【24h】

In praise of hybrids

机译:赞美混合动力车

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

In setting cost-based airport charges, there has been an extended debate on the relative merits of single till regulation (under which aeronautical charges are set to cover all costs less non-aeronautical income) and dual till regulation (under which aeronautical charges recover only aeronautical costs, with non-aeronautical income not taken into account). As non-aeronautical activities are often highly profitable, airlines typically strongly support single till approaches in order to benefit from these profits, while airports correspondingly typically support dual till. In this polarised arena, hybrid approaches tend to be portrayed by academics, airports and airlines as unsatisfactory second bests, lacking in rigour. In contrast, this paper explores the drawbacks in the extreme positions, and examines why hybrids may have significant practical advantages. In particular, a hybrid approach may reduce the setting difficulties and perverse incentives associated with single till, while offering the prospect of lower charges than dual till.The paper goes on to examine some of the practical implications of different approaches to deriving the commercial contribution and the benefits of hybrid approaches for transitional purposes. Overall, it concludes that hybrid approaches, despite their neglect, have major practical benefits and should form an important option in regulatory considerations.
机译:在确定以成本为基础的机场收费时,关于单层收费(将航空收费设置为可覆盖所有成本减去非航空收入的费用)和双层收费(仅可收回航空收费)的相对优点进行了广泛的辩论。航空成本,不计非航空收入)。由于非航空活动通常具有很高的利润率,因此航空公司通常会大力支持单程进场以从中获利,而机场通常会相应地支持双程进站。在这个两极分化的舞台上,学者,机场和航空公司倾向于将混合方法描述为令人满意的次优,缺乏严格性。相反,本文探讨了极端情况下的弊端,并研究了为什么混合动力车可能具有明显的实际优势。特别是,混合方法可以减少单耕的设置困难和不正当的激励措施,同时提供比双耕更低的收费前景。本文继续研究了不同方法在推导商业贡献和实践中的一些实际含义。用于过渡目的的混合方法的好处。总的来说,它得出的结论是,尽管忽略了混合方法,但仍具有重大的实际好处,应成为监管方面的重要选择。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号