Journal of Air Transport Management 90 (2021) 101946

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Air Transport Management

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jairtraman

Air traffic forecast and its impact on runway capacity. A System

Dynamics approach
Diana C. Tascón a, *, Oscar Díaz Olariaga b
a
Universidad Distrital Francisco José de Caldas, Facultad de Ingeniería, Carrera 7, # 40B-53, Bogotá, Colombia
b
Universidad Santo Tomás, Facultad de Ingeniería Civil (Grupo de Investigación GIFIC), Carrera 9 #51-11, Bogotá, Colombia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: The uninterrupted growth of air traffic in Colombia has been reinforced since the 1990s by a public policy of
Airport liberalization of airspace, and by redirecting public and private investment towards the modernization and
Runway capacity updating of airport infrastructures, giving in concession the busiest airports in the country, 19 to date. In the
System Dynamics
commercial air sector, and in this same period, the flag airline was privatized and new air operators, including
Liberalization
Air transport demand
low cost airlines (LCC), entered the market. Since 2012, air fares are completely deregulated. Consequently, in
Bogotá-El Dorado the last two and a half decades, passenger transport in Colombia grew by 863%. This important growth rate has
been driven and led by the country’s main airport, the Bogotá-El Dorado International Airport (BOG), in the
capital of Colombia. But some technical reports consider the airport will reach its maximum capacity in the short
term mainly because of its inability to expand its airfield (runway system). Due to this circumstance, the
aeronautical public authority of Colombia gave course to the planning, design and construction of a new airport
(complementary) on the outskirts of the city of Bogotá, which will enter the design phase in 2026/2027.
Therefore, it is considered suitable the development of a traffic forecast for BOG in the medium term and to
evaluate the impact of future demand on the runway capacity of the airport. Then, and due to the complexity of
the air transport forecast, the use of System Dynamics (SD), is considered to be appropriate as an analysis
approach. System Dynamics is based on feedback control theory and it is equipped with mathematical computer
simulation models, which uses linear and non-linear differential equations. The results suggests a need to expand
the airport case study (runway system) after mid-2019, where the current capacity utilization factor is around
100% and two to three runways will be required for the normal operation; after October 2022 the number
runways required is set to three until the last period simulated (2023).

1. Introduction Colombia gave direction to the planning, design and construction of a

The uninterrupted growth of air traffic in Colombia has been rein­
forced since the 1990s by a public policy of liberalization of airspace,
and by redirecting public and private investment towards the modern­
ization of airport infrastructures (Díaz Olariaga, 2016, 2017). The public
policies of the air sector led to the fact that in the last two and a half
decades passenger transport in Colombia grew by 863% (Aerocivil,
2019a,b). This important growth rate has been driven and led by the
country’s main airport, Bogotá-El Dorado International Airport (here­
inafter BOG). But some technical reports estimate that the airport will
reach its maximum capacity in the short term mainly because of its
inability to expand its airfield (currently two runways) (Aerocivil,
2016). Due to this circumstance, the aeronautical public authority of
new airport (complementary) to the outskirts of the city of Bogotá,
which is estimated to enter into operations in 2026/2027 (ANI, 2018).
Then, it is considered opportune to calculate a traffic forecast for
BOG in the medium term (6 years) and to evaluate the impact of future
demand on the runway capacity of the airport. Due to the complexity of
the forecast of air transport, the use of the System Dynamics (hereinafter
SD) approach is founded appropriate for the present investigation, since
with SD it is possible to develop a model to forecast the demand of
operations on runway and evaluate its impact over the capacity of the
BOG runway system. Basically, once a set of variables of level, flow and
parameters that must be included in the model are defined, the limits of
the model, the subsystems, the causality structures and the level flows
will be established, and then we proceed to quantify the model and run

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: dctasconh@udistrital.edu.co (D.C. Tascón), OscarDiazOlariaga@usantotomas.edu.co (O. Díaz Olariaga).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2020.101946
Received 18 November 2019; Received in revised form 9 April 2020; Accepted 27 September 2020
Available online 10 October 2020
0969-6997/© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
D.C. Tascón and O. Díaz Olariaga
Fig. 1. Projection of the demand for operations (takeoffs/landings) according to forecasts for 2012 (F2012) and 2015 (F2015). Source: Aerocivil (2014), 2016.
the simulation referred to the airport object of the case study. So that, in
accordance with the principles of SD, a better understanding of the
behavior of the system is achieved.
2. Literature review
There are many studies that address the various aspects of the
liberalization of the air transport market (or industry). These studies
deal with issues such as the spatial effects of deregulation on connec­
tivity and accessibility (Díaz Olariaga and Carvajal, 2016; O’Connor,
2003; Bowen, 2002, 2000; Ivy, 1995; Chou, 1993), market competition
and consolidation (Goetz, 2002; Goetz and Sutton, 1998; Debbage,
1993; Graham, 1993), network structures (Díaz Olariaga and Zea, 2018;
O’Kelly, 1998; Shaw and Ivy, 1994; Shaw, 1993), airfare prices (Vowles,
2006; Stavins, 2001; Oum et al., 1996), and airline alliances (Fan et al.,
2001; Oum et al., 2001; Vowles, 2000; Youssef and Hansen, 1994).
Other studies focus on the analysis of diverse situations (e.g. demand
behavior), in the post liberalization context, particularized in certain
countries or regions; in addition to the countless jobs in relation to the
United States, we have, for example, from Europe (Eriksson and Pet­
tersson, 2012; Fan, 2006; Goetz and Graham, 2004; Thompson, 2002;
Graham, 1998, 1997; Ivy, 1995; Dennis, 1994), from Canada (Oum,
1991), from Australia (Hooper, 1998; Forsyth, 1991), from Asia (Bowen,
2000; Bowen and Leinbach, 1995), from Brazil (Oliveira et al., 2016;
Koo and Lohmann, 2013), from Central and Eastern Europe (Jankiewicz
and Huderek-Glapska, 2015), from Africa (Njoya et al., 2018; Abate,
2016; Dobruszkes et al., 2016; Njoya, 2015; Surovitskikh and Lubbe,
2015; Ismaila et al., 2014; Daramola and Jaja, 2011), and finally from
Colombia, where there is only one related research, that of Díaz Olariaga
et al. (2017). From the point of view of public policy, Koo and Lohmann
(2013) examine the relationship between the volatility of aeronautical
public policy and the spatial evolution of the air transport supply; these
authors focus on the domestic aviation sector of two comparative cases,
Australia and Brazil. On the other hand, Rolim et al. (2016) analyze the
development of the demand in recently privatized airports, applied to
the case of Brazil. Changes in traffic concentration at airports as a result
of liberalization have also been analyzed (Díaz Olariaga and Zea, 2018;
Koo et al., 2013; Halpern, 2011; Suau-Sánchez and Burghouwt, 2011;
2
Journal of Air Transport Management 90 (2021) 101946
Derudder and Witlox, 2009; Dobruszkes, 2009; Papatheodorou and
Arvanitis, 2009).
Concerning the methodologies used for forecasting, the air transport
industry has been addressing the issue of traffic prognosis for at least six
decades, but academics began to present formal studies and research
since much less time, about three decades ago. During this time, a va­
riety of models have been developed to forecast the demand of pas­
sengers. The most used prediction methods can be classified into two
large groups: economic models and time-series models (Dantas et al.,
2017). The economic methods focus on the correlation between the
demand of passengers and multiple variables, which are considered as
the influence of changes in the economic environment and the traffic
system. The forecast models are established through a series of equa­
tions. Commonly used models include regression analysis (Abed et al.,
2001), causality test (Fernandes and Pacheco, 2010), logit model (Gar­
row and Koppelman, 2004), and gravitational models (Grosche et al.,
2007). Time series methods primarily rely on historical data to predict
by extracting the intrinsic relationship between current data and series
of past observations. The various time-series models have been used to
forecast passenger demand, such as smoothing techniques (Samagaio
and Wolters, 2010), the adapted Markov model (Chin and Tay, 2001),
ARIMA/SARIMA (Tsui et al., 2014), seasonal adjustment method (Aston
and Koopman, 2006), etc. However, due to the non-linear characteristic
of passenger demand, economic and time-series approaches are severely
criticized due to their limited and poor effective forecasting capacity
(Tsui et al., 2014). Therefore, some academics try to explore other
methodologies, such as those based on artificial intelligence (for
example, neural networks), which are characterized by self-adaptation
and non-linearity, and have the ability to map arbitrary functions (Jin
et al., 2020; Xiao et al., 2014).
Finally, not many academics have used System Dynamics to research
the management of air transport. Lyneis (2000) used SD models to
forecast aircraft demand. Miller and Clarke (2007) used SD models to
evaluate investment strategies in aviation infrastructure. Suryani et al.
(2010) established an SD model to simulate the expansion of passenger
terminal capacity and forecast passenger demand. And Suryani et al.
(2012) establishes an approach, via SD, to forecast air cargo demand
related to terminal capacity expansion.
D.C. Tascón and O. Díaz Olariaga Journal of Air Transport Management 90 (2021) 101946

Table 1 traffic, and in demand, was gradually absorbed over time, and most
Projection of the demand for operations (takeoffs/landings) according to fore­ especially by the last two expansions of the airport, 2007–2013 and
casts for 2012 (F2012) and 2015 (F2015). Source: Aerocivil (2014), 2016. 2015–2018. However, these two extensions did not imply any action on
Year Operations demand (peak Required Necessary the airport’s runway system.
hour) capacity runways In another order, projections of demand and required capacity, made
2021 120 118–124 3 in the last two updates of the airport’s Master Plan (2012, 2015), are
2026 137 136–144 4 shown in Fig. 1 and Table 1.
2031 154 186–196 5 As can be seen in the projections in Table 1, starting in 2021, a new
2041 184 186–196 5
runway (the third in the system) should already be available to respond
to the projected demand and even more runways (until a five runways
system) in the long term (2041) if it is not intended to stop the growth of
the airport. And this increase in the airfield (runways, taxiways, etc.)
Table 2 would lead to the mandatory development of new infrastructures and
Modeling activities, methods and products. Source: Tascón Hoyos (2017). related facilities. This situation has led airport planners to demand, ur­
gently, for a new airport expansion, especially its runway system; but for
Activity Method Product
various reasons (mainly lack of land availability and severe environ­
Definition and structuring It focuses on the definition and Conceptual mental restrictions), any new expansion of the airport is practically
of the dynamic behavior elaboration of a system mapping
unfeasible. For all these reasons, and to respond to the anticipated de­
of the system mapping that involves the
following elements: mand, the Colombian aeronautical public authority has launched the
- Limits of the model development of a new airport (15 km from the current one), now known
- Subsystems as El Dorado II (Aerocivil, 2016), which is expected to start operations in
- Causality structures
2026/2027.
- Flows and levels
Quantification of the The quantification implies: Quantified model
model - Definition of decision rules 4. Methodology
that govern the system.
- Estimation of parameters, 4.1. Approach and methodological references
correlations and initial
conditions.
- Execution of consistency This article seeks to evaluate the impact of demand forecasts on the
tests management of runway capacity, taking Bogotá-El Dorado International
Simulation Simulation and analysis of the Results of the Airport in Bogotá, Colombia as a case study. The situation described was
behavior of response variables simulation and its
faced with the use of simulation under the System Dynamics approach,
analysis
which was developed in 1961 by Jay Forrester in the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology (MIT), one of the challenges posed by building
models under a SD approach is elaborating reliable operational func­
tions, including wide ranges of variables so as to capture likely behaviors
that have perhaps never been observed before (Forrester, 1968); this
3. Case study
enables us to assess the outcome resulting from variable interaction so as
to anticipate policy-related long-term effects. It also enables us to sys­
Bogotá-El Dorado International Airport (H24, IATA code: BOG; ICAO
tematically explore new strategies and improve our understanding of the
code: SKBO), located in the city of Bogotá (capital of Colombia), and the
system (Sterman, 2000).
only airport that serves the city, is publicly owned but has been oper­
SD incorporates a set of tools that allow the understanding of com­
ating under concession since 2007 by the (private) operator OPAIN, S.A.
plex environments; tools such as causality diagrams, that encourage
(Díaz Olariaga, 2017), the year in which the airport experienced the
systemic thinking among managers of processes, capture the dynamic
start of a major expansion of its infrastructure and facilities (mainly the
complexity of a given system and provide the considerable advantage of
new passenger terminal building and accesses on the land side), with an
simulating the model to evaluate the interaction results and thus
investment of USD 650 million, and which culminated in 2013. In 2015,
anticipate the long-term collateral effects of decision-making policies
a second expansion began, which ended in 2018, this latest expansion
can be anticipated before they are executed in the system (Sterman,
involved actions on both land side and air side.
2000).
The airport (located 2548 m above sea level) has an approximate
There is a proposed SD model (Suryani et al., 2010), which was taken
area of 975 ha, and is 12 km from the city center of Bogotá. The airport
as a reference for the described purpose, in it the authors forecast and
has a system of two parallel runways, 13L/31R (north runway) and 13R/
analyze the demand of air passengers with the aim of evaluating the
31L (south runway), both for takeoff and landing operations, and each
future requirements of runway capacity as well as passenger terminal for
with a length and width of 3800 × 45 m (AIP, 2019); the reference code
Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport (TPE). The use of SD allowed
of the aerodrome is 4-E. Statistics for 2018 indicate that the airport
them to evaluate some scenarios of track capacity expansion.
mobilized 32.7 million total passengers (domestic + intl.), 741,000 tons
The use of Systems Dynamics, in the modeling and simulation of
of air cargo and managed 333,000 operations (takeoffs/landings)
complex systems, implies the execution of a set of tasks that are syn­
(Aerocivil, 2019a,b).
thesized in Table 2.
BOG has led and promoted the development of air traffic nationwide
In general, the use of the runway depends on the demand of flights
in the last two and a half decades, from the year of the liberalization of
that are affected by external and internal factors. The demand for air
air transport in Colombia (1991) to 2018, total passenger traffic grew
transport tends to evolve based on changes in prices and economic
more than seven times (Aerocivil, 2019a,b). This superlative growth in
conditions. There are several factors that affect the demand for air

3
D.C. Tascón and O. Díaz Olariaga Journal of Air Transport Management 90 (2021) 101946

Table 3
Correlation indexes between preliminary variables.Source: Authors.

travel, which are basically socio-economic and demographic (Suryani

Table 4 et al., 2012). Accordingly, the following section provides and explains
Socio-economic indicators to be included in the model. Source: Authors.
the structure that was used to simulate air traffic forecasting and its
Indicators impact on runway capacity requirements.
GDP per capita
Population 4.2. Definition and structuring of the dynamic behavior of the system
Total exports
Total imports
Consumer price index (CPI) In the model developed, the analysis focused on the impact of de­
Exchange rate (USD to COP) mand forecasts on runway capacity management in the terminal area, so
it was decided to work the forecast directly in terms of demand for
landings and take-offs (flights), for which data and statistics were taken
from the Aerocivil (2019a,b), the socio-economic data was obtained
from the Bank of the Republic of Colombia, Banco de la República de
Table 5
Colombia (2019) and DANE (2019).
Variables and parameters of the model. Source: Authors.
Initially, we started with a set of variables (both input and response),
Variable/Parameter Type Observations/source
which are considered to be typically relevant for air traffic forecast, thus,
Runway capacity Auxiliary Historical data a preliminary analysis consisted in determining the correlation between
Year Auxiliary Counts the years of operation that are these variables, obtaining the results shown in Table 3.
being simulated
Flights/month Auxiliary Equation of the model, built from
Concentrating on the variable to predict in the model, which means
historical data the demand for runway operations (flights), only the variables with the
Runway capacity Auxiliary Equation of the model highest incidence were included. Also in order to simplify the model and
utilization (%) avoid redundancies, those variables that are highly explained by others
GDP per capita Auxiliary Equation of the model, built from
were in some cases excluded (as in the case of GDP and GDP per capita,
historical data
Total exports Auxiliary Equation of the model, built from where only GDP per capita remained). As a conclusion of this analysis
historical data the socioeconomic indicators listed in Table 4 were incorporated.
Total imports Auxiliary Equation of the model, built from Even when a low correlation is observed between the number of
historical data flights and the exchange rate, it will remain in modeling since it is
Consumer price index Auxiliary Equation of the model, built from
(CPI) historical data
conceptually relevant for the case studied. The variables and parameters
Exchange rate (USD to Auxiliary Equation of the model, built from contemplated in the modeling are specified in Table 5, along with their
COP) historical data type (according to SD), some observations and the source (if applicable).
Average capacity per Parameter Historical data In terms of SD types of variables, it is worthy to clarify that: level
runway
(stocks) variables represent an accumulation of people or things in a
Existing runways Parameter Historical data
Required runways factor Auxiliary Equation of the model specific location or with a specific condition in a system, an element of a
Increase in required Flow Equation of the model system that accumulates or drains over time. Stocks are the memory of a
runways system and are only affected by flows (Ford, 2018). Meanwhile the flows
Additional runways Level Equation of the model (rates) are the movement of people or things between stocks within a
required
system boundary or across the model boundary and thereby into or out
Total required runways Auxiliary Equation of the model
of the system. Flows represent activity, in contrast to stocks that
represent the state of the system (Ford, 2018). Auxiliary (converter),
have the property to take certain values and change instantly. Finally
parameters are factors that are considered constant, during the

4
D.C. Tascón and O. Díaz Olariaga Journal of Air Transport Management 90 (2021) 101946

Table 6
Representation of some relationships and model feedback cycles. Source: Authors.
Type of relationship Graphic representation

This fraction of the model indicates that as the number of flights increases, the runway utilization increase. And an
increase in runway capacity would mean a decrease in runway utilization.

Here the influence of the passage of time (year), on variables such as the CPI, GDP per capita and the demand for
operations is represented; which is incremental for all these cases

This fraction of the conceptual map emphasizes on the variables that impact the flights per month. It is shown that an
increase in any of the related variables would lead to an increase in the number of flights

Finally are shown causality relationships such as:

If current the existing runways increases, the amount of additional runways required will decrease.
If the average capacity per runway increases, the required runways factor will decrease. Other relations can be
observed in the graphic.

computation span of one model run.
4.2.1. Conceptual mapping of the model
Using SD causality diagrams, we proceed to propose the relationships
that exist between the variables included within the scope of the model.
In this sense, Table 6 contains the description of some of the causality
relationships considered.
4.3. Quantification of the model
The data taken as the main input to quantify the model are between
the first of January of 2000, which in the simulation corresponds to
period 1; and December 31st of 2017, which in the simulation corre­
sponds to period 216. The flights, both departures and arrivals, that
involved the Bogotá-El Dorado International Airport (BOG), were
contemplated, as well as parameters like the capacity of its runways.
The runway capacity data comes from Aerocivil (2010b), and cor­
responds to the operating capacity averages given in annual terms and
taken for convenience of the model to their monthly equivalences. In
order to forecast the behavior of the demand for operations, monthly
data is available from January 2000 to December 2017. The behavior of
the total execution of monthly operations is reflected in Fig. 2.
Fig. 3 shows the annual behavior of this variable, this allows us to
identify an annual trend of the presented data.
By using data analysis and in several cases linear regressions, the
relationships between variables and the equations that described them
were established, the general structures of the functional relations be­
tween the variables are shown in Table 7.
The quantified model was simulated by using Vensim®, software for
SD. The flows and levels diagram related with the quantified model is
shown in Fig. 4, the obtained results are presented in the next section.
5. Results
Once the model was quantified, the simulation was carried out in
order to forecast the runway capacity needs for the airport case study in
the medium term, considering the close and direct relationship between
this need and the number of flights executed by a time period (month),
both the result of this variable and the number of runways required will
be presented.
To evaluate the performance of the model with respect to the his­
torical data behavior, a simulation, for the period between January 2000
and December 2017, was run. Fig. 5 illustrates the average of monthly
flights per year for both, the historical available data and the simulation.

5
D.C. Tascón and O. Díaz Olariaga Journal of Air Transport Management 90 (2021) 101946

Fig. 2. Total monthly flights between 2000 and 2017. Source: Aerocivil (2019a,b).

Fig. 3. Total number of flights per year. Source: Aerocivil (2019a,b).

6
D.C. Tascón and O. Díaz Olariaga Journal of Air Transport Management 90 (2021) 101946

Table 7
General functional relation for variables in the model. Source: Authors.
Variable Functional relation

Runway capacity f(Average capacity per runway, Existing runways)

Flights/month f(Year, Exchange rate, Consumer price index (CPI), GDP per capita,
Total exports, Total imports)
Runway capacity utilization (%) f(Flights /month, Runway capacity)
GDP per capita f(Year)
Total exports f(Total imports)
Total imports f(GDP per capita)
Consumer price index (CPI) f(Year)
Average capacity per runway It is a parameter
Existing runways It is a parameter
Required runways factor f(Flights /month, Average capacity per runway)
Increase in required runways f(Existing runways, Required runways factor, Additional
runways required)
Additional runways required f(Increase in required runways)
Total required runways f(Existing runways, Additional runways required)

In addition to this graphic which allows comparing and noticing a
similar tendency for simulated and historical data, and with the inten­
tion to validate the ability of the model to represent the behavior of this
variable, the simulation results and historical data were contrasted
under MAPE (Mean Absolute Percentage Error) calculation, a small
MAPE value indicates that forecasts have a higher likelihood of being
accurate (Kim and Kim, 2016; Ren and Glasure, 2009). The result is
shown in Table 8.
This MAPE can be considered good enough for the type of medium
and long-term decision to which we refer, as well as for the considerable
sensitivity interval that the availability of runways actually implies.
In order to forecast the required runway capacity, the model was
simulated considering both, a past period (between 2000 and 2017), and
a projection of six years, between January 2018 and December 2023
(periods 217 to 312 in the simulation). In the next figures the results for
the variables of greatest interest are presented. Those are, flights/month
(Fig. 6), use of runway capacity (Fig. 7), and total runways required
(Fig. 8).
The simulation suggests a need to expand the airport case study after
mid-2019, where the current capacity utilization factor is around 100%
and two to three runways will be required for the normal operation;
after October 2022, the number runways required is set to three until the
last period simulated, which corresponds to December 2023.
6. Conclusions
Air traffic forecasts are essential in airport planning for determining
future capacity requirements (runway system, taxiway, apron, terminal
building, access facilities, etc.), and where the runway system is the
most important infrastructure of the airport. Because the airport

Fig. 4. Flows and levels diagram. Source: Authors.

7
D.C. Tascón and O. Díaz Olariaga Journal of Air Transport Management 90 (2021) 101946

Fig. 5. Average monthly flights per year. Simulations vs. Real historical data. Source: Authors.

long and very long term. Therefore, regardless of the uncertainty

Table 8 element of future results and events, the airport industry requires fore­
Mean Absolute Percentage Error for Average monthy flights per casts to anticipate and anticipate future scenarios.
year. Source: Authors. With the use of System Dynamics modeling, it has been possible,
Variable MAPE through flights forecasts, to assess the degree of use of the runways for
Average monthly flights per year 8.35% the case study airport (associated with air transport in a high growth
liberalized market), as well as forecasting its runway needs in the me­
dium term. The result found is in accordance with the expansion plans
infrastructure projects are expensive and involve many resources and for this airport, which, at peak hours, is operating at the limit of its
long development and decision-making times, an understanding based capacity. With the System Dynamics approach, it was possible to
on data from future demand, provides airport planners with the neces­ incorporate into the model for the forecast of operations (flights), the
sary information for effective decision making in the short, medium, socioeconomic variables and the historical behavior that this industry

Fig. 6. Number of flights per month. Simulation between 2000 and 2023. Source: Authors.

8
D.C. Tascón and O. Díaz Olariaga Journal of Air Transport Management 90 (2021) 101946

Fig. 7. Runway utilization (%). Simulation between 2000 and 2023. Source: Authors.

Fig. 8. Required runways. Source: Authors.
has had for the case studied, in which a constant growth of the demand
for operations during the last decades is presented.
Acknowledgment
This work was partially funded by a FODEIN project (from Uni­
versidad Santo Tomás, Bogotá, Colombia).
References
Abate, M.A., 2016. Economic effects of air transport market liberalization in Africa.
Transport. Res. Part A 92, 326–337.
Abed, S.Y., Ba-Fail, A.O., Jasimuddin, S.M., 2001. An econometric analysis of
international air travel demand in Saudi Arabia. J. Air Transport. Manag. 7,
143–148.
Aerocivil, 2019a. Statistics. http://www.aerocivil.gov.co/atencion/estadisticas-de-las-a
ctividades-aeronauticas.
Aerocivil, 2019b. Declaración de Capacidad Aeropuerto Eldorado. Bogotá: Aeronáutica
Civil de Colombia.
Aerocivil, 2016. Análisis técnico de la viabilidad operacional y elaboración del plan
maestro aeroportuario para el proyecto de infraestructura El Dorado II. Bogotá:
Aeronáutica Civil de Colombia.
Aerocivil, 2014. Actualización del Plan Maestro del Aeropuerto Internacional El Dorado.
Bogotá: Aeronáutica Civil de Colombia.
AIP, 2019. AIP SKBO-Bogotá El Dorado. Bogotá: Aeronáutica Civil de Colombia.
ANI, 2018. Factibilidad Y Estructuración - APP Aeropuerto El Dorado II. Agencia Nacional
de Infraestructura, Bogotá.
Aston, J.A.D., Koopman, S.J., 2006. A non-Gaussian generalization of the airline model
for robust seasonal adjustment. J. Forecast. 25, 325–349.
Banco de la República de Colombia, 2019. Estadísticas. http://www.banrep.gov.
co/es/-estadisticas.
Bowen, J., 2002. Network change, deregulation, and access in the global airline industry.
Econ. Geogr. 78 (4), 425–439.
Bowen, J., 2000. Airline hubs in Southeast Asia: national economic development and
nodal accessibility. J. Transport Geogr. 8 (1), 25–41.
Bowen, J., Leinbach, T., 1995. The state and liberalization: the airline industry in the
East Asian NICs. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 85 (3), 468–493.
Chin, A.T.H., Tay, J.H., 2001. Developments in air transport: implications on investment
decisions, profitability and survival of Asian airlines. J. Air Transport. Manag. 7,
319–330.
Chou, Y.H., 1993. Airline deregulation and nodal accessibility. J. Transport Geogr. 1 (1),
36–46.
DANE - Departamento Administrativo Nacional de Estadística, 2019. https://www.dane.
gov.co/index.php/estadisticas-por-tema.
Dantas, T., Oliveira, F., Repolho, H., 2017. Air transportation demand forecast through
Bagging Holt Winters methods. J. Air Transport. Manag. 59, 116–123.
Daramola, A., Jaja, C., 2011. Liberalization and changing spatial configurations in
Nigeria’s domestic air transport network. J. Transport Geogr. 19, 1198–1209.
Debbage, K., 1993. U.S. airport market concentration and deconcentration. Transport. J.
47 (1), 115–136.
Dennis, N., 1994. Airline hub operations in Europe. J. Transport Geogr. 2 (4), 219–223.
Derudder, B., Witlox, F., 2009. The impact of progressive liberalization on the spatiality
of airline networks: a measurement framework based on the assessment of
hierarchical differentiation. J. Transport Geogr. 17, 276–284.
Díaz Olariaga, O., Zea, J.F., 2018. Influence of the liberalization of the air transport
industry on configuration of the traffic in the airport network. Transportation Res.
Procedia 33, 43–50.
Díaz Olariaga, O., 2017. Políticas de privatización de aeropuertos. El caso de Colombia.
Doc. Aportes Adm. Pública Gest. Estatal 29, 7–35.
Díaz Olariaga, O., Girón Amaya, E., Mora-Camino, F., 2017. Pronóstico de la demanda de
pasajeros en aeropuertos privatizados. VI Congreso Internacional de la Red
Iberoamericana de Investigación en Transporte Aéreo.10-12 octubre 2017 (Santiago
de Chile).
Díaz Olariaga, O., Carvajal, A.F., 2016. Efectos de la liberalización en la geografía del
transporte aéreo en Colombia. Cuadernos Geográficos 55 (2), 344–364.
Díaz Olariaga, O., 2016. Análisis del desarrollo reciente del transporte aéreo en
Colombia. Revista Transporte y Territorio 14, 122–143.
Dobruszkes, F., Mondou, V., Ghedira, A., 2016. Assessing the impacts of aviation
liberalisation on tourism: some methodological considerations derived from the
Moroccan and Tunisian cases. J. Transport Geogr. 50, 115–127.
Dobruszkes, F., 2009. Does liberalisation of air transport imply increasing competition?
Lessons from the European case. Transport Pol. 16, 29–39.
Eriksson, M., Pettersson, T., 2012. Adapting to liberalization: government procurement
of interregional passenger transports in Sweden, 1989–2008. J. Transport Geogr. 24,
182–188.
Fan, T., 2006. Improvements in intra-Europe inter-city flight connectivity, 1996–2004.
J. Transport Geogr. 14 (4), 273–286.
Fan, T., Vigeant-Langlois, L., Geissler, C., Bosler, B., Wilmaking, J., 2001. Evolution of
global airline strategic alliance and consolidation in the twenty-first century. J. Air
Transport. Manag. 7 (6), 349–360.
Fernandes, E., Pacheco, R.R., 2010. The causal relationship between GDP and domestic
air passenger traffic in Brazil. Transport. Plann. Technol. 33, 569–581.

9
D.C. Tascón and O. Díaz Olariaga
Ford, D., 2018. A System Dynamics Glossary. https://sds.memberclicks.net/assets
/SDGlossary.pdf.
Forrester, J.W., 1968. Industrial dynamics: a response to ansoff and slevin. Manag. Sci.
14 (9), 601–618.
Forsyth, P., 1991. The regulation and deregulation of Australia’s domestic airline
industry. In: Button, K. (Ed.), Airline Deregulation: International Experiences. David
Fulton Publishers, London, pp. 48–84.
Garrow, L.A., Koppelman, F.S., 2004. Predicting air travelers’ no-show and standby
behavior using passenger and directional itinerary information. J. Air Transport.
Manag. 10, 401–411.
Goetz, A., Graham, B., 2004. Air transport globalization, liberalization and sustainability:
post-2001 policy dynamics in the United States and Europe. J. Transport Geogr. 12
(4), 265–276.
Goetz, A., 2002. Deregulation, competition, and antitrust implications in the US airline
industry. J. Transport Geogr. 10 (1), 1–19.
Goetz, A., Sutton, C., 1998. The geography of deregulation in the U.S. airline industry.
Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 87 (2), 238–263.
Graham, B., 1998. Liberalization, regional economic development and the geography of
demand for air transport in the European Union. J. Transport Geogr. 6 (2), 87–104.
Graham, B., 1997. Regional airline services in the liberalized European Union single
aviation market. J. Air Transport. Manag. 3 (4), 227–238.
Graham, B., 1993. The regulation of deregulation: a comment on the liberalization of the
U.K’.s scheduled airline industry. J. Transport Geogr. 1 (2), 125–131.
Grosche, T., Rothlauf, F., Heinzl, A., 2007. Gravity models for airline passenger volume
estimation. J. Air Transport. Manag. 13, 175–183.
Halpern, N., 2011. Measuring seasonal demand for Spanish airports: implications for
counter-seasonal marketing. Res. Transportation Business & Manag. 1 (1), 47–54.
Hooper, P., 1998. Airline competition and deregulation in developed and developing
country contexts – Australia and India. J. Transport Geogr. 6 (2), 105–116.
Ismaila, D.A.I., Warnock-Smith, D., Hubbard, N., 2014. The impact of air service
agreement liberalisation: the case of Nigeria. J. Air Transport Manag. 37, 69–75.
Ivy, R., 1995. The restructuring of air transport linkages in the new Europe. Prof. Geogr.
47 (3), 280–288.
Jin, F., Li, Y., Sun, S., Li, H., 2020. Forecasting air passenger demand with a new hybrid
ensemble approach. J. Air Transport. Manag. 83, 1–18.
Jankiewicz, J., Huderek-Glapska, S., 2015. The air transport market in Central and
Eastern Europe after a decade of liberalisation – different paths of growth.
J. Transport Geogr. 50, 45–56.
Kim, S., Kim, H., 2016. A new metric of absolute percentage error for intermittent
demand forecasts. Int. J. Forecast. 32 (3), 669–679.
Koo, T., Lohmann, G., 2013. The spatial effects of domestic aviation deregulation: a
comparative study of Australian and Brazilian seat capacity, 1986–2010.
J. Transport Geogr. 29, 52–62.
Koo, T., Tan, S., Duval, D., 2013. Direct air transport and demand interaction: a vector
error-correction model approach. J. Air Transport. Manag. 28, 14–19.
Lyneis, J., 2000. System dynamics for market forecasting and structural analysis. Syst.
Dynam. Rev. 16, 3–25.
Miller, B., Clarke, J., 2007. The hidden value of air transportation infrastructure.
Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change 74, 18–35.
Njoya, E., Christidis, P., Nikitas, A., 2018. Understanding the impact of liberalisation in
the EU-Africa aviation market. J. Transport Geogr. 71, 161–171.
Njoya, E.T., 2015. Africa’s single aviation market: the progress so far. J. Transport Geogr.
50, 4–11.
O’Connor, K., 2003. Global air travel: toward concentration or dispersal? J. Transport
Geogr. 11 (2), 83–92.
O’Kelly, M., 1998. A geographer’s analysis of hub-and-spoke networks. J. Transport
Geogr. 6 (3), 171–186.
10
Journal of Air Transport Management 90 (2021) 101946
Oliveira, A.V.M., Lohmann, G., Costa, T.G., 2016. Network concentration and airport
congestion in a post de-regulation context: a case study of Brazil 2000-2010.
J. Transport Geogr. 50, 33–44.
Oum, T., Yu, C., Zhang, A., 2001. Global airline alliances: international regulatory issues.
J. Air Transport. Manag. 7 (1), 57–62.
Oum, T., Zhang, A., Zhang, Y., 1996. Optimal airport pricing in the hub-and-spoke
network. Transport. Res. B 30 (1), 11–18.
Oum, T., 1991. Airline deregulation in Canada. In: Button, K. (Ed.), Airline Deregulation:
International Experiences. David Fulton Publishers, London, pp. 124–187.
Papatheodorou, A., Arvanitis, P., 2009. Spatial evolution of airport traffic and air
transport liberalisation: the case of Greece. J. Transport Geogr. 17, 402–412.
Ren, L., Glasure, Y., 2009. Applicability of the revised mean absolute percentage errors
(MAPE) approach to some popular normal and non-normal independent time series.
Int. Adv. Econ. Res. 15 (4), 409–420.
Rolim, P.S.W., Bettini, H.F.A.J., Oliveira, A.V.M., 2016. Estimating the impact of airport
privatization on airline demand: a regression-based event study. J. Air Transport.
Manag. 54, 31–41.
Samagaio, A., Wolters, M., 2010. Comparative analysis of government forecasts for the
Lisbon Airport. J. Air Transport. Manag. 16, 213–217.
Shaw, S.L., Ivy, R., 1994. Airline mergers and their effect on network structure.
J. Transport Geogr. 2 (4), 234–246.
Shaw, S.L., 1993. Hub structures of major U.S. passenger airlines. J. Transport Geogr. 1
(1), 47–58.
Stavins, J., 2001. Price determination in the airline market: the effect of market
concentration. Rev. Econ. Stat. 83 (1), 200–202.
Sterman, J., 2000. Business Dynamics, Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex
Word. Irwin McGraw-Hill, Boston.
Suau-Sanchez, P., Burghouwt, G., 2011. The geography of the Spanish airport system:
spatial concentration and deconcentration patterns in seat capacity distribution,
2001–2008. J. Transport Geogr. 19 (2), 244–254.
Surovitskikh, S., Lubbe, B., 2015. The Air Liberalisation Index as a tool in measuring the
impact of South Africa’s aviation policy in Africa on air passenger traffic flows. J. Air
Transport. Manag. 42, 159–166.
Suryani, E., Chou, S.-Y., Chen, C., 2010. Air passenger demand forecasting and passenger
terminal capacity expansion: a system dynamics framework. Expert Syst. Appl. 37,
2324–2339.
Suryani, E., Chou, S.Y., Chen, C.H., 2012. Dynamic simulation model of air cargo
demand forecast and terminal capacity planning. Simulat. Model. Pract. Theor. 28,
27–41.
Tascón Hoyos, D., 2017. Modelo Dinámico para Contrastar el Desempeño Ambiental,
Social y Económico de Estrategias para la Gestión de Residuos de Construcción y
Demolición en Bogotá D.C. http://hdl.handle.net/11349/6318.
Thompson, I., 2002. Air transport liberalization and the development of third level
airports in France. J. Transport Geogr. 10 (4), 273–285.
Tsui, W.H.K., Ozer Balli, H., Gilbey, A., Gow, H., 2014. Forecasting of Hong Kong
airport’s passenger throughput. Tourism Manag. 42, 62–76.
Vowles, T., 2006. Airfare pricing determinants in hub-to-hub markets. J. Transport
Geogr. 14 (1), 15–22.
Vowles, T., 2000. The geographic effects of US airline alliances. J. Transport Geogr. 8 (4),
277–285.
Xiao, Y., Liu, J.J., Hu, Y., Wang, Y., Lai, K.K., Wang, S., 2014. A neuro-fuzzy combination
model based on singular spectrum analysis for air transport demand forecasting.
J. Air Transport. Manag. 39, 1–11.
Youssef, W., Hansen, M., 1994. Consequences of strategic alliances between international
airlines: the case of Swissair and SAS. Transport. Res. 28 (5), 415–431.