdom, including the types of people who benefit. There was growth in low-cost carrier-based leisure travel between 1995 and 2005 across all socioeconomic groups, but it was greater for the higher socioeconomic groups. The amount of travel by the lowest socioeconomic groups increased from 1.8 million United Kingdom leisure passengers in 1995 to 3.0 million in 2005, but the share decreased slightly from 8.7% to 7.7%. The range of aviation choices that tourists face need to be conceptualised, from the time they consider a holiday up to and including when they actually travel. Such choices include: Which origin airport to fly from? Which destination airport to land at? How to get to these airports via surface transport? Which airline to travel with? For some aviation choices there may be only one option, for example, if there is only one airline flying between the origin and destination airports (sometimes perceived within an airport-pair choice framework). There is still a choice in this, whether to take this flight or the default option of not travelling. A further choice option available in some situations is whether the individual could take an alternative transport mode to flying, most typically high-speed rail (see Chapter 6). The two key characteristics affecting most air travel choices are cost and time (see some of the aviation choice reference examples such as Hess and Polak, 2005, and Proussaloglou and Koppelman, 1999). In addition, tourists value distances to and from the airports in relation to the holiday origin and destination. Passengers are interested in door-to-door travel time not just the duration of the flight. The complexity increases if public transport is used for either surface access trip, as tourists also have to get to and from the public transport mode. Surface access modes of public transport options include taxi, bus, and rail. The travel behaviour issues for airport access are different from other surface transport contexts. For instance, when accessing airports individuals will often not use public transport as they have to take bags with them. A further complication is that surface access trips involve other individuals that can affect the tourist air travel choice process. Principal amongst them are meet-and-greet individuals, people travelling to and from airports to see off or welcome back an air traveller, typically a family member or friend.
7.2 THE ROLE OF AIRPORTS IN THE AVIATION SYSTEM The main focus in this chapter is on individual tourist responses as a function of demand, but there are also links to the supply side, i.e. what is on offer to the traveller. The level of supply in an airport context covers a range of interrelated factors such as the underlying cost and availability of fuel, the types of aircraft available at the airport, the application and use of technology, airport management approaches, and airport capacity development and constraints (Kazda and Caves, 2007). Airport development starts initially with an ad hoc single airport for a city. Over time further secondary airports are built, often for technical and political reasons. There are some currently city airport systems with two airports, a traditional large airport together with a smaller secondary one. Typical European airport systems examples include Frankfurt versus Hahn, Barcelona versus Gerona, and Brussels versus Charleroi.
II. BEFORE TRAVELLING: CHOOSING TRANSPORT MODES, AIRLINES, AND AIRPORTS
7.3 Methodologies to Determine Choice for Air Transport Applications
85
Whilst there is development of individual airports, typically through their own Master plans, ideally wider strategic planning is required for city regions of two or more airports to ensure a more efficient use of resources and a better provision of air services. It can be hindered by airports in one system having different owners, for example, Brussels Airport (Brussels Airport Company) and Charleroi (‘Brussels South’, Government of Wallonia), where there is no overarching strategic policy body. There are now many distinct multiairport regions around the world, and airports within the system tend to complement and compete with each other. de Neufville and Odoni (2013) identify 31 metropolitan regions in the world that generate more than 15 million originating passengers. The largest five regions, in order, are London, Tokyo, New York, Paris, and Los Angeles. For the largest region, London, the development of secondary airports has evolved to enable certain airports to have particular low-cost carriers and to serve certain markets: Gatwick (African and South American destinations), Stansted (Ryanair with a focus on low-cost carriers), Luton (EasyJet with a focus on holiday charters), and London City (access to financial district). Airports vary in terms of public and private ownership, and opportunities for growth in terms of surrounding space available and the planning process. Their focus varies across different countries and regions of the world, as documented in Caves and Gosling (1999). One example is airports in Germany, where there is a lengthy planning process often constrained by an influential environmental lobby. Another example is the Greek airport system, which has a tourism and social trip focus, and many airports have strong local authority control. Many tourism-based airports are focused primarily on inbound or outbound leisure travellers, as demonstrated by consumers near Northern European ‘outbound’ airports taking summer sun holidays via Southern European ‘inbound’ airports. Some airports do attempt to attract both inbound and outbound leisure travellers. One example, Cardiff International Airport, is likely to always predominate with outbound Welsh travellers going on holiday, but has been trying to build up Cardiff as a city-based tourist attraction (Davison et al., 2010). de Neufville and Odoni (2013) outline how some major airports develop specific terminals with a sole focus on low-cost carriers and thereby primarily leisure travellers, such as Paris Charles de Gaulle Airport (terminal 3). These ‘budget terminals’ are often in stark contrast to high specification and expensive terminals that house legacy carriers, although it does not necessarily mean that airport charges will differ between terminals. As shown previously, some multiairport systems such as London (Luton) and Frankfurt (Hahn) have this scaled up with airports specifically dedicated to low-cost carrier services. The economic viability of airports remains important, even following a period of growth in most regions worldwide. Airport income tends to be split into aeronautical and nonaeronautical revenue streams. Airports attempt to make as much income as possible from travellers via nonaeronautical revenue, typically through retailing and parking ventures. The desire of an airport to build shopping malls and generate parking revenue is an interesting tension when there are environmental as well as economic priorities.
7.3 METHODOLOGIES TO DETERMINE CHOICE FOR AIR TRANSPORT APPLICATIONS This section reviews a couple of underpinning methodologies that can be used to determine choice for air transport, discrete choice modelling, and market segmentation. The first methodology is the development of discrete choice models, a widely accepted technique originating from economic consumer theory that has been used in transport research since the 1970s (see Ben-Akiva and Lerman, 1985; Louviere et al., 2000). The choices are deemed to be discrete because individuals make choices from a set of mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive alternatives. In an aviation example, the destination airport choice for a holiday would be made from a discrete set of airport alternatives. Quantitative data input to these choice models can either come from available revealed preference data or from specifically designed stated preference survey experiments, which enable the mental processes of consumers to be considered. Modelling based on stated preferences also has the advantage of enabling the analysis of hypothetical scenarios under experimental conditions. Stated preference-based discrete choice models can be utilised to predict consumer behaviour and forecast what travellers do under changed circumstances. For example, what will happen to demand if all air fares increase by 10%, or if journey time to and from the airport falls by 20%? However, forecasts generated from stated preference data can be subject to bias, typically if respondents state something in the experiment but act differently in practice. Initial air travel choice modelling examples tended to focus on flight choice (Proussaloglou and Koppelman, 1999; Mason, 2000), airline choice (Hensher et al., 2001), and airport choice (Brooke et al., 1994; Hess and Polak, 2005).
II. BEFORE TRAVELLING: CHOOSING TRANSPORT MODES, AIRLINES, AND AIRPORTS
86
7. Airport Choice
Over time the models have taken on more complicated structures to take account of increasing complex behavioural aspects. For example, Hess et al. (2013) incorporate the three choices of airport, airline, and surface access transport mode into one nested model structure. The second methodology concerns market segmentation, assuming that a market as a whole does not consist of homogeneous individuals. Typically, a market is segmented using the exploratory, statistical technique of cluster analysis and according to demographic variables such as age, gender, and income. These are the type of variables examined together with transport data and air travel characteristics, which can identify aviation-related passengers who share similar attitudes and characteristics, and future policy can be targeted accordingly. Cluster analysis has been applied to a range of aviation market segmentation examples, including Davison and Ryley (2013) and Budd et al. (2014). Some of the air travel discrete choice model examples also consider market segments, typically splitting the output according to the leisure and business traveller dichotomy, such as Brooke et al. (1994), or by using survey data solely targeting a particular market segment, such as business travellers in Mason (2000). There are complexities associated with individual decision-making and behaviour that make applications, such as air transportation and tourists, difficult to analyse and model. For instance, discrete choice models have an assumption of rational decision-making which is not always the case. In addition, cluster analysis can seem to be simplistic and not take account of complexities such as within-segment variations, atypical consumers, and the way that people can change segment over time. A further assumption of both methodologies is that individuals act independently, whereas in reality they typically make decisions linking with other people, say family and friends close to them. The emergence of social media in recent years has reinforced this influence and associated techniques such as social network analysis offers opportunities to examine the relationships between individual decision-makers. It has recently been applied to transport examples (e.g. Ryley and Zanni, 2013), and so could be expanded into air transport and tourism research. The quality of data collected is important for the outcomes of the methodological techniques to be applied, whether it is qualitative or quantitative in nature. Collecting new and original aviation data can mean that some difficulties arise if it is undertaken at an airport. Security procedures mean that it can be hard to access an airport, and the survey locations within terminals need to be considered to ensure a sample without bias. For instance, surveys need to be undertaken across a full section of terminals and departure gates to ensure a representative range of destinations are covered. They should also cover wider periods of time, as behaviour often changes across days of the week as well as months and seasons over a year. Having the data collection effort away from airports, say direct targeting of households, can be easier and ensure a wider cross-section of the population, although some of the sample may be infrequent flyers or individuals who have never flown (for a discussion of these groups, see Chapter 4). Recent technological developments, such as information recorded on mobile devices and the associated big data capability will enable a greater quantity and a higher quality of data, and enable more advanced methodologies and improves outcomes for air transport and tourism applications. Despite the opportunities offered by big data, sample representativeness will still need to be ensured and appropriate analytical techniques applied in order to make the most of the expanded data.
7.4 AIR TRANSPORT APPLICATIONS WITH A FOCUS ON AIRPORT CHOICE FOR TOURISTS This section provides more focus on themes bringing together air transportation applications with a focus on airport choice for tourists. Initially, the methodologies applied (choice modelling and clustering market segments) are considered, before a range of relevant themes are discussed. These cover the role of airport catchment areas, airport region strategic planning, and possible impacts of technology development.
7.4.1 Choice Modelling Case Studies Many studies focus on tourists within the more general leisure trip market segment, as opposed to business travellers. One example is the stated preference choice modelling study by Proussaloglou and Koppelman (1999), based on telephone survey data of respondents in Chicago and Dallas. They developed a choice framework consisting of air carrier, flight schedule, and fare class and determined that leisure trip-makers have a lower willingness to pay for airline offerings, such as a frequent-flyer programme, than business travellers. A stated preference choice modelling study of business travellers by Mason (2000) provided insights into leisure trip-makers. It was demonstrated that business travellers from small-to-medium companies are attracted to low-cost carriers, showing that it is not just leisure trip-makers using this airline type. II. BEFORE TRAVELLING: CHOOSING TRANSPORT MODES, AIRLINES, AND AIRPORTS
7.4 Air Transport Applications With a Focus on Airport Choice for Tourists
87
A number of more specific airport choice studies have been undertaken, again covering business and leisure travellers. A particularly interesting case study is for the multiairport region of San Francisco (Hess and Polak, 2005). They studied the following three San Francisco airports (using 1995 data): San Francisco International (15 million passengers, 56%), Oakland International (7.7 million passengers, 29%), and San Jose Municipal (4.2 million passengers, 16%). There three significant attributes affecting choice are fare, frequency, and access journey time. Those not significant are access journey cost, flight time, number of operators on route, aircraft size, and airport on-time performance. Results were further split by resident and visitor passenger, in addition to the leisure and business traveller dichotomy. One outcome identified was a higher relative desire for greater daily flight frequencies by visitor leisure travellers than resident leisure trip-makers.
7.4.2 Clustering Market Segments of Tourists Passengers naturally have a strong preference for the nearest airport, but passengers do trade between airports, especially if they have had a good previous experience. Parking costs and departure time can be more influential than flight cost, as shown by survey results split by market segment within Davison and Ryley (2010) from residents of the East Midlands region of the United Kingdom. The ‘employed frequent flyers’ and ‘less mobile low earners’ showed a particular preference for an early flight, whereas the more price sensitive ‘retired annual holiday makers’ preferred lower parking costs. As also documented in Davison and Ryley (2010), these market segments have tourism preferences. ‘Retired annual holiday makers’ and ‘retiring frequent flyer’ segments did not mind returning to locations they have visited before and had been discouraged from flying due to recent changes in airport security. ‘Frequent flyer’ segments were demonstrated to be least satisfied by destinations from nearest regional airport and more likely to holiday abroad rather than in the United Kingdom. Perhaps a future trend could be the promotion of holidaying domestically rather than abroad (the so-called staycation—see Davison and Ryley, 2016 for further discussion), to infrequent flyers on environmental or financial grounds, if the cost of air travel increases.
7.4.3 Airport Catchment Areas Passengers are willing to travel long distances to access airports, as documented by Ryley and Davison (2008). Most residents of the East Midlands region of the United Kingdom have used the local airports (East Midlands Airport, 88% and Birmingham International Airport, 79%), but it is of interest that many have also travelled further to access the London airports (Heathrow, 67%; Gatwick, 63%; Luton, 58%; and Stansted, 44%). This is typically a journey of between 1 and 2 h travel time, with all London airports over 80 miles away. Many airports such as those in London now have large overlapping catchment areas. The spatial dimension of this has been demonstrated visually by 120-min mapping (using isochrones) of selected UK airports (Wiltshire, 2018). Thelle and Sonne (2018) have demonstrated that almost two-thirds of Europeans live within a two-hour drive of at least two airports, further demonstration of overlapping catchment areas accordingly and a high degree of choice in a dynamic airport system. Catchment areas can be measured by a range of indicators, for example, distance, travel time, and travel cost, and there is scope for further spatial analysis of this concept. The catchment areas of airports are important from both an economic and environmental perspective. Future faster connections for passengers, say through a new public transport line or road building scheme, can lead to an increased airport catchment area. Depending on the type of surface access transport opportunities, the split can be more environmentally friendly and promoted accordingly. In determining future UK airport expansion between Heathrow and Gatwick airports (in the end Heathrow was recommended by the Government-appointed Commission), both airports presented plans with improved environmental surface access modal share, through further or newly developed public transport routes via High-Speed Rail and other train/bus service developments, to increase the catchment area (Ryley and Zanni, 2015b).
7.4.4 Airport Region Strategic Planning Aviation strategic planning is often undertaken by regional policy makers in order to ensure efficient airport development. Recommendations for policy makers in the Australian state of Queensland (Donnet et al., 2018), which has tourism as one of the main industries, are based on US State examples. The States of Florida (CFASPP—Continuing Florida Aviation Systems Planning Process) and California (CASP—California Aviation System Plan) plans have clearly defined aviation strategies that assist integrated surface transport systems and funding allocations. II. BEFORE TRAVELLING: CHOOSING TRANSPORT MODES, AIRLINES, AND AIRPORTS
88
7. Airport Choice
The study by Donnet et al. (2018) also identifies a clear airport hierarchy within Queensland, split between the North and South East regions of the State, the latter being the main focal point. The underlying concern behind the investigation is that the primary airport in Queensland, Brisbane, faces strong competition from the two major international airports of Sydney and Melbourne, which have strong State-based support. The tourism decision-making of passengers, including their airport entry point to Australia whether Sydney, Melbourne, or Brisbane, can therefore strongly influence national and regional aviation policy-making. Any national airport hierarchy includes global and regional airports, and in different circumstances these airports complement and compete with each other. As a United Kingdom example, the regional airports of Cardiff International Airport and Bristol Airport compete with each other to some extent where their catchment areas overlap, but also have the shared goal of attracting local consumers whilst competing against the global London airports of Heathrow and Gatwick (Davison et al., 2010). As shown by a survey-based study of passengers at the UK airport of Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield (Ryley and Zanni, 2015b), smaller regional airports are particularly focused on leisure travel, typically to summer sun destinations. These leisure travel-based airports are also more reliant on car-based travel, which tends to be the quickest and cheapest mode of transport. There tends to be a real or perceived lack of public transport alternatives. Whilst reducing private car journeys may yield environmental benefits, such strategies are largely at odds with commercial pressures to maximise the revenue potential of airport parking.
7.4.5 Technology Developments Technological developments influence the airport choice of tourists. The potential of three technological innovations to reduce carbon emissions for airport surface access journeys was evaluated by Ryley et al. (2013). First, telepresence was considered, whereby relatives or friends could say goodbye to a traveller from home rather than travel to an airport to drop-off or pickup a passenger. Telepresence provides an alternative solution to face-to-face interactions, with remote communication between people with access to telepresence suites of dynamic video, motion-sensitive cameras, and surround sound. One suite could be located at home, the other at an airport, and they offer a more realistic three-dimensional experience than standard television viewing. Indeed, telepresence images are already being used at some airports for wayfinding. Telepresence may be a feasible technology for the year 2020 as market presence increases and installation and usage costs decrease. Second, techniques to encourage public transport use, more environmentally friendly than motor vehicles, were investigated using the RFID (radio-frequency identification) tagging of luggage so that the bags could travel separately from passengers. This could assist tourists from being reliant on car-based travel, although security concerns still need to be overcome. Third, software could be developed to encourage ride-sharing, which could reduce the number of vehicles travelling to and from airport and knock-on effects such as congestion and pollution. This type of software is already available, but personal concerns of sharing travel with others need to be overcome for some population segments. These surface access examples illustrate the way that technology can change the tourist traveller experience at airports across a number of ways, with a range of economic, environmental, and social benefits.
7.5 CONCLUSIONS The focus of this chapter has primarily been on individuals and the tourism choices they make, largely related to air travel. There is a complex combination of choices that tourists have to make incorporating surface access transport modes, airlines, and airports (origin and destination). A multidisciplinary approach has been applied to the study of air travel-related tourist choices, principally from microeconomics (choice modelling), marketing (cluster analysis), and planning (airport region strategic planning). Many relevant studies focus on tourists within the traditional wider leisure trip-maker category, often contrasted against business travellers. The growth in secondary airports, in response to demand principally driven by leisure travel, has provided a greater choice for consumers in terms of origin and destination airports, as well as tourism destinations in a dynamic system. It has also encouraged tourists to travel further to access the origin airport in their home country. The main focus within this chapter has been on airports within the air transportation and tourism system. Most airports focus on either tourist departures or arrivals, but some locations do focus on both, whether single-airport cities such as Cardiff or multiairport regions such as San Francisco. Airports have the challenge to compete and complement each other within a regional and national hierarchy, and this should be planned in order to make it an II. BEFORE TRAVELLING: CHOOSING TRANSPORT MODES, AIRLINES, AND AIRPORTS
REFERENCES
89
efficient system. Airports also need to be aware of technological developments, as illustrated in this chapter, in order to stay competitive and offer an attractive airport experience for leisure travellers. This airport choice examination has highlighted some interesting and relevant further research opportunities. Air travel choices are becoming increasingly complex, and modelling should further respond accordingly to incorporate more origin and destinations options to the choice set of travellers. In addition, there should be more of a focus on spatial analysis. When considering the geography of where travellers live, the question of the individuals benefiting from the leisure travel advancements comes to the fore, that the opportunities should be available across all sections of society and not just the wealthy elite. Perhaps amongst the airport system response in an increasingly competitive environment there should be a renewed focus on state support for regional and less competitive airports.
References Ben-Akiva, M., Lerman, S., 1985. Discrete Choice Analysis: Theory and Application to Travel Demand. MIT press, Cambridge. Brooke, A.S., Caves, R.E., Pitfield, D.E., 1994. Methodology for predicting European short-haul air transport demand from regional airports. J. Air Transp. Manag. 1, 37–46. Budd, T.M.J., Ryley, T.J., Ison, S.G., 2014. Airport ground access and private car use: a segmentation analysis. J. Transp. Geogr. 36, 106–115. Caves, R.E., Gosling, G.D., 1999. Strategic Airport Planning. Pergamon, Oxford. Civil Aviation Authority, 2006. No-frills Carriers: Revolution or Evolution? A Study by the Civil Aviation Authority. The Stationery Office, Norwich. Davison, L.J., Ryley, T.J., 2010. Tourism destination preferences of low-cost airline users in the East Midlands. J. Transp. Geogr. 18 (3), 458–465. Davison, L.J., Ryley, T.J., 2013. The relationship between air travel behaviour and the key life stages of having children and entering retirement. J. Transp. Geogr. 28, 78–86. Davison, L.J., Ryley, T.J., 2016. An examination on the role of domestic destinations in satisfying holiday demands. J. Transp. Geogr. 51, 77–84. Davison, L.J., Ryley, T.J., Snelgrove, M., 2010. Regional airports in a competitive market: a case study of Cardiff International Airport. J. Airport Manag. 4 (2), 178–194. de Neufville, R., Odoni, A., 2013. Airport Systems. Planning, Design and Management, second ed. McGraw-Hill, New York. Donnet, T., Ryley, T.J., Lohmann, G., Spasojevic, B., 2018. Developing a Queensland (Australia) aviation network strategy: lessons from three international case studies. J. Air Transp. Manag. 73, 1–14. Hensher, D.A., Stopher, P.R., Louviere, J.J., 2001. An exploratory analysis of the effect of numbers of choice sets in designed choice experiments: an airline choice application. J. Air Transp. Manag. 7, 373–379. Hess, S., Polak, J.W., 2005. Mixed logit modelling of airport choice in multi-airport regions. J. Air Transp. Manag. 11, 59–68. Hess, S., Ryley, T.J., Davison, L.J., Adler, T., 2013. Improving the quality of demand forecasts through cross nested logit: a stated choice case study of airport, airline and access mode choice. Transportmetrica A Transp. Sci. 9 (4), 358–384. Kazda, A., Caves, R.E., 2007. Airport Design and Operations. Emerald, Bingley. Louviere, J.J., Hensher, D.A., Swait, J.D., 2000. Stated Choice Methods. Analysis and Application. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Mason, K.J., 2000. The propensity of business travellers to use low cost airlines. J. Transp. Geogr. 8, 107–119. Proussaloglou, K., Koppelman, F.S., 1999. The choice of air carrier, flight, and fare class. J. Air Transp. Manag. 5, 193–201. Ryley, T.J., Davison, L.J., 2008. UK air travel preferences: evidence from an East Midlands household survey. J. Air Transp. Manag. 14 (1), 43–46. Ryley, T.J., Zanni, A.M., 2013. An examination of the relationship between social interactions and travel uncertainty. J. Transp. Geogr. 31, 249–257. Ryley, T.J., Zanni, A.M., 2015b. A passenger perspective of surface access issues at a regional airport in the UK: the case study of Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield. Int. J. Aviat. Manag. 2 (3/4), 241–255. Ryley, T.J., Elmirghani, J., Budd, T., Miyoshi, C., Mason, K., Moxon, R., Ahmed, I., Qazi, B., Zanni, A., 2013. Sustainable development and airport surface access—the role of technological innovation and behavioural change. Sustainability 5 (4), 1617–1631. Thelle, M.H., Sonne, M.L.C., 2018. Airport competition in Europe. J. Air Transp. Manag. 67, 241–248. Wiltshire, J., 2018. Airport competition: reality or myth? J. Air Transp. Manag. 67, 232–240.
II. BEFORE TRAVELLING: CHOOSING TRANSPORT MODES, AIRLINES, AND AIRPORTS