본 논문은 국내공항의 경쟁력과 문제점을 살펴보고 공항별 규모 및 역할별로 그룹화, 차별화하여 항공정책 부분과 연계하여 선택적 접근을 시도하였다. 그리고 종합적으로는 전국 14개 공항의 운영현황을 비교분석 해, 앞으로 나가야 할 방향을 제시하는 것이 본 연구의 가장 중요한 목적이다. 본 연구는 DEA모델을 이용하여 전국 14개 공항의 2009년부터 2011년 최근 3년 데이터를 이용, 투입요소인 계류장면적, 활주로 수, 터미널면적, 주차장면적, 종사원수와 산출요소인 운항실적, 여객처리실적, 화물처리실적으로 각 공항별 효율성을 분석하였다. 분석결과는, 전체기술적 효율성의 경우 전체적으로 과거에 비해 점차 개선되는 것으로 나타났으나 공항별로는 많은 ...
본 논문은 국내공항의 경쟁력과 문제점을 살펴보고 공항별 규모 및 역할별로 그룹화, 차별화하여 항공정책 부분과 연계하여 선택적 접근을 시도하였다. 그리고 종합적으로는 전국 14개 공항의 운영현황을 비교분석 해, 앞으로 나가야 할 방향을 제시하는 것이 본 연구의 가장 중요한 목적이다. 본 연구는 DEA모델을 이용하여 전국 14개 공항의 2009년부터 2011년 최근 3년 데이터를 이용, 투입요소인 계류장면적, 활주로 수, 터미널면적, 주차장면적, 종사원수와 산출요소인 운항실적, 여객처리실적, 화물처리실적으로 각 공항별 효율성을 분석하였다. 분석결과는, 전체기술적 효율성의 경우 전체적으로 과거에 비해 점차 개선되는 것으로 나타났으나 공항별로는 많은 편차를 보여주고 있다. 김포, 김해, 대구공항은 점차 효율성이 개선되어 2010년과 2011년 들어와 상대적으로 가장 높은 효율성을 보여주고 있다. 군산, 청주, 양양공항은 효율성이 개선되고 있지만 개선의 정도가 낮고 여전히 비효율성이 높은 것으로 나타났다. 특히 평균에 비해 많이 낮은 것으로 나타난 울산, 사천, 원주, 포항, 무안공항은 획기적인 대책이 필요한 것으로 판단된다. 그리고 순수기술적 효율성의 경우 전체적으로 과거에 비해 개선되지 않은 것으로 나타났으며, 대구, 김포, 김해공항은 점차 효율성이 개선되었고, 다른 공항에 비해 상대적으로 높은 효율성을 보여주고 있다. 규모의 경제의 경우 전체적으로 과거에 비해 조금씩 개선되는 것으로 나타났으나, 공항별로는 많은 편차를 보여주고 있다. 김포, 김해, 군산공항은 점차 효율성이 개선되어 상대적으로 높은 효율성을 보여주고 있다. 청주, 양양공항은 효율성이 개선되고 있지만 개선의 정도가 낮고 여전히 비효율성이 높은 것으로 나타났다. 포항, 무안의 경우도 비효율성이 개선되어야 하며, 특히 평균에 비해 많이 낮은 것으로 나타난 울산, 사천, 원주, 대구공항은 획기적인 대책이 필요한 것으로 판단된다. 종합적 규모의 효율성결과물로는 김해를 포함한 12개 공항의 결과는 규모수익체증인 IRS로 모든 생산요소를 동시에 증가시킬 때 산출량이 더 증가하는 것으로, 생산요소를 더 투입하면 산출량은 더욱더 증가할 수 있는 것으로 나타났다. 다만 김포, 제주공항은 시설투자가 적정규모로 운영상 효율성제고의 노력이 필요하다는 결론을 내릴 수가 있다.
본 논문은 국내공항의 경쟁력과 문제점을 살펴보고 공항별 규모 및 역할별로 그룹화, 차별화하여 항공정책 부분과 연계하여 선택적 접근을 시도하였다. 그리고 종합적으로는 전국 14개 공항의 운영현황을 비교분석 해, 앞으로 나가야 할 방향을 제시하는 것이 본 연구의 가장 중요한 목적이다. 본 연구는 DEA모델을 이용하여 전국 14개 공항의 2009년부터 2011년 최근 3년 데이터를 이용, 투입요소인 계류장면적, 활주로 수, 터미널면적, 주차장면적, 종사원수와 산출요소인 운항실적, 여객처리실적, 화물처리실적으로 각 공항별 효율성을 분석하였다. 분석결과는, 전체기술적 효율성의 경우 전체적으로 과거에 비해 점차 개선되는 것으로 나타났으나 공항별로는 많은 편차를 보여주고 있다. 김포, 김해, 대구공항은 점차 효율성이 개선되어 2010년과 2011년 들어와 상대적으로 가장 높은 효율성을 보여주고 있다. 군산, 청주, 양양공항은 효율성이 개선되고 있지만 개선의 정도가 낮고 여전히 비효율성이 높은 것으로 나타났다. 특히 평균에 비해 많이 낮은 것으로 나타난 울산, 사천, 원주, 포항, 무안공항은 획기적인 대책이 필요한 것으로 판단된다. 그리고 순수기술적 효율성의 경우 전체적으로 과거에 비해 개선되지 않은 것으로 나타났으며, 대구, 김포, 김해공항은 점차 효율성이 개선되었고, 다른 공항에 비해 상대적으로 높은 효율성을 보여주고 있다. 규모의 경제의 경우 전체적으로 과거에 비해 조금씩 개선되는 것으로 나타났으나, 공항별로는 많은 편차를 보여주고 있다. 김포, 김해, 군산공항은 점차 효율성이 개선되어 상대적으로 높은 효율성을 보여주고 있다. 청주, 양양공항은 효율성이 개선되고 있지만 개선의 정도가 낮고 여전히 비효율성이 높은 것으로 나타났다. 포항, 무안의 경우도 비효율성이 개선되어야 하며, 특히 평균에 비해 많이 낮은 것으로 나타난 울산, 사천, 원주, 대구공항은 획기적인 대책이 필요한 것으로 판단된다. 종합적 규모의 효율성결과물로는 김해를 포함한 12개 공항의 결과는 규모수익체증인 IRS로 모든 생산요소를 동시에 증가시킬 때 산출량이 더 증가하는 것으로, 생산요소를 더 투입하면 산출량은 더욱더 증가할 수 있는 것으로 나타났다. 다만 김포, 제주공항은 시설투자가 적정규모로 운영상 효율성제고의 노력이 필요하다는 결론을 내릴 수가 있다.
In this Study under-developed Korean local airports will be analysed for further development in the future, considering the unpredictable international economic changes. In order to develop local airports, elaborate analysis, initiative aviation policy and budget is essential. The purpose of the air...
In this Study under-developed Korean local airports will be analysed for further development in the future, considering the unpredictable international economic changes. In order to develop local airports, elaborate analysis, initiative aviation policy and budget is essential. The purpose of the airport is to transport people and goods rapidly. States are striving to dominate the market in advance by making hub airports, expanding commercial function of airports, relating tourism to air transport, using larger aircraft, supporting low-cost carriers and enhancing service level. Therefore, competitiveness and problems of local airports, together with the negative examples caused by aviation policy, are analysed. Regarding vitalization of local airports, grouping and differentiating based on size and role of each airport, and "selection and concentration" for aviation policy will be discussed. In this study, DEA model is used based on efficiency evaluation and positive analysis, for three years data from 2009 to 2011 of fourteen airports at the Republic of Korea. Input factors such as size of apron, number of runway, size of terminal, number of employees, and output factors such as air transport record, passenger transport record, cargo transport record, are used for the efficiency of each airport. The result of the analysis is that CRS which stands for entire technical efficiency, has been improved but shows great deviation among airports. Gimpo, Gimhae and Daegu Airport have improved and show most efficiency in 2010 and 2011. Gunsan, Chungju and Yangyang Airport have improved but the level of improvement is low, still showing inefficiency. Ulsan, Sacheon, Wonju, Pohang and Muan Airport shows less improvement - lower than the average - asking for innovative measures. Gimpo airport shows more improvement than Gimhae airport, and Jeju airport shows the greatest and continuous improvement. Regarding VRS which stands for pure technical efficiency, it shows that entire improvement has not taken place. Daegu, Gimpo and Gimhae Airport improved with higher efficiency level. Chungju Airport has improved but the level of improvement is low, still showing inefficiency. Regarding SE which stands for economic scale, entire level shows improvement but with great deviation among airports. Gimpo, Gimhae and Gunsan Airport have improved and show most efficiency. Chungju and Yangyang Airport have improved but the level of improvement is low, still showing inefficiency. Pohang and Muan Airport needs more improvement. Ulsan, Sacheon, Wonju and Daegu Airport shows less improvement - lower than the average - asking for innovative measures. Overall scale efficiency results for 2011, related to CRS which stands for constant returns to scale, Gimpo and Jeju Airport show optimization, when all input factor is increased the output is also increased proportionately. Related to IRS which stands for increased returns to scale, other twelve airports including Gimhae Airport, show de-optimization, when all input factor is increased the output is also increased massively, in result requiring more active investment on facilities and vitalization for long-term aspect. Investment of facilities of Gimpo and Jeju Airport have reached the proper level, asking for enhancing the operational efficiency effort. DRS which stands for decreased returns to scale, has not been discussed in this study. In order to vitalize national airports, establishing new local airport strategy, expanding non-aviation commercial revenue, improvement and expansion of airport facilities, enhancing support to low-cost carriers, developing passenger demand, diverse airport operation system, supporting private jet operation, expanding new access facilities and changing transportation system should be emphasized. Moreover, collecting public opinion sufficiently and discretion when decision making should be needed. Institutional Framework is needed in order to prevent negative results caused by indiscreet aviation policy. The government shall decide new investment based on demand, not based on political or public opinion, to prevent additional cost and loss of budget. Besides, airport operator and airlines should meet the changing and diverse demand of customers, or else it will result in losing customers to other transportation methods. More drastic support shall be provided to air transport business and small-sized airlines, allowing free entrance to aviation market. Airports around the world are commercializing the airport itself when building new airports or expanding current airport, emphasizing national image, symbolic and creative features of the city. By encountering the unique design of the airport, it tells where the person has arrived. Therefore, adding local international flights with duty-free shops in the arrival area, making outlet shops near airports, building big amusement area and symbolic structures to specialize the airport should be considered. Regarding the policy development of all airports should be based on selective approach. Strongpoint airports should need facilties improvement and drastic investment. Middle-sized airports should develop international flights and differentiated service. Small airports need to be designated as essential public airport to operate at least minimum flights and vitalized by using small aircrafts. It is difficult to judge whether local airports are efficient or inefficient. If efficiency is only emphasized, local people have to live in inconvenient transportation system. Therefore, both economic and public factors need to be considered. Moreover, government study on analysis for valid demand is needed, focusing on the fact that knowing valid demand is the starting point of vitalization. Lastly, the meaning "vitalization" of the airport shall be focusing not on the figures itself but on the people and logistics, such as providing transportation service to national and international passengers
In this Study under-developed Korean local airports will be analysed for further development in the future, considering the unpredictable international economic changes. In order to develop local airports, elaborate analysis, initiative aviation policy and budget is essential. The purpose of the airport is to transport people and goods rapidly. States are striving to dominate the market in advance by making hub airports, expanding commercial function of airports, relating tourism to air transport, using larger aircraft, supporting low-cost carriers and enhancing service level. Therefore, competitiveness and problems of local airports, together with the negative examples caused by aviation policy, are analysed. Regarding vitalization of local airports, grouping and differentiating based on size and role of each airport, and "selection and concentration" for aviation policy will be discussed. In this study, DEA model is used based on efficiency evaluation and positive analysis, for three years data from 2009 to 2011 of fourteen airports at the Republic of Korea. Input factors such as size of apron, number of runway, size of terminal, number of employees, and output factors such as air transport record, passenger transport record, cargo transport record, are used for the efficiency of each airport. The result of the analysis is that CRS which stands for entire technical efficiency, has been improved but shows great deviation among airports. Gimpo, Gimhae and Daegu Airport have improved and show most efficiency in 2010 and 2011. Gunsan, Chungju and Yangyang Airport have improved but the level of improvement is low, still showing inefficiency. Ulsan, Sacheon, Wonju, Pohang and Muan Airport shows less improvement - lower than the average - asking for innovative measures. Gimpo airport shows more improvement than Gimhae airport, and Jeju airport shows the greatest and continuous improvement. Regarding VRS which stands for pure technical efficiency, it shows that entire improvement has not taken place. Daegu, Gimpo and Gimhae Airport improved with higher efficiency level. Chungju Airport has improved but the level of improvement is low, still showing inefficiency. Regarding SE which stands for economic scale, entire level shows improvement but with great deviation among airports. Gimpo, Gimhae and Gunsan Airport have improved and show most efficiency. Chungju and Yangyang Airport have improved but the level of improvement is low, still showing inefficiency. Pohang and Muan Airport needs more improvement. Ulsan, Sacheon, Wonju and Daegu Airport shows less improvement - lower than the average - asking for innovative measures. Overall scale efficiency results for 2011, related to CRS which stands for constant returns to scale, Gimpo and Jeju Airport show optimization, when all input factor is increased the output is also increased proportionately. Related to IRS which stands for increased returns to scale, other twelve airports including Gimhae Airport, show de-optimization, when all input factor is increased the output is also increased massively, in result requiring more active investment on facilities and vitalization for long-term aspect. Investment of facilities of Gimpo and Jeju Airport have reached the proper level, asking for enhancing the operational efficiency effort. DRS which stands for decreased returns to scale, has not been discussed in this study. In order to vitalize national airports, establishing new local airport strategy, expanding non-aviation commercial revenue, improvement and expansion of airport facilities, enhancing support to low-cost carriers, developing passenger demand, diverse airport operation system, supporting private jet operation, expanding new access facilities and changing transportation system should be emphasized. Moreover, collecting public opinion sufficiently and discretion when decision making should be needed. Institutional Framework is needed in order to prevent negative results caused by indiscreet aviation policy. The government shall decide new investment based on demand, not based on political or public opinion, to prevent additional cost and loss of budget. Besides, airport operator and airlines should meet the changing and diverse demand of customers, or else it will result in losing customers to other transportation methods. More drastic support shall be provided to air transport business and small-sized airlines, allowing free entrance to aviation market. Airports around the world are commercializing the airport itself when building new airports or expanding current airport, emphasizing national image, symbolic and creative features of the city. By encountering the unique design of the airport, it tells where the person has arrived. Therefore, adding local international flights with duty-free shops in the arrival area, making outlet shops near airports, building big amusement area and symbolic structures to specialize the airport should be considered. Regarding the policy development of all airports should be based on selective approach. Strongpoint airports should need facilties improvement and drastic investment. Middle-sized airports should develop international flights and differentiated service. Small airports need to be designated as essential public airport to operate at least minimum flights and vitalized by using small aircrafts. It is difficult to judge whether local airports are efficient or inefficient. If efficiency is only emphasized, local people have to live in inconvenient transportation system. Therefore, both economic and public factors need to be considered. Moreover, government study on analysis for valid demand is needed, focusing on the fact that knowing valid demand is the starting point of vitalization. Lastly, the meaning "vitalization" of the airport shall be focusing not on the figures itself but on the people and logistics, such as providing transportation service to national and international passengers
AI-Helper
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.