report

Review of airline responses due to tariff differentiation

Results

The Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management and Schiphol Airport differ on how airlines respond to a stronger differentiation of airport charges by noise category. The actual responses depend on multiple (airline-specific) factors and therefore cannot be predicted with absolute certainty. Given this uncertainty, the responses assumed by both parties are not very far apart and both seem realistic. The ratios between replacement rates for different aircraft categories used by Schiphol do seem to better reflect the savings that can be realized. It is recommended not to use separate responses for different airline segments when these cannot be well substantiated. The Ministry and Schiphol do not take into account the possibility of airlines shifting noisy aircraft from night to day or rationalizing their operations at Schiphol. As a result, the noise impact related to a stronger differentiation of airport charges is underestimated.  

Background

The Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management defined a package of measures to reduce noise pollution around Schiphol Airport. The package has been notified to the European Commission in the context of the Balanced Approach procedure. One of the measures concerns a stronger differentiation of airport charges based on the aircraft’s noise category. Increasing the charges for noisy aircraft and decreasing them for quieter aircraft creates a (greater) financial incentive for airlines to replace noisy aircraft with quieter types. The impact of the measure depends on the extent to which airlines are willing and able to replace aircraft. The ministry and Schiphol differ on how airlines respond to the measure. Beelining was asked to assess these assumed responses based on the underlying assumptions.

Methodology

Based on the 2025-2027 tariff scheme, the financial incentive to replace a noisy aircraft with a quieter type was determined. Potential responses to the new system were then identified. On this basis, the airline responses assumed by the Ministry and Schiphol were reviewed. 

Cover_Review_airline_responses_tariff_differentiation_December_2024

Colophon

Client: Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management

Author(s): Rogier Lieshout

Type: Note

Date: 2 December 2024

Files

questions about this publication?

Contact

If you have any questions about this publication or our services, please feel free to contact us by e-mail or via the contact form.

Contact details

info@beelining.nl

+31 (0)6 2823 7401

www.beelining.nl

KvK: 83803157

BTW: NL003875598 B18

Contact Form

other recent

Publications

Assessing the cost-effectiveness of noise-mitigating measures in the context of the Balanced Approach procedure.

Review of assumed airline responses due to a stronger differentiation of airport charges at Schiphol.

Assessment of slot mobility at Schiphol and the impacts of facilitating slot trading.