Deregulation Process in Sweden: The role of the State and Swedavia Case Studies Lappeenranta 23 rd April, 2014
Jul 19, 2015
Deregulation Process in Sweden: The role of the State and Swedavia
Case Studies
Lappeenranta 23rd April, 2014
Role of the Swedish State and Swedavia
“Aviation has a unique position when it comes to creating effective travel options for longer trips, both within the country and abroad, and that has been an important starting point for my suggestions. By dividing the airports in different categories, the state resources, on a number of airports, will help to strengthen national and international accessibility”.
Governmental one‐man investigator Christina Rogestam.
Role of the Swedish State and Swedavia
"In order to develop a smaller airport it requires a strong commitment from the region, politicians and industry and that they are working closely together……,”
Luftfartsverkets General Director Lars Rekke.
"When the municipality has full control it also increases the possibilities for developing the airport. It has a large interest in the airport and will be able to make adaptations to local and regional development in a completely different way than the Luftfartsverket. During our negotiations, the municipality has proven to be a tough counterparty that pushed us properly, while discussions proceeded in a very good spirit. “
Luftfartsverkets, Chief of Negotiations, Olle Sundin
Break up of LFV aviation monopoly in 2009
LFV to keep on technical aspects only
New company (Swedavia) established to manage / run the airports
Also a political decision to sell some of the LFV / Swedavia airports
Recognition of uncompetitive and highly expensive model
Swedish Timeline
The Sale Process – Regional Perspective
Regions nervous about taking on airports
Long term implications of “owning” airport not clear
Feeling that it’s a govnt. obligation
Opportunistic regions could see the benefits
Very fast negotiations resulted in quick sales
Already in 2006 KLR, NRK, HAD were sold
SLOW FAST
1. EX‐SWEDAVIA Norrkoping (2006)
Halmstad (2006)
Kalmar (2006)
Karlstad (2010)
Jönköping (2010)
Skellefteå (2010)
Ängelholm (2011)
Örnsköldsvik (2011)
Sundsvall (2013)
2. SWEDAVIA Stockholm (ARN)
Stockholm (BMA)
Gothenburg
Malmö
Luleå
Umeå
Östersund
Visby
Ronneby
Kiruna
Sweden Status Quo
Ownership Models ‐ SwedenÄngelholm 100% privateReal estate makes it profitablePEAB; construction company with development plans
Jönköping Airport municipality owned Airport real estate controlled by separate municip. company
Karlstad, HalmstadMunicipality owned Considered a public “utility”
Växjö Infrastructure owned by the region and 2 municipalitiesAirport tower services in separate company
Old philosophy – did same things, in the same way
Since 2006 – no development whatsoever
Dependent on 2 carriers (BRA & NextJet – both flying to Stockholm)
No development strategy and no future vision
2015 – employed well known consultants!
Staying Still………
Took time to adapt to new ownership
Slow pace of development, but it was quite planned and deliberate
Recent years has seen change – in particular the uncertainty around SAS’s future
New strategy and now new routes: scheduled service to Berlin and increased charters
Cautious………