Planning, Sustainability and Airport-Led Urban Development

138 Pages·2012·7.43 MB·English

MAA-4-2012-Report excerpts distributed at the meeting
International Planning Studies
Vol. 14, No.2, 161-176, May 2009
Planning, Sustainability and Airport-Led
Urban Development
ROBERT FREESTONE
Facultyofthe BuiltEnvironment, University ofNewSouthWales, Sydney,Australia
ABSTRACT Airportsarenolongerplaces whereplanesjusttakeofjandlandbuthaveevolvedinto
major business enterprises with spatial impacts andfunctional implications that extenddeep into
metropolitan areas. They are vital hubs in the global space of flows.. Airport-led urban
development, notwithstanding its employment and income generating capabilities andpotentials,
comes with costs and risks. economic, environmental, and cultural. A host ojplanning issues are
raised. Traditional NIMBY reactions against airport expansion are evolving into more
fundamental critiques ofaviation around issues such as climate change.. Mediating the conflict
between the aviation industry'spro-growth stance and more scepticalperspectives is the concept
ofsustainable aviation. This mayprove an oxymoron but it remains vital to link airportplanning
to the broaderplanning ofsustainable communities andregions.
Introduction
Withoutthedevelopmentofairportsinfacilitatingthelarge-scalemovementofpassengers
and fr·eight, globalization in its cunent forms would be 'utterly different, possibly non
existent' (Uny, 2007). Airports have become vital functional nodes in the world
economy and the jousting for regional, national, and international competitiveness.,
They are growth nodes for local areas and regional economies. They have spawned new
urbanforms, mostlyspontaneously and less rarely deliberative, as theirdirectandindirect
impacts spilloverairportboundaries. Thesetrendsareimpossibletoignoreinplanningfor
the future at an international scale,
Airport-ledurbandevelopment,notwithstandingitsemploymentandincomegenerating
capabilities and potentials, comes with costs and risks, economic, environmental, and
cultural. Theaerotropolismodelofdevelopment(Kasarda,2000,2001, 2006)while super
ficially attractive requires closer interrogation and elaboration as a sustainable urban
planning and economic development strategy., These new urban forms, even the most
successful onesinconnection withplannedmega-airports, raise a host ofplanningissues.,
There has long been a strong NIMBY reaction against new airports and export expan
sion, but this is now morphing into a more fundamental critique ofairports and air traffic
around the issue ofclimate change. Airport-led urban development is at the epicentre of
Correspondence Address. Robert Freestone, Planning and Urban Development Program, Faculty ofthe Built
Environment, University ofNew South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia Tel: [phone]; Fax:
[phone]. Email: rfreestone@unsweduau
ISSN 1356-3475 Print/1469-9265 Online/09/020161-16 © 2009Taylor& Francis
DOl: 101080113563470903021217
MAA-4-2012-Report excerpts distributed at the meeting
162 R.. Freestone
this debate. Bringing the sides together requires more consultation, more collaboration,
more research, and a far greater awareness at a regional scale fIom all stakeholders that
airports are no longer just transport hubs (difficult enough major land uses even in this
narrow sense) but underpin diversified mixed used activity centres, zones, and corridors,
which need to be comprehended wholly as a new urban form (Guller & Guller, 2002)
This paper offers a brief and critical overview of these issues from a broad planning
perspective.. It does not attempt a comprehensive survey of the airport-environment
interface or offer detailed policy reviews of specific jurisdictions.. Rather, the approach
taken is a wide-ranging synoptic one that essentially presents a dialogue between a
bullish pro-growth perspective evident in aviation industry and government circles
versus a more critical perspective questioning mainstream thinking that seemingly
endorses limitless growth potential. The paper has three main parts: a brief survey of
the phenomenon and drivers of airport-focused urbanism, a precis of airport planning
trends and the aerotropolis concept, and a consideration ofeconomic and environmental
airportdevelopmentcritiques with aview to seekingrapprochementinthe context ofsus
tainable development The paper draws flom a broader study examining the urban policy
impacts and implications ofthe 'airport metropolis' in Australia and internationally.l
Airport-Focused Urbanism
Transformationsinthenatureandroleofurbanairportsarebeingplayedoutagainstfunda
mental changes in forces affecting both cities and aviation. The intersecting trends
are towards inexorable growth.. Notwithstanding a scatter of 'shrinking cities', urban
populations have been steadily rising and extended metropolitan regions have become a
dominant urban form with concomitant demands for transportation infIastructure and
connectivity. Similarly, while checked by successive exogenous shocks - terrorism,
regional pandemics, surging oil prices, and economic crises - the historical growth in
aviation activity has been steadily upward. The nexus between these phenomena rotates
around the role of aviation in economic development. There is debate as to whether
increased aviation activity is a cause or effect ofeconomic growth, but either way, there
is a strong correlation between metropolitan growth and aviation (Brueckner, 2003). In a
globalized world, aviation has cemented its place as a dominant transport technology
with consequent ramifications for the ordering of urban and regional space economies at
different scales.. John Kasarda has memorably captured this emergent reality with his
notion of a fourth wave of development in which airports shape business location and
urban development in the twenty-first century as much as highways did in the twentieth
century,railroadsinthenineteenthandseaportsintheeighteenth(www.aerotropolis.com).
Airports are a remarkable barometer ofthe historical dynamism ofcities through time
(Gordon, 2004). Theyhaveevolvedthroughatypologyofurbanandarchitecturalforms in
concertwiththerising demandfor airtravel accompanying urbanpopulation growth.. The
initial grassed aerodromes ofthe 1920s were formalized as city gateways akin to rail and
port terminals by the late 1930s. The development ofmilitary-related infIastructure and
utilization during the Second World War helped lay a platform for rapid expansion
through the democratization ofinternational air travel from the 1950s. The 1960s saw a
phase of replication as new airports were developed on the metropolitan fringe to
replace or supplement older facilities hemmed in by the spread of urban development
Thedesignerairportthen tookholdas aplace-makingdevice withthe subsequentstruggle
MAA-4-2012-Report excerpts distributed at the meeting
Planning, Sustainability andAirport-Led Urban Development 163
for regional and intemational competitive advantage as the era of mass air travel was
confirmed. Latterly, the trend has been towards a greater diversity of type and form
(mega airports, specialist cargo airports, low cost carrier terminals).
Over the same period, airport-related development has also changed in character and
increased in scale, Early aviation-linked businesses, often makeshift, opportunistic, and
engineering-related were gradually supplemented and supplanted by more extensive
commercial development servicing increasedpassenger and cargo activity such as hotels
and height forwarders. In time, where land supply permitted, master planned business
parks sprung up because ofthe proximity advantages and waves ofredevelopment began
to shape new city and suburban commercial landscapes in line with the rise ofthe edge
city phenomenon (Garreau, 1992). The major trend has been toward 'more upscale, less
industrial-based type of development' (Dempsey et at, 1997). The influence of airport
access on urban structurehas beenfelt not justin closephysical proximitybut ata metro
politan scale defined by time contours. This broader impact is frequently channelled via
development corridors assuming a variety offorms depending on land availability, trans
port modalities, and planning strategies, and controls (Schaafsma etat" 2008).,
Castells(1996) inhistreatiseontherise ofinformational societyintroducedtheconcept
of 'spaces offlows', redefining the geography ofeconomic development as less about an
amalgam ofindividual places but more the connections between them, In an increasingly
globalizedworldwhereflows ofgoods,people, andservices arecentral, aviationnetworks
helpdefineworldconnectivity. Increasesinroutesandtraffichaveledtotheemergenceof
vital airport hubs and reinforced global city status, Airports are the 'hubs of flows', and
have experienced revolutionary change in their operational and strategic environments
in the process, Free trade laws and the liberalization of aviation regulations under neo
liberalpolitical-economicphilosophieshaveformed abackdroptothesechanges. Airports
are central to competitive and comparative advantage: 'the airport is perhaps the most
important, single piece of infrastructure in the battle between cities and nations for
influence in, and the benefits of, growth and development'(O'Connor & Scott, 1992)..
The growth ofbusiness travel, discretionary leisure trips, and fleight movements in the
world economy has been profound. The expansion ofcargo in particular has been driven
bydevelopmentoffaster,larger,longerrangeaircraft,theliberalizationofairheightservices
in many markets, the intemationalization of economic activity, and proliferation ofjust
in-time material management practices (Leinbach & Bowen, 2004). Such trends have
reinforced the significance ofairports in their regional context and they have now become
'centraltotheoperationanddevelopmentofmetropolitanareas' (O'Connor& Scott, 1992).
A macro-trend affecting the nature ofairports in their urban context has been the pro
gressive loosening oftheir historic ties with the state. Airports have shifted flom being a
branchofgovernmentto dynamicandcommercially-orientedbusinesses (Doganis, 1992).,
Developingthisproposition, three key economic trends have transformed the world's air
ports over the last quarter century: commercialization, privatization, and globalization
(Graham, 2001)..
Airportcommercializationmeans thetransformation ofapublicutility to acommercial
enterprisewiththeadoptionofmorebusinesslikemanagementpractices. Bigairportshave
tumed themselves into shopping malls and progressed into property development. The
most recent trend within terminals has been for shops and restaurants to be pushed to
the so-called 'airside' zone after passengers have gone through security (so they can
relax and consume). This has been complemented by more intensive development on
MAA-4-2012-Report excerpts distributed at the meeting
164 R. Freestone
vacantairportlandnotneededfor aviationoperationsandhassometimesextendedbeyond
the actual airport boundary in joint ventures. A recunent phrase heard in aviation-speak
captures the guiding philosophy: making the airport 'a destination in its own right'., The
new class ofAsian airports - such as Singapore Changi developed from 1981 - have
all been conceived as 'airport cities' on extensive sites liberated hom the physical
constraints faced by older airports in more established built-up areas. Commercialization
is also aresponse to the volatility ofthe airportbusiness, whichis particularly susceptible
to downturnfrom forces beyondthecontrolofthesectoritself, Non-aeronautical activities
spread the business risk and constitute a source for 'secure sustainable revenue' (Reiss,
2007). In principle, this income stream can be applied to infrastructure investments
without steadily raising landing and passenger fees being imposed on the airlines
(Doganis, 1992). Non-aeronautical revenues constituted approximately 30% of total
airport revenues in 1990. This rose to 46% in 1995, to 51% in 2000, and to 54% in
2007 (Airport Innovation, 2007)" Non-aviation aspects of airports also tend to be less
regulated, offering airport companies greater freedom for entrepreneurial innovation.
Airport privatization is the transfer ofthe management ofan airport, and in many cases
ownership as well, to the private sector by a variety of methods. These include share
flotations, theadoptionofstrategicpartnerships,andtheintroductionofprivatemanagement
contracts. One ofthemostprofoundandextensivenational privatization exerciseshas been
in Australia where since 1996 a total of 22 airports previously under the control of the
CommonwealthGovernmenthavebeen soldonlong-termleasestoprivatesectorconsortia,
The policy generated a multi-billion dollar budget windfall for government and has been
accompanied by significant investments in infrastructure as desired (and, in some cases,
required under the terms oftransfer) but has also been marked by aggressive moves into
general property development on airport land (Freestone etaZ., 2006),
Airport globalization denotes the emergence ofglobal airport companies who operate
an increasingnumberofairports around theworldsuchas BAA,Schiphol, andMacquarie
Airports. Some ofthese global players are traditional airportoperators whereas others are
new to airport management. Schiphol airport itself has been an industry leader in the
possibilities of airport-centric development As early as the 1930s, it was a place that
other airports learned flom. Authorities encouraged the public to visit the airport and use
it as a 'civic amenity' - 'by visiting the airport citizens could show their support' and
become 'more air-minded and, eventually, make the airport more money' (Adey, 2006)
Its real influence has been felt since the 1980s with its 24 h a day 'AirportCity' concept
based on many different types ofcommercial and cultural enterprises at the airport, plus
various joint building and land development ventures with other corporations and
governmentbodies,.
Major airports are assuming a dominant role as transactional spaces in the global
economy (Gottdiener, 2001)., They have become key nodes for global production and
enterprise systemsdemanding speed, agility, andaccessibility. Airportsandtheirenvirons
offer advantages to business in a globally networked economy where the new credo is
what the futurist Alvin Toffler dubbed 'survival of the fastest' (Kasarda, 2006)" They
constitute critical gateways and conduits for inter-regional and international travel,
trade, and tourism. This means that airport lands and the territory around airports or
with good access time-wise have increased significantly in value" However, most econ
omic impact studies remain at an aggregate level and despite attempts to measure
the more immediate employment impacts of airports (Twomey and Tomkins, 1995;
MAA-4-2012-Report excerpts distributed at the meeting
Planning, Sustainability andAirport-Led Urban Development 165
AlChalbi, 1998),thereremainfundamental methodologicaldifficultiesinestablishingany
precise 'causality between the expansion ofan airport and widereconomic development'
(Graham, 2003).
Thevalorizationofairportaccessappearstobemanifestedinatleastfourdifferentways:
through airport-support functions, attraction of time-sensitive activities, concentration of
businesses with high-travel demands, and attraction of non-aeronautical development
attractedbyagglomerationeconomies. Thefirst ofthesereferstoexpandedandnewactivi
tiessupportingtheoperationsoftheairportgravitatingtotheairportenvirons. Theseinclude
services directly supporting operations (like flight kitchens and aircraft maintenance),
airport-related height services (shipping, height forwarding, customs, foreign trade
zones) and services for airline employees and passengers such as hotels, restaurants, and
car rental franchises.. Employment mix and growth tends to be proportionate to the scale
of airport operations as either an aircraft servicing centre, fr·eight facility, or passenger
hub(Weisbrodetat., 1993).Airportsandcitiescompeteformajorinvestmentslikemainten
anceoperationsfacilities, aprocesswhichcaninvolvecommitmentofmillionsofdollarsof
public funds (Nunn &Schoedel, 1995)..
Also drawn to airport areas are time-sensitive goods-processing and distribution func
tions such as e-commerce, warehousing, and perishables handling.. Air cargo express
has become the preferred mode for shipping high value to weight products, like elec
tronics, optics, and pharmaceuticals.. The 'need for speed' means that 'storage has given
way to velocity as the emphasis has shifted from static inventory to the movement of
goods' (Frej, 2004). As supply chains have become more complex, specialist logistics
firms have become key players in inter-regional and international goods assembly and
movement. The actual cost ofmoving materials long distances is a small element in the
total costofshipping doorto door(Harris, 1994).. Thereal economic savings andefficien
ciesaretobegainedinland-basedandinter-modaloperations, underliningtheimportance
ofairport accessibility. Areas around airports can also be very attractive for development
because, if not built out, they are often flat and suitable for big footprint buildings
(Blanton, 2004). The rise aroundtransporthubs including airports ofnew goods assembly
and distribution spaces embedded in global supply chains has been described as one of
the 'more significant transformations of the built environment over the past decade'
(Waldheim & Berger, 2008)..
Airportproximity is also a magnetfor organizations whose operations require frequent
inter-citytravel to do face-to-face business. Airports offeringfr·equent serviceto a variety
ofdestinations are thus most highly valued.. 'Airport intensive' economic sectors include
insurance, banking and finance, printing and publishing, transport, computers, precision
and optical instruments, business services, and R&D (York Aviation, 2004).. Airport
corridors have accordingly become attractive for office buildings housing regional
corporate headquarters. A familiar global landscape of anonymous towers with familiar
corporate logos alongside motorways linking central business districts (CBDs) and air
ports has been played out around the world (Hack, 2000). Airports themselves are also
places of 'meetingness' (Urry, 2007) offering numerous micro-scale opportunities to
help bind together the transactional economy (Knorr-Cetina, 2006)..
Finally, the accessibility, visibility, and prestige of an airport address can attract
non-airport development, serving other markets through growing economies of scale..
In this and the other ways mentioned, airports clearly have major spatial - and
economic - impacts and it is one reason why they are seen as powerful economic
MAA-4-2012-Report excerpts distributed at the meeting
166 R. Freestone
development tools. Qualifications can be made but numerous studies report positive
growth indicators., One rule ofthumb is that a 10% increase in passengers leads approxi
mately to a 1% increase in service-related industries (Brueckner, 2003), A study of
Schiphol airportestimatedthat the total multiplierofdirect employmentis approximately
2: that is, one job on the airport leads to one job in indirect and another in induced
employment (Hakfoort et al., 2001). Employment growth within 6 km of an airport can
be 2-5 times faster than elsewhere in the suburban ring ofthe metro area in which it is
located (Weisbrod et at" 1993). The market-driven attraction of business activity into
airport areas through agglomeration economies raises issues for industrial location
policy and the possible need to reserve land for firms requiring air transport access
(Warffemius et at" 2009),
WhenHarrisandUllmandevisedtheirideal-typicalmodel ofmulti-nucleatedurbanform
in 1945, they did not include an airport zone" In an era ofDC-3s and flying boats canying
30-40 passengers, the scale of inter-regional and international operations was modest
and airports remained a highly specialized and generally fringe land use. Nearly a half
century later, Harris (1997) updated this status in a revised 'peripheral model
ofmetropolitan areas' which acknowledged the new 'airport cluster' alongside other new
suburban forms such as shopping malls, corporate campuses, and theme parks. Airports
can be key development catalysts as cities metamorphose into polycentric urban realms
(Hall, 2001), Some theorists have taken this trend to its logical zenith: the aerotropolis.
Airport-Centred Planning
The vision ofan airport at the city's heart goes back at leastto Le Corbusierin the 1920s
whose ideal city featured an aerodrome sitting atop a multi-nodal grand central station
flanked by vertiginous skyscrapers., Presciently, he conceived the urban form as 'a
model city for commerce' and the most literal expression of the philosophy that 'the
city which can achieve speed will achieve success' (Le Corbusier, 1987). Other contem
porary visions imploded airport structures much less elegantly into the urban fabric
(Pearman, 2004)" Latter day versions are characteristically more spatially expansive.,
Moving beyond the reality of small-scale airport business parks and fly-in residential
and leisure communities, Conway (1980) conceived the 'decoplex' as a development
ecology complex with jetport alongside industrial sites, offices, hotels, and waste treat
ment facilities and then the more heroically scaled 'Jet City' as a 'functionally efficient
centre ofeconomic development'.,
Kasarda's 'aerotropolis' model is the best-known modern model to capture the nexus
between planning, sustainability and airport-led urban development. The aerotropolis is
a normative urban form 'leveraged by air commerce' (Kasarda, 2001), It is promoted as
a means of building competitive advantage into the fabric of cities. The core is an
airport city integrating aeronautical and non-aeronautical uses including business
offices, hotels, and conference centre. This anchors a more extensive mix of precincts
of warehouses, e-fulfilment centres, industrial and office parks, free trade zones, hotel
and entertainment districts, all oriented to connecting motorway corridors. Residential
districts, the only non-commercial land use, occupy the wedges between the motorways
away humthemainflightpaths. Threecentral 'aerotropolisprinciples' are thedesirability
of clustered rather than ribbon development, the importance of high-quality design
standards, and opportunities for beautification ofairport gateways,
MAA-4-2012-Report excerpts distributed at the meeting
Planning, Sustainability and Airport-Led Urban Development 167
The aerotropolis model successfullyconveysthe importance ofthe airportin urban and
suburban business development in a globalized economy, Its appeal from an industry
perspective is to encapsulate the economic and community benefits delivered by airports
(Siebert, 2008) As a senior executive in Macquarie Airports Management put it: 'a
successful airport is clearly a driver of a city's and region's economic performance'
(Moore-Wilton, 2007). In these terms the aerotropolis virtually represents a business
model. The conceptual weaknesses of the model lie in dependence on a non-renewable
resource, over-concentration ofcritical infrastructure, and a presupposition to the hege
monyofairportsinlogisticsanddistribution(Charlesetal.,2007)" Fromabroaderplanning
perspective, theaerotropolismodelalsotacitlyendorsestheinevitabilityifnotdesirability
ofanextensive 'sprawlandscatter'patternofsuburbanlandusedevelopment.Atworst,the
aerotropolis presents an unsustainable urban form, which augments 'already existing
externalities ofnoise, pollution, and increasedtraffic congestion' (Leinbach, 2004).
Most aerotropolis development to date has been 'spontaneous and haphazard' (WWw.,
aerotropolis.com), mainly because planning and governance structures have been frag
mented and have not see the problems - and possibilities - whole" Guidance on
bettermodels comes from actual airport masterplans, particularly for greenfield projects,
whichhavebeenconceivedasinter-modalandmulti-useactivitycentres, Theplanningfor
these projects extends beyond existing airport planning guidelines which relate more to
regional scale facilities and a narrower band of environmental impact concerns headed
by noise (American Planning Association, 2006).. On top of solutions to complex engin
eering problems, they encompass a range of considerations commensurate with the
design ofregional communities and town centres, These new airports include Bangkok's
Suvarnabhumi, Hong Kong's ChepLapKok, and Seoul's Incheon. Masterplanners ofthe
new DenverInternational Airport had similarly expansiveideas aboutintegrated land use
development(DempseyetaI., 1997).Thesemega-projectsintegrateamixofuses inambi
tious schemes, which anticipate and seek to mitigate interface issues with contiguous
land uses" Similar ideas will likely involve the many hundreds of new airports or
airport expansions planned for India and China over the coming decades.
These large integrated projects attempt to internalize spin-off economic activity in a
way not systematically captured by airports before the early 1980s (van den Berg et aI.,
1996). Moreover, their increasing scale is directly predicated on the presumption that
bigger airports ensure greater economic returns and possibilities. Like much property
driven development in the DAE, the behemoth Dubai World Central airport takes this
model to the extreme (Bagaeen, 2007). However, these sorts ofairports are the exception
rather than the rule" Most major airports are more complexly integrated into the existing
urban environment and must constantly negotiate a set of problematical interactions
including noise, air quality, public safety, traffic congestion, and infrastructureprovision"
Nevertheless, bothtypes ofairport stillraisequestionsaboutthe longrun sustainability of
extensiveairtravel andtheurbanforms whichcometodependonit Thisleadstothethird
issue ofconcern in this paper,
Airport-Induced Concerns
The dominant discourse in the aviation industry is growth and this similarly underpins
the aerotropolis concept. Predictions ofbusiness travel, tourist flows, and air cargo all
point upward in the long term, This in turn translates into the need for more airport
MAA-4-2012-Report excerpts distributed at the meeting
168 R. Freestone
capacity andperforce through economic multipliers into continued development in the
broaderaerotropolis.. However, these aggressive growth scenarios are beingcontestedin
many parts of the world on various grounds., The challenges faced by airport-centered
development can be discussed under two general sets of concerns: economic and
environmentaL
Economically, the case for seemingly unrestricted growth of the aviation industry is
now questioned on several grounds., Williams (2000) queries much industry-sponsored
pro-aviation economic analysis as based on contestable assumptions, uncertain forecasts,
aspatial reasoning (henceignoringredistributional impacts), andinadequateconsideration
ofenvironmental costs. At the sametime, the aviation sectoris said torequire investment
on a massive scale and benefit from heavy subsidies.,
The implicit assumption in anointing the airport as a regional growth pole is the
diffusionist idea of economic growth being imported through airport activity and
spreading its material beneficence outward. These ideas are associated with the
classic development theory work of Albert Hirschman and Gunnar Myrdal in the
1950s-1960s, yet contemporary regional development theory has clearly moved on
(Glasson & Marshall, 2007), In the race to develop airports for regional comparative
advantage, the question must be asked as to just how many airport growth poles can
be viable? There are certainly examples of major airports without significant area
development commensurate to the scale oftheir aviation activity. For example, contri
buting factors in Atlanta's failure to fully tap the development potential of Hartsfield
International - the world's busiest airport - include the unavailability of large area
development sites, chronic airport noise problems and blight in contiguous commu
nities, failure to provide adequate services infrastructure in advance of development,
the unattractiveness of the airport area for investors, and breakdowns in regional
cooperation and focus (Kramer, 2004)., Other general impediments to the development
relate to restrictions on both development of airport land especially for non-aviation
purposes and area planning restrictions, such as airports located in green belt zones.
Utilizing airports to capture a sizeable slice ofthe air height market has been seen as a
desirable economic development strategy. There are several grounds for this approach,
Overthepast30 years,the growthinthevalueofcargo shippedbyairhas significantlyout
stripped growth ofglobal trade generally and there is further evidence that aircargo traffic
recovers atamuchquickerrate thanpassengerflows inan economic downturn (Kasarda &
Sullivan, 2005). Much growth has also been fuelled by the rise ofintegrated operators like
DHL, TNTExpress, UPS, andFedEx, which are expectedto have aglobal market share of
31%by 2019 (Gillingwater etai., 2003).
The shining exemplar ofheight-centered airport development is Memphis, Tennessee,
anditsriseasamajorinlandportduetoitsheadquarteringofFedEx(althoughtheimmedi
ateareaaroundtheairportremainsblightedandthetargetofanewcommunityrenaissance
movement)., Other places have tried to tap the corporate search for greater and faster
supply chain economies as an area development strategy, with development ofpredomi
nantly orexclusively heightairports, often converting former military orgeneral aviation
facilities. Oneoutcomeofthesedevelopmentsandtherelatedgrowthofthelogisticssector
hasbeenthe 'globaltranspark' conceptThesearemorethantraditionalaircargofacilities,
but conceived as concentrations of time-sensitive economic activities based around
transport hubs with direct inter-modal loading and unloading capabilities, advanced
telecommunication services, and light-handed governmenttaxes, and customsprocessing.,
MAA-4-2012-Report excerpts distributed at the meeting
Planning, Sustainability andAirport-Led Urban Development 169
They are seen as economic catalysts 'to render development to a large surrounding
hinterland' (Sit, 2004). Although various projects have been proposed in China, Germany,
and the USA, none has really taken off, including the Global TransPark at Kinston Airport
near Greenville, North Carolina, which remains a conventional and small-scale airport
industrial complex, with the novelty ofaconference facility.
There are general reasons why economicreturnsfrom new airfreight-led airportdevel
opmentsmightbe overstated. Oneisthatcargo (asopposedtopassengergrowth)isapoor
predictor ofemployment growth and hence economic development, with warehouse and
distribution facilities increasingly automated and offering lower paying jobs (Green,
2007). Second, is an unrealistic faith in a 'build and growth will come' optimism that
ignoresfundamental parameters suchasaccessibility andcompetitionfrom otherairports.
Third,is abasicbusinessrule oftheindustrythattendsto workinfavourofexistingfacili
ties: 'airlines go to markets, notairports' (quotedinErie, 2004).. Fourth, much height still
moves by other modes, including in the holds of passenger aircraft, but in the bigger
scheme of things there is still negligible integration of air freight with rail and sea
modes (Bowen & Slack, 2007). There is a final problem for some freight airports and
thatistheirenvironmentalimpacts. Cargoaircraftareoftenolderplanes,lessenvironmen
tally efficient and noisy,. Night time operations are important in a 24 h global economy.
Problems arise when located close to centres ofpopulation and if airport operations are
constrained as a result of community concerns with delivery times being lengthened,
then just-in-time operations can be threatened (Gillingwater et at, 2003). This links to
broader environmental challenges faced by airports and therefore the urban-economic
system built around them, namely the aerotropolis.
Environmentalist critiques of airports have targeted various operational dimensions
such as air pollution, physical, and psychological health, contaminated run-off, and land
consumption ('the biggest sprawl of all'). Ayres (2001) argues that 'in its total impact
onclimate,ecology, andhealth,today'smega-airportmaybeoneofthemostill-conceived
forms oflarge-scaleinfrastructurehumankindhaseverdevised',aswellasoneofthe least
accountable.. Historically, environmental protests have been targeted at local concerns
about the development of new airports on specific sites or expansion of existing ones.
These classic NIMBY campaigns have variously targeted noise, health and amenity;
impact on property prices; blight; loss of biodiversity and heritage sites; and accident
risk. As a result, many airports have limitations on their activity, e.g., aircraft movement
and type limits, flightpath restrictions within noise contours, and night curfews,. Some
66% ofEuropean airports have environmental constraints (Hooper, 2007). Beyond oper
ational considerations and management efficiencies, airports have an 'environmental
capacity' linked to the tolerance of their impacts within the host environment, both
human and non-human (Upham et aI.., 2003).,
A larger environmental dimension is now evident in the questioning of airport and
airport area development. According to Short (2004), 'airports are not just nodes in the
global network offlows; they are sites ofmajor environmental impact that highlight the
tension between international connectivity and local livability',. Recognition of this
nexus between the global and the local is now influencing environmental protests with
a shift away from localized campaigns towards broader implications for environmental
sustainability and climate change, social justice and economic development. There has
emerged 'a more universal struggle aimed at countering airport expansion' (Griggs &
Howarth, 2004). In Australia, the issue of privatization lends a special flavour to
MAA-4-2012-Report excerpts distributed at the meeting
170 R. Freestone
growing public debate on airports with a strongly stated view by some in the community
that 'transport is a public responsibility' and that utilization of public land for business
enterprises not directly connected to core airport activity reflects only a quest for profits
(May & Hill, 2006). More universally, concern at the aviation industry's contribution to
global warming has undoubtedly become the key concern. A general consensus appears
to be that the aviation industry in terms of global anthropogenic carbon emissions is
responsible for 3-5% ofthe worldwide totaL Itis the projections that are most troubling..
Without ameliorative action, an unconected increase in CO aviation emissions by 2050
2
ofup to 300% is now a common prediction (Upham et at, 2003; Macintosh & Downie,
2007).
Airports now find themselves at the epicentre ofthe growing debate about the global
environmental consequences ofaviation, and hence the targetofvigorous criticism and
opposition in which local struggles seamlessly mesh with regional, national, and inter
national concerns (Griggs & Howarth, 2008). Activist groups like the umbrella organ
ization Airport Watch in the UK argue that there are many powerful environmental,
equity and economic reasons to oppose the aggressive expansion of aviation.. They
bring a more expansive and sophisticated critique compared to isolated past efforts
Just as the aviation industry builds coalitions between airlines, airports, and the aero
space industry ('freedom to fly'), environmental protest groups are also linking up to
form a broader political force which, along with the approaching reality of peak oil,
is being heard in government circles.. In the UK, again, the government's independent
watchdog, the Sustainable Development Commission, has called for a rethink of
aviation policy on environmental and economic grounds (Milmo & Vidal, 2008). An
accumulation of concerns lies behind recent opposition to various economic develop
ment strategies based on airports, with disquiet over proposals for Hamilton, Ontario
a notable example (McGreal, 2008). The opposition that conflunts many airports
today inevitably extends into questioning the broader concept of airport-led regional
development
Towards Sustainable Airports?
At the most extreme in the debate over aviation, diametrically opposed positions have
been stakedout. Theenvironmentalistposition calls for demandmanagement with atigh
tening of government policies and international regulations to constrain demand for air
travel. The argument is that aviation is locked too much into a 'predict and provide'
mentality.. There is serious discussion about increasing the cost of air travel over and
above market forces to dampen demand and offset emissions by adding compulsory
environmental charges. The pro-growth position highlights the economic disbenefits of
restricting airport capacity. A range of negative impacts are highlighted. One estimate
ofthefailuretoincreasecapacitytomeetgrowingdemandisareductioningrossdomestic
product at a national level by 2.5-3% (York Aviation, 2004). Aviation-linked or orien
tated businesses and activities within wider airport catchments must be factored into the
discourse ofdeclining patronage, investment, profitability, andjob growth..
Theconceptofsustainable aviation appeals as a middle groundand there are initiatives
in this area. For example, Sustainable Aviation in the UK represents a comprehensive
industry-led strategy for the long-term sustainability ofthe UK aviation industry.. Under
the group's compact, member airports are committed to a sustainable future through