The effects of use agreements on airport efficiency

• Published in: Journal of air transport management 2020-05, Vol.84, p.101767, Article 101767
• Main Authors: Karanki, Fecri, Lim, Siew Hoon
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• ISSN: 0969-6997; 1873-2089
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jairtraman.2020.101767

Bilateral contracting is integral to the working relationship between airports and airlines. In the U.S., the three common types of airport use agreements are the residual method, the compensatory method, and the hybrid method. Under a residual agreement, the financial risk of the host airport is borne by the signatory airlines, and in return, the signatory airlines pay reduced user fees. Under a compensatory agreement, however, airports bear their own financial risks in the absence of a signatory airline. A hybrid agreement combines the features of residual and compensatory agreements. For example, under a hybrid agreement, airports usually bear their own financial risks in terminal operations while the signatory airlines take over the financial risks in airfield operations. The aim of this paper is to determine whether these three types of business agreements affect airport operational efficiency. Using 2009 to 2016 yearly data of 59 U.S. hub airports, we find that airports with residual-type agreements tend to have lower operational efficiency. This implies that, although under a residual agreement, the signatory airlines pay favorable airport fees and charges, increased airport inefficiency may undercut any potential benefits of the agreement. •Residual, compensatory and hybrid are three common types of U.S airport use agreements.•Airports adopting the residual agreement are less efficient than others.•Increased inefficiency may undercut any potential benefits of residual agreements.