Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
US airports negotiate legally binding contracts with airlines and finance large investment projects with revenue bonds. Applying insights from transaction cost economics, we argue that the observed variation in contractual and financing arrangements at US airports corresponds to the parties' needs for safeguarding and coordination. The case evidence presented reveals that public owners set the framework for private investments and contracting. We suggest that airline contracts and capital market control result in comparative efficient investments and act as a check on the cost inefficiency typically linked to public ownership.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fuhr et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: