AVIATION, THE ECONOMY AND EQUITY

Not everyone flies

• People most likely to have flown over the last year are those earning over £30,000. (Source: A Mori Poll, commissioned by the industry pressure group Freedom to Fly, published in 2001.)
• Richer people are more likely to fly off on weekend breaks. It is these flights that will account for much of the projected growth in air travel over the next 20/30 years.
• In the last 12 months only 2 out of 5 people will have made a trip by plane. 62% will not have travelled by air.
• 12% of the population have never been on a plane.
• 53% of trips were made by just 11% of the population. (Source: Travel Trends 2000.)

Weathier people fly more
People with sufficient disposable income fly for pleasure. People on tight budgets do not fly. Lowering air fares and increasing the number of flights may attract more passengers. But people with large disposable incomes will fly more frequently than people with smaller incomes. People on tight budgets will still not be able to fly.

Wealthier flyers are subsidised by the taxpayer

People who fly are subsidised through the tax system by those who do not fly or cannot afford to fly. The annual value of the tax subsidies will increase from around £9 billion per year to £16 billion per year if forecast passenger demand is to be met. See aviation and taxation briefing.

People on low-incomes do not fly off on weekends abroad. They make fewer air journeys than anybody else. They therefore receive the least benefits from the subsidised fares.

People on tight budgets depend on public services that would benefit more if aviation subsidies were re-directed to health, education, care of the elderly, etc. aviation and taxation briefing.

The poorest people often suffer the most

Some of the very poorest in the UK living under the flight paths and around airports. It is they who suffer the worse environmental consequences of aviation. They are also the least likely to be able to move away. Curbing air travel would improve the quality of their daily lives.

Curbing air travel would have environmental gains for poor people in developing countries as it is those countries that are the big losers from global warming, to which emissions from aircraft is a growing contributor. Many of the same people are trapped under flight paths.

Myth of the poor

The aviation lobby claims that if prices were to go up reflect the real costs and that the subsidies were removed, poorer people would be prevented from going on holiday. This is not true. As shown above, poorer people would gain most from realistic air fares because they would benefit from the subsidies currently going to the well-off via the aviation industry. Poorer people would have the choice to spend their extra money on holidays - which may or may not involve flying.

Conclusions

Subsidised flying is socially and economically divisive. People who fly for pleasure should pay the full economic and environmental cost.

Links to other pages on economics and the airport studies

Links to related pages