تاثیر توافق"آسمان های باز" ایالات متحده واتحادیه اروپا بر ساختار بازار خطوط هوایی و شبکه های هواپیمایی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|19742||2009||13 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||11876 کلمه|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Journal of Air Transport Management, Volume 15, Issue 2, March 2009, Pages 59–71
The gradual liberalization of international air transport has largely benefited the traveling public. Progress since the development of concepts such as “Open Skies” in the late 1970s as an alternative to the restrictive bilateral air service agreements that had effectively controlled most international air transport since the mid-1940s has been uneven and spasmodic. The recent move to open the North Atlantic more fully to competition has proved a particularly challenging task, and the agreement between the US and the European Union is still both partial and conditional. This paper offers an overview of the economics of the situation and provides insights into the reasons why it has developed in the way it has, the outcomes that we may expect from it, and some consideration of the wider, non-commercial, impacts that it may have.
From the late 1970s, when first the US domestic cargo market was liberalized followed by the domestic passenger sector, there has been a gradual withdraw of the state from the specific economic regulation of airlines. Internationally, the initial moves at deregulation can be traced to the initiation of the US's “Open Skies” policy from 1979. The recent opening up, at least to a substantial extent, of the US–EU1 transatlantic market is the one of the most significant measures of international airline liberalization since the removal of international market barriers within the European Union (EU). The US–EU passenger market is substantial. In 2007 it accounted for 55 million passengers, 385 flights per day in each direction and 235 nonstop city-pairs served by 45 airlines comprising eight from the US, 26 from the EU and 11 others. Geographically, 32 airports in 23 states were served on the US side and 53 airports in 19 countries in the EU. The development comes at a time when similar measures have been initiated in other long-haul markets (e.g. between the US and Australia), and when there are similar, some complementary, changes taking place within air transportation more generally, including initiatives to improve air navigation systems, the coming on-line of new aircraft, developments in the way that airports are used and financed, and structural changes within the industry as a new wave of merger takes hold. Understanding a little of the history of the recent develops on the North Atlantic helps us appreciate why the current arrangements exist, and offers some insights into likely future institutional changes. It is inevitable that the current regime is only a stepping-stone. Understanding the nature and economics of the airline industry helps in appreciating how carriers, and other suppliers such as airports, are likely to react to the new situation. It is also helpful to look beyond the narrow and specific confines of air transportation issues to explore the implications of more generic policies, such as industrial and security policies, may be for the long-term development of the North Atlantic market.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
The experiences of deregulation (or in Europe, “liberalization”) of air transportation and other markets over the past quarter of a century are generally seen as having produced significant economic benefits. Not everyone has gained, certainly some communities have lost airline services, some airlines have gone bankrupt, and some classes of passengers are now paying higher fares, but for those few that have been adversely affected there are many more who can fly more cheaply, have a greater variety of services to choose from, and have found jobs in the extended air transportation value chain. No positive change occurs without disruption, this has certainly been the experience of airlines, but these negative features have been far outweighed by the positive impacts.33 One would expect very much the same general outcome from the transatlantic Open Skies agreement. Since the move is to a more market-based system, the exact outcomes of the new institutional structure are, almost be definition impossible, to foresee; after all if one could predict them then these could have been enacted through command and control measures. The emergence of more flexible international air transport regimes for extra-European movements has benefited those involved. Efforts to get a comprehensive Transatlantic agreement have proved challenging, however, in part because of somewhat differing views in Europe and the US on the meaning of free trade. What does seem to be clear, from a European perspective, is that there are benefits for the Union as a whole in adopting a uniform Open Skies agreement with the US, although there may be additional gains in extending this to a full and genuine Open Aviation Area of the type found within the US and the EU. The challenge now is to develop a mutually acceptable framework that allows both parties to move from a simple, product based, Open Skies to one that embodies the mobility of factors of production as well within a full open market.