Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180

Aviation and externalities: the accomplishments and problems

Milan Janic *

ALFA IFA, Gregor

ci
ceva 9, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia

Abstract
Civil aviation has become a major industry and is one of the fastest growing sectors of the world
economy. The growth of civil aviation has advantages and disadvantages for the society. The advantages
include the direct and indirect generation of new jobs within and around the sector as well as providing a
strong stimulus to the globalisation of the industry, business and long distance tourism. Disadvantages
include its negative impacts on the environment. This paper presents an overview of the impacts of civil
aviation on the environment. In particular, it considers some of the important technological and institu-
tional innovations, that have been implemented in the sector over time in order to simultaneously increase
its eciency and decrease the negative impacts on the environment. Thus, it illustrates how a `sustainable'
development of the sector is attempted to be achieved through management of the system's noise, air
pollution and safety side eects. 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Air transport; Externalities; Noise; Airports

1. Introduction

The transport sector has developed into a major industry during the 20th century. Apart from
the direct benets to those employed in it, it has been helpful in stimulating the overall increase in
prosperity, faster development and the expansion of the world's trade and increasing opportunity
for travel and tourism that has taken place. It has also, however, created a wider set of negative
impacts on the environment. The eects of atmospheric pollution, noise, accidents, congestion
and delays have been particularly emphasised (Button, 1993; European Commission, 1996). 1
Because of the constant, signicant and fast growth of the sector, its environmental impacts are a

*
Corresponding author. E-mail: milan.janic@amis.net
1
Here, the environment is taken to embrace congestion, which is normally treated as a `club problem' in economics in
addition to the externality problems associated with the impact of air transport on the physical environment.

1361-9209/99/$ see front matter 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 1 3 6 1 - 9 2 0 9 ( 9 9 ) 0 0 0 0 3 - 6
160 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180

cause of increasing concern. One way of reviewing them is within the concept of `sustainable
development'. 2
Civil aviation represents a sub-sector of the transport sector. Currently, this is one of the fastest
growing sectors of the world economy. A brief look at the sector's development indicates some
impressive developments. For example, in 1994 the sector operated a total eet of about 15,000
aircrafts, which served more than 10,000 airports. The sector directly employed about 3.3 million
people of which more than 1.4 million were in US. During the same year, more than 1.2 billion
people and about 23 million tonnes of freights were transported. (The freight gure represented
one third of the value of the world's manufactured export.) The sector has constantly grown at the
annual rates varying between 5% and 6.5%. These rates have been higher than the growing rates
of Gross National Product (GNP), which indicates that the trac volume is going to double every
12 years. If there are no signicant constraints to such growth, the sector's measurable impact will
rise to about $US 1800 billion by the year 2010. The number of jobs aected by the sector is
expected to increase to more than 33 million in 2010 (Air Transport Action Group, 1996a; In-
ternational Civil Aviation Organisation, 1994).
Civil aviation, however, may impact the environment in various ways.
First, it may expose the people living, working and/or recreating near the major ground-based
aviation objects (the airports) to local noise, air pollution and risk of death or injury due to
aircraft accidents.
Secondly, it may directly expose some people to direct risk of death or injury due to aircraft
accidents. In this case these people are the users of aviation services and then full costs of po-
tential accidents are not being internalised through such things as insurance. Accidents can
happen at the airports and/or during ights.
Thirdly, it may cause suering to people from global emissions, which contribute to acid rains
(mostly caused by emission of NOx ), global warming (mostly caused by emission of CO2 ) and
upper ozone layer depletion (mostly caused by emission of CFSs-chlorouorocarbons from the
air conditioning of the planes) (Button, 1993; European Commission, 1996).
Fourth, like the other transport modes, congestion and delays can occur whenever demand for
service exceeds available capacity of the aviation infrastructure at the prevailing price.
The impacts of civil aviation on the environment imposes cost on both participants (the users
and operators) (internal/private cost) and society as a whole (external cost) (European Com-
mission, 1996). There have been research eorts to evaluate these costs. For example, Levinson
et al. (1998) provided a survey addressing the estimation issue and make comparisons of the
external cost of air and highway inter-city travel. The study shows that noise is the dominant
environmental cost of air travel, followed by congestion, air pollution and accidents. For highway
inter-city travel, the external costs have been ranked as follows: accidents, congestion, noise and

2
According to Whitelegg (1993), any `sustainable entity' should satisfy three basic conditions as follows:
First, it can be allowed to use any sort of renewable resources at a rate which does not exceed the rate of their
regeneration.
Second, the rate of use of non-renewable resources should not exceed the rate at which sustainable renewable sub-
stitutes have been developing.
Third, the rate of emission of pollutants by any entity should not exceed the assimilative capacity of the environ-
ment.
 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180 161

Table 1
Comparison of long-term average social costs for air and highway travel
Type of cost Air travel ($/pkt) Highway travel ($/pkt)
Air pollution 0.00090 0.00370
Noise 0.00430 0.00045
Accidents (safety) 0.00050 0.02000
Congestion 0.00170 0.00460
Total 0.00740 0.02888
pkt passenger-km; Compiled from Levinson et al. (1998).

air pollution. In addition, it shows that the social cost of highway travel is about 15% of total
travel cost. For air travel, the social cost's share is only about 5% of total travel cost. Table 1
illustrates the inter-modal comparison of long-run average social costs for air and highway
travels. These costs have been expressed in $US per realised passenger kilometre.
The most recent investigations indicate that the global impact of aviation on the environment
with respect to air pollution has been relatively small, and it is expected to remain at the same level
in the future. For example, the aviation sector uses about 5% of the world's annual oil con-
sumption or about 12% of oil consumption of the transport sector. Such relatively small amounts
have caused a relatively modest contribution to global, man-made emissions of NOx and CO2 .
Emissions of CO2 by jets at high altitudes have been estimated to be responsible for only 1% of
any future rise in global temperatures caused by articial emissions (Air Transport Action Group,
1996b).
These gures have not diminished the growing interest and importance of research on the re-
lationships between aviation and environment. Institutionally, one of the rst international steps
intended to create a consistent set of global and specic measures for preventing air pollution and
global warming threatening the whole planet was made at the United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Besides the problems
relating to other sectors of the world's and national economies, the Conference addressed two
principal environmental problems relevant to civil aviation. These concerned aircraft noise and
engine emissions. As far as noise is concerned, it was not shown to be a signicant issue at the
conference. Addressing pollution of the atmosphere was given the highest priority.

2. The impacts of civil aviation on the environment

Civil aviation has created many potential environmental problems, which were recognised at an
early stage of the sector's development and produced policy responses. Policies have been focused
at three levels.
Optimal use of the existing technology.
Investing and developing new technologies (the aircraft and engines).
Supporting innovations.
One international organisation that has attempted to globally co-ordinate work on aviation
environmental problems has been the International Civil Aviation Organisation. It has designed
162 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180

Table 2
Environmental problems/impacts associated with operation of civil aviation
Problem Explanation
1. Air pollution near the airports - The aircraft engine emissions.
- Emissions from the airport motor vehicles.
- Emissions from the airport accesses trac.
- Emissions from the other airport sources.

2. Global emissions - Long-range air pollution (i.e., `acid rains').

- `Greenhouse' eect.
- Depletion of ozone layer.

3. Aircraft noise - Noise in the vicinity of the airports caused by the aircraft movements.
- Engine testing and other noise sources at the airports.
- Noise caused by the aircraft en-route (not including sonic boom).
- Sonic boom caused by supersonic aircraft.

4. Aircraft incidents/accidents - Accidents or incidents involving the passenger death, injury and damaging
of dangerous goods carried as cargo.
- Other environmental problems that may arise from aircraft accidents.
- Emergency procedures involving fuel dumping.

5. Congestion and delays - Airport and en-route congestion and delays.

6. Airport/Infrastructure construction - Loss of land.

- Soil erosion.
- Impact on water tables, river sources and eld drainage.
- Impacts on ora and fauna.

7. Water/Soil pollution near airports - Water pollution caused by inadequate treatment of contaminants in the
airport waste water.
- Water and soil pollution caused by leakage from storage tanks.

8. Airport waste management - Disposal of environmentally harmful materials used in the aircraft servicing
and maintenance.
- Disposal of waste from the airport and incoming aircraft.
Sources: Crayston (1992); Morrissette (1996).

an inventory of all these problems, which are presented in Table 2 (Crayston, 1992; Morrissette,
1996).

2.1. Air pollution

The analysis of air pollution generated by civil aviation can be seen to consist of two parts. The
rst is the analysis of the sector's fuel consumption and energy eciency and the second is the
analysis of the characteristics of the air pollution itself.
 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180 163

2.1.1. Analysis of fuel consumption and energy eciency

(i) The total fuel consumption of the sector. The world's civil aviation eet consumed about 138
million tonnes of aviation fuel in 1990. About 96% of this was jet fuel. According to the recent
estimates made by ICAO, the annual consumption of jet fuel is expected to increase by about 65%
during the next thirty years i.e. to 220 million tonnes in the year 2020. The estimates have been
made taking into account the expected growth in aircraft movements and the inuence of a set of
developmental factors such as progress in engine technology, implementation of more fuel-e-
cient operating procedures and renewing of the aircraft eet (Balasov and Smith, 1992).
(ii) Progress in the aircraft engine technology. Airspace manufacturers have made eorts to
improve fuel eciency of aircraft engines that also emit less pollution. In designing such engines,
the constructors have simultaneously solved a set of complex tasks. The most complex consisted
of improvements to engines' propulsion and thermal eciency. Better propulsive eciency has
guaranteed obtaining of greater propulsive power from a given amount of energy generated by the
combustion processes. Improved thermal eciency has provided increase in the overall engine
pressure ratio and turbine temperature. Other tasks consisted of making a proper balance between
the engine weight, drag, noise and emissions.
In order to obtain a higher propulsive eciency, it is necessary to reduce waste energy in the
engine exhaust stream. This has produced a lower jet velocity. Since engine thrust is the product of
exhaustive mass ow and velocity, the velocity has to be reduced and the mass ow should be
increased to retain a desired level of thrust. This implies an increase in the bypass ratio that is
dened as a rate between amount of air owing round the engine core and the amount of air
passing through it. The engines with the higher bypass ratio have a lower Specic Fuel Con-
sumption (SPC) that is dened as the ratio of fuel burnt per hour per tonne of net thrust (Cundy,
1996). This is a global indicator of the overall engine propulsive and thermal eciency. According
to Thame (1992) there were two main previous phases of developing of the jet engines. The rst
phase lasted 15 years, from 1946, when the rst jet engine (Ghost and Avon) entered commercial
use and when the rst modern low-bypass turbofan engine (JT8D) entered commercial service.
During that period the average SFC expressed in kg of fuel consumed per hour per kg of gen-
erated thrust decreased for about 30% (i.e., from 0.643 to 0.436 kg/kg h). The next phase lasted
from 1960 to 1995. In 1960, the rst big turbofans were launched. They had average SFC 30%
lower than the engines of the previous period; i.e., their SFC was reduced from 0.436 to 0.298 kg/
kg h. The current phase is likely to last from 1995 to 2015. During that period the average SFC is
likely to be reduced to less than 0.184 kg/kg h.
To illustrate how SFC is related to bypass ratio of jet engines, relevant data for 20 engines
produced by dierent airspace manufacturers is sorted out and regressed. 3 The SPC is the de-
pendent variable. The engine bypass ratio (BR) is found in Eq. (1) to be the independent variable.
Its values have varied from 0 for the engines Ghost and Avon to about 9 for the family of engines
GE90 developed for the Boeing 777 (Thame, 1992)

3
The most famous manufacturers of the aircraft engines are: CFM Company (joint corporation of Snecma (France)
and General Electric Company (USA)), Rolls-Royce (UK), Pratt and Whitney and General Electric (USA), and IAE
(International Aero Engines AG made up of the engine manufacturers Pratt and Whitney, Rolls-Royce, MTU (Europe)
and Aero Engine Corporation (Japan)).
164 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180

SFC 0:334 0:036 ln BR; R2 0:908; N 20: 1

It can be shown that SFC has decreased by about 4% per each incremental increase in the
engine bypass ratio. This information can be used to examine the existence of `sustainable' de-
velopment of the aircraft engines with respect to fuel consumption.
(iii) Operational measures to reduce fuel consumption. Two groups of operational measures have
contributed to the diminishing overall level of fuel consumption of civil aviation (International
Civil Aviation Organisation, 1996).
The rst group aimed at cutting overall fuel use and has included the following sub-measures:
improvements in air trac control system, more direct ights to reduce the total travel distance
per passenger, optimisation of aircraft climb/descent proles in terms of fuel, NOx or other pol-
lutants, reductions in cruising speed, harmonising fuel prices to discourage `tankering', prohi-
bition of short-distance sectors, improvement in load factor and reducing of long taxing and
towering of aircraft at the airports.
A second group of measures has included reducing of cruising altitudes, restrictions over ight
routes, reducing ying in daylight, widening (or narrowing) of the ight corridors and reposi-
tioning of the ight corridors in order to use or avoid extreme weather conditions.
(iv) Fleet renewal. In the early 1980s, the cost of fuel accounted for about 30% of the total
aircraft operating costs. Currently, the share of fuel cost in the total operating cost is about 15%
(Air Transport Action Group, 1996b; Thame, 1992). The decrease in the share of fuel cost has
come about because of the stabilisation in fuel prices and the renewing of the airline eets by the
replacement of `older' fuel-inecient aircrafts with ones equipped with new engines consuming
4050% less fuel per unit of payload. In the future, global aviation and non-aviation factors may
inuence the fuel prices. The process of eet renewal is expected to be a gradual one. It will
depend on a set of factors including developments in air travel demand, availability of time and
money to replace the `old' with the `new' aircraft and the capacity of aircraft manufacturers. In
addition, prices and performances of competing aircraft, labour and fuel, environmental regu-
lation and industry protability are going to be of importance.
(v) Cumulative eects. A number of other reinforcing eects seem promising for the future
`sustainable' development of civil aviation.
Development of aircraft engine technology, operational measures and eet renewal.
Improvements of the ight management techniques.
Management of load factor.
According to the International Civil Aviation Organisation (1992), the rst two measures are
expected to reduce fuel consumption per available ton-km by about 23%. Additional reductions
of about 5% may be achieved by increases in load factor (Balasov and Smith, 1992). The resultant
potential `sustainability' of civil aviation with respect to fuel consumption and energy eciency
during the period 19902015 can be illustrated using regression analysis. The average fuel con-
sumption per available ton-km expressed in grams of fuel consumed per tonne kilometre is the
dependent variable, AFC. Its values have been estimated assuming an annual improvement in fuel
eciency of 2.5% during the observed period. Two independent variables are deployed. The rst
(T) is time expressed in years for the period 19902015. The second represents the volume of
output expressed in million ton-km carried out per annum, ATK. This variable has been estimated
taking into account a renewal of the aircraft eet and stable trac growth of passenger and freight
 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180 165

demand at average annual rates of 5% and 6.5%, respectively. For estimation purposes, 1 ton-km
has been adopted as equivalent to 9 passenger km; average load factor has been adopted to be
0.55. 4 The resultant equation is:
AFC 30:690:22; ATK 0:355 T 0:017 ;
143:67 7:234 62:390

R2 0:993; F 10; 023:563; DW 1:515; N 25: 2

The values of t-statistics in the parenthesis below the coecients and F-statistic indicate that
independent variables and whole equation are signicant at 1% and 5%, respectively. The R2 -
statistics conrms strong causalities between the independent and the two independent variables.
The DW statistics indicates that auto-correlation of the rst order between the independent
variables is not a problem. On the basis of this relationship, the average unit fuel consumption will
decrease by about 18% during the period 19902000, and by about 65% over 19902015.

2.1.2. The analysis of air pollution

The air pollution caused by civil aviation is dependent on four factors: the intensity and volume
of the aircraft movements, fuel consumption and energy eciency, the rate of renewing of the
aircraft eet by introducing `a cleaner' aircraft, and the type and spatial concentration and dis-
tribution of the particular pollutants. The rst three factors have already been analysed. This
leaves the analysis of the fourth factor.
(i) Characteristics of the main pollutants. The fuel burnt in the gas turbine of an aircraft engine
represents a mixture of many dierent hydrocarbons. While combusting in the engine, the fuel is
mixed with air. The result of the burning process is the energy that moves the aircraft ahead and
emitted gases, which transform into the atmospheric pollutants. The latter include: smoke and
carbon monoxide (CO), carbon dioxide (CO2 ), unburnt hydrocarbons (UHC), and oxides of
nitrogen (NOx ) (NOx NO + NO2 ). Smoke is primarily associated with the engines' operations
during the aircraft take-o and climb-out. Under specic atmospheric conditions, a high con-
centration of this gas may reduce visibility at the airports. Carbon dioxide (CO2 ) is associated
with all phases of ight. Carbon monoxide (CO) and unburnt hydrocarbons (UHC) are partic-
ularly emitted as the aircraft engines operate at low power, i.e., particularly while on the ground
idling. The nitrogen oxides (NOx ) are emitted mainly during the engines' operation at high power
and during cruising. At present, aircraft engines' burning of 1 kg of jet fuel produces about 0.011
kg of NOx , 3.16 kg of CO2 and 1.25 kg of water vapour H2 O (Ralph and Newton, 1996).
Besides eorts to reduce engine noise and improve fuel eciency that can contribute to re-
duction in emission of all pollutants, manufacturers of aircraft engines have made signicant
progress in changing the structure of emitted pollutants. On one side, the levels of CO and UHC
have been reduced particularly thanks to increase in the engines' combustion temperature. On the
other side, the level of NOx has been increased due to increase in temperature. It shows that the
average emission of particular pollutants per unit of output per year has signicantly altered with

4
It is expected that there will be complete banning of `older' `environmentally dirty' aircraft such as B707, B727,
Douglas DC8, and early models of the B737 and Douglas DC9. Instead of them the new aircraft like B717 (MD 95),
B737 (Next Generation), B757, B767, B747-400, B777, Boeing-MD90, and Airbus A 320 family, A330/340 equipped
with `clean' engines are expected to prevail at most of the airlines at the end of this and beginning of the next century.
166 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180

the change of aircraft engine age. For instance, the emissions of CO have fallen from about 180 g
per passenger (g/pax) for `old' aircraft to less than 60 g/pax for the `new' ones. Emission of UHC
has fallen from about 95 g/pax for `old' aircraft to less than 10 g/pax for `new' ones. However,
emission of NOx has increased from about 80 g/pax for an `old' aircraft to about 110 g/pax for a
`new' one (Thame, 1992). As a result, NOx has become a dominant pollutant of modern aircrafts.
For a typical ight of length of 500 nautical miles by modern two-engine aircraft, about 27% of
total pollutants are emitted during take-o/landing phase and the rest during the climb out/cruise/
descend phases. The shares of NOx in total emissions during the take-o/landing and climb-out/
cruise/descent phase of ight is estimated to be about 77% and 89%, respectively. The share of
particular pollutants in the mix emitted during the whole ight is estimated to be: 85.9% NOx ,
12.4% CO, 1.6% UHC and 0.1% smoke (Bahr, 1992).
Furthermore, there is evidence that specic emissions of the NOx in g/kg of fuel burnt has
always been lower during cruising than the taking-o phase, primarily due to lower combustion
temperatures. The situation is quite contrary for supersonic ights. In order to regulate and
control the emission of the NOx , ICAO has set up emission limits dependence on the engine's
overall pressure ratio. Fig. 1 shows that modern engines satisfy these limits which vary from 0.267
at the engine pressure ratio of 10 to 0.443 g/pound of thrust at the engine pressure ratio of 30.
Evidently, with some exceptions, a higher overall engine pressure ratio has contributed to re-
ducing combustion temperatures and thus decreased the specic emission of the NOx .
(ii) The impacts of pollutants on the environment. The eects of civil aviation can spread over a
wide area. This has produced three types of environmental impacts of the NOx . These are `long-
range' air pollution, `changing of ozone layer' and `greenhouse' eect.
Long-range air pollution refers to the eects of air pollution far away from the polluting source.
One such eect is `acid rain' caused by the atmospheric `washing-out' of the NOx . It has been
shown, however, that the aircraft contribution to this eect has been relatively very small.

Fig. 1. Dependence of the turbofan production of the NOx and ICAO limits on overall engine bypass ratio (Hertog,
1994).
 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180 167

Changing the ozone layer has been identied as a second global environmental impact. The
ozone, however, has constantly been naturally destroyed and replenished. It can, in that sense,
be considered to be `a renewable' resource like water. Before the impacts of the man-made pol-
lutants, an equilibrium level of ozone existed. It absorbed much of the negative ultraviolet sun-
light waves that would otherwise reach the surface of the earth and aect the biosphere. When
aircraft related pollution appeared complex chemical reactions were initiated. The NOx emitted
by aircraft has contributed to two dierent eects on the ozone (Fig. 2). First, at altitudes from
1 to 12 km (i.e. the troposphere where the subsonic ights take place) it has enhanced the ozone
concentration. It has acted as a `greenhouse' gas. The concentration of NOx in the upper tro-
posphere has been large and during winter months aircrafts have been identied as dominant
sources of the NOx at locations in the Northern Hemisphere. During summer these concentra-
tions have been much smaller. Second, at higher altitudes, from 15 to 30 km, where supersonic
ights have taken place, an increase in concentration of NOx has depleted the ozone layer. As
shown in Fig. 2 the crossover surface between production and destruction of ozone layer lies
roughly between the lower stratosphere and high troposphere (1215 km) the trop-pause
where long-range aircrafts cruised. Recent investigations estimate that jet aircrafts produce
only 24% of the man-made emissions of NOx . Also, the impact of these NOx on global warming

Fig. 2. Distribution of ozone concentration and the eects of aviation (mid-latitude) (NASA and GARE, 1996).
168 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180

seems to be relatively small, about 5% over a period of 20 years and only 24% over a longer
period (Air Transport Action Group, 1996b; NASA and GARE, 1996; Rochat, 1993).
Greenhouse eects are seen as the third environmental impact of civil aviation. Various gases
remaining in the atmosphere over many years which contribute to a global warming of the
earth have mainly caused this eect. Besides NOx , there is CO2 generated by the aircraft. As
mentioned above, the rate of CO2 production has been estimated at about three times the
rate of fuel consumption. Both pollutants together have contributed to urban smog and CO
burdens.
Despite the signicant amount of recent work on the impacts of aviation emissions on the
environment, many complex physical and chemical processes related to impact of the pollutants
on the neighbouring atmosphere, and vice versa, still remain little understood. These have initi-
ated numerous laboratory based and experimental (`by the aircraft measurement') projects. 5

2.2. Aviation noise

Noise or sound is a very subjective experience. Three factors have been considered to be of
particular importance for subjective evaluation of noise. The rst one is the intensity of sound
which is usually expressed in decibels (dB). By using decibel as the unit metric, the range of sound
among 0 and 150 dB can be compressed. Frequency is the other important factor. It is dened as
the rate of vibration of a sound source expressed in hertz. A greater vibration of source indicates a
greater frequency. A source of sound, like an aircraft engine, usually generates dierent fre-
quencies. The last factor is the time variation of the sound level. Changes of sound level and
frequencies over a short time tend to be disturbing to listeners.
There are two sources of noise from any aircraft engine, machinery and primary jet noise. The
origins of machinery noise are rotating engine's parts such as the fan, compressor and turbine.
The noise of the fan and compressor is spread forward from the engine. The noise of turbine is
spread backward from the engine. The primary jet noise is generated by mixing of high-speed gas
exhausting from the engine with surrounding air. The fan exhaust also generates the noise, par-
ticularly at high levels of thrust during take-o. At the same time, the presence of the fan exhausts,
mues and reduces primary jet noise. The main source of noise during the take-o is primary jet
noise. Machinery noise appears as the major source during landing (Ashford and Wright, 1979;
Horonje and McKelvey, 1983).
Noise is often considered as one of the most serious environmental problems of aviation.
Particularly, noise generated at the airports has emerged to be an annoyance for people living
nearby. A fast growth of the number of airports and aircraft movements, number of jets in the

5
For example, the European Commission currently sponsors several projects. These include: AEROCHEM;
AEROCONTRAIL, AEROJET, AEROTRACE, MOZAIC and STREAM. All are intended to assess the impacts of
present and future subsonic and supersonic civil transport on the atmosphere, investigate the most important chemical
processes and interactions between the aircraft engines' pollutants and atmospheric ingredients, and provide
quantitative data and additional knowledge on the spatial (three-dimensional, 3-D) distribution and concentration of
the pollutants along the real aircraft paths. These will be carried out using global chemical transport model as well as by
using aircraft themselves as global atmospheric research platforms (NASA and GARE, 1996).
 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180 169

airline eets as well as a relative frequent inability of the local community to properly control the
land use around the airports have emphasised the urgent need for systematically coping with the
problem. Such urgency has instigated short, medium and long-term eorts to deal with aviation
noise. These eorts have been oriented as follows.
Since noise has been identied as a potentially serious problem at a relatively early stage of the
development of aviation, the motivation for its institutional regulation, controlling and moni-
toring has been high.
More sophisticated time and space-based noise abatement procedures have been developed.
Planning and control of land use around airports have become sensitive matters.
New aircraft equipped with lesser noise (`quieter') engines have entered the service (in particu-
lar, two engine aircrafts generating less noise in an absolute sense have more intensively been
entering commercial service).
(a) Regulation, control and monitoring of aviation noise. Regulation of aircraft noise has meant
developing appropriate measuring methodologies. There are now 18 dierent noise measurement
methodologies, each using specic metrics developed for various short, medium and long-term
planning and operating purposes have been developed (Walder, 1991). The most commonly ap-
plied measure has been the dB (A) scale. This is the logarithmic scale referred to in abbreviated
form as A-weighted sound level scale. Another scale is the Eective Perceived Noise Level
(EPNdB) scale. The rst scale equally weighs dierent frequencies generated by specic sound.
Another scale dierently weighs dierent frequencies generated from the noise source; it em-
phasises those frequencies that are more annoying for the listeners. Furthermore, this measure
comprises the eects of duration of sound and presence of `pure' tonnes (Horonje and
McKelvey, 1983). Listeners may be particularly sensitive to diversity of frequencies and duration
of sound. Regarding subjective feelings of listeners, the dB (A) scale does not correlate well as
EPNdB and this may be considered as its disadvantage. On the other hand, the dB (A) scale
possesses an important advantage in comparison to the EPNdB scale because it is a simple tool
for monitoring noise generated by dierent aircrafts that operate at the same or adjacent airports.
Such simplicity and a relatively sucient accuracy have enhanced the use of dB (A) scale for land-
use planning. On the other side, the EPNdB scale has been applied for the aircraft certication
(Horonje and McKelvey, 1983). The relationship between the two scales is as follows:
EPNdB  dB (A) + 12 (Ashford and Wright, 1979).
Aviation noise was rst regulated in 1959 by the setting of the limits to sound generated by the
aircraft operating at particular airports. The acceptable noise level was established at 112 PNdB
(Perceived Noise Level in Decibels). The ICAO established international certication standards
for commercial jet aircraft in 1971. In the late 1970s, new noise restrictive standards were laun-
ched. They were included in Chs. 2 and 3 of ICAO Annex 16, vol. 1 (Environmental Protection)
(Walder, 1991). These standards have been applied to all jet aircraft starting operation from
October 1977. More recently, they have been reconrmed. The maximum level of the EPNdB has
been established dependent on the phase of ight, maximum aircraft take-o weight and number
of engines. For example, the permissible noise level for aircraft powered by four engines and with
a maximum take-o weight of approximately 370 ton is during landing, take-o and sideline is
limited to 103 EPNdB and 102 EPNdB, respectively. These limits are the same for two-engine
aircrafts while landing and being sidelined but are a little bit lower during take-o (Air Transport
Action Group, 1996a, b).
170 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180

(b) Noise abatement procedures. Landing and take-o procedures have been continuously im-
proved to abate the noise around airports. They have been separately designed for specic lo-
cations. Generally, any noise abatement procedure consists of time and space components.
The time component usually includes restriction for noisy aircraft use of an airport during
periods of a day. In some cases these restrictions may be extended to complete aircraft population.
For example, at many West European airports the aircraft operations have been completely
banned during the night hours (10.00 p.m. to 06.00 a.m.).
The space component is represented by 3-D aircraft path to/from the airport. Particular or all
aircrafts may use this path either permanently or from time to time. Usually, it is a curved path
(observed in horizontal plane) that should be followed by the aircraft in order to avoid noise-
sensitive areas. In many cases it has been impossible to reduce the level of noise by exclusive
introduction of longer curved paths; examples where this problem exists are Heathrow, Frankfurt
and Montreal Dorval (Walder, 1991). Under such circumstances, the vertical prole of the noise
abatement path has appeared a promising solution. It should be pointed out that the aircraft
manoeuvring space and conguration of incoming and outgoing paths are dierent. Namely,
during approach, the prole of noise abatement path is more or less strictly dictated by the ne-
cessity for joining the track of available instrumental landing systems like the Instrumental
Landing System or the Microwave Landing System. These systems determine the 3-D path of an
aircraft while approaching a runway. Small deviations from this path have been permitted to
allow the aircraft to perform step-descend procedure which may allow passing over noise-sensitive
areas at a higher altitude or staying there only for a short time. Take-o procedures are much
more complicated because they require development of complex ight techniques during steep up-
ward paths just after lift-o. Any of these techniques involve variations in position of the aps and
management of engine thrust. An example of new noise abatement procedure during the aircraft
taking-o is shown in Fig. 3 (Connor, 1996). The take-o path, denoted by the heavy line, aims to
reduce noise over sensitive areas far from the airport runway. The path denoted by the dotted line
aims at noise abatement over populated areas closer to the runway. Eectively, this procedure
shifts noise away from one area (in this case one close to the airport) to another (far from the
airport). As a result, reduction of engine thrust and noise levels over sensitive area will always
require increasing noise over the other areas due to the application of engine power for climbing
later on.
(c) Planning and control of land use. The other measure for reducing noise nuisance is a stricter
control of land use around airports. The generic idea has been to prevent residential and other
unsuitable use of the land around airports. This is a relatively old idea dating before the emer-
gence of large jet aircrafts. By strict application of this measure, noise nuisance caused at an
airport could theoretically be completely eliminated. Positive examples of careful overall spatial
planning and control of land use in the vicinity of airports include Paris Charles de Gaulle and
Montreal Mirabel. However, overall the policy has its limitations. Each country has tended to
prescribe its own specic procedure for managing the use of land around airports including design
of protecting measures making standardisation impossible. Each airport also possesses its own
specic social, economic and political context as well as history and physical geography. Land use
must also be considered in the context of other measures to abate the noise. Nevertheless, dierent
forms of control of land use applied by the airport and airlines themselves have sometimes shown
to be productive. For example at Montreal Mirabel, the land around the airport has been ac-
 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180 171

Fig. 3. Example of noise abatement procedure during the aircraft take-o (Connor, 1996).

quired and controlled by the aviation enterprises, the airport authorities and the airlines. Osaka
Kansai Airport has been built on an articial island, thus new land has been used and noise-
sensitive areas have been avoided (Walder, 1991).
(d) Introduction of `quieter' aircraft. The last but perhaps the most important measures for
reducing aircraft noise nuisance is improved aircraft engine design and a relatively fast replacing
of the noisy aircraft by quieter ones.
(i) Improvement of the aircraft engines. Introduction of high by-pass combustion technology to
aircraft engines has reduced the primary noise from engine from about 88 dB (A) to 65 dB (A)
over the last thirty years (Air Transport Action Group, 1996b). At the same time, engines have
become bigger and stronger in order to be able to propel faster and bigger aircrafts. In order to
illustrate the dynamics of such development, two regression equations are estimated. The rst one
addresses the relationship between the average noise per unit of thrust during aircraft taking-o
(Ut ) expressed in dB (A) per tonne of thrust and the total thrust (TR) expressed in tonnes of
thrust. The sample contains relevant data on 20 dierent aircraft types entering commercial
service until the early 1980s (from Cessna 500 to B747-200B) (Green and Swanborough, 1991).
The regression equation is:

Ut 79:029 TR0:966 ; R2 0:987; N 20: 3

As it can be seen, the noise per unit of thrust has decreased far more than proportionally to the
increase in total engine thrust. The larger and faster (e.g., more productive) aircraft have been
powered by stronger turbofan high-bypass engines which have generated a lower specic noise.
172 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180

A second regression equation establishes the relationship between the average noise per unit of
aircraft maximum take of weight (dependent variable Uw ) and time (T) and the aircraft weight
(W). For a sample of 13 aircraft types, the following is estimated:
Uw 61:094 W 0:906 T 0:103 ;
22:608 3:679 27:455

R2 0:982; F 244:74; DW 1:877; N 13: 4

2
The high R indicates a close relationship between the dependent and two independent vari-
ables. The whole equation and particular explanatory variables are signicant either at 5% or 1%
levels. (See F and t-statistics given in parenthesis below particular coecients of the equation.)
Also there is no important auto-correlation between particular independent variables (Johnston
et al., 1989).
In the equation, variable T can take the values between 1 and 30 beginning with 1959 when the
rst generation turbofan jet engines installed on the Boeing 707-100 entered commercial service
and extends to 1989 when the rst Airbus A320-200 equipped with new generation of high-bypass
turbofan quieter engines like CFM-56-5 and/or IAE 2500 entered service. Meanwhile, low bypass
turbo-fan engines were introduced into commercial service. The new engines have reduced jet-
exhaust noise and internal noise control features. Increasing bypass (airow) through the engine
has contributed to reducing noise at a given thrust (Smith, 1992). Maximum take-o weight, W is
expressed in tonnes and it has also varied across aircrafts in the sample, for example, from 42
tonnes for the BAE 146-200 to 395 tonnes for the B747-400SR. Noise level Uw is expressed in dB
(A) scale (Air Transport Action Group, 1996a, b; Green and Swanborough, 1996, 1991).
This regression equation conrms the development of environmentally more friendly aircraft
engines over time and the positive inuence of aircraft size. For example, elasticity Ew 0.906
indicates that as the aircraft take-o weight has increased by 1%, the relative noise has decreased
for about 0.9%. It seems, however, that time and weight have been exhausted as sources for
potential abatement of aircraft noise. First, according to current trends, noise could be reduced
for only about 0.3% per year during the next ve years (i.e., DUw (%)  Uw T ; W =
T DT Et Uw 30; 395=30 5 0:103 0:33% (Manheim, 1979)). Furthermore, it is likely that
the maximum take-o weight of new aircraft will not exceed 400 tonnes: the only exception will
likely be the Airbus's newest 600-seat A3XX.
(ii) Replacing `noisy' with `quieter' aircraft. Besides reducing absolute and relative levels of
noise, the introduction of aircraft with quieter engines has reduced the spatial spreading of noise
around the airports. This has been achieved by squeezing of noise `footprint', that is generated
during landing and take-o. A B727-200 that entered the commercial service in 1960s generated a
footprint of area of 14.25 km2 with a constant noise level of 85 dB (A). In contrast, the Airbus
A320-200 which entered the commercial service in the late 1980s creates a constant noise footprint
of 85 dB (A) over only 1.5 km2 . Table 3 provides examples of aircraft noise `footprints'. The print
has been reducing despite increases in maximum take-o weights.
Reduction in contours has reduced the number of people directly exposed to intrusive aircraft
noise in the vicinity of airports. It has been estimated that this number amounts only 5% of the
number registered in 1970s (Air Transport Action Group, 1996b). Further eorts to reduce the
level of aviation noise are expected to take place under stable growth of aviation sector for two
reasons.
 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180 173

Table 3
Example of the relationships between the aircraft take-o weight and noise `footprint'
a
Combination of aircraft Ratio of the MTOW Ratio of the noise `footprint' area
B757/B727-200 1.40 1:11
A320-200/B727-200 0.89 1:9
A319/B737-200 0.95 1:10
a
MTOW - Maximum take-o weight (B727-200  76 tonnes; B757  107 tonnes; B737-200  55 tonnes; A319  64
tonnes; A320-200  67.5 tonnes; Area of `footprint' of B727-200 is 14.25 km2 . Noise level: 85 dB(A); Source: Air
Transport Action Group, 1996b; Walder, 1991.

The rst consists of further improvements to aircraft engines. This will not be easy because
most known measures, innovations and knowledge have been exploited. Therefore, future de-
velopment will have to go beyond today's conventional high-bypass turbofans technology.
Concepts like the turbofan with ultra-high-bypass ratio and open rotor prop-fans have already
been identied as possible solutions (Smith, 1992).
The other direction is the utilisation of various combinations of dierent measures. These in-
clude: (i) speeding-up of renewal of aircraft eets; (ii) introducing more ecient noise-abate-
ment procedures; and (iii) improving current practices of airport land-use planning and
control. The rst measure may also improve control of land-use around existing airports
and contribute to better spatial planning of the new ones. In addition, the control of land-
use is expected to involve prevention of residential areas near airports and movement to new
locations (Walder, 1991).

2.3. Aviation safety

Apart from eciency, a long standing priority in air transport has been safety. Typically, this
issue has been addressed by assessment of the risk of accidents and setting this against the costs of
alternative safety measures (Sage and White, 1980).
(a) Concept of risk and safety. Generally, a risk is dened as a chance of injury, damage or loss
or a dangerous chance (Wirashinge and Jordan, 1983). Risk is measured by the probability of an
event whose consequences may be more or less serious injuries, damages and/or losses. Thus it
involves the aspect of chance and aspect of consequences. The estimation of risk is based either on
objectively or subjectively known or assumed probabilities. It should be distinguished from
`uncertainty' that arises when the outcome of an event occurs with unknown probabilities. Safety
can be dened as the level of risk that is deemed acceptable. In aviation, risk is usually measured
by the probability of an incident. Experience has shown that these probabilities have been very
low with few accidents in comparison to the volume of operations and intensity of activities. Thus,
it has been dicult to explain, locate, and manage the problem of aviation safety as well as arrive
at an acceptable and widely understandable level of safety. After each fatal aircraft accident a
common question has emerged if and how much the aviation sector is safe and how its safety can
be managed by dierent impacted groups. These groups may be represented by the users (the air
passengers), service operators (the airlines, airports, air trac control), aviation and non-aviation
professional and non-professional organisations, and public (Kanafani, 1986).
174 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180

The evidence is that most aviation accidents are caused by a complex system of mutually de-
pendent factors. They can be classied according to dierent criteria. First, according to the
current state-of-knowledge they can be categorised into a group of known and avoidable causes
and a group of unknown and unavoidable causes like hazardous weather, human error, me-
chanical failure, sabotage and military action. Since these factors are inherent to the aviation
operations, apparently we can never be certain that the fatal accidents will not occur. Does that
mean that the system will never be safe? The answer is no since the occurrences of accidents does
not necessarily mean that the system is unsafe. In order to properly judge, the safety should be
considered with respect to the basic causes of accidents. Namely, if accidents occur due to known
and avoidable reasons the system should be considered as unsafe. Otherwise, if accidents occur
due to unknown and unavoidable reasons, the system should be considered as safe (Kanafani,
1986).
(b) The main factors causing the aviation accidents. As it has been mentioned above, the factors
like hazardous weather, `human' errors, mechanical failures, sabotages and military actions have
been identied as dominant unavoidable causes of aviation accidents.
Hazardous weather mostly aected aircraft during two crucial phases of ight; landing and
take-o. Unpredictable thunderstorms and frontal systems may cause troublesome wind-share,
fog and snow, and low ceiling that can reduce the horizontal and vertical visibility near airports.
They impact the airport operations. For instance, during the period 19701987, the US National
Transportation Safety Board identied low-altitude wind shear as the factor which caused and/or
contributed to 18 accidents of commercial aircrafts. Seven of them were fatal and resulted in the
loss of 575 lives. This factor has instigated the development of tools for mitigating the worst
impacts of severe weather conditions. Airborne and ground-based detection systems are available
that inform pilots and air trac controllers of hazardous weather in advance and before it be-
comes dangerous (Rosenberg, 1987).
Human errors are factors widely aecting the aviation safety. Most accidents have been caused
by human errors combined with other factors. Human error can be present on the producing and
the operating side of the aviation sector involving the aircraft, the airport and air trac control
facilities and equipments. As a rule, hidden constructive and production errors have been detected
and eliminated only after the accidents have occurred. For example, on 3 March 1974 the crash of
DC-10 near Paris resulted in the strengthening of wide-body oors. In this accident 346 people
perished. In an accident involving a DC-10 at Chicago on 25 May 1979 where engine failure led to
271 deaths, the outcome was a review of aircraft take-o speeds (Stewart, 1994). Human oper-
ational errors may happen because of excessive workloads. Mental capacity is primarily depen-
dent on the ability to successfully receive, select, process and distribute relevant information.
Long work periods may cause stress that can later lead to poorer work performance. Diminution
of performance under stressful conditions may cause conscious and/or unconscious risky be-
haviour and generate errors that may have fatal consequences. For example, the airborne collision
between BEA and Inex-Adria aircraft on 10 September 1976 over Zagreb was caused by air trac
controller error. The investigation showed that the controller had been working for an extended
period in a stressful environment caused by trac overload and weaknesses in the monitoring
equipment. In this accident 176 people were killed. It initiated improvements to the air trac
monitoring procedures and hastened development of airborne anti-collision equipment (Stewart,
1994). Since errors may also be caused by lack of experience in managing available equipment, the
 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180 175

instruction and training of aviation sta can play a crucial role in the successful introduction of
personnel into the work cycle (Kuhlmann, 1980). Aviation, however, seems unlikely to ever be
100% safe in the large part because of the complexities at the human-technology interface (Dose,
1995).
Sabotage is the third group of factors that may impact the overall level of aviation safety.
Sometimes such actions have resulted in the incidents with `happy outcome' where the passengers
and aircraft have been saved but equally the consequences can be severe. One example of the latter
was the crash of a B747 on 23 June 1985. The aircraft crashed nearby Ireland due to suspected
bomb explosion. In this accident 270 people died. After this crash security measures at high risk
airports were strengthened (Stewart, 1994). In addition, this and the other terrorist acts, have
initiated the development of numerous products and control procedures aimed at preventing
aircraft from falling under the control of terrorists. Two broad types of equipment have been
developed. The rst is intended to prevent an illegal entry into an aircraft. The other is aimed at
detecting the presence of weapons (Rosenberg, 1987).
Military and `semi-military' operations have also emerged as important causes of aviation
accidents. A typical example was the crash of Korean B-747 over Sakhalin Inland when 269
people died. The aircraft was shot down by a Soviet missile due to error in identication of the
target. The event contributed to improving the co-ordination between the civil and military
aviation sectors (Stewart, 1994).
(c) Some safety records. ICAO provides the safety records on commercial domestic and in-
ternational aviation and this has enabled determination of global safety trends. ICAO has de-
veloped two measures of safety trends. The rst is the number of passenger fatalities per 100
million passenger-km and the second, the number of fatal accidents per 100 million km own. In
both cases, fatal accidents are dened as events where one or more people have died by causes that
have been directly related to the scheduled and/or non-scheduled commercial airline ight (Corrie,
1994). A brief look at the ICAO historical safety gures shows that the safety rate for the in-
ternational and domestic schedule aviation operations has improved over time. Fatalities fell from
0.18 to 0.04 per 100 million passenger-km between 1970 and 1993 with a particularly signicant
decrease between 1970 and 1977. The number of fatal accidents over 23 years varied between 16
and 31 and the annual average rate was 25. 6
Table 4 provides more details of the planes involved in aviation accidents. The distribution of
fatal and non-fatal accidents per aircraft category is provided. The greatest number of accidents
has involved turbo-props but the greatest number of people involved has been in accidents with
the turbojet. This is explained by the fact that turbojets carry a greater number of passengers.
Two causal relationships can be used to better explain the current situation regarding aviation
safety. The rst is the dependence of the number of deaths per passenger-km (Y1 ) on the number
of people dead per aircraft crash (X) and the annual volume of passenger-km (X). The relationship
is estimated using data from period 19811996 (International Civil Aviation Organisation, 1994/
1995/1996). It has taken the following form:

6
These gures exclude accidents that occurred in the former USSR and events involved in unlawful interference with
aviation.
176 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180

Table 4
Characteristics of fatal accidents by aircraft category
Aircraft Fatal accidents Killed people Survived people Number of people Number of survived
category per aircraft (%) per aircraft (%) per aircraft (%) died per aircraft people per aircraft
Turbojet 34.2 69.6 86.5 56 41
Turbo-prop 48.5 28.1 11.4 16 4
Piston-engine 17.3 3.3 2.1 5 2
Source: International Civil Aviation Organisation (1994, 1995, 1996).

Y1 3:801  1010 4:196  1011 X1 2:095  1016 X2 ;

2:983 10:674 3:446

R2adj 0:901; F 69:296; DW 1:617; N 16: 5

The number of deaths per unit of output has increased with the increase in the number of
people killed per single crash and decreased with the increase in the volume of output. This
supports the idea that an increase in the number of passengers per aircraft increases the risk that a
greater number will die in a crash and that the introduction of faster and larger aircraft has in-
creased the sector's productivity and thus its output. At the same time, all sorts of improvements
have made it more reliable and this has reduced the risk of crashes despite more intensive ying.
Another regression equation expresses the relationship between the number of fatal events per
aircraft type (Y2 ), and the number of ights per aircraft type (X1 ) and average age of particular
aircraft (X2 ). The calculations relate to the following aircraft types: Fokker F28, Fokker F70/
F100; Airbus A300, A310, A320; Lockheed L1011; British Aerospace BAe146; Boeing B727,
B737-1/200, B737-3/4/500, B747, B757, B767; McDonnell Douglas DC9, MD80 (Curtis, 1998;
Walder, 1991). The equation is:
Y2 1:206 1:743X1 0:900X2 ;
0:692 6:355 3:887

R2 0:929; F 84:640; DW 1:823; N 16: 6

Since the hypothesis that aircraft accidents have always happened as random events have been
setup, Eq. (6) does not mean that more used and older aircrafts have been less safe. It only in-
dicates that in the past, travelling by these aircraft was more risky. Consequently, although being
of causal structure, both regressions should be applied exclusively in explaining and estimating the
risk of a past fatal accident and not for any predictive purposes.
Despite encouraging safety trends over the previous period, it may be dicult to continue this
in the future. According to ICAO long-trac forecasts, as the rate of accidents per take-o re-
mains roughly stable for the period 19932003 the increase in passengers will push up the number
of fatal accidents (Corrie, 1994). Hence, they systematically aim for measures towards further
reduction of the rate of fatal accidents. 7 These measures can be classied into new regulatory
safety standards and non-regulatory prevention measures and are being both created and im-
plemented at national and international levels.

7
The concern would seem to be based on a public perception of accidents in terms of absolute numbers of events
rather than the probability of a death during a ight.
 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180 177

2.4. Congestion and delays

Congestion depends on the number of aircraft requesting service on the route and/or at the
airport at the same time and the capacity of service facility at that time. The problem of excessive
congestion and delays in civil aviation concerns relationships between demand for service and the
capacity of infrastructure to serve it 8 (Ausrotas and Simpson, 1992; Janic, 1997; Newel, 1979;
Odoni and Simpson, 1979). Locations that suer the most frequent congestion are hub airports
and airspace around them. Excessive congestion has been identied as aviation's biggest long-
term challenge. It causes delays and thus unreliability, reduces the eciency of airlines and airport
operations, increases workloads of air trac control systems and waste energy and materials.
The following gures illustrate the problem. In Europe, air trac delays peaked in the late
1980s and again in the summer of 1991. Some improvement was achieved in the years that fol-
lowed, but in 1995 the trend once again was towards a worsening situation. In the 12 months to
December 1996, 15.4% of ights incurred an average air trac control delay of 16.7 min. Whilst
the existing levels of delays may or may not be optimal the situation is likely to deteriorate. In the
USA, the Air Transport Association of America estimated that the average delay for domestic
departures in 1995 was 7.2 min. With more than 6 million departures carried out by the major and
national US carriers in that period, this produced a total delay of 738,000 h. If average annual
utilisation of an aircraft is 3000 h, this total represents an amount equivalent to using nearly 250
aircraft for an entire year (Air Transport Action Group, 1996b).
Congestion and delays aect dierent groups dierently (Air Transport Action Group, 1996b).
Airports: Congestion and delays may limit the growth of airports, which may cause loss of rev-
enues for the airport operators and authorities.
Airlines: Congestion and delays may curtail the growth of airlines. This may in turn impose a
higher operating costs on them, cause a loss of business (revenues, prots, and employment),
and divert some users to the other transport modes.
Air travellers: Congestion and delays may cause a loss of productivity, particularly to business
people. The airlines penalize them with higher cost, which actually represents a loss of their real
income.
Tourist industry: Congestion and delays may cause loss of revenue due to limited growth as well
as loss of inbound business. The revenue of other national economies may increase thanks to
attracting the tourists to their destinations.
Labor pool: Due to a limited growth, fewer jobs may be provided.
Business and industry: Congestion and delays may cause a loss of revenue, higher operating
costs, loss of prot to business, as well as transfer of rising business activities to more attractive
locations.
Governments: The tax and fee income may be reduced due to congestion and delays. Actually
that means a loss of expected revenue.
Aircraft manufacturers: Two eects may appear. The number of ordered aircraft might be de-
creased. At the same time, more aircrafts may be needed to oset moderate congestion.

8
The issue is one of optimal congestion in most cases zero congestion is sub-optimal because it means that idle
capacity is present in some form.
178 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180

A common remedy for alleviating and even eliminating congestion and delays consisted of
expansion of existing and adding new air transport infrastructure. In addition, implementation of
more sophisticated air trac management technologies and techniques that are able to better
match the growing demand to available system capacities and keep the system's safety and e-
ciency at the desired level have emerged as promising ways. Finally, airports do not use economic
pricing. If there is a shortage of airline seats, the price rises and this acts both to contain demand
and stimulate increased supply but there is no such incentive structure at airports or for air trac
control. Rational pricing oers a policy consistent with the way airlines operate themselves.

3. Conclusions

The paper has addressed some important issues on the impacts of civil aviation on the envi-
ronment. Four types of impacts have been particularly analysed: air pollution, noise; safety (i.e., a
risk of accidents), and congestion and delays. The analysis suggests that civil aviation has been
developing in a sustainable way. In particular, development of new generations of larger and
faster aircraft has resulted in an increase in air transport productivity, and a decrease in the
average level of noise and fuel consumption. The relative decrease in fuel consumption has
contributed to diminishing total fuel consumption and thus total emission of all pollutants. This is
expected to decrease the relative negative impacts of civil aviation to greenhouse eects.
The rate of accidents has always been very low in comparison to the volume of air transport
activities. It has been decreasing over time despite an enormous growth in the system's output.
The risk of travelling by plane has declined and the system has become safer. Nevertheless, and
despite continuous eorts to regulating the operations of the sector and implementing various
preventive measures, it seems that the sector will never be absolutely safe due to hidden and un-
avoidable random factors that may still cause the aircraft accidents.
Congestion and delays have been identied as inherent and severe externalities in today's civil
aviation. They frequently occur at and around busy airports. They have impacted either directly
or indirectly on dierent actors within civil aviation, from the end-users and operators to aircraft
manufacturers and governments.

References

Ashford, N., Wright, P.H., 1979. Airport Engineering. Wiley, New York.
Air Transport Action Group (1996a). The Economic Benets of Air Transport, Air Transport Action Group, Geneva.
Air Transport Action Group (1996b). Air Transport and the Environment, Air Transport Action Group, Geneva.
Ausrotas, R.A., Simpson, R.W., 1992. Impacts of Technology on the Capacity Needs of the US National airspace
System. NASA (National Aeronautics and Space Administration), STIP, The MIT, Cambridge, MA.
Bahr, D.W., 1992. Turbine Engines Developers Explore Ways lower NOx Emission Levels. ICAO Journal,
International Civil Aviation Organisation, GE Aircraft Engines, Montreal, Canada, pp. 1417.
Button, K.J., 1993. Transport Economics, 2nd ed. Edward Elgar, Aldershot, UK.
Corrie, S.J., 1994. Potential Growth in Air Travel Demands Renewed Eort to Improve Safety Record. ICAO Journal,
International Civil Aviation Organisation, Montreal, Dec. pp. 79.
Crayston, J., 1992. ICAO Group Identies Environmental Problems Associated with Civil Aviation. ICAO Journal,
International Civil Aviation Organisation, Montreal, pp. 45.
 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180 179

Connor, L.T., 1996. Proposed Take-o Noise Abatement Procedures Demonstrate Potential to Mitigate Problem.
ICAO Journal, International Civil Aviation Organisation, Montreal, pp. 1920.
Cundy, J., 1996. Designers Contemplating the Task Developing an Engine to Power 600-seater airliners. ICAO Journal,
International Civil Aviation Organisation, Montreal, pp. 1011.
Curtis, T., 1998. Fatal Event Rates for Selected Airliner Models, (By Aircraft Model), http//: airsafe.com/copy.htm.
Dose, A., 1995. Safety Is Best Served by Paying Close Attention to the Key Elements in Its Management. ICAO
Journal, International Civil Aviation Organisation, Montreal, September: 2021.
European Commission, 1996. Towards Fair and Ecient Pricing in Transport: Policy Options for Internalising the
External Costs of Transport in European Union, (Green Paper), Bulletin of the European Union, Supplement 2/96,
European Commission, Brussels.
Green, W., Swanborough, G., 1996. Commercial Aircraft: Illustrated Encyclopaedia. Henry Proost & Cie, Turnhout.
Green, W., Swanborough, G., 1991. Airlines. Penguin Group, London.
Hertog, R., 1994. Aircraft in Production Today Must Exceed Technical and Environmental Requirements. ICAO
Journal, International Civil Aviation Organisation, Montreal, Canada, pp. 911.
Horonje, R., McKelvey, F.R., 1983. Planning and Design of Airports, 3rd ed. McGraw-Hill, New York.
International Civil Aviation Organisation, 1992. Investment Requirements for Aircraft Fleets and for Airport and
Route Facility Infrastructure to the Year 2010. Circular 236, International Civil Aviation Organisation, Montreal.
International Civil Aviation Organisation (1994) ICAO Projects long-term moderate trac growth of 5 percent per
year. ICAO Journal, International Civil Aviation Organisation, Montreal, pp. 2021.
International Civil Aviation Organisation (1994/1995/1996) Annual trac statistics. ICAO Journal (Various issues),
International Civil Aviation Organisation, Montreal.
International Civil Aviation Organisation, 1996. Experts consider operational measures as means to reduce emissions
and their environmental impacts. ICAO Journal, Department of Trade and Industry (UK), International Civil
Aviation Organisation, Montreal, pp. 910.
Janic, M., 1997. A Model of Air Trac Flow Management Problem in Air Trac Control: Assigning priorities for
landings at a congested airport. Transportation Planning and Technology 19, 3169.
Johnston, A.C., Johnston, M.B., Buse, R.C., 1989. Econometrics: Basic and Applied. McMillan, New York.
Kanafani, A., 1986. The Analysis of Hazards and the Hazards of Analysis: Reections on Air Trac Safety
Management. Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Berkeley, USA, Working paper, UCB-
ITS-WP-84-1.
Kuhlmann, A., 1980. Introduction to Safety Science. Springer, New York.
Levinson, D.M., Gillen, D., Kanafani, A., 1998. The Social Cost of Intercity Transportation: A review and comparison
of air and highway. Transport Reviews 18, 15240.
Morrissette, S.E., 1996. A Survey of Environmental Issues in the Civilian Aviation Industry. Journal of Air Transport
World Wide 1, 2238.
Manheim, L.M., 1979. Fundamentals of Transport System Analysis: vol. 1: Basic Concepts. MIT Press, Cambridge,
MA.
NASA, GARE, 1996. Lingering Uncertainty about Aviation's Impact Addressed by Growing Body of Scientic Data.
ICAO Journal, International Civil Aviation Organisation, Montreal, pp. 1114.
Newel, G.F., 1979. Airport Capacity Analysis. Transportation Science 13, 201241.
Odoni, A.R., Simpson, W.R., 1979. Review and Evaluation of National Airspace System Models. US Department of
Transportation, Federal Aviation Administration, Oce of System Engineering Management, Washington, DC.
Ralph, M.O., Newton, P.J., 1996. Experts Consider Operational Measures as Means to Reduce Emissions and Their
Environmental Impacts. ICAO Journal, International Civil Aviation Organisation, Dept. of Trade and Industry,
Montreal pp. 910.
Rochat, P., 1993. Key Environmental Issues Range from Aircraft Noise to Greenhouse Eect. ICAO Journal,
International Civil Aviation Organisation, Montreal, pp. 3134.
Rosenberg, B., 1987. Air safety: The State of Art, Aviation Week & Space Technology, March: 5166.
Sage, A.P., White, E.B., 1980. Methodologies for Risk and Hazard Assessment: A Survey and Status Report. IEEE
Transaction on System Man and Cybernetics SMC-10 (8), 425441.
180 M. Janic / Transportation Research Part D 4 (1999) 159180

Smith, M.T.J., 1992. Evolving Noise Issue Could Persist into the Next Century. ICAO Journal, International Civil
Aviation Organisation, Montreal, pp. 1113.
Stewart, S., 1994. Air Disasters. The Promotional Reprint Company Ltd, Leicester, UK.
Thame, C., 1992. ICAO Analyses Trends in Fuel Consumption by World Airlines. ICAO Journal, International Civil
Aviation Organisation, Montreal, pp. 1821.
Walder, R., 1991. Ageing Aircraft Programme Entails Major Eort and Expense. ICAO Journal, November: 68.
Whitelegg, J., 1993. Transport for a Sustainable Future: A Case of Europe. Belhaven Press, London.
Wirashinge, S.C., Jordan, I.J., 1983. Common Risk and Risk Associated with Air Travel in Canada, Paper presented on
Symposium on Risk in Transport, University of Waterloo, Ontario.