Transport geography refers to the investigation of the movement of people, goods, and information, and the connection between these factors Rodrigue, Comtois & Slack (2013). As a special branch or specialty in geography, transport geography deals with specification of space on the surface of the earth, particularly the location, substance, form, and effects that transportation ha on processes, land cover, and land use. The aim of transport geography is to detect and describe the transportation of people, goods, and information across the earth (Rodrigue, Comtois & Slack, 2013). Transport geography also seeks to identify and explain the effects of transportation on the different aspects of life. The importance of transport geography is that it contributes to development in economy of a geographical location.
Transport geography also contributes to the urban and rural planning, as it helps the planners identify essential infrastructure that furthers development. When equipped with information regarding infrastructure, the planners are in a position to plan for the future of a geographical area. The aim of this paper is to review four journal articles from reputable journals on transport geography. The analysis will not only contribute to better understanding about transport geography, but will also sharpen my skills in the identification of relevant materials from journals, and the subsequent analysis of these materials to inform an identified concept in transport geography.
Article 1
Christidis, P. (2016). Four shades of Open Skies: European Union and four main external
partners. Journal of Transport Geography, 50, 105-114.
This article by Christidis was accessed from the Journal of Transport Geography. The article sought to analyze the status of the EU’s aviation relations with four important partners: USA, Russia, Morocco and Turkey. According to this article, there are many obstacles to the liberalization of aviation, including factors from the supply side. Also, spatial distribution for aviation is largely influenced by the condition of the different markets in the aviation industry. Most importantly, the operations of aviation are hindered by the varying regulations and policies from different countries.
The policies, according to Christidis, hamper the possibility of an open international aviation. However, alliances in aviation are continually being encouraged by the hub and spoke networks, which improve the concentration of competition in the aviation industry. The external aviation policy of the European Union is founded on the Open Skies Agreement, according to this article. These agreements form the basis for the liberalization of aviation for the rest of the world. The aviation relations between the EU and the rest of the countries in the world are specific to each country, and fundamentally based on the policies and regulations of each country.
The article hypothesizes that the specific characteristics of each market determines the EU policy on aviation liberalization as seen by the distribution of the EU’s policies in its geographical external market. According to Christidis (2007), socio-economic status, demography, politics, and the geography of an area facilitates spatial distribution. The four different countries analyzed in this article bear different socio-economic status, demography, politics, and geography. Therefore, the countries are sufficient to analyze the impacts that different aspects have on spatial distribution as stipulated in the EU’s policies and Open Skies regulations.
Christidis (2007) concluded that liberalization in the four countries included in the study provides sufficient empirical evidence to support the hypothesis that that the specific characteristics of each market affects the EU policy on aviation liberalization in the different markets. Opening of an international open air transportation market puts demand on competition in air travel, in addition to increasing demand for the air services. However, achieving the liberalization may require more than standard policies and regulations. Christidis (2007) observed that removal of capacity limitations and opening of a market that utilizes standard rules could be an effective strategy of increasing competitiveness.
Article 2
Pitfield, D. E. (2009). The assessment of the EU–US Open Skies Agreement: The counterfactual
and other difficulties. Journal of Air Transport Management, 15(6), 308-314.
The impact of EU-US open skies agreement is an awaited phenomenon, as it is expected to bring many benefits in the spatial distribution of air transportation. According to Pitfield (2009), the Open Skies Agreement is expected to bring a myriad of benefits, including lower costs of air fare, increase in passenger volume, and an increase in consumer choice and welfare.
Since the implementation of the Open Skies Agreement, there have been visible supply-side changes, although wider judgments haven’t been made. Pitfield (2009) sought to offer some insight into data that will be required to make these and other wider judgments and discuss some methodological difficulties that may hinder this process. By the time this article was written, the Open Skies Agreement had been in effect for only one year, and Pitfield (2009) posited that it was too soon to make a verdict. However, there are some visible effects that need to be investigated further, as there is insufficient information regarding the impacts of the agreements on various aspects of air transportation.
Pitfield identifies two major features of the Open Skies Agreements; lifting the restrictions on rights of routes, which facilitates the movement of airlines from EU to US cities. This feature also allows for the movement of airlines from the US/EU to non-EU countries that are members of the ECAA. The second feature is Foreign Ownership, which states that US companies can only own 49% of voting rights in the EU airlines. These features haven’t been identified in the previous article by Christidis (2007), but are necessary in understanding the impacts that the Open Skies Agreements have had on spatial distributions in air transportation.
Similar observations to those of Chritidis regarding the benefits of Open Skies Agreements were made by Pitfield. The findings of both articles indicate that Open Skies Agreements have the potential to improve customer satisfaction, increase customer volume, and reduce air fare. Therefore, it is prudent to conclude that Open Skies Agreements have brought many positive benefits, especially to the economy of the different countries involved. The information in this article is essential in analyzing the transport geography, specifically the challenges facing transport geography in the airline industry.
Article 3
Button, K. (2009). The impact of US–EU “Open Skies” agreement on airline market structures
and airline networks. Journal of Air Transport Management, 15(2), 59-71.
The growth of the economy between different countries has always been hampered by the restrictive limitations regarding international travelling. Liberalization of the international air transportation has however presented different countries with the solutions to this problem. Bilateral air transportation services have been replaced by the Open skies Agreements. Button (2009) carried out an investigation to establish the effects that the EU-US Open skies agreements has in the structure of airlines and on airline networks.
The Open Skies Agreements are not the first attempts at improving the airline structures between different countries. There have been many changes intended to improve the airline networks, including improvement of air navigations systems, development of new online aircrafts, enhancements of the use and funding of airports, and major structural changes to the airline industry. All these challenges have been implemented with the sole aim of improving transport geography, specifically in the airline industry. Burron (2009) observes that liberalization in the airline industry has always been inhibited by the varying laws and policies that govern the different countries.
The overly regulated airline markets and structures have also resulted to the observed limitation in transport geography in airline industry. This is because domestic markets are regulated by internal structures, which Button observes are not only difficult to instate change, but also greatly differ from other domestic markets. These challenges further complicate the possibility of liberalization of the airline networks and structures. These complications and challenges have consequently hampered the economic development between different countries, in addition to limiting competitiveness in airline industry.
Button concludes that liberalization in air transportation has produced significant economic benefits for all the involved countries. However, unlike the other two articles that majorly analyzed the benefits of liberalization, Button (2009) takes a different approach to identify even challenges that have accompanied the liberalization. Due to the enhanced competitiveness among airlines, inferior local airlines have been put out of business as a result of liberalization. Also, Button posits that while some consumers have enjoyed lower air fare, others have not experienced any changes in the price of transportation.
Similar to the previously analyzed articles, it is clear that the open skies agreements have opened up business, leading to better economy in the participating countries. This article is significant to this analysis, as it presents a different approach and view on the effect of transport geography. The article also adds to the body of knowledge on the effects that the US-EU open skies agreements have had of the various aspects of transport geography. The information in this article can be useful in delineating a research question for further study on the effect of open skies agreements.
Article 4
Valentina, M., Paolo, M., & Renato, R. (2014). EU-US Open Skies Agreement: what is changed
in the north transatlantic skies? Transportation Journal, 53(3), 305-329.
The US-EU open skies agreement has had potent implications in the North Transatlantic market since its implementation that was instituted in 2008. The purpose of this article by Valentina, Paolo and Renato (2014) was to compare nonstop and two step schedule flights in an off peak week. The comparison was intended to provide information on whether the open skies agreements has availed more choices for travelers for the transatlantic travelers, and whether the agreements have led to improved commercial exploitation agreements. The article also sought to evaluate the impact that the Us-EU agreements have had on competition, alliances, and operations in the airport operations.
Valentina, Paolo and Renato (2014) observed that the previous bilateral air service agreements were inhibitive to economic growth and braoder platform for selection of carriers by customers. These observations are similar to those of Button (2009) and Pitfield (2009), who observed that bilateral agreements were limiting to economic development. The introduction of open skies agreements, according to Valentino, Paolo and Renato (2014) has brought significant changes and improvements to the economic development between the EU and the US. In addition, the open skies agreements have led to more choices from which the consumers can choose for transportation.
This movement of people has also led to improved economy, as people can easily travel or do business across different countries without being limited by mobility. Some of the industries that have immensely gained from the liberalization of the air transport industry include hotel and tourism and the labor market industry. The competition between different providers has also encouraged collaboration and coordination between the different providers on scheduling and pricing of services (Valentino, Paolo & Renato, 2014). As a result, customers are enjoying better services characterized by efficiency and timeliness.
This article also analyzes the negative impacts that liberalization has had on various stakeholders. The high competition has forced some of the local companies out of business, and this observation has been echoed by Button (2009). This perspective of the effects of the US-EU open skies agreements gives us a different view to analyze its implementation. This article is fundamental as it presents us with vital information regarding the effects of open skies agreements between the US and the EU. The findings of this study are similar to those of other authors. The article is also essential in understanding the dynamics of transport geography, and how polices and regulations affect these dynamics.
Conclusion
In conclusion, transport geography has many impacts on the operations of many activities on the surface of the earth. The interconnections of various infrastructural elements that form transport geography determine the effectiveness of these operations. The movement of people, goods and services, and information is the foundation of transport geography. This paper analyzed four journal articles related to transport geography. More specifically, the analysis focused on the effects that open skies agreements have had on various aspects of transport geography. From the analysis, it is evident that the open skies agreements have significantly impacted the economy, market competitiveness, and collaboration and coordination of services among the various providers. Although there are some negative impacts of the agreements, there are more positive outcomes of the agreements than there are the negative outcomes.
References
Button, K. (2009). The impact of US–EU “Open Skies” agreement on airline market
structures and airline networks. Journal of Air Transport Management, 15(2), 59-71.
Christidis, P. (2016). Four shades of Open Skies: European Union and four main external
partners. Journal of Transport Geography, 50, 105-114.
Pitfield, D. E. (2009). The assessment of the EU–US Open Skies Agreement: The
counterfactual and other difficulties. Journal of Air Transport Management, 15(6),
308-314.
Rodrigue, J. P., Comtois, C., & Slack, B. (2013). The geography of transport systems. London: Routledge.
Valentina, M., Paolo, M., & Renato, R. (2014). EU-US Open Skies Agreement: what is
changed in the north transatlantic skies? Transportation Journal, 53(3), 305-329.
