Cost competitiveness of major airlines: an international comparison
This paper compares unit cost competitiveness of the world's 22 major airlines over the 1986-93 period. First, a unit cost index for aggregate output is computed via a multilateral index procedure. A translog variable cost function is estimated and used to decompose the unit cost differentials into potential sources: input prices, network and output attributes, and efficiency. The results of the unit cost decomposition are used to construct a cost competitiveness indicator after removing the effects of network and output attributes. Our results for 1993 are: (a) Asian carriers (except Japan Airlines and All Nippon Airways) were generally more cost competitive than the major U.S. carriers, mostly due to their substantially lower input prices; (b) Japan Airlines and All Nippon Airways were over 50% less cost competitive than American Airlines mainly because of their high input prices; (c) major European carriers were 7% (British Airways)-42% (Scandinavian Airlines Systems) less cost competitive than American Airlines, because of higher input prices and lower efficiency; (d) among the U.S. carriers, American Airlines, United Airlines and Delta were similar in cost competitiveness, while Northwest and Continental enjoyed, respectively, 5 and 12% cost competitiveness over American Airlines; (e) exchange rate fluctuation has had considerable effects on the cost competitive position of Japan Airlines and Lufthansa.
Volume (Year): 32 (1998)
Issue (Month): 6 (August)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/547/description#description|
|Order Information:|| Postal: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/supportfaq.cws_home/regional|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Caves, Douglas W & Christensen, Laurits R & Diewert, W Erwin, 1982. "Multilateral Comparisons of Output, Input, and Productivity Using Superlative Index Numbers," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(365), pages 73-86, March.
- Good, David H. & Roller, Lars-Hendrik & Sickles, Robin C., 1995. "Airline efficiency differences between Europe and the US: Implications for the pace of EC integration and domestic regulation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 508-518, February.
- Christensen, Laurits R & Jorgenson, Dale W, 1969. "The Measurement of U.S. Real Capital Input, 1929-1967," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 15(4), pages 293-320, December.
- Good, D.H. & Nadiri, M.I. & Roller, L.H. & Sickles, R., 1992.
"Efficiency and Productivity Growth Comparisons of European and U.S. Air Carriers : A First Look at the Data,"
92-22, C.V. Starr Center for Applied Economics, New York University.
- David Good & M. Nadiri & Lars-Hendrik Röller & Robin Sickles, 1993. "Efficiency and productivity growth comparisons of European and U.S. Air carriers: A first look at the data," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 115-125, June.
- Robert Summers & Alan Heston, 1991. "The Penn World Table (Mark 5): An Expanded Set of International Comparisons, 1950–1988," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 106(2), pages 327-368.
- Encaoua, David, 1991. "Liberalizing European airlines : Cost and factor productivity evidence," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 109-124, March.
- Baltagi, Badi H & Griffin, James M & Rich, Daniel P, 1995. "Airline Deregulation: The Cost Pieces of the Puzzle," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 36(1), pages 245-60, February.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:transa:v:32:y:1998:i:6:p:407-422. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.