Airport congestion pricing and cost recovery with side business

被引:11
|
作者
Kidokoro, Yukihiro [1 ]
Zhang, Anming [2 ]
机构
[1] Natl Grad Inst Policy Studies, Tokyo, Japan
[2] Univ British Columbia, Sauder Sch Business, Vancouver, BC, Canada
关键词
Cost recovery; Airport congestion pricing; Aeronautical serviee; Non-aeronautical service; Side business; Market power; CONCESSION REVENUES; SINGLE-TILL; CAPACITY; CHARGES; ECONOMICS; PERSPECTIVES; COMPETITION; INVESTMENT; EFFICIENCY; AIRLINES;
D O I
10.1016/j.tra.2017.12.003
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
This paper explores the implications of an imperfectly competitive non-aeronautical market for cost recovery at a congestible airport. We show that aeronautical revenue under welfare maximization is short of its costs, because the optimal airport charge must be set lower than the first best level, to counteract market power in the non-aeronautical market, which results in insufficient revenue. However, imperfectly competitive non-aeronautical service ("side business") leads to a positive profit that the airport may share, thereby improving the chance to recover costs. We demonstrate that airport overall cost recovery, including the profit from side business, may be satisfied, depending on the profit from side business and the demand elasticity of side business. Our analysis further identifies the role of "another good," which can be a substitute or a complement for non-aeronautical service, in cost recovery. We analyze both cases of exogenous and endogenous prices of another good. When the price of another good is exogenous, the price higher (lower) than the marginal cost in the another-good market makes cost recovery less (more) likely. When the price of another good is endogenous, cost recovery is more likely (unlikely) to hold when non-aeronautical service and another good are closer complements (substitutes) or/and the airport absorbs more (less) profits from side business. The possibility that a monopoly airport fails to satisfy cost recovery is also examined.
引用
收藏
页码:222 / 236
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Airport pricing and regulation under passenger demand uncertainty
    Liu, Wen-Jing
    Gong, Xu
    Li, Zhi-Chun
    TRANSPORTMETRICA B-TRANSPORT DYNAMICS, 2022, 10 (01) : 1184 - 1205
  • [22] Airline baggage fees and airport congestion
    Jiang, Changmin
    Zheng, Shiyuan
    TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PART C-EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES, 2020, 117
  • [23] Airport congestion delays and airline networks
    Wang, Chunan
    Wang, Xiaoyu
    TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PART E-LOGISTICS AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW, 2019, 122 : 328 - 349
  • [24] Modeling Framework for Evaluating Sensitivity of Airline Schedules to Airport Congestion Pricing
    Hassan, Ahmed
    Abdelghany, Khaled
    Abdelghany, Ahmed
    TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH RECORD, 2010, (2177) : 33 - 40
  • [25] Airport airside congestion pricing considering price discrimination between aircraft type under a Stackelberg game
    Zhang, Baocheng
    Ye, Zhijian
    Wang Lili
    TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AND TECHNOLOGY, 2020, 43 (01) : 48 - 61
  • [26] A pricing versus slots game in airport networks
    Czerny, Achim I.
    Lang, Hao
    TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PART B-METHODOLOGICAL, 2019, 125 : 151 - 174
  • [27] Congestion pricing under operational, supply-side uncertainty
    Boyles, Stephen D.
    Kockelman, Kara M.
    Waller, S. Travis
    TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PART C-EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES, 2010, 18 (04) : 519 - 535
  • [28] Airport charges, economic growth, and cost recovery
    Zhang, AM
    Zhang, YM
    TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PART E-LOGISTICS AND TRANSPORTATION REVIEW, 2001, 37 (01) : 25 - 33
  • [29] Modeling Multi-Timescale Dynamics for Airport Surface Congestion and Recovery
    Cai, Kaiquan
    Zhang, Minghua
    Zhu, Yongwen
    Yang, Yang
    Zhu, Yanbo
    IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS, 2024, 25 (12) : 20657 - 20672
  • [30] Licence to build, licence to charge? Market power, pricing and the financing of airport infrastructure development in Australia
    Lohmann, Gui
    Trischler, Jakob
    TRANSPORT POLICY, 2017, 59 : 28 - 37