Simple answer: the government, airlines, and shareholders? But local residents and other stakeholders also voice their views about Schiphol, even using litigation. Niall Buissing's PhD research shows how the aviation debate has become caught between fragmented powers and conflicting interests.
Schiphol as a lens
In the early days, airlines were often state-owned, but over time market forces and international competition became increasingly important. Today, a growing number of stakeholders seek to influence the course of the aviation sector. This trend is clearest in the debates related to Schiphol. For years, the Netherlands national airport has been at the centre of heated discussions about excessive noise levels, climate impact and capacity reduction. However, according to Buissing, the conflict is about more than just one single airport. Schiphol serves as a lens though which broader developments in the aviation sector can be observed.
'The position of Schiphol in the Netherlands is quite unique,' he says. 'Though a relatively small country, we have a major international airport and a national airline that has an expansive, global outlook.'
At the same time, residents are directly affected by noise and emissions, nature organisations invoke environmental regulations, and public authorities occupy multiple roles. For example, both the Dutch state and the municipality of Amsterdam are shareholders in Schiphol, but they are also responsible for regulation and for safeguarding the public interest. Each party, in its own way, seeks to steer decision-making around Schiphol in a certain direction.
'You can see that all these interests are competing simultaneously,' Buissing explains. 'Economic interests, the living environment, climate goals and international competition. They can't be easily traded off against each other.'
'Aviation is increasingly politically and socially charged'
The courtroom as an extra arena
Whereas decisions used to be held mainly in boardrooms or between states, they are now increasingly influenced and contested in the public domain and in court. In this way, stakeholders attempt to influence the direction the sector is taking.
One recent example is what is known as the 'Balanced Approach': an internationally agreed policy framework for limiting aircraft noise around airports. The Netherlands wanted to implement this by limiting the number of flights at Schiphol. However, the international approach sees reducing flights as a last resort only to be used after all other options have been explored.
'This tension explains why environmental organisations, local residents, and even airlines are taking legal action,' says Buissing. 'The courtroom is becoming a place where choices about aviation policy are tested and fought out.'
This has consequences for the public debate. 'Aviation has increasingly become a politically and socially charged issue,' he argues. 'That puts it on edge. Parties are increasingly adopting a firmer stance against each other, while the complexity of the situation calls for more attention to each other's perspectives and for what is legally and internationally feasible.'
'The courtroom becomes a place where choices about aviation policy are tested and fought out'
How many flights do we actually need?
One of the hardest questions to answer is how many flights the Netherlands actually needs. What does maintaining an international airport of this size involve? And how do you balance the costs and the benefits?
'That's hard to measure,' Buissing says. 'Some parties believe that Schiphol could operate fewer flights, but how do you determine in advance where the tipping point lies? Reducing flights could have consequences for KLM's business model and network, which relies heavily on transfer passengers - people who transfer to intercontinental flights via Schiphol. So, this involves the international solidarity of the Netherlands.'
'The discussion needs to shift,' Buissing continues. 'It's not only about what choices are available, but who's prepared to make those choices.'
More sustainable aviation
Ultimately, aviation policy is all about balancing competing interests, where interests sometimes conflict. According to Buissing, it is up to politicians to make those choices. 'Aviation appeals to the imagination,' he says, 'while the underlying international agreements and the room that countries do or do not have to take their own measures often remain invisible.'
According to Buissing, it is also important to take a broader view of sustainability in aviation: not only in terms of climate and the environment, but also in terms of economic resilience and strategic independence. 'The core of my research is not that there is one correct outcome,' he says. 'It's about a better understanding of the interests that are at play. Only then can we have a more honest and constructive debate about the future of flying.'
