Mind the Gap in São Paulo: An Analysis of Airport Access and Integrated Transportation in Brazil’s Federal Infrastructure Policies

Abstract

This thesis explores the issue of airport access within the context of Brazil’s federal infrastructure policies and programs. The paper charts the historic, political, and socioeconomic factors that have driven Brazil’s relative infrastructure deficits. Recording the effects of economic development, social mobilization policies, and airline deregulation, Brazil’s air traffic has nearly tripled from 2002 through 2012. In 2012, 36 million passengers traveled through São Paulo Guarulhos Airport—the same amount that traveled in the whole country a decade earlier. Despite this tremendous growth in air traffic, federal authorities did not invest in expanding airport infrastructure. The impetus of the 2014 FIFA World Cup and 2016 Rio Olympics, as well as two major commercial aviation accidents in 2006-2007, promoted policy reform that created new aviation authorities and airport investment programs. These reforms led to plans for privatizing three major airports, including Brazil’s largest, Guarulhos, in 2012. Two case studies explore the effects of policy changes and investment programs on airport access and integrated transportation. The first case study analyzes the airport privatization and investment projects at Guarulhos Airport. A consortium led by ACSA/Invepar and including a 49% stake by state company INFRAERO far outbid other groups to win the concession for a tender price of R$16.2 billion. Findings show that the concessionaire has acted quickly to invest in upgrading terminal interiors, commercial services, and airside infrastructure. The concessionaire and federal aviation regulators voiced public disagreement over the completeness of runway upgrades needed to accommodate larger aircraft, illustrating the challenges of diffuse regulatory authority and duplicative oversight agencies. Other concessionaire actions have been directed by concession agreement terms imposing financial incentives and disincentives heavily tied to the completion of a new terminal, Terminal 3, in time for the 2014 World Cup as well as smaller service quality enhancements. Master Plan requirements also called for the construction of a new parking garage, which has expanded the airport’s supply of private cars. Privatization, in policy and practice, have had no other effects on surface access. Interviewed officials note that the policy includes no provisions for access and separates public transportation matters, including those for airport access, from airport policies. The second case study analyzes the interaction between two proposals for highspeed rail service to Guarulhos Airport that have conflicted with each other. The Airport Express line, initially considered in 2001, was released for tender and later withdrawn due to lack of interest and potential competition from a larger high-speed rail (TAV) project. Meanwhile, the TAV project, which was initially proposed in 2009 and promised to be delivered before the 2014 World Cup, has still not broken ground due to the enormous scale of the R$34 billion installation and politicization of the project. In December 2013, regional transit authorities began work on a commuter train line that will extend to the airport yet offer less-than-optimal service levels for airport-bound passengers. The comparison of airport investment and airport access is a tale of two policies; the former is organized, cohesive, resource-rich and mostly effective, while the latter devolves into piecemeal projects without clear mandates, appropriate resources, or freedom from political ties. The comprehensive analysis of these cases finds a major gap exists: the lack of an explicit airport access policy at the federal level hampers the planning and implementation of suitable integrated transportation solutions.