Aviation TDM
Air Transportation Demand Management
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Victoria Transport Policy Institute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Updated 6 September 2019
This chapter describes management strategies to increase air transport efficiency, including strategies that encourage use of alternative modes, reduce total air traffic, increase air travel system efficiencies, and reduce specific aviation external costs such as air and noise pollution.
Aviation TDM includes efforts to encourage more efficient use of air transportation resources, and reduce excessive air travel. Many specific TDM strategies can apply to aviation (Whitelegg and Cambridge 2004):
· Congestion Pricing can be used to manage airport congestion and allocate landing slots. Just as airlines offer lower fares during off-peak seasons, they could more frequently offer lower fares for flights during off-peak times of day.
· Least Cost Planning can be applied to aviation planning and investments, so alternative solutions can be considered equally with aviation investments and subsidies. For example, investments to improve express rail and bus service may be more cost effective than expanding airports to accommodate growth in medium-distance (100-800 miles) trips.
· Price Reforms can help encourage efficiency, manage demand and internalize costs.
· Aviation Fuel Tax Increases can internalize costs, create more neutral transportation fuel prices, and encourage more efficient aircraft (T&E, 1999b).
· Eliminate tax exemptions and low tax rates on airports and aviation fuels that tend to favor air travel over other alternative modes. Eliminate duty-free shops at airports, which encourages air travel.
· Support development of fast and efficient rail transport on busy corridors to compete with air transport for medium-distance journeys.
· Implement TDM Programs for airport ground transportation, Commute Trip Reduction Programs for airport employees, and Smart Growth for airport area development.
· Implement Tourist Transportation Management to encourages reduced motor vehicle travel for recreation trips.
· Incorporate Sustainability Objectives in aviation planning.
· Upgrade and replace older aircraft with newer models that reduce fuel consumption, noise and air pollution emissions, and improve air traffic management systems to increase operational efficiency (TC, 1999).
Aviation provides significant benefits to users and the economy, but it also has significant economic and environmental costs (Davidson, Wit and Dings, 2003; Somerville, 2003; Whitelegg and Cambridge, 2004; Bows and Anderson, 2007). Air traffic is one of the fastest growing uses of energy, and a major source of noise and air pollution. For example, flying first class on a single domestic round trip can contribute more greenhouse gas emissions than a year of driving
Air transport has relatively high emission rates per passenger-kilometre, especially for short distances (less than 1000 km), because emissions are particularly high during take-off and landing. High altitude emissions contribute more to global warming per unit than other types of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions (IPCC, 1999; Lee and Sausen, 2000). Air travel’s contribution to global warming is predicted to increase from about 3.5% up to 5-15% of total human impacts if current trends continue (T&E, 1999a).
Newer aircraft are more fuel efficient and produce less noise and air pollution, and airport authorities are incorporating sustainability objectives in their planning, but their effectiveness is limited, and such gains are often overwhelmed by growth in traffic volumes. As a result, the total economic, social and environmental costs of air transport are increasing in most regions.
Annual Growth Rates (T&E 1999a)
Flights 3.4%
Aircraft kilometres 3.9%
Passengers 4.7%
Passenger kilometres 4.9%
Cargo 6.7%
Airports use large amounts of land, and impose direct impacts on the natural environment and human communities. Airports are major activity centers that often have significant ground transportation congestion and are frequently a catalyst for low-density, automobile-dependent land development.
Table 1 ICAO Inventory of Environmental Impacts
|
Environmental Concern |
Typical Sources |
|
Aircraft noise |
Noise in the vicinity of airports caused by aircraft operations. Engine testing and others noise sources at airports. Ground support vehicles and operations. Sonic boom caused by supersonic aircraft Noise caused by aircraft en-route |
|
Air pollution near airports |
Aircraft engine emissions (carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds, unburnt hydrocarbons) during landing and take off cycle. Emissions from airport ground service vehicles. Emissions from access traffic (automobiles, buses, trains). Emissions from other airport sources (solvents, fuels, etc.). |
|
Global phenomena |
Long-range air pollution (eg. acid rain). Greenhouse effect (combustion gases including carbon dioxide, water, carbon monoxide, oxides of nitrogen, methane ). Depletion of ozone layer (releases of chlorofluorocarbon, oxides of nitrogen and high altitude vapour trails). |
|
Airport and infrastructure construction |
Loss of land. Soil erosion. Impact on water tables, river courses and field drainage. Destruction of natural resources (wetlands, wildlife, ecosystems). Impact on flora and fauna. |
|
Water and soil pollution near airports |
Water pollution caused by inadequate treatment of contaminants in airport wastewaters. Herbicides, defoliants and poisons to eliminate rodents and pests. Aircraft maintenance (oils, paints, wastes from workshops facilities). Aircraft washing, deicing and anti-icing. Leaking pipes and storage tanks (above and below ground level). Spills of fuels, lubricants and solvents. Runoff from paved areas. |
|
Airport waste management |
Disposal of environmentally harmful materials used in aircraft servicing and maintenance (metals, solvents, acids, dyes, paint strippers, adhesives, petroleum distillates, hydraulic fluids, etc.). Pesticides, herbicides, disinfectants. Solid and liquid wastes from airport operations including administration, cargo, maintenance, terminal buildings, restaurants and cafeterias, parking lots, medical clinics, etc.). Disposal of waste from the airport and incoming aircraft. |
|
Aircraft accidents/incidents |
Accidents/incidents involving dangerous goods carried as cargo. Other environmental problems arising from aircraft accidents. Emergency procedures involving fuel dumping. |
This table lists various environmental impacts associated with aviation.
Aviation and related activities are considered prestigious and particularly important for economic development. As a result, airports and some air services are often subsidized, directly and indirectly, through favorable industrial, tax and regulatory policies (UBA, 2001). Policies that underprice aviation and favor it over other consumer options violate Market Principles, and tend to be economically harmful overall.
Demand management can increase the efficiency and social benefits of aviation. For example, a Royal Commission on Environmental Protection found (RCEP, 1994):
· A reduction in the growth and rate of air travel would help considerably towards reducing, or at least stabilizing, emissions from aircraft. It would also reduce the scale of some of the other environmentally damaging effects of air transport, such as noise and the loss of land for airports and surface links. (p.74, para 5.38).
· An unquestioning attitude towards future growth in air travel, and an acceptance that the projected demand for additional facilities and services must be met, are incompatible with the aim of sustainable development, just as acceptance that there will be a continuing growth in demand for energy would be incompatible. Another parallel is with the forecast growth in road traffic…A comparable change in attitude towards the growth of air transport is needed, only in this case on an international scale. (p.75, para 5.39).
· We recommend that policy on air services should be based on discouraging air travel for domestic and near-European journeys for which rail is competitive, and that the government should support the upgrading of rail links to the main international airports in order to avoid the need for development of air feeder services from regional airports. (p.207, para 12.50).
Short and medium-distance air trips tend to compete with automobile and train travel, so the relative price and service quality of these modes affects air travel volumes. For example, convenient, affordable, high speed train service between major cities in France, Japan and Spain have reduced air traffic volumes on the same corridors.
Aviation transport management programs can be implemented by international agreements related to transportation, environmental protection and tourist industry development; as part of national transportation planning and investment programs; and by regional airport authorities.
Current interregional transportation planning tends to favor air travel over alternative modes, particularly interregional bus. For example, For example, there are federal, state and regional programs to support airports, and policies to maintain commercial aviation service competition, but no similar programs for interregional bus services (GAO, 2005). This has reduced the quality of alternatives.
Aviation transport management is a relatively new concept so it is uncertain how much effect such programs can have. Although some aviation traffic has very high value, much of the growth in air transport appears to be relatively low value trips that are sensitive to pricing and the quality of alternatives. It is likely that a coordinated Aviation TDM program could significantly reduce air traffic growth rates.
Research by Hagler Bailly (1999) finds the fuel price elasticity of airline travel seem to fall in the -0.25 to -0.45 range, which means that a 10% increase in fuel prices typically reduces airline travel by 2.5% to 4.5%. The same study found that the long-run elasticity of fuel use to aviation turbo fuel prices is -0.3, with a range of –0.2 to -0.45. Research summarized in Davidson, Wit and Dings (2003) indicates the elasticity of air travel with respect to ticket price is about 1.0, and fuel costs represent about 10% of total operating costs, so doubling fuel costs or imposing other fees of this magnitude would reduce air travel mileage about 10%.
Table 2 Travel Impact Summary
|
Objective |
Rating |
Comments |
|
Reduces total traffic. |
3 |
|
|
Reduces peak period traffic. |
3 |
|
|
Shifts peak to off-peak periods. |
3 |
|
|
Shifts travel to alternative modes. |
2 |
May shift air travel to other modes. |
|
Improves access, reduces the need for travel. |
|
|
|
Increased ridesharing. |
|
|
|
Increased public transit. |
2 |
May shift air and ground transport to transit. |
|
Increased cycling. |
|
|
|
Increased walking. |
|
|
|
Increased Telework. |
1 |
May result in some electronic substitution of physical travel. |
|
Reduced freight traffic. |
2 |
Reduced air freight may be an important component of aviation transport management. |
Rating from 3 (very beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.
Benefits can include reduced congestion, infrastructure, operating costs, air and noise pollution, crashes and land use impacts associated with aviation and airport construction. Some Aviation TDM strategies improve Transportation Choice for medium-distance travel. Emission Reduction benefits tend to be particularly large for reductions in high altitude jet travel.
Costs can include increased program and planning costs, increased consumer prices and reduced consumer services (for example, if reduced public subsidies result in closing down a local airport).
Table 3 Benefit Summary
|
Objective |
Rating |
Comments |
|
Congestion Reduction |
3 |
Can reduce both aviation and ground transportation congestion. |
|
Facility Cost Savings |
1 |
Some automobile traffic may be reduced, while some trips may shift from air to automobile. |
|
Consumer Savings |
-2 |
Some strategies increase prices, although others reduce prices for alternatives. |
|
Transport Choice |
2 |
Some strategies improve alternatives, such as rail transport. |
|
Road Safety |
0 |
Uncertain. |
|
Environmental Protection |
3 |
Aviation has high environmental costs, so managing aviation can provide significant environmental benefits. |
|
Efficient Land Use |
1 |
Some strategies involve more efficient land use, particularly around airports. |
|
Community Livability |
2 |
Aviation can impose significant air and noise pollution, so managing aviation can significantly improve community livability. |
Rating from 3 (very beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.
Equity impacts depend on which TDM strategies are implemented and what perspective is used in the analysis. Aviation is a relatively high-priced travel mode that tends to be used most by higher-income travelers. As a result, aviation subsidies and underpricing tend to be regressive (i.e., they benefit higher-income people more than lower-income people). On the other hand, increasing aviation prices to internalize costs makes air travel less affordable to lower- and middle-income consumer, harming them directly (although the overall equity impacts depends on how revenues are used).
Since aviation tends to dominate most medium- and long-distance public transportation markets, alternatives such as bus and rail have received little support. To the degree that Aviation TDM involves improving these alternatives it can benefit people who are transportation disadvantaged (particularly those with lower incomes), and communities that do not have commercial airports.
Table 4 Equity Summary
|
Criteria |
Rating |
Comments |
|
Treats everybody equally. |
-2 |
People who depend most on air transport may bear higher costs. |
|
Individuals bear the costs they impose. |
2 |
Many strategies internalize costs. |
|
Progressive with respect to income. |
0 |
Depends on type of program, particularly how any revenues are used. |
|
Benefits transportation disadvantaged. |
1 |
Some strategies improve transport choices. |
|
Improves basic mobility. |
1 |
Some strategies improve transport choice. |
Rating from 3 (very beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.
Aviation TDM can apply in various geographic areas, but tend to be most important in large urban regions with large airports. Since federal, state/provincial and regional agencies do most air transportation planning they have the greatest role in implementing Aviation TDM. Local governments may be involved in airport land use and ground transportation planning.
Table 5 Application Summary
|
Geographic |
Rating |
Organization |
Rating |
|
Large urban region. |
3 |
Federal government. |
3 |
|
High-density, urban. |
2 |
State/provincial government. |
3 |
|
Medium-density, urban/suburban. |
2 |
Regional government. |
2 |
|
Town. |
1 |
Municipal/local government. |
1 |
|
Low-density, rural. |
1 |
Business Associations/TMA. |
1 |
|
Commercial center. |
0 |
Individual business. |
1 |
|
Residential neighborhood. |
0 |
Developer. |
1 |
|
Resort/recreation area. |
2 |
Neighborhood association. |
0 |
|
College/university communities. |
0 |
Campus. |
0 |
Ratings range from 0 (not appropriate) to 3 (very appropriate).
TDM Program and Improved Transport Choice
Aviation TDM can involve Congestion Pricing, Price Reforms and increased Fuel Taxes.
It can involve an airport TDM Program, an airport employee Commute Trip Reduction Program, and airport area Smart Growth. Airport planning may incorporate Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements and Universal Access. It can involve Freight Transportation Management and Tourist Transportation Management. It can reflect Least Cost Planning and Market Principles.
Stakeholders include aviation, transportation planning, land use planning, and environmental planning agencies, local airport authorities, airlines, residents impacted by airports and air traffic, travel agencies and related industries, and businesses that depend heavily on air transport.
A major barrier to Aviation TDM is the common assumption that growing air travel is particularly important to economic development and deserves public support. The aviation industry has little experience with demand management.
|
What’s the difference between a bad golfer and a bad skydiver? The bad golfer goes whack! “damn” and the bad skydiver goes “damn” whack!
What did one Hawaiian shark say to the other? “Oh, no – not airplane food again.”
If an airline that flies across continents is called “transcontinental,” would one that only flies short distances be considered “incontinental”? |
Below are some best practices that apply to Aviation TDM. Table 6 summarizes recommended practices for improved aviation environmental protection.
· Apply Least Cost Planning to airport and air transportation service planning. Allow demand management alternatives to compete equally with capacity expansion investments for dealing with aviation transportation problems.
· Incorporate Sustainability objectives in aviation planning (Upham and Mills, 2003).
· Use competitive bids to sell airport landing slots and other forms of Congestion Pricing to allocate airport capacity.
· Price air travel to reflect full costs, including airport facilities and environmental externalities. Avoid undertaxing aviation fuel and airport land.
· Include all impacted stakeholders in aviation and airport planning, including organizations and agencies with environmental and equity interests.
· Improve transportation alternatives for medium-distance (100-800 mile) journeys.
· Avoid use of air miles and long-distance holidays as consumer rewards and gifts. This can be discouraged by treating these as taxable income.
Table 6 Environmental Issues and Potential Solutions (ICAO)
|
Environmental Issues |
Actions Required |
|
Global impacts including the “greenhouse effect” and depletion of the ozone layer. |
Reduce carbon dioxide emissions, improve fuel efficiency, reduce emissions of oxides of nitrogen, chlorofluorocarbons and other contaminants which destroy the ozone layer. |
|
Air pollution |
Reduce emissions of carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, volatile organic carbons, oxides of nitrogen and other air pollutants from aircraft, ground vehicles and other airport operations. |
|
Surface water, soil and groundwater contamination |
Limit contamination of waters by accidental or routine emissions of de-icing fluids, waste oils, cleaning fluids, paints, solvents, spillage, aircraft and equipment fuels, batteries, including chemicals and other dangerous goods shipped for commercial purposes. Control surface water runoff and treat contaminated waters. Replace hazardous materials with safer alternatives. |
|
Waste disposal |
Improve the efficient management of the use of materials. Replace hazardous materials with more benign substances. Reduce consumption. Reduce quantities of waste materials for disposal. Improve packaging standards. Promote greater awareness and use of recyclable materials. Develop safe means of waste collection, sorting, distribution, recycling and disposal. Develop industry standards and technologies. |
|
Noise emissions |
Reduce noise from aircraft, ground vehicles and access traffic. Design airports and support systems to be compatible with communities. Optimize management of airport activities. |
|
Consumption of resources |
Optimize airport design and layout, resources planning; waste collection, recovery, reuse and destruction. Improve building efficiency and design. Rehabilitate existing structures in harmony with the environment. Improve efficient use of energy and land. Recover reusable materials. Collection of harmful materials and gases; heating, cooling and lighting. |
|
Natural resource conservation and sustainable development |
Design airports to be compatible with surrounding landscape. Management and conservation of wildlife and ecosystems at airports and the surrounding areas. Minimise use of pesticides and herbicides. Conduct airport development in harmony with the surrounding terrain, flora and fauna. |
|
Environmental laws and legislation |
Review existing municipal, regional and national laws and international conventions affecting airports, airlines, travelling public, suppliers and manufacturers at large so as to respond to a wide variety of political, social, economic and technical initiatives emanating from local, national and international bodies. Develop compatible policies and practices. |
|
Technology transfer and development |
Learn from the experiences from others. Share existing technologies. Encourage the development of new technologies. |
|
Development and harmonisation of environmental standards |
Rationalize methods and develop standards, recommended practices and guidelines for world-wide application. Create methods for environmental certification. Give preference to international actions. |
|
Collection of statistical data And analysis |
Monitor performance and collect data to aid in prioritization of activities, decision making, and to demonstrate compliance. Report synthesised data in order to assess the nature of the problems and to be in a position to formulate appropriate recommendations and standards. |
Researchers May and Hill argue that the unchecked growth of aviation, as generally assumed by the aviation and tourism industries, and by governments, has significant risks, because aviation is a major source of global warming emissions, imposes local environmental impacts such as noise and air pollution, and the aviation industry is vulnerable to increasing fuel prices. He recommends the following policy reforms to encourage demand management in order to reduce aviation impacts and risks:
By MATTHEW L. WALD, The New York Times / June 6, 2001
WASHINGTON, The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, in an effort to relieve congestion at La Guardia Airport, plans to suggest sharply raising landing fees or auctioning off landing slots.
The authority, which runs the airport, plans to make its formal proposal to the Federal Aviation Administration on Wednesday, according to officials at both agencies. But it will face considerable opposition from airlines and some elected officials.
The F.A.A. will add other options to alleviate congestion, perhaps ordering airlines to cut the number of flights or fly bigger planes, according to people who have been briefed about the two agencies' proposals.
F.A.A. officials said the solution chosen for La Guardia could be a model for other crowded airports across the country, although La Guardia's problem is the worst.
"We continue to believe that La Guardia is really unique; there are physical constraints there we don't see at other airports," Jane Garvey, the F.A.A. administrator, said today in a telephone interview. "But we also think we can learn something."
Last summer, about a quarter of the nation's air traffic delays were traceable to La Guardia, she said, although the number has fallen to about 10 percent now.
La Guardia's problems began about a year ago, after Congress lifted all restrictions on the number of incoming flights, and airlines added so many flights that the airport routinely experienced hundreds of long delays daily.
To address the problem, in December the F.A.A. put a cap on the number of flights and distributed the slots by lottery. The actions reduced congestion, but only temporarily. The lottery system is supposed to expire on Sept. 15 and be replaced by "market forces," the F.A.A. said. However, Ms. Garvey said today that it would probably have to be extended.
The Port Authority will raise as one possibility simply increasing landing fees sharply, which planners hope would decrease the number of flights and encourage airlines to use larger planes, spreading their higher cost among more passengers.
A key question, though, is how the additional revenue will be spent. The Port Authority has discussed investing it at other airports, including John F. Kennedy International, to let that airport handle more traffic.
Various planners have raised the idea of making improvements at Stewart Airport, near Newburgh, N.Y., or making that airport easier to get to from New York City, to help turn it into a fourth jetport for the area.
Neil Levin, the executive director of the Port Authority, said that the idea was not to raise more revenue. "The only goal here is to impact behavior of flights at La Guardia," he said.
The airlines, however, have already complained that there is no justification for raising travelers' costs at La Guardia. And the authority may also face legal hurdles in trying to raise landing fees above costs, according to one Congressional staff member.
Mr. Levin, stressing that the agency's proposals were simply starting points for debate, said, "All we know is that we've got a problem there and the public is not being well served by congestion."
Under its proposal to auction off landing slots, the authority would give each airline a fixed number of landings and takeoffs – the authority has discussed 10 of each as a possible number – and allocate hundreds more slots in relation to market share. About 20 percent of the slots would be put up for auction. The airport can accommodate about 1,200 flights a day before problems arise.
The F.A.A. has told Congressional staffers that another idea would be to control the problem administratively, ordering the airlines to use bigger planes and reducing the number of landings allowed. A provision of federal law gives the F.A.A. the authority to ensure efficient use of air space, and some officials believe that the F.A.A. could use that authority to limit flights, or to threaten the airlines into taking measures to reduce traffic themselves.
|
CO2 From
Planes Harm Twice as Much October 25, 2001
|
According to a major study, many airports have environmental monitoring or sustainability evaluation programs. Environmental practices commonly in place at airports include measuring and monitoring water conservation, water quality, climate change, air quality, land use, biodiversity, environmentally sustainable materials, waste, noise and aesthetics, energy, and green buildings.
Economic sustainability practices commonly in place at airports include local hiring and purchasing, contributing to the community, quantifying the value of sustainability practices, contributing to research and development, and incentivizing sustainable behavior. Social concerns at airports include public awareness and education, stakeholder relationships, employee practices and procedures, sustainable transportation, alleviating road congestion, accessibility, local culture and heritage, indoor environmental quality, employee well-being, and passenger well-being.
The following summarizes the PhD dissertation, “Indicators Of Sustainable Development In Civil Aviation” by Paul Michael Grimley.
There is a need to apply the principles of sustainable development to the practice of the civil aviation industry. This research draws on sustainable development literature, general systems theory and quality principles to derive a holistic and systemic sustainable development model, and a methodology for deriving indicators of sustainable development. These are then applied to the civil aviation system, to select and construct indicators of sustainable development in civil aviation. The indicator selection process is participative, and seeks the views of stakeholders of UK civil aviation. Stakeholders are asked, via a Delphi study, to give their views on the meaning of sustainable aviation, and on the most important aspects of sustainable development in civil aviation.
The research proposes a set of 29 indicators for sustainable development in civil aviation, including institutional and regulatory indicators. The research findings suggest that, amongst UK civil aviation stakeholders, there is some consensus on the important sustainability issues facing civil aviation, and on their choice of indicators. There is little understanding of the meaning of sustainable aviation, and disagreement on policies to adopt in favour of sustainable development in aviation. Amongst stakeholders from civil aviation organisations, there is strong opposition to regulatory or economic policies in favour of sustainable development. While the safety of civil aviation is institutionalised, there is evidence to suggest that opposition to other aspects of sustainable development is embedded in the regulatory and operational organisations of civil aviation.
Airport environmental management policies that the UK government began implementing in 2003 have slowed aviation demand somewhat (though it is still increasing), and has redistributed some air traffic to less congested routes, and encouraged the accelerated purchase of cleaner, quieter aircraft. This program includes improving and modernizing existing regional airports, as an alternative to building new airports and new runways. At Heathrow, where a new runway could be needed in the period 2015 to 2020, expanding the airport is conditional on meeting the noise and air quality limits that we have set out. The Government has led work to consider whether the environmental impact of making more use of existing runways, or building a third runway, would be acceptable.
The UK Department for Transport has helped establish an Airport Transport Forum (ATF) to encourage use of alternative modes for surface travel to major airports, such as encouraging employees to use public transit rather than drive. Specific policy strategies to help achieve this objective include improving public transit service to airports, develop worksite travel plans with specific trip reduction targets, ridesharing, car parking pricing policies and road user charges.
ACRP (2008), Airport Sustainability Practices: A Synthesis of Airport Practice, Airport Cooperative Research Program, Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org); at http://pubsindex.trb.org/document/view/default.asp?lbid=872705.
Aviation Environment Federation (www.aef.org.uk) is a UK based not-for-profit Non-Governmental Organisation that works exclusively on the environmental impacts of aviation. It promotes a sustainable future for aviation which takes account of the environmental and amenity effects of air travel.
Susanne Bohler, Sylvie Grischkat, Sonja Haustein and Marcel Hunecke (2006), “Encouraging Environmentally Sustainable Holiday Travel,” Transportation Research A, Vol. 40, Issue 8 (www.elsevier.com/locate/tra), Oct. 2006, pp. 652-670.
Alice Bows and Kevin L. Anderson (2007), “Policy Clash: Can Projected Aviation Growth Be Reconciled With The UK Government's 60% Carbon-Reduction Target?,” Transport Policy, Vol. 14, No. 2 (www.elsevier.com/locate/transpol), March 2007, pp. 103-110.
BTS (annual reports), “Energy Intensity of Certificated Air Carriers, All Services,” National Transportation Statistics, Bureau of Transportation Statistics (www.bts.gov/btsprod/nts/Ch4_web/4-21.htm).
BTS (2011), The U.S. Rural Population and Scheduled Intercity Transportation in 2010: A Five-Year Decline in Transportation Access, Bureau of Transportation Statistics (www.bts.gov); at www.bts.gov/publications/scheduled_intercity_transportation_and_the_us_rural_population/2010/pdf/entire.pdf.
California High Speed Rail Authority (www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov).
CAN-Europe and T&E (2006) Clearing the Air: The Myth and Reality of Aviation and Climate Change, European Federation for Transport and Environment (www.transportenvironment.org) and CAN-Europe – Climate Action Network Europe (www.climnet.org) ; at www.transportenvironment.org/docs/Publications/2006/2006-06_aviation_clearing_the_air_myths_reality.pdf.
Centre for Aviation, Transport and the Environment (www.cate.mmu.ac.uk) at Manchester Metropolitan University provides information on air travel and sustainability issues.
CST (2001), “The Future of Aviation,” Sustainable Transportation Monitor, Number 3, Centre for Sustainable Transportation (www.cstctd.org).
Robert Damuth (2008), The Economic Impacts and Social Benefits of the U.S. Motorcoach Industry Binding the Nation Together by Providing Diverse and Affordable Services for Everyone, American Bus Association (www.buses.org); at www.buses.org/files/Report08.pdf.
Marc D. Davidson, Ron C.N. Wit, Jos
M.W. Dings (2003), Meeting External Costs in the Aviation Industry,
Commission for Integrated Transport (www.cfit.gov.uk).
DFT (2003), The Future of Air Transport, UK Department for Transport (www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_aviation/documents/page/dft_aviation_031516.pdf).
DFT (2006), Air Transport White Paper Progress Report 2006, UK Department for Transport (www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/groups/dft_aviation/documents/page/dft_aviation_613840.hcsp).
Jos Dings, et al (2002), External Costs Of Aviation, CE (www.ce.nl). This paper provides estimates of the environmental costs of air travel.
EEA (2000), Environmental Taxes: Recent Developments in Tools for Integration, Environmental Issues Series No. 18, European Environment Agency (http://org.eea.eu.int).
EC (1999), Air Transport and the Environment. Towards meeting the Challenge of Sustainable Development, Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Commission of the European Communities, the European Parliament, (Brussels; http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/en/com/pdf/1999/com1999_0640en01.pdf), 1999.
Economist (2006), “The Sky's The Limit,” The Economist (www.economist.com), 10 June 2006.
FOE (2000), The Right Price for Air Travel Campaign, Friends of the Earth Netherlands, (www.milieudefensie.nl/airtravel/index.htm).
GAO (2005), Survey of Small Community Air Service Grantees and Applicants, Government Accountability Office (www.gao.gov).
Tony Grayling and Simon Bishop (2002), Sustainable Aviation 2030, Institute for Public Policy Research (www.ippr.org.uk).
Green Skies Alliance (www.greenskies.org) is an information exchange concerning the environmental impacts of aviation.
Paul Michael Grimley (2006), Indicators of Sustainable Development in Civil Aviation, Dissertation, Loughborough University (http://dspace.lboro.ac.uk/dspace/handle/2134/2755).
Hagler Bailly (1999), Potential for Fuel Taxes to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Transport, Transportation Table of the Canadian National Climate Change Process (www.tc.gc.ca/Envaffairs/subgroups1/fuel_tax/study1/final_Report/Final_Report.htm).
C. Hewett and J. Foley (1999), Plane Trading: Policies for Reducing the Climate Change Effects of International Aviation, Institute for Public Policy Research (London; www.ippr.org.uk), 2000.
IPCC, Aviation and The Global Atmosphere. Summary for Policymakers, Special Report for Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (www.ipcc.ch).
Ian Humphreys and Stephen Ison (2005), “Changing Airport Employee Travel Behaviour: the Role of Airport Surface Access Strategies,” Transport Policy, Vol. 12, No. 1 (www.elsevier.com/locate/transpol), January 2005, pp. 1-9.
International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation (www.aef.org.uk) international network of environmental NGOs that share a common concern with the problems of air quality, climate
change and noise in relation to aviation, and are committed to developing and providing technical expertise and common policy strategies to the work of ICAO, with a view to reducing emissions
and noise.
IPCC (1999) Aviation and the Global Atmosphere, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; at www.grida.no/climate/ipcc/aviation/126.htm.
M. Janic (1999), “Aviation and Externalities: The Accomplishments and Problems,” Transportation Research Part D, Vol 4, No. 3, pp. 159-180.
Journal of Air Transport Management (www.elsevier.nl/locate/jairtraman) publishes articles covering major policy and management issues facing the air transport industry.
Journal of Air Transportation World Wide (http://ntl.bts.gov/data/jatww.html) is a professional journal covering aviation issues.
D.S. Lee and R. Sausen (2000), “New Directions: Assessing The Real Impact Of CO2 Emissions Trading By The Aviation Industry,” Atmospheric Environment, Vol. 34, pp. 5337-5338.
Steven E. Morrissette (1996), “A Survey off Environmental Issues in the Civilian Aviation Industry,” Journal of Air Transportation World Wide, Vol. 1, No. 1, (http://ntl.bts.gov/data/jatww.html), pp. 22-38.
Murray May and Stuart B. Hill (2002), “Unpacking Aviation Travel Futures – An Application of Causal Layered Analysis,” Journal of Future Studies, August 2002.
Murray May (2006), “Aviation Meets Ecology – Redesigning Policy And Practice For Air Transport And Tourism,” Transport Engineering in Australia, Vol 10, No 2 (wwwistp.murdoch.edu.au/research/journal/TEA.html), 2006, pp. 117-128.
Murray May and S.B. Hill (2006), “Questioning Airport Expansion – A Case Study of Canberra International Airport,” Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 14, pp. 437-450.
David McCollum, Gregory Gould and David Greene (2009), Aviation and Marine Transportation: GHG Mitigation Potential and Challenges, Pew Center on Global Climate Change (www.pewclimate.org); at www.pewclimate.org/technology/report/aviation-and-marine.
Jim Nicell and Jeremy Cornish (2002), Global Air Transport And The Environment, International Centre for Aviation and the Environment.
RCEP (1994), Eighteenth Report, Transport and the Environment (Cm 2674), Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (www.rcep.org.uk), HMSO (London).
RCEP (2002), The Environmental Effects Of Civil Aircraft In Flight, Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (www.rcep.org.uk/aviation.html), HMSO.
Youdi Schipper (2004), “Environmental Costs in European Aviation,” Transport Policy, Vol. 11, No. 2 (www.elsevier.com) April 2004, pp. 141-154.
Michael Sivak (2019), Flying First Class on a Single Domestic Round Trip Can Contribute More Greenhouse Gas Emissions than a Year of Driving, Green Car Congress (www.greencarcongress.com); at www.greencarcongress.com/2019/07/20190701-sivak.html.
Hugh Somerville (2003), “Transport Energy and Emissions: Aviation,” Handbook of Transport and the Environment, Elsevier (www.elsevier.com), pp. 263-278.
Strategic Aviation Special Interest Group (www.sasig.org) seeks to ensure that there is a national aviation strategy for the UK that reconciles economic, social and environmental issues in a sustainable way.
Sustainable Cities & Aviation Network (SCAN-UK) (www.scan-uk.mmu.ac.uk) is an internet-supported network of UK academics, industry and NGO representatives focused on sustainability and aviation.
TC (1999), Transportation and Climate Change: Options for Action, Transport Canada (www.tc.gc.ca/envaffairs/english/climatechange/ttable).
TC (2002), International Workshop on Aviation Operational Measures for Fuel and Emissions Reductions, hosted by Transport Canada (www.tc.gc.ca/programs/environment/freighttransportation/awareness/presentations.htm).
T&E (1999a), Aviation; Air Transport's Environmental Impact, European Federation for Transport and Environment (www.t-e.nu).
T&E (1999b), Aviation; The Role of Economic Instruments in Environmental Aviation, European Federation for Transport and Environment (www.t-e.nu).
UBA (2001), Environmental External Costs of Transport: Analysis of Subsidies in the Aviation Sector, ABA, German Environmental Agency; cited in OECD (2002), Environmental Impacts of Transport Subsidies, OECD Workshop on Environmentally Harmful Subsidies (www1.oecd.org/agr/ehsw/SG-SD-RD(2002)1r1.pdf).
Paul Upham (2002), A Comparison Of Sustainability Theory With UK And European Airports Policy And Practice, Department of Environmental and Geographical Sciences, Manchester Metropolitan University (www.doc.mmu.ac.uk/aric/index.html), 2000.
Paul J. Upham and Julia N. Mills (2003), Environmental and Operational Sustainability of Airports: Core Indicators and Stakeholder Communication, Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research, UMIST, Manchester (www.tyndall.ac.uk).
Paul Upham, Janet Maughan David Raper and Callum Thomas (2003), Towards Sustainable Aviation, Earthscan (www.earthscan.co.uk).
John Whitelegg and Howard Cambridge (2004), Aviation and Sustainability, Stockholm Environmental Institute (www.sei.se/aviation/index.html).
Ron Wit and Marc Davidson (2002), Aviation and Climate Change: Search for Effective Global Market-Based Options that Secure Interests of Developing Countries, European Federation for Transport and Environment (www.t-e.nu).
Wuppertal Institute (1999), Measures to Reduce Exhaust Emissions from Civil Air Traffic, German Institute for Economic Research (www.wupperinst.org); summary at www.umweltbundesamt.org/fpdf-k/1955.pdf.
This Encyclopedia is produced by the Victoria Transport Policy Institute to help improve understanding of Transportation Demand Management. It is an ongoing project. Please send us your comments and suggestions for improvement.
Victoria Transport Policy Institute
www.vtpi.org info@vtpi.org
1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA
Phone 250-360-1560
#77