MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2282859402

Competition in the Air: European Union Regulation of Commercial Aviation

2001· article· en· W2282859402 on OpenAlexaff
Paul Stephen Dempsey

Bibliographic record

VenueSMU Scholar (Southern Methodist University) · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicAviation Industry Analysis and Trends
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLiberalizationEuropean unionInternational tradeAviationCompetition (biology)Single marketTreatySubsidyBusinessCustoms unionEconomic policyInternational economicsEconomicsMarket economyPolitical scienceEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Though creation of a European common market has been a goal since the conclusion of the Treaty of Rome in 1957, movement toward a single market in commercial air transport has consumed most of the ensuing half-century. While economic unification has come relatively easy in many sectors, creating a single market for air transport has proven to be a difficult challenge. The history of European commercial aviation is a colorful mix of national politics and economic policy. Although efforts to achieve regulatory liberalization were undertaken in the years leading up to the creation of the European Union (EU, or the Union), comparatively little liberalization occurred until the Union was achieved. While historically the airlines of Europe had been heavily regulated, owned, and/or subsidized by their governments, by the 1980s the European Community (EC, or the Community) began to move toward liberalization. National governments traditionally shielded their airlines from the rigors of the marketplace, perceiving the industry to have public utility characteristics. Governments utilized air carriers to promote public policy objectives beyond allocative efficiency, such as increasing tourism and foreign exchange, augmenting international prestige, enhancing national security, reducing unemployment, and promoting domestic aircraft manufacturing.This paper examines the EC/EU's movement toward air transport liberalization. It begins by identifying the various commercial air transport organizations in the EU and discusses their respective positions-historical and current-on liberalization. It proceeds by examining the actions that the member European governments have taken on the subject, and reviews how these actions foreshadowed multilateral agreements. It discusses the Treaty of Rome's competition rules and their application to the field of air transport. The paper then focuses on the current structure of the EU. It also reveals how the Single European Act was the catalyst in not only the establishment of the EU, but also the acceleration towards air transport liberalization.The paper proceeds to review the important Court of Justice cases that circumscribed the zone of application in which the competition rules can regulate air transport. It next details how the EU institutions, early on, utilized the Treaty of Rome and the Court of Justice decisions to develop the foundation for a unified European transport policy. The paper then moves to a detailed discussion of what is commonly considered the contemporary environment for commercial air transport regulation-the sequence of 'packages.' The section breaks down the regulatory environment by sector area-for example, pricing, market access, state aid, etc. It also considers the relevance of the EU merger regulations to air transport. In addition, this section discusses EU regulations of non-economic air transport issues. Finally, this chapter looks into the future of EU air transport and examines the prospectus for further liberalization, paying particular attention to true cabotage and the EU acting for the European commercial aviation market as a whole.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.456
Threshold uncertainty score0.371

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.044
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.182 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSMU Scholar (Southern Methodist University)Same topicAviation Industry Analysis and TrendsFrench-language works237,207