Abstract
This paper aims to provide an analysis of the existing security system at European airports. At first, the security is defined and the considerations of the air passenger security on the ground and in the air are discussed. Subsequently, current aspects shaping the European aviation security policy are introduced. The analysis of stakeholders and their roles in aviation security is presented. The passengers’ perspective is of special focus. Next, security measures such as physical security measures and personnel are presented while specific issues such as technology deployment, standards and passenger acceptance are discussed in the European context. New concept for security is introduced. The analysis conducted leads us to the conclusions. The existing security system at European airports is rather reactive than proactive. The new concepts rely heavily on technological developments while it is crucial to increase the focus on intelligence gathering and passenger experience. Based on the identified gaps in the existing literature, further research should focus on CBA of European aviation security system as well as human drivers of (in)security.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Council Decision 2007/551/CFSP/JHA is an agreement between the EU and the US that enables to transfer and process 19 pieces of Passenger Name Record data by air carriers to the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) (2007 PNR Agreement) , the information includes for example names, travel dates, full itinerary, billing and baggage data.
Regulation (EC) No 2320/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2002 establishing common rules in the field of civil aviation security (OJ L 355, 30.12.2002) lays down European common standards for aviation security. Other relevant documents include the Annex 17 of the Chicago Convention. For further harmonization of the European rules, additional acts of implementing legislation were implemented. The ‘One-stop security’ in the European Union is a result of the common regulatory framework.
References
Abeyratne (2010) Full body scanners at airports—the balance between privacy and state responsibility. J Transp Secur 3:73–85
Airbus Company (2011) Global market forecast 2011–2030. Airbus Company
Akhtar JB (2010) Assessing security measures reducing terrorist risk: inverse ex post cost-benefit and cost-effectiveness analyses of Norwegian airports and seaports. J Transp Secur 3:179–195
Anderson T (2006) Terror may be at bay at port; shipping hubs too vulnerable. The Daily News of Los Angeles, 18 May
Bailey EE (2002) Aviation policy: past and present. South Econ J 69(1)
Bemosa project (2011) A behavioral model of security in airports, preliminary results. EC FP7 project BEMOSA. Madrid
Boeing Company (2011) Current market outlook 2011–2030. Boeing
Brück TE (2007) A survey on the economics of security with particular focus on the possibility to create a network of experts on the economic analysis of terrorism and anti-terror policies and on the interplay between the costs of terrorism and of anti-terror measures. DG Justice, Freedom and Security
EC (2011) Impact assessment on the possible use of security scanners at EU airports
Ecorys (2011) Security regulation, conformity assessment and certification. DG Enterprise and Industry, Brussels
Eurocontrol (2007) A matter of time: Air traffic delay in Europe. EUROCONTROL Trends in Air Traffic, https://www.eurocontrol.int/sites/default/files/content/documents/official-documents/trends-in-air-traffic/tat2-air-traffic-delay-europe-2007.pdf, pp. 2: 14–42
Frimpong (2011) Introduction of full body image scanners at the airports: a delicate balance of protecting privacy and ensuring national security. J Transp Secur 4:221–229
Frontex (2011) Annual risk analysis (report). p. 4591
Greco T (1989) A cognitive-behavioural approach to fear of flying: a practitioner’s guide. Phobia Pract Res J 2(1):3–15
Hobijn B (2002) What will homeland security cost? Econ Pol Rev 8(2):21–33
Hunter (2011) A study of consumer perception of smiling customer service within the airline industry. J Transp Secur 4:35–56
IATA (2012) http://www.iata.org/whatwedo/safety_security/security/Pages/index.aspx. Last entry 1 March 2012
Jackson B, Chan E, LaTourrette T (2011) Assessing the security benefits of a trusted traveler program in the presence of attempted attacker exploitation and compromise. J Transp Secur
Jacobson S, Lee A (2010) Aviation security in 2030: a glimpse into the future. ORMS Today 37
Jacobson S, Lee A, Nikolaev A (2009) Designing for flexibility in aviation security systems. J Transp Secur 2:1–8
Kaplan L, Szybillo G, Jacoby J (1974) Components of perceived risk in product purchase: a cross-validation. J Appl Psychol 59(2):287–291
SEO Economisch Onderzoek (2008) Benchmark for airport charges and governmental taxes. Dutch Directorate General for Transport and Civil Aviation, Amsterdam
Sinbad project (2010) Sinbad. EC
Slovic PF (2000) Rating the risk. Perception of risk. Earthscan, London
Smith P (2007) The airport security follies—opinion. New York Times
Stewart M, Mueller J (2008a) A risk and cost-benefit assessment of United States aviation security measures. J Transp Secur 1(3):143–159
Stewart M, Mueller J (2008b) A risk and cost-benefit assessment of Australian aviation security measures. Secur Challenges 4(3):45–61
Sweet K (2008) Aviation security and passenger rights. Vol 2. Praeger Security International, Westport Connecticut, p 45. Aviation Security Management
TSA (2012) www.tsa.gov
UK Department for Transport (2010) Impact Assessment on the use of security scanners at UK airports
US Government Accountability Office (2009) Aviation security: TSA’s cost and performance study of private-sector airport screening. GAO, Washington, DC
Yates JS (1992) The risk construct. Risk taking behavior. Wiley, Hoboken