Can reopening Doncaster Sheffield Airport be classed as sustainable? That’s the question our Green Watch team has been investigating. To do this they used the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to allow them to make a fair assessment. Here’s what they discovered.
On November 12th the Board of the South Yorkshire Mayoral Combined Authority (SYMCA) will meet to approve the latest stage of the ongoing project to reopen Doncaster Sheffield Airport (DSA)
The airport closed its doors at the end of October 2022. A series of challenges, such as Brexit and Covid, saw airlines withdraw from the airport. This left it with only one carrier. Peel, the owners and operators, decided that it was no longer commercially viable and shut it down.
Since then, a campaign has emerged to reopen the site. It involves various political factions, pressure groups, and business leaders. A consensus is forming that the airport is critical to meeting Doncaster’s and the wider region’s economic growth ambitions. With this a decision will be made on providing £3 million in short-term funding, then £138 million to support the airport and wider related developments.
But how do the arguments for reopening the airport line up with the UN SDGs? Let’s take a look.
Economic growth appears to be the main driver for the re-opening of the Doncaster Sheffield Airport. Its closing is reported to have lost 800 direct jobs, with 2,700 more at risk in the supply chain. The SYMCA figures claim an economic benefit of an annual net GVA of £108.4 million. They also state an approximate £49.5m loss in welfare.
Whilst these numbers are significant for those directly involved, it should be noted that for Doncaster alone there are 132,000 people employed in an economy worth £3,582 million in GVA. South Yorkshire is significantly larger with 594,000 jobs and £21,880 million in GVA (figures from ONS for 2022).
The paper on which the SYMCA board will decide claims that the airport and the wider SY Airport City project that depends on it “could deliver over 5,000 direct jobs, a Gross Value Add (GVA) uplift of £6.6bn”. These numbers differ significantly from those published in the same organisations Plan for Good Growth. This plan suggests the airport and associated development area “Gateway East” has the potential to add £500m-£1bn+ to the economy and 3,000 to 4,500 jobs.
In its previous incarnation DSA was largely a tourist airport and supported the pre-Brexit movements of Eastern European migrant workers. Proponents of the airport’s return suggest that it would bring business travel and with it economic benefit. However research from the New Economics Foundation shows no correlation between economic growth and business travel. The world has changed and so has how people work.
Unfortunately the economic analysis behind the Full Business Case supporting the airport reopening is not available to the public. Only the headline numbers appear. Without this data it is impossible to properly scrutinise these important investments. It is tempting to assume they are simply supporting a decision that has already been made.
“As I have from the beginning of this process, I remain fully committed to reopening the airport.” Oliver Coppard 4th November 2024
Aviation is the privilege of the rich, both globally and within the UK. Figures from Our World in Data shows the richest 50% of the global population produces 90% of the aviation emissions.
The New Economics Foundation highlights that access to international travel brings social benefits to UK residents. However, a small, wealthy subset of the British population will typically capture a share of any new capacity. This includes the reopening of DSA. Each year, around half of British residents do not fly at all. Increased air traffic will have a significant transfer of welfare from the majority to a wealthy minority of frequent flyers. The former will suffer the ill effects of greenhouse gas emissions, noise, and reduced air quality.
It could be argued that improving access through a regional airport might close this gap. However the reduction in cost is unlikely to be enough to benefit those who currently can’t afford to fly.
When it comes to jobs further research by the New Economics Foundation shows that increased productivity in the air transport industry has not translated to wage growth. After considering inflation, wages were actually significantly lower in 2022 than they were in 2006. These real terms wage reductions are experienced exclusively by middle and lower-paid workers, with the top earners seeing growth. Overall, between 2008 and 2022, the gains in productivity growth have accrued to higher-paid staff and shareholders.
In the section of the SYMCA paper which deals with Equality and Diversity Implications, it simply states there will be “None”
Within this goal is the requirement to “Rationalize inefficient fossil-fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption by removing market distortions”.
Currently aviation is one of the most subsidised areas of the economy. This amplifies its ability to do harm by protecting it from the mechanisms subjected on other sectors.
The most critical subsidy here is that Airlines pay zero duty on aviation fuel. Most tickets also don’t attract VAT. This keeps ticket prices artificially low compared to alternative forms of travel. The recent budget changes around Air Passenger Duty at around £4 per short haul flight are unlikely to be high enough to impact on traveller behaviour. It is also unlikely to level the playing field with other more sustainable systems such as rail.
The Committee on Climate Change, the UK governments independent advisor body in it’s 2023 report to Parliament stated:
“No airport expansions should proceed until a UK-wide capacity management framework is in place to annually assess and, if required, control sector GHG emissions and non-CO2 effects. A framework should be developed by DfT in cooperation with the Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish Governments over the next 12 months and should be operational by the end of 2024. After a framework is developed, there should be no net airport expansion unless the carbon-intensity of aviation is outperforming the Government’s emissions reduction pathway and can accommodate the additional demand.”
Is the reopening of an airport the same as expansion? It’s hard to argue that it isn’t. It will certainly add to the UK’s capacity to operate flights and support one of the few sectors for which emissions continue to grow year on year. Emissions which, after a dip during the pandemic, appear to be growing again.
The paper presented to the SYMCA suggests that climate change implications will be reduced by “displacement of air traffic from other airports” and by promoting the “clean or low carbon aviation sector.”
Without seeing the new airport’s commercial model, we can only speculate. It’s difficult to see how the new operator will base their business plan solely on transferring routes from other airports. Is there an imagined future where people choose Doncaster over Leeds, Manchester or East Midlands? Will the airlines then reorganise accordingly?
So what of the clean alternatives? It’s important that we continue to investigate alternatives to our existing energy sources, but it’s also important that significant decisions are not made on the basis of unproven technologies or unscaleable solutions. Synthetic Aviation Fuel (SAF) has the potential to reduce some of the carbon impacts of traditional aircraft engines. However CO2 is only one of the climate impacts. Contrails and NOx will still be produced which currently inflate the climate impact of aviation.
The UK has mandated 10% of aviation fuel to be SAF by 2030. But, the CCC has stated that there is currently no published plan to show how an industry, which currently only produces 1.2% of the required fuel, can scale up in time.
It is the position of the Grantham Centre for Sustainable Futures that in a time of climate crisis, where cuts to emissions are not happening at a pace or scale necessary, airport expansion is unjustifiable. Air travel is inherently inequitable. The benefits are for the few, the harms borne by the many. At this time the economic case for public subsidy of this project has not been made satisfactorily.
Many of these topics were discussed by a panel of experts at our recent Sustainability Symposium which you can read a summary of here or watch the full recording of the event here.
We urge residents of South Yorkshire, whatever their views on the reopening, to pressure their elected representatives to publish the Business Case in full, so proper scrutiny of these decisions can be made.