research paper about airline industry

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 06 June 2023

Firm value in the airline industry: perspectives on the impact of sustainability and Covid-19

• Yaghoub Abdi   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7551-3068 1 ,
• Xiaoni Li 1 &
• Xavier Càmara-Turull 1  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  10 , Article number:  294 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

8718 Accesses

5 Citations

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Business and management

To date, there has been limited research undertaken into firm value determinants in the air transport industry, one of the most essential sectors for global business. In view of this, in this study, we review and synthesise the literature that focuses on the value of firms in this sector and discuss conceptually and empirically the determinants influencing airlines’ stock values. Our main objective is to widen our understanding of the current state of research on the firm value of air transport companies. Using the systematic literature review (SLR) approach, we classify 173 papers published from 1984 to 2021. We find considerable changes in academic interest in the topic over the time period analysed, especially as a consequence of crisis-induced market crashes. In addition, we classify the main research themes relating to airlines’ market value, identify gaps, and introduce potential future research avenues in this area. Among the themes identified, the adjustment in the industry-level factors such as alliances, market structure and competition were the most common source of fluctuations in airlines’ stock value. However, we find shifting to sustainability initiatives and its consequence for stakeholders’ value as one of the most discussed topics in this context. The trend has gained attention since early 2020 due to the emergence of the Covid-19 pandemic as companies are looking for green and sustainable ways to protect the value in crisis time. Our findings assist transportation researchers and executives in addressing major value drivers of airline firms.

Similar content being viewed by others

Assessments of the environmental performance of global companies need to account for company size

Charting sustainable logistics on the 21st-Century Maritime Silk Road: a DEA-based approach enhanced by risk considerations through prospect theory

ESG performance on the value of family firms: international evidence during Covid-19

Introduction.

The airline industry is arguably among the world’s most widespread, fastest growing and rapidly rising industries, providing a wide variety of services for people worldwide (Belobaba et al., 2009 ). In recent years, air transport has become one of the primary modes of travel. This is confirmed by the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO), which reported that in 2019 the number of air travellers rose to 4.5 billion (ICAO, 2019 ). While the industry was hit hard by the COVID-19 pandemic, suffering dramatic falls in the rate of the services provided and passenger numbers, there are evidence that the industry is recovering (McKinsey, 2021 ). According to the International Air Transport Association (IATA), in 2021 the overall figure was 47% of the number of passengers in 2019 (IATA, 2022 ), with expected increases to 83% in 2022, 94% in 2023, 103% in 2024 and 111% in 2025. Therefore, a continuation of this growth rate would mean passenger demand doubling over the next years.

Since its establishment, many aspects of air transport have undergone structural reforms involving technological advances (e.g., the emergence of commercial jet aircraft in the 1950s and the design of wide-body jumbo jets in the 1970s), administrative procedures (e.g., the deregulation process starting in the US in 1978) and financial aspects (the continual growth of airline firms listed in various stock exchanges on a global scale) (Belobaba et al., 2009 ; Malighetti et al., 2011 ). The trend follows the general acceleration of supply chain companies to gain a competitive advantage (Azadian, 2020 ). These changes have re-shaped the industry, altering previously fundamental characteristics and markedly changing perspectives in the industry, leading to an environment of market competition (Cook, 1996 ). Since starting to finance their operations from stock markets rather than relying on state support, issues such as the use of financial analyses on stock returns, cost-of-capital, and the valuation of assets and securities have become crucial (Malighetti et al., 2011 ). In this regard, the industry has been transformed into a much riskier one (Vasigh et al., 2020 ). To remain efficient, it is clear that air carriers must seriously consider financial management and the economic environment in which they operate.

Given that the ultimate objective of financial management for today’s value-minded executives is value creation and maximising shareholders’ profits (McKinsey, 2020 ), firm value has become an important consideration in stakeholders’ financial attitudes. Market value offers meaningful insight into the valuation of a company and can assist both airline executives and investors to determine the airline’s financial status. Due to the importance of this parameter, studies have focused on several factors affecting the value of airlines. However, a review of the literature shows that academics have paid insufficient attention to valuation studies (Malighetti et al., 2011 ). While many reviews have been carried out in the air transport context (Matias Ginieis et al., 2011 , 2012 ; Khudhair et al., 2019 ; Mardani et al., 2015 ; Kaps and Phillips, 2017 ; Kalemba and Campa-Planas, 2011 ; Campa-Planas and Kalemba, 2017 ; Spasojevic et al., 2018 ; Wang and Gao, 2021 ; Sun et al., 2021 ; Duval, 2013 ; Raza et al., 2020 ; Papatheodorou, 2021 ), no comprehensive and generic review of the contextual factors that affect a firm’s valuation has yet been carried out.

An analysis of academic contributions, however, shows that firm value has often been linked to different business strategies and policies, and is thereby influenced by several factors. This poses the question as to what the value determinants are and how they can be classified. The systematic review conducted by Pereira et al. ( 2021 ) appears to be the only study to map out the value-creating business activities in the aviation industry. The authors identified 114 value-creating innovations and how they add value to the industry. Based on the results, initiatives relating to efficiency, convenience, portfolio differentiation and sustainability stood out. Taking a more comprehensive overview, the present study spans determinants such as firm and industry level factors, health crises, political and economic stability, customer relationship, etc. as value drivers to identify the content relationships and approaches, and to explore the gaps in the literature. This topic is extremely important given that the COVID-19 pandemic plunged the entire industry into crisis and destroyed stakeholder value, making it crucial to fill any gaps. We theoretically document the concept of firm value, then gather related studies, commenting on the factors involved, which are grouped into corresponding themes. This approach enabled us to unpack the nature of drivers of firm value and to recognise how these elements have been represented in academic contributions, finally indicating future research directions. From this perspective, the present study sought to answer the following questions:

How has the literature on firm value evolved in the air transport industry?

What are the main research directions relating to firm value in the industry?

What are the main influential factors of firm value in the industry?

In what context has the research focus shifted from traditional value drivers to sustainability initiatives?

What are the niches for forthcoming academic investigations on this topic?

The current study answers the aforementioned study questions by means of the systematic literature review or SLR method, and via thematic scrutiny of the relevant information, using the WoS Core Collection-Clarivate & Scopus databases. There is limited documentation on review studies in the field of air transportation, with existing reviews able to be divided into two streams. First are the articles focusing on the theoretical and empirical study of the air transportation domain. They notably consider specific factors such as air travel demand (Wang and Gao, 2021 ), revenue management (Raza et al., 2020 ) and service quality (Kalemba and Campa-Planas, 2011 ) and safety (Campa-Planas and Kalemba, 2017 ), or they organise the study around the COVID-19 pandemic (Sun et al. 2021 ). Other studies revolve around reviewing the interrelationship between the airline industry and tourism (Papatheodorou, 2021 ), and the role of airlines in economic development (Lenaerts et al., 2021 ).

The aim of our review was to systematically identify and discuss the progress of academic research into firm value in the air transport context, including how this has changed over time in terms of the number of papers focusing on the topic, the host (journals) for publication, and the most productive researchers, countries, etc. The aim of this investigation was to provide a multidisciplinary analysis of the ongoing discussion on firm value in the airline sector by building bridges among different perspectives and identifying the factors impacting firm value. In addition, by mapping out these value drivers we could establish a broad discussion of problem-based solutions to the construction of knowledge from the management perspective. A summary of the identified gaps in the literature, the research questions, and the contribution of the present study is presented in Table 1 .

The paper is structured as follows. Section “State of the art” presents a theoretical framework of the main research; the section “Method” describes the research methodology, sample selection and search strategy; and the section “Assessment of the selected publications” reports the results of the review. The paper ends with some conclusions, policy reflections and research limitations.

State of the art

This section briefly reviews the business environment of airlines, the concept of a firm and its internal value factors, as well as external factors influencing market value.

Airline sector

The global aviation industry is a worldwide service provider and has a fundamental responsibility in the establishment of the world’s economy (Belobaba et al., 2009 ). The industry assumes this role through its activities and impact on related industries. Airlines receive a huge volume of funds and recruit thousands of people, all of which contribute to innovation and economic growth. Air transport is also a driver of globalisation. It improves standards of living by widening leisure and cultural experiences for the people, helps to enhance living standards, and advances sustainability via facilitating tourism and trade. The development of air transport and its technical advancements and service performance make it one of the major means of building of modern world (ICAO, 2017 ).

In order to improve the performance of the industry, it is critically important for airline companies to operate efficiently, the most efficient ones can usually offer lower prices and consequently attract more passengers (Assaf and Josiassen, 2012 ). In addition, more efficient companies can use the benefits of scale by having a larger number of travellers which contributes to better global recognition and image for their brand. Traditionally, air transport has generated some of the lowest returns across business sectors. According to the 2020 year-end economic report by the international air transport association (IATA Economics, 2020 ), even before the current pandemic crisis, equity holders had failed to gain an adequate return for their finances. As shown in Fig. 1 , IATA documents the divergence of returns on invested capital (ROIC) against the weighted average cost of capital (WACC), for the years 2007–2021. The function of ROIC is to measure the financial efficiency of a firm in which how well the invested capital under its control has been allocated to produce profitable investments. It also shows how well a company’s money has been utilised to generate revenue (Lee, 2019 ). One can see that the companies operating in this sector have rarely generated revenues as high as the WACC for the industry as a whole.

Return on capital invested in the wole airlines industry was lower than cost of capital.

Market value is an attempt to estimate the value of a property under open market conditions (Pagourtzi et al., 2003 ). In other words, it refers to the price of an asset at which a supplier and a buyer would agree to change its ownership. An agreed market value satisfies both the seller and the buyer and usually refers to the stock price of publicly listed trading companies. Stock price variation, therefore, represents a percentage change in a firm’s market value at any given time and is driven by supply and demand. Market value is estimated by applying valuation methods that reflect the nature of the asset and the underlying environment in which it could be traded in trade markets (Pagourtzi et al., 2003 ).

Book value is an accounting concept that measures the value of a firm using assets as they are recorded on a balance sheet. It represents the wealth of a company in assets as well as the value of the company’s stockholder equity, as registered on a balance sheet. Book value is considered the sum of a firm’s historical records of assets and liabilities together with documented costs and revenues carried forward to future periods (Boulton et al., 2003 ). Investors are particularly interested in the association between market and book value, considering shares selling well above the book value a target for overvalued portfolios, and those selling below it as undervalued portfolios. Market value and book value together help the company to produce insights into its business prospects. However, due to its ability to instantly reflect the growth or collapse of a firm, the market value provides a better indication of investors’ expectations regarding its business prospects. Some specific applications and issues are addressed using the book-to-market ratio, which compares the original cost of the asset and the firm’s market value as calculated by its market capitalisation. It is an important firm-level indicator of a company’s returns, irrespective of size and the geographical location in which it is operating (Cakici and Topyan, 2014 ). It dramatically highlights any growing discrepancies between book value and market capitalisation (Boulton et al., 2003 ).

Asset valuation theories have long been of interest to both investors and academics in finance. The literature on firm valuation highlights the discrepancy between a firm’s market value and its book value by means of the present value of future abnormal earnings. In this context, book-to-market value (B/M) reflects the investors’ estimate of a firm’s abnormal earnings. The Fama-French ( 1996 ) three-factor model argues that a large proportion of the discussed CAPM average-return anomalies in the literature such as size, book-to-market ratio, earnings/price, cash flow/price and past sales growth are related, and their model is capable of addressing them. Size, book-to-market ratio and excess return on the market are the three main elements of the model introduced by Fama-French. These factors are used as small minus big (SMB), high minus low (HML) and the return of the portfolio minus the risk-free rate of return. The same authors also introduced the size effect and the B/M effect as two behavioural anomalies. These two effects argue that small firm stock tends to have a higher return than large firm stock, and that firms with a high B/M (when the market value is significantly lower than the book value) tend to have continuously low earnings, respectively. Meanwhile, a low B/M (when the market value is significantly higher than the book value) is a signal for sustainable profit growth (Fama and French, 1995 ). In other words, a negative difference between stock price and book value signals a potential impairment, specifically when the discrepancy exists for a long period (Bini and Penman, 2013 ). Conversely, when the stock price exceeds the book value, it can be assumed that the firm is able to generate revenues, or its stocks have a higher market value.

This issue has been discussed in the associated literature, which reveals that calls were made to reform accounting standards, the conventional historical cost approach having outlived its usefulness (Boulton et al., 2003 ). These calls resulted in a transition from an industrial to a fundamentally knowledge-based approach. Based on this method, intangible assets are considered the new drivers of economic activity (Skinner, 2008 ; Canibano et al., 2000 ). The valuation of intangible assets has become a significant contemporary discussion point for researchers in different fields of human knowledge in their attempt to identify relevant intangibles for management purposes and firm valuation (Fazzini, 2018 ; Lim et al., 2020 ; García-Ayuso, 2003 ). In this regard, the OECD ( 2012 ) argues that in the studies on this topic, better management is positively correlated with the disclosure of intangibles and financial performance.

Internal factors influencing firm value of airlines

Works by Li et al. ( 2004 ) and Malighetti et al. ( 2011 ) investigate the industry-level value determinants for airlines. Both studies suggest a range of possible determinants influencing firm value. For their part, Malighetti et al. ( 2011 ) collected data from 87 airlines and 24 airport companies to test the value relevancy of a broad range of variables, as summarised in Fig. 2 , showing that many internal factors including the above-explained items affect firm value. The variables considered were categorised into four potential value determinants to regress against firm value. The four value driver categories provided information about the financial status of the firm, the type of ownership, and industry-specific and control variables. Drivers of shareholder wealth were introduced into this framework, based on extensive previous literature highlighting the structure of the market, the role played by the network (e.g., flight frequency, size of the aircraft, number of routes under competition, and market share on both local and worldwide scales) and the type of business model (i.e., low-cost, or full-service) chosen by the airline. They found that the ownership structure has a direct relationship with firm value: a higher degree of ownership concentration is associated with a higher market value. This is probably due to the greater tendency to maximise firm value under these conditions. This outcome is consistent with the general industry view asserting a positive link between state ownership and both efficiency and return for firms operating with higher levels of debt and a higher equity ratio (Le and O’Brien, 2010 ). It also concurs with the results of the research conducted in this paper since the airline industry is a capital-intensive sector with a high debt-to-equity ratio. Conversely, the study found that firm size and age are negatively correlated with the firm value of airlines.

Internal annd external factors influencing market value of airlines.

External factors influencing firm value of airlines

The aviation industry is extremely sensitive to external economic, political, and social factors due to its heavy dependency on a wide range of business and industrial support. Government policies, regulations, mass media, and customers are parties having an impact on airlines’ market value. Due to their significance in terms of these factors and particularly due to bilateral trade agreements (Haanappel, 1980 ), the majority of international airlines (except in the United States) were in control of governments until the mid-1980s when this type of airline was deemed to be the best model ensuring the growth of industry (Belobaba et al., 2009 ). Therefore, the industry is highly connected with politics and government elites. Almost all state-owned air carriers suffer from distressed state airline syndrome which is a political and organisational virus affecting this type of airline due to issues such as substantial losses (e.g. large volume of collected debts, undercapitalised and indirect subsidies that hide real losses), over-politicised, bureaucratic management, poor service quality, etc. (Doganis, 2001 ).

A sizeable portion of the industry involves cross-border operations so that not only the domestic market but also economic conditions around the globe, affect the industry’s performance. In this regard, academic research has widely reflected the issues and claims that establishing strategies to utilise their firm-level strengths and neutralise external weaknesses may build sustained competitive advantage (Porter, 1985 ; Song et al., 2021 ). In this regard, the term contagion or herd behaviour is used to describe the transmission of instability or unexpected phenomena in one industry(country) to another because of trade, financial or other economic linkages between them (Gillen and Lall, 2003 ). A wide range of disasters, terror attacks, earthquakes, and aircraft crashes are highlighted in the literature as having implications for firms’ financial decision-making (Fernandez-Perez et al., 2021 ).

Studies also considered the consequences of health crises like the SARS and the current Covid-19 pandemic on firm performance. Such outbreaks challenge health care, economic, and financial systems worldwide. The problem is more severe for the airline industry because the shutdown significantly restricts people’s movement decreasing passenger demand for flights. Financial market uncertainty will be triggered by negative sentiment in the operation and business environments. Therefore, airlines lose their value in global financial markets. To summarise, this study categorises a variety of factors that changed considerably and have implications on the value of the firm. These factors range from political, environmental and social factors to the public health situation.

Systematic review is a methodology that finds existing studies, picks contributions, analyses and synthesises data, and reports to reach out clear conclusions about existing knowledge and unidentified aspects of those publications (Denyer and Tranfield, 2009 ). Alternatively, according to the document published by the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD), the method aims to identify, assess and outlines the findings of all relevant research papers to facilitate the accessibility of available evidence to policy-makers (CRD, 2009 ). It also serves in two fundamental ways; identifying gaps to suggest future research avenues and providing key information as a framework (Kitchenham, 2004 ). Therefore, reviewing the literature is an important part of every research topic. Moreover, a profound understanding of the necessary processes and skills and owing experience in the respective field are compulsory to conduct a literature review (Fisch and Block, 2018 ).

Based on the work by Tranfield et al. ( 2003 ), the systematic literature review method helps to avoid the biases of traditional reviews of the current body of literature. This method allows the researcher to summarise the to-date literature relevant to the topic of interest; analyses the topic from various perspectives; and, finally, provide reliable insight from a pool of knowledge dispersed across a broad range of studies. SLR could be very useful to evaluate available information and subsequent understanding in responding to the research objective (Kitchenham, 2004 ). In this study, based on the guidelines defined in CRD ( 2009 ) and Denyer and Tranfield ( 2009 ), the method was applied to provide a reference on international academic research related to firm valuation in the air transport industry.

Search strategy

We followed three steps to execute the SLR. The first was to set up keywords and perspective combinations of those keywords in the search. Inclusion and exclusion criteria for papers found constitute a second phase to adjust the relevance of each study to the current research paper concern. In this phase, we further evaluated selected papers based on certain characteristics. Finally, meta-analysis of selected papers, such as year-wise distribution of selected studies, identifying the most productive author, geographical setting, and co-authorship maps as well as keyword co-occurrence analysis, was a third step. We further provide a thematic analysis of sampled articles to elucidate the main research strands in the field.

Databases and software

To carry out the review, we used documents published in journals indexed in Scopus and WoS Core Collection-Clarivate. Both databases are very well known in academia and host thousands of contributions annually. Specifically, we selected Scopus to apply keyword combinations since it is considered a large abstract and citation database for peer-reviewed literature. According to Elsevier’s website ( 2021 ), Scopus provides extensive citation search results and updates scholars and institution profiles automatically, creating a rich connection between researchers, released ideas and institutions. Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science is also one of the most important databases, offering comprehensive citation search and analytical information tools. It holds a prominent position in its association with scientific products and features across different knowledge domains (Li et al., 2017 ). Consequently, both databases are useful tools to conduct systematic reviews (Campa-Planas and Kalemba, 2017 ; Calatayud et al., 2016 ; Li et al., 2017 ; Bergiante et al., 2015 ). Using the R 3.6.0 programming package, Vosviewer and Microsoft Excel, we analysed the sampled publications to determine the evolution in the published papers over the period. Figure 3 summarises the search process.

Our initial result of 572 documents was filtered by including only peer-reviewed articles and those related to the research theme at the airline context, resulting in 173 eligible documents. (author created).

Keyword identification and sampling

As a search strategy highly contributes to a methodical extraction of papers, it is critical to determine which terms to use in the process of searching to find relevant articles and to determine how these will be specified during the strategy. The approach undertaken is based on the main research questions to encompass potentially relevant academic contributions. Particularly, based on the background reading and subject heading brainstorming, we selected the relevant keywords to ensure that the search is comprehensive considering different spelling, synonyms, variants of keywords and related concepts. As shown in Table 2 , we used a total of eight keywords to develop the search strings: ( book value , market value , firm value , stock market , valuation , air transport , airline , and aviation ). These keywords were formulated to run in both databases as: “book value” OR “market value” OR “firm value” OR “stock market” OR “valuation*”) AND (“air transport*” OR “airline” OR “aviation”. In this formula, based on the guideline by Gu and Lago ( 2009 ) the Boolean operators of OR/AND have been used between keywords to allow synonyms and to link two clusters of terms, respectively. Also, to extend the range of possible studies the study uses an asterisk at the end of some keywords, somewhat different keywords for the same concept are used in some studies (Wilding et al., 2012 ). The aim of the phase was to retrieve articles having the most relevant keywords in their title, abstract, or keyword sections for further assessment of eligibility and inclusion.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

In this study, we used the following criteria to select relevant articles among those found in the review and filtered any non-compliant studies out of the sample. The first criterion was that the article be published following a peer-reviewed process. Therefore, we eliminated publication forms such as book series, conference proceedings, book reviews and working papers. The second criterion was that the sampled studies had to investigate the book value or market value of one or more airlines. Next, we filtered for only articles with editorial lines related to research areas: business economics, economics, business, transportation, business finance, management, and hospitality leisure sport tourism in WoS together with including articles within business and economics subject areas in Scopus. We also included articles in the fields of environmental studies and hospitality leisure tourism to cover work related to sustainability and its effect on firm performance and the value of airlines in the WoS Core Collection-Clarivate database. It is worth noting that we did not control other potential factors such as open or closed access, year, language, etc when searching in neither WoS nor Scopus databases. This means that all studies, having any firm valuation or performance measures appearing as a search result of the above-defined keywords and consistent with the criteria, are included in the analysis. The final step was to merge both file results in the biblioshiny package (using R-Studio), after removing duplicates to achieve the final sample. The review identified a total of 572 empirical studies as follows: 411 peer-reviewed, 98 conference papers, 10 conference reviews, 16 reviews,16 books and book chapters, and a further 21 documents classified as early access (9), short survey (6), note (2), business article (1), preprints (1), and erratum (1). Contributions that failed to satisfy the inclusion criteria, such as the conference papers and the book chapters, were filtered at this stage. The strategy yielded a final sample of 173 articles.

Assessment of the selected publications

The assessment of the selected articles is divided into two sections: a descriptive analysis and a thematic analysis. The former provides a quantitative description, summarising the features gleaned from the information obtained regarding the performance of authors and countries, year of publication and a keyword co-occurrence network. For its part, the thematic analysis emphasised the identification and interpretation of the organisation of the studies in the sampled articles based on the similarities and tendencies found.

Descriptive analysis

Evolution of the number of academic papers.

Figure 4 illustrates the evolution of the selected academic articles between 1984 (the year the first related article appeared in a database) and 2021. It shows that significant changes in publications took place, with ever-growing numbers of articles annually and an evolution in the publishing pattern, implying that interest in the topic has undergone significant changes. The upward trend is especially obvious between 2008 and 2018, with 91 of the 173 (52%) articles published in this period. The trend is even more evident in the last 3 years of the period, with 39 articles published. It is worth mentioning that scientific interest in the topic is in line with the ongoing status of global business. During the period 2008‒2018, the world was suffering and recovering from a financial crisis, making stock market volatility a popular topic. However, following the full recovery of the market in 2017, the issue of firm value became less significant, hence we can observe a decrease in the number of published papers in 2018 and 2019. The topic drew renewed attention in 2020 and 2021 because of the COVID-19 pandemic, which threw the airline sector into the darkest period in its history. With the sharp decline in demand and activity in the industry, airline values have fallen dramatically. In this context, the scholarly discussion to find managerial orientations that can ensure the protection of stakeholders’ wealth is unsurprising. In this regard, there is an urgent need for research to address the effect of support measures to overcome the crisis, such as suspending some business operations to reduce costs, relief on taxes and charges and the design of proactive strategies for governments to tackle the sharp changes in oil prices.

The figure shows the significant changes in term of the number of articles being published on the joint field of airline industry and firm valuation over time.

Most cited papers and sources

Some statistics from the selected papers are shown in Tables 3 and 4 . Notably, we report the most cited publications and the most productive sources, obtained from the systematic review process. The number of citations illustrates the impact of all the articles, authors and journals. The idea behind the statistics is to assess which paper has received the most attention in academia by adding the number of citations for all the articles published by each author. We also report the most productive and the most cited journals.

Tables 3 and 4 show that the most cited article is by Kang et al. ( 2010 ), entitled “Impacts of positive and negative corporate social responsibility activities on company performance in the hospitality industry”, receiving a total of 312 citations. The Journal of Air Transport Management is the journal with the highest number of publications, with 23 papers, and it also has the highest number of citations. This is to be expected since this journal is the specialised resource for all air transport issues. In terms of the number of publications, the next resource is Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review with seven publications, while the Journal of Financial Economics has the second-highest number of citations. These two journals issued 30% of the papers included in the sample, with the remaining journals publishing just one paper each, demonstrating that the sampled papers are not uniformly distributed among different journal publications.

Geographical scope

We also analysed the authors’ country of affiliation to identify the spatial distribution of the present research topic. Figure 5 depicts the countries contributing to the topic, with the USA as the top contributor (62 papers), followed by China (30 papers). Spain (16 papers) is the third most interesting country on the topic of valuation in the airline industry. Based on the review, the topic is North America/Europe-centric, with 74% (129 papers) of attention to the topic coming from these two continents.

Spatial distribution of sampled articles showing that USA has been the most productive country.

Co-authorship analysis among authors

Scientific collaboration could be defined as the cooperation that takes place within a social context between two or more researchers, which facilitates the sharing of meaning and the fulfilment of tasks relating to a mutually shared goal (Sonnenwald, 2007 ). In other words, co-authorship as an ongoing procedure could be characterised as separated segments that motivate people to exchange expertise, skills and information (Samitas and Kampouris, 2017 ). From an academic perspective, co-authorship advances innovation in knowledge transfer in the transition phase to an innovative partnership between universities (Chen et al., 2013 ), encouraging researchers to work together to intensify the quality and quantity of published articles (Samitas and Kampouris, 2017 ).

We used the full counting mode to identify the data selection and thresholds. To apply the method, we considered an author’s finite number of documents as 1 (minimum number of edges). Figure 6 shows the collaboration network of authors, illustrating the interplay between scholars in this field. In this figure, the number of publications by each team determines the size of the boxes. The distance between the two boxes is interpreted as an indication of the intensity of the relationship between authors (Shi and Li, 2019 ). The shorter the distance between two authors, the stronger they have co-authored with each other. When specific authors collaborate closely, their respective nodes are thicker and closer. Connected authors are commonly grouped together. For example, the cluster consisting of Zhang A, Hu Q, Zhang Y, Czerny A, Park J-H, Park N-K have collaborated closely, usually conducting joint research. Zhang A obtained the highest total link strength among the authors, having taken part in five research projects.

The largest connected co-authorship network in the dataset, analyzed using VOS clustering. The figure shows a weak collaboration among researchers publishing at this field.

The size of the nodes in Fig. 6 is directly dependant on the number of publications, while the different colours connect the different authors. From the distribution of the clusters in the graph, we can conclude that the authors have a weak collaboration tie and are barely connected, possibly indicating that the researchers attach importance to establishing more collaborative relationships. To this effect, the information flow will have a higher propensity to diffuse throughout the field.

Keyword co-occurrence analysis

The ‘co-occurrence analysis’ provides the network of conceptual relations from the perspective of researchers in the field. By placing the words in context, and in relation to other terms and concepts, the co-word map can be seen as a semantic representation of knowledge structures (Tijssen and Van Raan, 1994 ). It involves the co-occurrence of words defined by the researchers in the articles, and those defined by professional indexers. The co-occurrence of keywords happens when two or more words appear together in a research study. Figure 7 (constructed by the VosViewer software) contains the keyword co-occurrence analysis of the terms firm valuation and air transport . Some points relating to the proximity between nodes, their size and the thickness of the lines between them must be considered to interpret the figure. Regarding size, the bigger the node [word], the larger the weight. The degree of relationship among the words is also shown by the distance between nodes. A shorter distance generally means a strong connection, while a thicker line reflects a greater co-occurrence between terms.

The frequently co-occurring keywords, themes, or topics in research in the firm value at the airline context. The figure highlights three words “airline”, “finance”, and “managment” with the highest frequency in the sampled articles.

Sixteen main keywords with a minimum of four occurrences appeared on applying the co-occurrence network, highlighting the dominance of air transport and stock market terms. As expected, the word airline had the highest frequency among the analysed documents. The second most frequent concept among the sixteen terms was value , reflected in many forms such as firm value, stock price, stock market, price, valuation, market and performance. The collection of papers, therefore, stands out as a more cohesive body of literature when the subject is valuation. Accordingly, and from the joint analysis of the figure, readers can appreciate that management , finance , airline , valuation , policy , analysis , industry , stock , analysis and return are popular words when addressing valuation in the air transport context. These keywords are shown in five clusters represented by different colours. Specifically, management , finance , airline industry and stock returns are the most prominent keywords to represent the topic over the whole period. The involvement of keywords with higher centralities is because the issue dealt with by the literature is primarily a managerial one, and second because the subject is highly oriented towards the area of finance. Third, the academic interest focused specifically on the airline industry in the period was substantial, although this key term was less important than the two research keywords listed above (Management and Finance).

Thematic analysis

Based on an initial reading of the 173 sampled papers, the influence of seven major groups of factors on airline value can be defined based on major themes. Notably, this categorisation is a purely manual classification of the sample since no coding method was used. It appears that the entire transportation industry is highly influenced by the impact of system risks due to a broad range of external factors, including financial events (recession, fuel price change, etc.), natural calamities (hurricane, tsunami, polar vortex, etc.) and man-made disasters (war, terrorist attack, etc.) (Deb, 2021 ). Almost all these studies use quantitative methods to approach the topic. This is not surprising since for our sample we tested two-factor associations (firm value and another quantifiable variable such as oil price, implementing sustainability standards, etc.) and it is a variance question in nature (Hermundsdottir and Aspelund, 2021 ; Van de Ven, 2007 ). Table 5 provides the detailed categorisation and references for the main research themes.

Industry-level characteristics

We identified the subject of inconsistencies in industry-level performance, including mergers and acquisitions (M&A), aircraft crashes, alliances, inter-industry competition, etc., as the most popular topic to study the effect of these actions on firm value (37 papers). Some of these topics were widely covered in the sample. For instance, Wassmer and Meschi ( 2011 ) studied the impact of code-sharing alliance formations and terminations on the stock price of airlines, finding that the stock market reacts to these incidents. The next notable determinant is oil price volatility, which significantly impacts the operation of firms in this industry. Wang ( 2013 ) extracted three main reasons from the literature as to why the oil price is an important factor for airline firms. Their first two reasons are based on the discounted cash-flow model, highlighting a firm’s future cash-flow as a value influencer: (a) oil is an important natural resource in economic activities, influencing costs and expected cash-flows and (b) rises in oil prices leads to inflation. If the price increase is met by an anti-inflationary policy (i.e., a rise in interest rates) from the central bank, higher interest rates cause discount rate incensement, which ultimately has an adverse effect on the stock price for the firm. The third reason is that a rise in oil prices will increase commodity prices, which will ultimately lead to diseconomies of scale. In all cases, oil price increases magnify the operating costs for airlines and reduce their profits (Mollick and Amin, 2021 ). Therefore, there is a connection between oil prices and stock market returns for airlines. Furthermore, and specifically, within this category, factors such as competition, co-specification, merging, aircraft crashes, bankruptcy, accidents and the market structure have been mentioned as value influencers, matching the theory discussed by Malighetti et al. ( 2011 ). These contributions provide insights into the association between asset prices and changes in these value driver factors, which may be of interest to researchers, industry practitioners, financial managers and decision-makers. Large-scale transport for long-distance travellers has tended to be seen as a cost-benefit calculation for policy recommendations (Kristoffersson et al., 2021 ).

Firm-level value influencers

Studies in this category mainly analyse changes in firm-level performance, including an airline’s business model (low-cost and full-service), firm demand for hedging, new route announcements, bankruptcy protection, etc., as the second most popular topic to study the effect of these actions on value (36 papers). For example, Kökény et al. ( 2021 ) explore whether the stock market performance of European airlines influences their business model, finding that an airline’s business model provides insight for investors into what type of market reactions can be expected in the various stages of an operation. This also enables investors to utilise appropriate criteria and financial metrics, while making investment decisions. This means that full-service airlines show significantly better performance than their low-cost carrier counterparts when crises hit and stock markets are devastated. This hypothesis gains support from Deb ( 2021 ), who documented that two small-scale services Compass Airlines and Trans States Airlines, as well as Virgin Australia, filed for bankruptcy due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Also in this category, factors such as flight and network efficiency, launching a mobile app, leasing choices, oil refinery, CEOs’ strategic risk-taking behaviour and technical efficiency have been mentioned as value influencers, which are matched with the theory discussed by Malighetti et al. ( 2011 ). For example, in an interesting study, Manuela et al. ( 2016 ) investigate Delta Airlines’ oil refinery acquisition strategy to hedge against rising fuel prices and its effect on its financial and operational performance. The results of the study indicate that the strategy positively impacted Delta’s income and that this was rewarded on the stock market via higher share prices following the acquisition announcement.

Sustainability

Many studies (31 out of 173) evidence the association between sustainability activities and firm financial performance and value. The articles with a corporate social responsibility theme bring together topics related to concerns arising from issues linked to firms’ environmental, social and governance responsibility. Due to the heterogeneity between terms referring to environmental, social and governance issues, in the present paper we use the term sustainability to represent these issues. Over the last few decades, the topic has not only gained interest among academic researchers, industry practitioners and investors but also among policymakers. It has been described as a voluntary corporate commitment to operate aligned with broader society’s expectations, rather than just traditional profit-making corporate behaviour (Casado-Díaz et al., 2014 ). This means that firms are encouraged to contribute to the sustainable development goals (SDGs), which could be achieved by developing strategies that integrate sustainable practices into their normal daily operations, with the aim of reaching their own sustainability (Escrig-Olmedo et al., 2019 ). This corporate responsibility is described as activities to proactively contribute to the sustainability agenda from all its financial, environmental and social perspectives. The corporate sustainability domain also covers a firm’s internal business operations and productions, management and strategy, organisational units, and marketing and communications with its stakeholders (Escrig-Olmedo et al., 2019 ; Lozano, 2015 ). These studies link a firm’s financial performance and value and the level of commitment to sustainability standards in terms of professionally managing issues such as resource use, emissions, innovation, the employee-shareholder relationship, management and the board. These studies suggest that sustainability issues influence a firm’s market value as well as the financial performance of air transport companies (Abdi et al., 2021 ), which will be consequently reflected in the stock market.

Customer relationship and marketing

The next sub-group focuses on the relationship between airlines and their customers. Consumer behaviour has long been analysed in the economic literature, appearing first in the transportation literature at the beginning of this century (Pan and Zuo, 2020 ). For airlines, consumer behaviour and especially the behaviour relating to airline choice is considered an important element in planning and is a basis for their strategies (Munoz and Laniado, 2021 ). This research strand emphasises the significance of managing the association with customers and its influence on firm value. Given the highly competitive nature of the global airline business, airlines implement a range of actions to satisfy and stay connected with their main customers, the passengers. These activities include marketing strategies (e.g., from social media activities to internal operations to improve safety and service quality). Based on the findings of these studies, market value modifications are expected due to changes in the level of passenger satisfaction, investment behaviour tendencies and wage concessions (Sun and Kim, 2013b ). Operators and practitioners must consider these dimensions and attributes because these items are influential to the overall perceived quality of a firm’s services (Ojo, 2017 ).

International political and economic instability

Changes in the political and economic situation significantly affect the market value of airlines. We use political and economic instability as an umbrella for studies in this domain since changes in firm value are rooted in the current political and macroeconomic situation. On this basis, this stream of literature mainly discusses contributions to a firm’s market value and the reaction to volatility due to worldwide political and economic factors such as terrorist attacks, and the transmission of these shocks to the market. For instance, although oil price volatility is an economic phenomenon, significant changes in supply and demand are usually triggered by political disturbances such as terrorist attacks in oil producers or importer countries (Mollick and Amin, 2021 ). Although shocks of this nature affect various industries at both country and international levels, they are disproportionately felt by insurance companies and tourism (including airlines). The issue was well reflected by IATA director and CEO Pierre Jean Jeanniot a year after the 9/11 terrorist attack when he said that “we have lost more in a year than we have made in our entire history. This is an industry that is now in a deep hole. We must start looking for footholds and ways to climb quickly out of the financial abyss” (Drakos, 2004 ). These papers mainly reflect the increased uncertainty of the industry following such incidents. For instance, Gillen and Lall ( 2003 ) studied how trade linkage and airline alliances are important in the transmission of global economic shocks to market value, finding the negative impact of shocks such as the 9/11 attacks on the mean abnormal returns of airlines.

New Method to predict share price

Apart from the studies having internal and external value drivers in focus, there are contributions that introduce new methodologies to increase the prediction accuracy of stock prices. Notably, most of the studies in this sub-category could fit in the internal factor category, but since they spotlight the innovative aspects of introduced stock price forecasting rather than the correlation between specific variables with firm value, we decided to present them in a new category. Since stock exchange mechanisms are complex and the market is influenced by seasonal factors, it has been proposed that multiple components are likely to impact the estimation of models, including financial data, the way to extract those data, optimisation algorithms and prediction model parameters (Zheng and He, 2021 ). Therefore, the selection of model features could consider both technical and fundamental characteristics. To this effect, when the share price is stable attention is directed to technical features. However, in times of high fluctuations, fundamental features may be a priority. Therefore, using long-term historical data is suggested for operating airlines since they are likely to produce more accurate analyses (Zheng and He, 2021 ). The models developed in this category could enhance the accuracy of a firm’s valuation and assist investors in making timely decisions for their financial strategies and business operations.

Health crisis

The next factor influencing the market value of airlines was found to be the global health crisis. Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and COVID-19 are contagious diseases that threaten human life. Risks like these disrupt business operations in infected countries, irrespective of the industry. Given the contagiousness of COVID-19, infected countries adopted various measures to limit contact (such as stopping unnecessary movement outside the home and public transport, closing schools and universities, and strict social distancing measures). Restrictions such as these immediately affected the economy, with the airline industry the first to suffer due to the dramatic drop in passenger demand. Because of the COVID-19 outbreak, the market value of airlines shrank significantly (Maneenop and Kotcharin, 2020 ). Studies in this cluster mainly use the event-study model to analyse the influence of disasters of this kind on online stock prices. This method is popular in economics and finance for investigating the effect of news related to a particular event on stock market prices (Maneenop and Kotcharin, 2020 ).

By contrasting the situation before and after the outbreak, and the stock returns for the airline industry and the whole market return (Maneenop and Kotcharin, 2020 ), these studies investigate the extent to which the firms in this industry may suffer (Liew, 2020 ), how severe the impact is and what the impact on stock price volatility may be (Deb, 2021 ). Different events and daily data sets were selected in these studies, including crucial announcements such as days-from-first-case reports by China (January 13, 2020) and the USA travel ban announcement by President Trump (March 11, 2020). The findings of these studies are also interesting. In this regard, Liew ( 2020 ) observed the rapid decline in profit of airlines and tourism-related businesses by monitoring statistics derived from three leading consolidators, namely hotel accommodation, airline tickets and travel service services. Deb ( 2021 ) finds that COVID-19 had an unprecedentedly severe effect on the stock price movements of airlines. This author further proposed a method to predict the market reaction to similar events, especially in the short term. Last, Maneenop and Kotcharin ( 2020 ) find that airline share prices reduce more significantly than the whole return of the market. All three studies resulted in major changes in airline valuation theory. To this end, it is necessary to design a strategy to alleviate the economic side effects of the pandemic in the airline industry.

Summary, implications, and future research avenues

Through the categorisation of value determinants of airline companies, the current study provides an approach to linking the theoretical concepts and practical findings by structuring them into seven main subject areas. In summary, we find that the topic is especially in demand as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has driven a radical shift in scholarly productions focused on the value issue for airlines. Looking at the sources of publication of these papers, the Journal of Air Transport Management (with 23 papers and 126 citations) is shown to be the most frequent and the most cited journal. The geographical scope analysis for authors’ affiliation showed the USA (62 papers) as the highest contributing country, followed by China (30 papers). As far as co-authorship among authors is concerned, Zhang A et al. were the biggest cluster of authors working closely together. However, most authors in this field tend to work separately. The analysis of keyword co-occurrence indicates that, as expected, airline is the most cited keyword among terms in this context.

Regarding the thematic analysis, we find that the largest group of studies examines the industry and firm-level factors. The third largest group of papers focuses on modern sustainability initiatives and relations with firms’ financial performance. Based on the findings of these studies, a drastic stock market reaction is to be expected as a result of any changes at the level of airlines’ corporate, environmental, social and governance responsibilities. The next sub-group is composed of studies that examine the impact of changes in the political and financial status of an airline on its market value performance. These contributions suggest that variations in factors such as political instability, terror attacks, oil price shocks and jet fuel prices may lead to market volatility. Issues related to the customer and marketing strategy, health threats and firm-industry level value determinants were also found as main themes in our dataset.

By analysing themes, we found that there is evidence of a shift in academic contributions to sustainability initiatives and their consequences for stakeholders’ value because the airline industry is regarded as one of the most challenging when it comes to environmental impact and sustainability issues (McManners 2016 a, 2016 b). However, this finding does not correspond to reality. According to Heeres et al. ( 2018 ), only 38% of the top 100 airlines publish their sustainability report. This may be due to uncertainty as to whether environmental sustainability is compatible with financial sustainability.

Regarding passenger issues, an interesting finding is that customer satisfaction has grown since the idea of low-cost airlines has become widespread, especially in the new millennium. As would be expected, following the deregulation of the industry, more commercial and market-leading perspectives became the norm, and knowledge of passengers and their preferences gained interest in academia (Spasojevic et al., 2018 ). There has also been a noticeable shift in scientific articles centring on the value issue, especially since 2020 with the output of COVID-19-related academic publications, totalling 31 (over 17% of sampled papers). Such considerable academic attention stands out in the tourism and hospitality field, including airlines (Chen et al., 2022 ). Studies in this domain have highlighted the need for policy designs to alleviate the impact of the pandemic on the airline industry as the one most damaged by COVID-19. However, the literature has failed to conclude with tangible practical solutions to protect the value when a negative event occurs.

Study implications

This paper contributes to the knowledge surrounding firm value determinants from both academic and industry perspectives. In terms of the first, despite the importance of valuation issues for firms, contributions to the tourism literature (including the airline context) remain scant. Considering the lack of review works as a response to an apparent gap, our study approaches the issue objectively by collecting the data from reputable journals in the WoS Core Collection-Clarivate & Scopus database. By doing so, we contribute to identifying and classifying the important value driver and influencer factors, helping to fill this gap and bring new insights by overviewing the relevant literature trends through the synthesis of the available documents. Additionally, a focus on the airline industry, which is one of the most important and rapidly growing industries, could contribute to the current body of knowledge with significant first-hand insights. To conclude, adding an in-depth systemic tendency to the wide divergent literature available in the field could benefit future researchers interested in air transportation business valuation and analysis.

The above consideration leads us to the second theoretical contribution of this study, which is the aggregation of existing knowledge on the topic of firm value in this context. Future researchers can find support for each of the concepts categorised among the analysed documents. The empirical findings confirm the theoretically anticipated firm-level financial and non-financial value drivers, together with external factors influencing the market value. This approach encourages researchers to recap understanding of the firm value topic through a new categorisation that can help to identify conceptual and empirical relations between main value-related subject areas. We observed that current contributions have turned their attention away from classic external and internal value drivers toward modern corporate social responsibility issues.

Systematic literature reviews can provide a reliable basis to formulate decisions and take action (Tranfield et al., 2003 ). In this regard, executives may also use the results to see how firm value issues are dealt with in the literature and benefit from the empirical results when designing business strategies and making decisions. Air carriers’ large-scale operations need a notable level of use of resources, and every major decision has an implication for a company’s financial returns, which will be reflected in its share value. This is understandable given the limited level of available resources for a company and the need to respect efficiency when allocating these restricted resources. Further, these companies should also bear in mind their competitors’ profiles and offering to customers (Chih et al., 2021 ). In practice, however, there is sufficient evidence of the inefficiency of airlines’ business strategy. To put this in perspective, Nzuva ( 2020 ) discusses how the majority of airline firms are suffering from low levels of profit, which hampers the industry from expanding. To this effect, business model modification is vital to meet airlines’ long-term growth.

Taking the above into account, we suggest that major changes in airlines’ value are caused by certain leading global trends such as the green finance discussion and unexpected negative events. Notably, the theme has gained momentum since the proposal of the 17 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015, which require allocating a firm’s resources to acquiring eco-friendly equipment, reaching higher standards for products and prioritising safety measures collectively as a corporation framework to “shift the world onto a sustainable and resilient path”. This trend has been even more in the spotlight since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic since it induced a crash in firm value, causing stakeholders and institutional investors to look for sustainable profit-making shares and protect their wealth at this time of crisis. Consequently, airline managers and industry decision-makers have acknowledged the recent preferred shift towards the importance of sustainable development strategies to communicate their obligation to maximise the wealth of their stakeholders. This campaign towards sustainability also provides an opportunity to launch a sustainable development agenda, which acts as an insurance link against unexpected negative events such as health crises (e.g., the current pandemic and SARS) and international political and economic instability (e.g., the 2008 global financial crisis, terror attacks such as 9/11, among others). In this regard, our findings provide insights for managers who are considering allocating available resources to sustainability activities by adopting more efficient and robust approaches, which by comparing stock returns for the airline industry with the whole market return (Maneenop and Kotcharin, 2020 ) consider the firm’s characteristics in terms of its business model and ownership structure. For instance, in terms of investment in renewable resources, recent developments in technology may throw up potential opportunities to reduce energy consumption by utilising more fuel-efficient aircraft technology and introducing direct flight pattern networks. We suggest that managers consider these factors to act proactively under economic turbulence rather than take a reactive approach to crash value at times of crisis. This could also apply to potential policymakers, requiring firms to invest more in such initiatives to be beneficial not only for the firm but also for society in the long term.

Limitations and future research

The selective, observational, and retrospective essence of this systematic review had several limitations. First, the search terms used cannot be assumed to be fully comprehensive and capture all the relevant academic articles. This is because a broad range of keywords has been used by researchers in the literature. We restricted the search to the definite and most probable keywords to capture the most relevant studies, making it almost impossible to cover the state of the field over time in a single study. To address this issue, future research could use a literature-exploration algorithm to find an almost overwhelming number of matching documents on a research topic. The second limitation is that we considered only articles published in the WoS Core Collection-Clarivate and Scopus databases. Future reviews should include articles published in other databases such as journal citation reports (JCR).

Third, within the papers found in the review, several studies were recognised as directly unrelated and removed from the study. Future studies may need to broaden the scope of the investigation in this regard. These studies could be improved by the investigation and assessment of advanced metamodels from other contexts and compliance with new techniques to be used (Binsuwadan et al., 2021 ). Additionally, due to the outbreak of COVID-19 and the questions it has raised about valuation, contributions to measure the effectiveness of preserving actions to survive the crisis, such as cutting capacity to reduce costs, relief on taxes and charges by governments, and to propose proactive strategies for policymakers to deal with fluctuating oil prices, seem necessary. In particular, a greater focus is needed on investigating the effectiveness of fiscal policies to prevent exposures in oil-related sectors such as the air transport industry. Furthermore, given that most studies in the literature concentrate on one or just a few airlines, more studies could be carried out using larger samples that cover a variety of firms. Last, the findings of the theme analysis may encourage more research on sustainable value drivers as a promising area of research. Additional contributions to provide significant information to understand the sustainable development agenda in recognition of firm value are needed for a sustainable future of the air transport industry.

Data availability

The data that supports the finding of this study are openly available in Scopus and Web of Science core-collection Clarivate databases. We used the articles published in these two databases through the right of access by the authors’ institution. These data are also publicly available from Google searches.

Abdi Y, Li X, Càmara-Turull X (2020) Impact of sustainability on firm value and financial performance in the air transport industry. Sustainability 12(23):9957. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12239957

Article   Google Scholar  

Abdi Y, Li X, Càmara-Turull X (2021) Exploring the impact of sustainability (ESG) disclosure on firm value and financial performance (FP) in airline industry: the moderating role of size and age. Environ Dev Sustain. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01649-w

Akyildirim E, Corbet S, O’Connell JF, Sensoy A (2021) The influence of aviation disasters on engine manufacturers: an analysis of financial and reputational contagion risks. Int Rev Financ Anal 74:101630. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IRFA.2020.101630

Alam IMS, Sickles RC(1998) The relationship between stock market returns and technical efficiency innovations: evidence from the US Airline Industry J Product Anal 9(1):35–51. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1018368313411

Allroggen F, Wittman MD, Malina R (2015) How air transport connects the world—a new metric of air connectivity and its evolution between 1990 and 2012. Transp Res Part E 80:184–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2015.06.001

Álvarez-Sanjaime Ó, Cantos-Sánchez P, Moner-Colonques R, Sempere-Monerris JJ (2020) A three-stage competition game in an air transport network under asymmetric valuation of flight frequencies. Econ Transp 21:100141. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ECOTRA.2019.100141

Alves CF, Barbot C (2010) Rivalry amongst European low cost airlines: are shareholders enjoying the game? J Air Transp Manag 16(6):304–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JAIRTRAMAN.2010.03.003

Assaf AG, Josiassen A (2012) European vs. U.S. airlines: performance comparison in a dynamic market. Tour Manag 33(2):317–326. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2011.03.012

Azadian F (2020) Assessing the effect of urban socioeconomic factors and the financial crisis of 2008 on domestic air cargo traffic in Florida. Transportation 47(1):223–241. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-018-9872-9

Azar C, Johansson DJ (2012) Valuing the non-CO2 climate impacts of aviation. Clim Change 111(3):559–579. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0168-8

Article   ADS   CAS   Google Scholar  

Baarsma BE, Lambooy JG (2005) Valuation of externalities through neo-classical methods by including institutional variables. Transp Res Part D 10(6):459–475. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRD.2005.06.001

Bayer E, Tuli KR, Skiera B (2017) Do disclosures of customer metrics lower investors’ and analysts’ uncertainty but hurt firm performance? J Mark Res 54(2):239–259. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmr.14.0028

Behrens C, Pels E (2012) Intermodal competition in the London–Paris passenger market: high-speed rail and air transport. J Urban Econ 71(3):278–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JUE.2011.12.005

Belobaba P, Odoni A, Barnhart C (2009) The global airline industry. John Wiley & Sons

Benaroch M, Jeffery M, Kauffman RJ, Shah S (2007) Option-based risk management: a field study of sequential information technology investment decisions. J Manag Inf Syst 24(2):103–140. https://doi.org/10.2753/MIS0742-1222240205

Beneish MD, Moore MJ (1994) Nonprice competition, cost shocks, and profitability in the airline industry. Res Transp Econ 3:67–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0739-8859(09)80005-X

Berghöfer B, Lucey B (2014) Fuel hedging, operational hedging and risk exposure—evidence from the global airline industry. Int Rev Financ Anal 34:124–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2014.02.007

Bergiante NCR, Santos MPS, Espírito Santo RA (2015) Bibliometric study of the relationship between business model and air transport. Scientometrics 105(2):941–958. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1711-6

Bernile G, Lyandres E, Zhdanov A (2012) A Theory of Strategic Mergers. Rev Finance 16(2):517–575. https://doi.org/10.1093/ROF/RFR013

Article   MATH   Google Scholar  

Bertus M, Godbey J, Hilliard JE (2009) Minimum variance cross hedging under mean-reverting spreads, stochastic convenience yields, and jumps: application to the airline industry. J Futur Mark 29(8):736–756. https://doi.org/10.1002/FUT.20379

Bini M, Penman S (2013) Companies with market value below book value are more common in Europe than in the US: evidence, explanations and implications. Report KPMG, 65. https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/pdf/2015/09/gvi-companies-with-market-vaule-below-book-value.pdf

Binsuwadan J, Jong GDe, Batley R, Wheat P (2021) The value of travel time savings in freight transport: a meta‑analysis. Transportation. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-021-10207-2

Bosch J-C, Eckard EW, Singal V (1998) The competitive impact of air crashes: stock market evidence. J Law Econ 41(2):503–519. https://doi.org/10.1086/467399

Boulton RE, Libert BD, Samek SM (2003) A business model for the new economy. J Bus Strateg 24(1):29–33. https://doi.org/10.1108/02756660310508245%5Cn

Bouoiyour J, Selmi R (2018) Are UK industries resilient in dealing with uncertainty? The case of Brexit. Eur J Comp Econ 15(2):277–292. https://doi.org/10.25428/1824-2979/201802-277-292

Bourjade S, Huc R, Muller-Vibes C (2017) Leasing and profitability: empirical evidence from the airline industry. Transp Res Part A 97:30–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRA.2017.01.001

Cakici N, Topyan K (2014) Risk and Return in Asian Emerging Markets: A Practitioner’s Guide. Palgrave Macmillan in the United States— a division of St. Martin’s Press LLC, 175 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10010. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137359070

Calatayud A, Palacin R, Mangan J, Jackson E, Ruiz-Rua A (2016) Understanding connectivity to international markets: a systematic review. Transp Rev 36(6):713–736. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2016.1157836

Cam MA (2008) The impact of terrorism on United States industries. Econ Pap 27(2):115–134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1759-3441.2008.tb01031.x

Campa-Planas F, Kalemba N (2017) Safety as a management concept in the air transport sector: a systematic literature review. Intang Cap 13(1):71. https://doi.org/10.3926/ic.918

Canibano L, Garcia-Ayuso M, Sanchez P (2000) Accounting for intangibles: a literature review accounting for intangibles: a literature review Leandro Canibano; Manuel Garcia-Ayuso; Paloma Sanchez. J Account Lit 19:102–130

Google Scholar  

Carlos Martín J, Román C, Espino R (2008) Willingness to pay for airline service quality. Transp Rev 28(2):199–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441640701577007

Carpentier C, Suret JM (2015) Stock market and deterrence effect: a mid-run analysis of major environmental and non-environmental accidents. J Environ Econ Manag 71:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JEEM.2015.01.001

Carter D, Mazumder S, Simkins B, Sisneros E (2021) The stock price reaction of the COVID-19 pandemic on the airline, hotel, and tourism industries. Finance Res Lett 102047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2021.102047

Carter DA, Rogers DA, Simkins BJ (2006) Does hedging affect firm value? Evidence from the US airline industry. Financial management 35(1):53–86

Casado-Díaz AB, Mas-Ruiz FJ, Sellers-Rubio R (2009) Stock market reactions to third-party complaints. Int J Bank Mark 27(2):167–183. https://doi.org/10.1108/02652320910935634

Casado-Díaz BA, Nicolau LJ, Ruiz-Moreno F, Sellers R (2014) Industry-specific effect of CSR initiatives: hotels and airlines. Kybernetes 43(3):547–564. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-12-2013-0271

Centre for Reviews and, & Dissemination (2009) CRD’s guidance for undertaking reviews in healthcare. CRD, University of York. https://storage.googleapis.com/plos-corpus-prod/10.1371/journal.pone.0201887/1/pone.0201887.s005.pdf?X-Goog-Algorithm=GOOG4-RSA-SHA256&X-Goog-Credential=wombat-sa%40plos-prod.iam.gserviceaccount.com%2F20210726%2Fauto%2Fstorage%2Fgoog4_request&X-Goog-Date=

Chen C-F, Wu T-F (2009) Exploring passenger preferences in airline service attributes: a note. J Air Transp Manag 15(1):52–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2008.07.005

Chen JK, Chen IS (2010) Aviatic innovation system construction using a hybrid fuzzy MCDM model. Expert Syst Appl 37(12):8387–8394. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ESWA.2010.05.043

Chen M-H, Liao C-N, Huang S-S (2010) Effects of shifts in monetary policy on hospitality stock performance. Serv Ind J 30(2):171–184. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642060802126684

Chen Y, Assimakopoulos D, Xie H, Chi R (2013) Evolution of regional scientific collaboration networks: China–Europe emerging collaborations on nano-science. Int J Technol Manag 63(3–4):185–211. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2013.056898

Chen Z, Wanke P, Antunes JJM, Zhang N (2017) Chinese airline efficiency under CO2 emissions and flight delays: a stochastic network DEA model. Energy Econ 68:89–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2017.09.015

Cheng LTW, McDonald JE (1996) Industry structure and ripple effects of bankruptcy announcements. Financ Rev 31(4):783–807. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6288.1996.tb00897.x

Cheng YH, Yang AS, Liu YH (2009) Financial investment behavior tendencies of air carriers. J Air Transp Manag 15(6):354–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2008.12.004

Cheng T-H, Huang C-J, Sung C-H, Huang Y-C (2021) Vulnerable company’s triumphs in M&A Negotiation under the impact of COVID-19—an empirical study of Asian companies. Rev Pac Basin Financ Mark Policies 24(2). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219091521500120

Chen CC, Zou SS, Chen MH (2022) The fear of being infected and fired: Examining the dual job stressors of hospitality employees during COVID-19. Int J Hosp Manag 102:103131

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Chih M, Rico T, Jiana M, Wang F (2021) What drives freight transportation customer loyalty? Diverging marketing approaches for the air freight express industry. Transportation 48(3):1503–1521. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-020-10104-0

Choi AS (2014) An experimental study to explore WTP for aviation carbon offsets: the impact of a carbon tax on the voluntary action. J Environ Plan Manag 58(9):1617–1634. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2014.940515

Choi AS, Ritchie BW (2014) Willingness to pay for flying carbon neutral in Australia: an exploratory study of offsetter profiles. J Sustain Tour 22(8):1236–1256. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2014.894518

Choi AS, Gössling S, Ritchie BW (2018) Flying with climate liability? Economic valuation of voluntary carbon offsets using forced choices. Transp Res Part D 62:225–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRD.2018.02.018

Clarke A, Bell PA, Peterson GL (1999) The influence of attitude priming and social responsibility on the valuation of environmental public goods using paired comparisons. Environ Behav 31(6):838–857. https://doi.org/10.1177/00139169921972371

Cook G (1996) A review of history, structure, and competition in the U.S. Airline Industry. J Aviation/Aerosp Educ Res 7(1). https://doi.org/10.15394/jaaer.1996.1183

Corte VD, Gaudio GD (2014) Employees’ value creation and value capture. The case of airline industry. Corp Ownersh Control 12:453–463. https://doi.org/10.22495/COCV12I1C5P1

Cui Y, Orhun AY, Duenyas I (2019) How price dispersion changes when upgrades are introduced: Theory and empirical evidence from the airline industry. Manag Sci 65(8):3835–3852. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3117

Czerny AI, Zhang A (2015) Third-degree price discrimination in the presence of congestion externality. Can J Econ 48(4):1430–1455. https://doi.org/10.1111/caje.12155

Dalalah D, Ojiako U, Chipulu M (2020) Voluntary overbooking in commercial airline reservations. J Air Transp Manag 86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2020.101835

Das KK, Mahapatra R (2020) Impact of COVID-19 on the perception of Indian investors towards investment in equity fund. Int J Financ Eng 07(03). https://doi.org/10.1142/S2424786320500401

Davidson WN, Worrell DL (1993) The stock market effects of CEO succession in bankrupt firms. J Manag 19(3):517–533

Deb S (2021) Analyzing airlines stock price volatility during COVID-19 pandemic through internet search data. Int J Finance Econ. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijfe.2490

Delquié P (2008) Valuing information and options: an experimental study. J Behav Decis Mak 21(1):91–109. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.579

Denyer D, Tranfield D (2009) Producing a systematic review. In: Buchanan D, Bryman A (eds) The Sage handbook of organizational research methods. Sage

Detzen D, Jain PK, Likitapiwat T, Rubin RM (2012) The impact of low cost airline entry on competition, network expansion, and stock valuations. J Air Transp Manag 18(1):59–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JAIRTRAMAN.2011.09.004

Doganis R (2001) The airline business in the twenty-first century. In: The airline business in the twenty-first century. Routledge Taylor and Francis Group, London and New York, NY

Domke-Damonte DJ (2000) The effect of cross-industry cooperation on performance in the airline industry. Int J Hosp Tour Adm 1(1):141–160. https://doi.org/10.1300/J149v01n01_08

Drakos K (2004) Terrorism-induced structural shifts in financial risk: airline stocks in the aftermath of the September 11th terror attacks. Eur J Political Econ 20(2):435–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EJPOLECO.2003.12.010

Duval DT (2013) Critical issues in air transport and tourism. Tour Geogr 15(3):494–510. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616688.2012.675581

El-Gazzar SM, Finn PM, Tang C (2009) The value relevance of earnings and nonearnings information in regulated and deregulated markets: the case of the airline industry. Int Adv Econ Res 15(1):88–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11294-008-9196-1

Elsevier website (2021) Scopus. https://www.elsevier.com/solutions/scopus

Escobari D (2014) Estimating dynamic demand for airlines. Econ Lett 124(1):26–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2014.04.012

Escobari D, Hernandez MA (2019) Separating between unobserved consumer types: evidence from airlines. Economic Inquiry 57(2):1215–1230. https://doi.org/10.1111/ecin.12736

Escrig-Olmedo E, Fernández-Izquierdo MÁ, Ferrero-Ferrero I, Rivera-Lirio JM, Muñoz-Torres MJ (2019) Rating the raters: evaluating how ESG rating agencies integrate sustainability principles. Sustainability (Switzerland) 11(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/su11030915

Fama EF, French KR (1995) Size and book‐to‐market factors in earnings and returns. J Finance 50(1):131–155. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1995.tb05169.x

Fama EF, French KR (1996) Multifactor explanations of asset pricing anomalies. J Finance 51(1):55–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.1996.tb05202.x

Fazzini M (2018) Intangible assets valuation. In: Business valuation: Theory and practice. Springer

Fernandez-Perez A, Gilbert A, Indriawan I, Nguyen NH (2021) COVID-19 pandemic and stock market response: a culture effect. J Behav Exp Finance 92:100454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbef.2020.100454

Fisch C, Block J (2018) Six tips for your (systematic) literature review in business and management research. Manag Rev Q 68:103–106

Flouris T, Swidler S (2004) American airlines’ takeover of TWA: an ex-post analysis of financial market information. J Air Transp Manag 10(3):173–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JAIRTRAMAN.2003.10.002

Flouris T, Walker TJ (2005) The financial performance of low-cost and full-service airlines in times of crisis. Can J Adm Sci/Rev Can Sci Adm 22(1):3–20

de Fusco RA, Fuess SM (1991) The relative effects of craft-level strikes: the case of airlines. J Labor Res 12(4):411–417. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02685437

García-Ayuso M (2003) Intangibles: lessons from the past and a look into the future. J Intellect Cap 4(4):597–604. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930310504590

Gaudenzi B, Bucciol A (2016) Jet fuel price variations and market value: a focus on low-cost and regular airline companies. J Bus Econ Manag 17(6):977–991. https://doi.org/10.3846/16111699.2016.1209784

Giambona E, Wang Y (2020) Derivatives supply and corporate hedging: evidence from the Safe Harbor Reform of 2005. Rev Financ Stud 33(11):5015–5050. https://doi.org/10.1093/RFS/HHAA015

Gillen D, Lall A (2003) International transmission of shocks in the airline industry. J Air Transp Manag 9(1):37–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0969-6997(02)00068-6

Ginieis M, Sánchez-Rebull MV, Campa-Planas F (2012) The academic journal literature on air transport: analysis using systematic literature review methodology. J Air Transp Manag 19(1):31–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2011.12.005

Ginieis M, Sanchez Rebull M, Hernandez A, Campa Planas F (2011) The air transportation sector and the interest in the scientific community: a systematic literature review. Sustain Tour Socio-Cult Environ Econ Impact pp. 81–93. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2165240

Goding L, Andersson-Franko M, Lagerkvist CJ (2018) Preferences for bio jet fuel in Sweden: the case of business travel from a city airport. Sustain Energy Technol Assess 29:60–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SETA.2018.06.015

Golbeck S, Linetsky V (2013) Asset financing with credit risk. J Bank Finance 37(1):43–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2012.08.010

Gong SXH (2007) Bankruptcy protection and stock market behavior in the US airline industry. J Air Transp Manag 13(4):213–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2007.03.003

Gong SXH, Firth M, Cullinane K (2008) International oligopoly and stock market linkages: the case of global airlines. Transp Res Part E 44(4):621–636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2007.05.008

Goodrich JN (2002) September 11, 2001 attack on America: impact on tourism security. J Travel Tour Mark 11(4):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1300/J073v11n04_01

Gu Q, Lago P (2009) Exploring service-oriented system engineering challenges: a systematic literature review. Serv Oriented Comput Appl 3(3):171–188. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11761-009-0046-7

Gu Z, Kim H (2009) CEO cash compensation determinants: an empirical examination of US airlines. Serv Ind J 29(7):995–1005. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642060902749823

Guzhva VS, Beltsova K, Golubev VV (2010) Market undervaluation of risky convertible offerings: evidence from the airline industry. J Econ Finance 34(1):30–45. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12197-007-9015-1

Haanappel PPC(1980) (1980) Bilateral Air Transport Agreements—1913–1980 Md J Int Law 5(2):241–2667

Hadavandi E, Shavandi H, Ghanbari A (2010) Integration of genetic fuzzy systems and artificial neural networks for stock price forecasting. Knowl-Based Syst 23(8):800–808. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2010.05.004

Heeres JL, Kruijd J, Montgomery E, Simmons JJ (2018) Building trust in the air: is airline corporate sustainability reporting taking off? PwC Survey Report, pp. 1–28

Hermundsdottir F, Aspelund A (2021) Sustainability innovations and firm competitiveness: a review. J Clean Prod 280:124715. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.124715

Hersch PL, Mcdougall GS (1993) The demand for corporate jets: a discrete choice analysis. Appl Econ 25(5):661–666. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036849300000011

Hess S (2007) Posterior analysis of random taste coefficients in air travel behaviour modelling. J Air Transp Manag 13(4):203–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2007.03.004

Ho CY, McCarthy P, Wang Y (2021) Competition and countervailing power: evidence from the China Eastern and Shanghai Airlines merger. J Air Transp Manag 91:101990. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JAIRTRAMAN.2020.101990

Ho JC, Qiu M, Tang X (2013) Do airlines always suffer from crashes. Econ Lett 118(1):113–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2012.09.031

Kang KH, Lee S, Huh C (2010) Impacts of positive and negative corporate social responsibility activities on company performance in the hospitality industry. Int J Hosp Manag 29:72–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2009.05.006

Hofer C, Eroglu C (2010) Investigating the effects of economies of scope on firms’ pricing behavior: empirical evidence from the US domestic airline industry. Transp Res Part E 46(1):109–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2009.08.010

Hu Q, Zhang A, Zhang Y (2019) Why are regional jets less used in emerging economies? A real options valuation approach and policy implications. Transp Policy 79:125–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRANPOL.2019.04.012

Hung JH, Liu YC (2005) An examination of factors influencing airline beta values. J Air Transp Manag 11(4):291–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JAIRTRAMAN.2005.01.004

Hunsader KJ, Dickens RN (2011) The oil industry’s response to new avenues in futures trading. Appl Financ Econ 21(6):401–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/09603107.2010.532104

Huse C, Evangelho F (2007) Investigating business traveller heterogeneity: low-cost vs full-service airline users. Transp Res Part E 43(3):259–268. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRE.2006.10.005

IATA Economics (2020) Economic performance of the airline industry in 2020 end-year report. IATA 2020 economic report. www.iata.org/economics

IATA (2022) Air passenger numbers to recover in 2024. https://www.iata.org/en/pressroom/2022-releases/2022-03-01-01/

ICAO (2017) The economic and social benefits of air transport. https://www.icao.int/meetings/wrdss2011/documents/jointworkshop2005/atag_socialbenefitsairtransport.pdf

ICAO (2019) The World of Air Transport in 2019. ICAO

Jackson SE (2009) Membership has its shareholder rewards. J Bus Strategy 30(1):53–55. https://doi.org/10.1108/02756660910926984

Janawade V, Bertrand D, Léo P-Y, Philippe J (2015) Assessing ‘meta-services’: customer’s perceived value and behaviour. Serv Ind J 35(5):275–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2015.1002480

Jeon J-H (2021) The impact of tourism uncertainty on airline stock markets in Korea: a quantile regression approach. J Bus Econ Manag 22(4):923–939. https://doi.org/10.3846/JBEM.2021.14668

Jerath K, Netessine S, Veeraraghavan SK (2010) Revenue management with strategic customers: last-minute selling and opaque selling. Manag Sci 56(3):430–448. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1125

Jiménez-Barreto J, Rubio N, Molinillo S (2021) “Find a flight for me, Oscar!” Motivational customer experiences with chatbots. Int J Contemp Hosp Manag 33(11):3860–3882

Jou R-C, Chen T-Y (2015) Willingness to pay of air passengers for carbon-offset. Sustainability 7(3):3071–3085. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU7033071

Jou R-C, Chien J-Y, Wu Y-C (2013) A study of passengers’ willingness to pay for business class seats of high-speed rail in Taiwan. Transportmetrica A 9(3):223–238. https://doi.org/10.1080/18128602.2011.565816

Kalemba N, Campa-Planas F (2011) An overview of the quality concept in the air transportation business: a systematic literature. Int J Qual Res 11(1):51–70

Kalyebara B, Ahmed AD (2012) Capital markets, corporate governance and capital budgeting: implications for firm value. Corp Ownersh Control 9(3):9–26. https://doi.org/10.22495/cocv9i3art1

Kaps RW, Phillips E (2017) Publishing aviation research: a literature review of scholarly journals. J Aviation/Aerosp Educ Res 14(1):8. https://doi.org/10.15394/jaaer.2004.1539

Karaman AS, Kilic M, Uyar A (2018) Sustainability reporting in the aviation industry: worldwide evidence. Sustain Account Manag Policy J 9(4):362–391. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-12-2017-0150

Karels GV (1989) Market forces and aircraft safety an extension. Econ Inq 27(2):345–354. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1465-7295.1989.tb00786.x

Kauffman RJ, Liu J, Ma D (2015) Technology investment decision-making under uncertainty. Inf Technol Manag 16(2):153–172. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10799-014-0212-2

Khudhair HY, Jusoh A, Mardani A, Nor KM, Streimikiene D (2019) Review of scoping studies on service quality, customer satisfaction and customer loyalty in the airline industry. Contemp Econ 13(4):375–388. https://doi.org/10.3846/16111699.2015.1095233

Kiesel F, Ries JM, Tielmann A (2017) The impact of mergers and acquisitions on shareholders’ wealth in the logistics service industry. Int J Prod Econ 193:781–797. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IJPE.2017.09.006

Kim H, Gu Z (2004) Impact of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the return and risk of airline stocks. Tour Hosp Res 5(2):150–163. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.thr.6040013

Kim YH, Kim MC, Mattila AS (2017) Corporate social responsibility and equity-holder risk in the hospitality industry. Cornell Hosp Q 58(1):81–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/1938965516649052

Kitchenham B (2004) Procedures for performing systematic reviews. https://www.inf.ufsc.br/~aldo.vw/kitchenham.pdf

Kizildag M, Goh BK (2011) The effects of asset growth on the cross-section of hospitality stock returns. J Hosp Financ Manag 19(1):129–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/10913211.2011.10653907

Kökény L, Kenesei Z, Neszveda G (2021) Impact of COVID-19 on different business models of European airlines. Curr Issues Tour 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2021.1960284

Kolaric S, Schiereck D (2016) Are stock markets efficient in the face of fear? Evidence from the terrorist attacks in Paris and Brussels. Finance Res Lett 18:306–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2016.05.003

Korkeamäki T, Liljeblom E, Pfister M (2016) Airline fuel hedging and management ownership. J Risk Finance 17(5):492–509. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRF-06-2016-0077

Krieger K, Chen D (2015) Post-accident stock returns of aircraft manufacturers based on potential fault. J Air Transp Manag 43:20–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2015.01.002

Kristiani E, Sumarwan U, Noor Yuliati L, Saefuddin A (2014) Managing rewards to enhance customer lifetime value. Asian Soc Sci 10(2):84–92. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v10n2p84

Kristoffersson I, Daly A, Algers S, Svalgård-jarcem S, Kristoffersson I, Daly A (2021) Representing travel cost variation in large-scale models of long-distance passenger transport. Transp Lett 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/19427867.2021.1944965

Kwoka J, Gu C (2015) Predicting merger outcomes: the accuracy of stock market event studies, market structure characteristics, and agency decisions. J Law Econ 58(3):519–543. https://doi.org/10.1086/684225

Le TV, O’Brien JP (2010) Can two wrongs make a right? State ownership and debt in a transition economy. J Manag Stud 47(7):1297–1316. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00916.x

Lee J (2019) Effects of operational performance on financial performance. Manag Sci Lett 9(1):25–32. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2018.11.003

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Lee WS, Moon J (2016) Determinants of CEO strategic risk-taking in the airline industry. Tour Manag Perspect 18:111–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2016.01.009

Lee WS, Moon J (2018) Tenure of top management team, employee relationship, and value of airlines. Res Transp Bus Manag 28:85–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rtbm.2018.07.003

Lee WS, Kim C, Moon J, Yoon H (2017) Impact of airline top management teams on corporate social responsibility. Tour Anal 22(1):19–29. https://doi.org/10.3727/108354217X14828625279591

Lenaerts B, Allroggen F, Malina R (2021) The economic impact of aviation: a review on the role of market access. J Air Transp Manag 91:102000. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2020.102000

Li K, Rollins J, Yan E (2017) Web of Science use in published research and review papers 1997–2017: a selective, dynamic, crossdomain, content-based analysis. Scientometrics 115(1):1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11192-017-2622-5

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Li MZ, Oum TH, Zhang Y (2004) Tobin’s q and airline performances. Public Works Manag Policy 9(1):51–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087724X04265137

Liew VKS (2020) The effect of novel coronavirus pandemic on tourism share prices. J Tour Futur. https://doi.org/10.1108/JTF-03-2020-0045

Lijesen MG (2006) A mixed logit based valuation of frequency in civil aviation from SP-data. Transp Res Part E 42(2):82–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRE.2005.09.002

Lim SC, Macias AJ, Moeller T (2020) Intangible assets and capital structure. J Bank Finance 118(105873). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89494-2_7

Limlomwongse Suksmith P, Nitivattananon V (2015) Aviation impacts on property values and management: the case of Suvarnabhumi International Airport. IATSS Res 39(1):58–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.IATSSR.2014.07.001

Lozano R (2015) A holistic perspective on corporate sustainability drivers. Corporate Soc Responsib Environ Manag 22(1):32–44. https://doi.org/10.1002/csr.1325

Lu J (2017) Journal of Air Transport Management Segmentation of passengers using full-service and low-cost carriers e Evidence from Taiwan. J Air Transp Manag 62:204–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2017.05.002

Lu JL (2017) Segmentation of passengers using full-service and low-cost carriers—evidence from Taiwan. J Air Transp Manag 62:204–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JAIRTRAMAN.2017.05.002

Lu JL, Shon ZY (2012) Exploring airline passengers’ willingness to pay for carbon offsets. Transp Res Part D 17(2):124–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRD.2011.10.002

Luo X, Homburg C (2008) Satisfaction, complaint, and the stock value gap. J Mark 72(4):29–43. https://doi.org/10.1509/JMKG.72.4.029

MacKerron GJ, Egerton C, Gaskell C, Parpia A, Mourato S (2009) Willingness to pay for carbon offset certification and co-benefits among (high-)flying young adults in the UK. Energy Policy 37(4):1372–1381. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENPOL.2008.11.023

Malighetti P, Meoli M, Paleari S, Redondi R (2011) Value determinants in the aviation industry. Transp Res Part E 47(3):359–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2010.11.007

Maneenop S, Kotcharin S (2020) The impacts of COVID-19 on the global airline industry: an event study approach. J Air Transp Manag 89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2020.101920

Manuela WS, Rhoades DL, Curtis T (2016) An analysis of Delta Air Lines’ oil refinery acquisition. Res Transp Econ 56:50–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RETREC.2016.07.005

Mardani A, Jusoh A, Zavadskas EK, Khalifah Z, Nor KM (2015) Application of multiple-criteria decision-making techniques and approaches to evaluating of service quality: a systematic review of the literature. J Bus Econ Manag 16(5):1034–1068. https://doi.org/10.3846/16111699.2015.1095233

Markoulis S, Neofytou N (2019) The impact of terror attacks on global sectoral capital markets: an empirical study. Econ Peace Secur J 14(1):46–59. https://doi.org/10.15355/epsj.14.1.46

McKinsey (2020) The value of value creation. https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/the-value-of-value-creation

McKinsey (2021) Back to the future? Airline sector poised for change post-COVID-19. https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/travellogisticsandinfrastructure/ourinsights/backtothefutureairlinesectorpoisedfor changepostcovid19/back-to-the-future-airline-sector-poised-for-change-post-covid-19_vf.pdf?shouldIndex=fa

McManners P (2016) The action research case study approach: a methodology for complex challenges such as sustainability in aviation. Action Res 14(2):201–216

McManners PJ (2016) Developing policy integrating sustainability: a case study into aviation. Environ Sci Policy 57:86–92

Merkert R, Beck M (2017) Value of travel time savings and willingness to pay for regional aviation. Transp Res Part A 96:29–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRA.2016.11.022

Miller LT, Park CS (2004) Economic analysis in the maintenance, repair, and overhaul industry: an options approach. Eng Econ 49(1):21–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/00137910490432593

Minja E (2011) Precision Air Services Ltd—jostling for position in Tanzanian airspace. Emerald Emerg Mark Case Stud 1(1):1–11. https://doi.org/10.1108/20450621111110483

Mohanty S, Nandha M, Habis E, Juhabi E (2014) Oil price risk exposure: the case of the U.S. Travel and Leisure Industry. Energy Econ 41:117–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENECO.2013.09.028

Mohanty P, Mishra S (2021) Assessing the impact of COVID-19 on the valuation of Indian companies using a financial model. Int J Emerg Mark. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOEM-11-2020-1388

Mollick AV, Amin MR (2021) Occupancy, oil prices, and stock returns: evidence from the U.S. airline industry. J Air Transp Manag 91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2020.102015

Moon J, Lee WS, Kim I (2016). Effect of corporate social responsibility on airlines. Int J Transp Econ 105–122. https://www.torrossa.com/en/resources/an/3126464

Munoz C, Laniado H (2021) Airline choice model for international round-trip flights: the role of travelers’ satisfaction and personality traits. Res Transp Econ 53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2021.101121

Murphy F, Li N, Murphy B, Cummins M (2013) The link between jet fuel prices, carbon credits and airline firm value. J Energy Mark 6(2):83–97. https://doi.org/10.21314/JEM.2013.090

Murphy J (2006) EADS co-operates over alleged insider dealing. Jane’s Def Wkly pp. 567–568

Ng ICL (2007) Advance demand and a critical analysis of revenue management. Serv Ind J 27(5):525–548. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642060701411682

Nicolau JL, Santa-María MJ (2012a) Effect of innovation on airlines’ operating leverage: a Spanish case study. J Air Transp Manag 25:44–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2012.08.001

Nicolau JL, Santa-María MJ (2012b) Gauging innovation worth for airlines. J Air Transp Manag 20:9–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2011.08.005

Nicolau JL, Santa-María MJ (2017) Sports results creating tourism value: Rafael Nadal’s tennis match points worth €12,000,000. Tourism Econ 23(3):697–701. https://doi.org/10.5367/te.2015.0537

Nikulina EN, Tarasova EV (2021) Application of option models in evaluation of innovative projects of the aviation industry. Rev Geintec-Gest Inov Tecnol 11(2):1860–1867. https://doi.org/10.47059/REVISTAGEINTEC.V11I2.1803

Nwude EC, Agbo EI, Agbadua BO (2016) Risks of equities listed in the airlines, automobile, road and maritime sectors of the Nigerian stock exchange. Int Bus Manag 10(22):5463–5474. https://doi.org/10.3923/ibm.2016.5463.5474

Nzuva S (2020) Evaluating business modelling and sustainability in the aviation industry: a comprehensive review. SSRG Int J Econ Manag Stud 7(10):64–77. https://doi.org/10.14445/23939125/IJEMS-V7I10P112

OECD (2012) Corporate reporting of intangible assets: a progress report (Issue April). http://www.oecd.org/daf/ca/IntangibleAssets.pdf

Ojo TK (2017) Quality of public transport service: an integrative review and research agenda. Transp Lett 11(2):104–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/19427867.2017.1283835

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Özcan İ (2019) Capital structure and firm performance: evidence from the airport industry. Eur J Transp and Infrastruct Res 19(3). https://doi.org/10.18757/ejtir.2019.19.3.4384

Pagourtzi E, Assimakopoulos V, Hatzichristos T, French N (2003) Real estate appraisal: a review of valuation methods. J Prop Invest Finance 21(4):383–401. https://doi.org/10.1108/14635780310483656

Pan X, Zuo Z (2020) Investigating travelers’ heterogeneous attitudes toward losses: insights from a stated preference experiment. Transp Lett 12(8):559–569. https://doi.org/10.1080/19427867.2019.1669000

Papatheodorou A (2021) A review of research into air transport and tourism:: launching the Annals of Tourism Research Curated Collection on Air Transport and Tourism. Ann Tour Res 87:103151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2021.103151

Park JH, Park NK, Zhang A (2003) The impact of international alliances on rival value: a study of the British Airways/USAir Alliance. Transp Res Part E 39(1):1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1366-5545(02)00023-6

Pereira BA, Lohmann G, Houghton L (2021) Innovation and value creation in the context of aviation: a Systematic Literature Review. J Air Transp Manag 94(Apr):102076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2021.102076

Petrescu M, Mangleburg T, Ben Mrad S, O’Leary K (2020) Reciprocal influences and effects of viral NWOM campaigns in social media. J Mark Commun 26(7):685–702. https://doi.org/10.1080/13527266.2018.1545244

Porter M (1985) Competitive advantage. Free Press

Qin M, Tang C-HH, Jang SS, Lehto X (2017) Mobile app introduction and shareholder returns. J Hosp Tour Manag 31:173–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2016.11.006

Racine M, Wilson C, Wynes M(2018) The value of apology: how do corporate apologies moderate the stock market reaction to non-financial corporate crises? J Bus Eth 163(3):485–505. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10551-018-4037-5

Rahman M (2020) Dynamic marketing productivity and firm intangible value: insights from airlines industry. J Marketing Theory Practice 28(3):342–355. https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.2020.1766360

Ramanchi R, Mehta S, Vedera M (2017) Equity research and valuation: Jet Airways. Emerald Emerg Mark Case Stud 7(2):1–28. https://doi.org/10.1108/EEMCS-06-2016-0144

Rambaud SC, Pascual JL, Rodríguez JCM (2021) Sustainability in the aerospace sector, a transition to clean energy: the E2-EVM valuation model. Sustainability 13(12):6717. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU13126717

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Ranasinghe T, Sivaramakrishnan KYi L (2021) Hedging, hedge accounting, and earnings predictability. Rev Account Stud 1–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11142-021-09595-8

Rauh C, Schneider G (2013) There is no such thing as a free open sky: financial markets and the struggle over European competences in international air transport. J Common Market Stud 51(6):1124–1140. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12057

Raza SA, Ashrafi R, Akgunduz A (2020) A bibliometric analysis of revenue management in airline industry. J Revenue Pricing Manag 19(6):436–465. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41272-020-00247-1

Rotaris L, Giansoldati M, Scorrano M (2020) Are air travellers willing to pay for reducing or offsetting carbon emissions? Evidence from Italy. Transp Res Part A 142:71–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRA.2020.10.014

Samitas A, Kampouris E (2017) Empirical investigation of co-authorship in the field of finance: a network perspective. Int Rev Financ Anal 58:235–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2017.11.006

Schipper Y, Nijkamp P, Rietveld P (1998) Why do aircraft noise value estimates differ? A meta-analysis. J Air Transp Manag 4(2):117–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0969-6997(98)00005-2

Schipper Y, Rietveld P, Nijkamp P (2001) Environmental externalities in air transport markets. J Air Transp Manag 7(3):169–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0969-6997(01)00002-3

Schwartz N, Zea M (1999) Surfing for value. Airl Bus 1999(7):68

Shaari NF, Abdul-Rahim AS, Afandi SHM (2020) Are Malaysian airline passengers willing to pay to offset carbon emissions? Environ Sci Pollut Res 27(19):24242–24252. https://doi.org/10.1007/S11356-020-08662-Y

Sheng D, Li ZC, Fu X (2019) Modeling the effects of airline slot hoarding behavior under the grandfather rights with use-it-or-lose-it rule. Transp Res Part E 122:48–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TRE.2018.11.006

Shepherd WG (1991) Market dominance under U.S. antitrust. Rev Ind Organ 6(2):161–176. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00364540

Shi Y, Li X (2019) A bibliometric study on intelligent techniques of bankruptcy prediction for corporate firms. Heliyon 5(12):e02997. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e02997

da Silva Rocha AB, Figueiredo Pinto AC (2006) The air transport industry crisis in Brazil and in the USA and companies’ additional value due to real options analysis. Lat Am Bus Rev 6(3):85–111. https://doi.org/10.1300/J140v06n03_04

Singal V (1996) Airline mergers and competition: an integration of stock and product price effects. J Bus 69(2):233–268. https://doi.org/10.1086/209689

Singh G, Shaik M (2021) The short-term impact of covid-19 on global stock market indices. Contemp Econ 15(1):1–18. https://doi.org/10.5709/ce.1897-9254.432

Skinner DJ (2008) Accounting for intangibles—a critical review of policy recommendations. Account Bus Res 38(3):191–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/00014788.2008.9663332

Smith VK, Mansfield C, Allen Klaiber H (2013) Terrorist threats, information disclosures, and consumer sovereignty. Inf Econ Policy 25(4):225–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoecopol.2013.06.002

Song HJ, Yeon J, Lee S (2021) Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic: evidence from the U.S. restaurant industry. Int J Hosp Manag 92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2020.102702

Sonnenschein J, Smedby N (2018) Designing air ticket taxes for climate change mitigation: insights from a Swedish valuation study. Clim Policy 19(5):651–663. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2018.1547678

Sonnenwald DH (2007) Scientific collaboration. Annu Rev Inf Sci Technol 41(1):643–681. https://doi.org/10.1002/aris.2007.1440410121

Spasojevic B, Lohmann G, Scott N (2018) Air transport and tourism—a systematic literature review (2000–2014). Curr Issues Tour 21(9):975–997. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2017.1334762

Sun KA, Kim DY(2013) Does customer satisfaction increase firm performance? An application of American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) Int J Hosp Manag 35:68–77

Sun X, Wandelt S, Zheng C, Zhang A (2021) COVID-19 pandemic and air transportation: successfully navigating the paper hurricane. J Air Transp Manag 94:102062. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2021.102062

Swaminathan V, Groening C, Mittal V, Thomaz F (2014) How achieving the dual goal of customer satisfaction and efficiency in mergers affects a firm’s long-term financial performance. J Serv Res 17(2):182–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094670513510196

Thomas SL, Officer D, Johnson NB (1995) The capital market response to wage negotiations in the airlines. Ind Relat 34(2):203–217. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-232X.1995.tb00369.x

Thorbecke W (2019) How oil prices affect East and Southeast Asian economies: evidence from financial markets and implications for energy security. Energy Policy 128:628–638. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ENPOL.2019.01.044

Thorbecke W(2020) The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the U.S. economy: evidence from the stock market J Risk Financ Manag 13(10):233

Tijssen RJ, Van Raan AF (1994) Mapping changes in science and technology: bibliometric co-occurrence analysis of the R&D literature. Eval Rev 18(1):98–115. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841X9401800110

Tranfield D, Denyer D, Smart P (2003) Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. Br J Manag 14(3), 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00375

Treanor SD, Rogers DA, Carter DA, Simkins BJ (2014) Exposure, hedging, and value: new evidence from the U.S. airline industry. Int Rev Financ Anal 34:200–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2014.04.002

Trifonov D (2021) Political connections of Russian corporations: blessing or curse? J Behav Exp Finance 29. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JBEF.2021.100458

Tsai D, Chang S, Chen W, Tran C-L (2008) The market valuation of new route announcements. J Air Transp Manag 14(5):252–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2008.04.011

Turner PA, Lim SH (2015) Hedging jet fuel price risk: The case of U.S. passenger airlines. J Air Transp Manag 44–45:54–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JAIRTRAMAN.2015.02.007

Van de Ven AH (2007) Engaged scholarship: a guide for organizational and social research. Oxford University Press on Demand

Vasigh B, Azadian F, Moghaddam K (2020) Methodologies and techniques for determining the value of an aircraft. Transp Res Rec 2675(1):332–341. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198120958419

Venkataraman SV, Ramachandran P (2016) A bargaining framework for the airline alliance revenue sharing problem. Int J Revenue Manag 9(4):201–220. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJRM.2016.079817

Wang S, Gao Y (2021) A literature review and citation analyses of air travel demand studies published between 2010 and 2020. J Air Transp Manag 97:102135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2021.102135

Wang YS (2013) The impact of crisis events on the stock returns volatility of international airlines. Serv Ind J 33(12):1206–1217. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2011.629295

Wang H, Gao X (2020) Oil price dynamics and airline earnings predictability. J Air Transp Manag 87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2020.101854

Wang KK, Wittman MD, Bockelie A (2021) Dynamic offer generation in airline revenue management. J Revenue Pricing Manag 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1057/S41272-021-00349-4

Wassmer U, Meschi PX (2011) The effect of code-sharing alliance formations and terminations on firm value: The role of co-specialization and scope extension. J Air Transp Manag 17(5):305–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JAIRTRAMAN.2011.03.005

Weiss LA, Wruck KH (1998) Information problems, conflicts of interest, and asset stripping: Chapter 11’s failure in the case of Eastern Airlines. J Financ Econ 48(1):55–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0304-405x(98)00004-x

Wilding R, Wagner B, Gimenez C, Tachizawa EM (2012) Extending sustainability to suppliers: a systematic literature review. Supply Chain Manag 17(5):531–543. https://doi.org/10.1108/13598541211258591

Xie J, Shugan SM (2001) Electronic tickets, smart cards, and online prepayments: when and how to advance sell. Mark Sci 20(3):219–243. https://doi.org/10.1287/mksc.20.3.219.9765

Xun J, Guo B (2017) Twitter as customer’s eWOM: an empirical study on their impact on firm financial performance. Internet Res 27(5):1014–1038. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-07-2016-0223

Yang J, Klassen KJ (2008) How financial markets reflect the benefits of self service technologies. J Enterp Inf Manag 21(5):448–467. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410390810904238

Yun X, Yoon S-M (2019) Impact of oil price change on airline’s stock price and volatility: evidence from China and South Korea. Energy Econ 78:668–679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2018.09.015

Zhang Q, Koutmos D, Chen K, Zhu J (2021) Using operational and stock analytics to measure airline performance: a network DEA approach. Decision Sci 52(3):720–748. https://doi.org/10.1111/DECI.12363

Zheng L, He H (2021) Share price prediction of aerospace relevant companies with recurrent neural networks based on PCA. Expert Syst Appl 183:115384. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ESWA.2021.115384

Download references

Acknowledgements

This project has received funding from European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement no. 713679 and from the Universitat Rovira i Virgili (URV).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Business Management, Universitat Rovira i Virgili Reus, Tarragona, Spain

Yaghoub Abdi, Xiaoni Li & Xavier Càmara-Turull

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yaghoub Abdi .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Additional information.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Abdi, Y., Li, X. & Càmara-Turull, X. Firm value in the airline industry: perspectives on the impact of sustainability and Covid-19. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10 , 294 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01644-8

Download citation

Received : 20 July 2022

Accepted : 27 March 2023

Published : 06 June 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01644-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Advertisement

Rating ESG key performance indicators in the airline industry

• Open access
• Published: 29 August 2023

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Alan Francisco Caraveo Gomez Llanos 1 ,
• Annas Vijaya   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8424-1076 1 , 2 &
• Hendro Wicaksono 1  

11k Accesses

6 Citations

Explore all metrics

The environmental, social, and governance (ESG) integration finds itself in a transition with rapid developments worldwide, given that the pandemic incentivized companies and investors to focus on other social and governance measures such as ESG ratings. However, the divergence of ratings from the ESG and a lack of transparency lead the companies to report voluntary indicators without standardization. This study aimed to identify the ESG criteria and the most suitable set of key performance indicators (KPIs) in the airline industry after the impact of COVID-19. Furthermore, the second objective was to determine the appropriate weights and ranking of the identified criteria. The multi-criteria decision-making analytical hierarchical process was applied for this purpose. Additionally, the use of intuitionistic variables delivers a comprehensive model for rating the airlines according to their ESG performance. The most relevant criteria found in the study were critical risk management, greenhouse gas emissions, and systemic risk management. Regarding the KPIs, the top-3 weights were the number of flight accidents, jet fuel consumed and sustainable aviation used, and the number of digital transformation initiatives.

Similar content being viewed by others

Measuring the level and risk of corporate responsibility – An empirical comparison of different ESG rating approaches

Airlines and Corporate Responsibility: Issues and Challenges

Do the Companies Benefit from Improved Disclosure Performance? Evidence from the Airport Industry

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Since the emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic, governments across the globe have introduced rapid economic rescue actions in hopes of protecting their companies and their people. As the pandemic remains uncertain, countries seek to implement measures that enhance and preserve both short-term and long-term prosperity. One of these measures includes the transition to a more inclusive and resilient society with zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (OECD, 2020 ). Corporate actions integrating these measures are often called Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) or Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Gillan et al. ( 2021 ) defined ESG as how stakeholder groups, i.e., investors, employees, communities, environmentalists, consumers, and corporations, integrate governance, environmental, and social concerns into their business models. ESG includes a governance dimension, whereas CSR generally refers to corporate activities regarding social responsibility but indirectly addresses governance issues. Hence, ESG is a broader term than CSR. Nonetheless, in this paper, both terms hold equal weight regarding sustainability. As published by the Global Sustainable Investment ( 2021 ) review, ESG integration finds itself in a transition with rapid developments worldwide, reshaping sustainable investment toward the best standards of practice. For example, there was a 15% increase in sustainable investment over the past two years, reaching USD 35.3 trillion in major markets.

The disruption caused by the pandemic incentivized companies and investors to focus on other social and governance measures, such as ESG ratings. Higher scores may indicate a better opportunity to cope with crisis scenarios, suggesting a firm’s capability of mitigating the associated risks. Subsequently, companies with more decisive ESG actions are expected to be more resilient in unstable market situations (Díaz et al., 2021 ). Despite the global focus, ESG is a concept that is still developing. While financial reporting standards have matured over the decades, ESG reporting is still unclear. As stated by Berg et al. ( 2019 ), most leading companies report an outline of voluntary ESG indicators without following a mandatory framework for all of them. Consequently, ESG raters provide their services by gathering and aggregating data across various sources, frameworks, and reporting standards. The expected result is the divergence of ratings from the ESG agencies to the assessed institutions and a lack of transparency regarding the methodologies used to measure the scores. Escrig-Olmedo et al. ( 2019 ) acknowledge issues such as the inconsistency of the assessments, the lack of overall scores of some rating agencies, and the lack of incorporation of the stakeholders in the evaluation process.

The airline industry faces challenges regarding its environmental impacts on the climate. The burning of jet fuel and the release of pollutant gases endanger global air quality (Abdi et al., 2020 ). Carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) is the main greenhouse gas producing the warming of the atmosphere. The International Air Transport Association (IATA, 2021d ) reported that worldwide flights emitted 905 million tonnes of CO 2 in 2019. However, the pandemic reduced this number to 495 million tonnes in 2020 due to travel restrictions and parked aircraft. Nevertheless, the rebound is expected to challenge the airlines to develop strategic sustainability measures for the upcoming years. The increasing awareness of adopting CSR has permeated the aviation sector as it also represents the brand image and reputation due to its significant role compared with other industries (Lee et al., 2018 ). Therefore, the airlines are aligning their strategies by integrating socially responsible aspects into their business practices to further sustainable development (Abdi et al., 2020 ). Nonetheless, air travel companies with high capital intensity and external debt are hesitant regarding ESG/CSR implementation due to their corporate financial performance. This situation impacts the compliance of airlines to develop CSR based on financial performance, affecting their sustainability strategies (Kuo et al., 2021 ). Although airlines have implemented these strategies, the percentage is still low compared to other sectors. Another challenge facing the airlines is selecting the best ESG indicators to prioritize implementation, considering aspects as operating costs, brand image, reputation, and profitability (Kuo et al., 2021 ). As Hristov and Chirico ( 2019 ) emphasized, there is a gap of updated literature regarding general sustainability KPIs for evaluating their ESG performance, as verified in this paper, as in the airline industry.

This study aimed to identify the ESG criteria and the most suitable set of key performance indicators in the airline industry after the impact of COVID-19. Furthermore, the second objective was to determine the appropriate weights and ranking of the identified criteria. The final goal was to propose a comprehensive model for rating the airlines according to their ESG performance. The findings can provide relevant implications for ESG analysts and airlines regarding measuring and reporting their sustainability KPIs. This approach deals with the sustainability challenges faced by the airline industry, which holds significant value for academics, practitioners, and policymakers alike. Moreover, the findings of this study can be directly applied in practice. The recent United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP26) underscored the importance of addressing the environmental initiatives highlighted in this research. The paper's discoveries also have the potential to strengthen the airline industry's sustainability and resilience in the aftermath of the COVID-19 impact. By prioritizing ESG KPIs, airlines' practitioners, and policymakers can proactively prepare for future disruptions and showcase their dedication to long-term sustainability. Additionally, the proposed model can be adopted by airlines to assess their performance in comparison to competitors and improve their ESG practices. The research met these objectives by addressing the following research questions: (a) What are the current KPIs reported by the airlines, and how important are they? (b) What are the major agencies in sustainability reporting? And (c) Are the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and intuitionistic variables suitable to calculate the ESG performance of the airlines?

The next section of this paper consists of: Sect.  2 includes a literature review introducing the use of ESG in the airline industry and other sectors and then proceeds with a cross-case analysis of sustainability reports in specific airlines. Additionally, Sect.  2 analyses the literature gap. In contrast, Sect.  3 thoroughly describes the research methodology. Section  4 depicts the resultant ESG criteria and key performance indicators and presents the weights and ranking obtained in the survey. Moreover, the section calculates the ESG rating and delivers the results of the model. Lastly, Sect.  5 discusses the findings, followed by the conclusion and suggestions for future research.

2 State of the arts

2.1 esg in the airline industry.

Various studies focused on ESG/CSR in the airline industry in recent years. Abdi et al., ( 2020 , 2021 ) investigated the sustainability performance within airlines. The scholars addressed the impact of ESG on the firm value and financial performance and the potential moderating role of firm size and age in the air transport industry. Similarly, other academics (Kuo et al., 2021 ) measured the ESG impact on the short-term financial performance of 30 worldwide airline companies.

Coles et al. ( 2014 ) examined the CSR practices in low-cost European airlines, while Cowper-Smith and de Grosbois ( 2011 ) identified CSR initiatives and the state of adoption among three large airline groups. Al Sarrah et al. ( 2021 ) explored the relationship between the civil aviation industry and sustainability considerations involving the role of stakeholders. The paper identified a vast number of CSR criteria.

Chang et al. ( 2015 ) evaluated a model for Asia–Pacific airlines to examine the critical strategic factors in CSR implementation. On the other hand, Karaman and Akman ( 2018 ) proposed an analytic hierarchy process (AHP) model to identify key factors regarding criteria and sub-criteria of CSR programs in the Turkish airline industry. Kılıç et al. ( 2019 ) studied the relationship between Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) reporting and firm performance. Comparably, Karaman et al. ( 2018 ) tested the link between sustainability reporting and sustainability performance.

Meanwhile, Lee et al. ( 2018 ) analyzed the materiality issue for the airline industry by comparing low-cost and full-service carriers. The Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) Materiality Map was utilized to measure firm performance. One year later, Stevenson and Marintseva ( 2019 ) reviewed the Fuzzy Set Theory for the formation of criteria and assessed a company’s CSR behavior and reporting techniques to discuss the effectiveness of the reporting standards in European airlines. The overview of the studies in the airline industry is shown in Table 1 .

2.2 Criteria comparison with other sectors

The five major frameworks and disclosure of standards are the global reporting initiative (GRI), the sustainability accounting standards board (SASB), the international integrated reporting council (IIRC), the climate disclosure standards board (CDSB), and CDP (CDSB, 2020 ). As reported by KPMG ( 2020 ), GRI is the leading framework used by around two-thirds of the top 100 companies ranked by revenue. The report also establishes that the SASB standard is the most frequently utilized for sustainability reporting regarding other guidelines and standards.

In Table 2 , the SASB standard was utilized to illustrate the differences and similarities of ESG criteria in the airlines and other sectors of the transport industry. The “greenhouse gas emissions” criterion is one of the most critical for the whole transportation sector. According to European Environment Agency ( 2021 ), road transport emitted 72% of all GHG in 2019. However, the percentage is expected to decrease because road transport decarbonizes faster than the other modes of transportation. The aviation sector is projected to increase up to 2030 in conjunction with maritime transport.

2.3 Sustainability reports in the airline industry

The following section exemplifies the lack of standardization in the sector regarding KPIs reporting through cross-case analysis. The selection of the air travel groups was based on the highest CO 2 emissions in Europe as of 2021 (Mazareanu, 2021 ). Three flag carriers appear in the top positions and one low-cost carrier in fourth place. Relevant data from their sustainability reports are given in Table 3 .

2.4 Literature gap analysis

As stated by Lydenberg et al. ( 2010 ), global activities hinder the determination of performance indicators. The variety of industries, along with the different methodologies across countries, establish complications in evaluating criteria for the rating agencies. The complexity obliges the raters to delimit manifold sets of KPIs, and thus, companies only produce voluntary reports addressing ESG issues. Nevertheless, mandatory reporting of a defined group of criteria could intensify peer-to-peer comparisons to determine current positioning and identify opportunities. In the case of the airline industry, there is no specific selection of attributes and standardized key performance indicators as verified in the airline’s sustainability reports.

Another gap to point out is the heterogeneity of the weighting evaluation. Rating agencies take different perspectives on the relative importance of criteria and whether performance in one attribute alters another (Berg et al., 2019 ). The rater’s methodologies to measure customers from distinct sectors remain unclear. Dow Jones appears more consistently in the aviation literature in partnership with RobecoSAM. This sustainability system, however, only displays its constituents without specifying the weights in their index factsheet (Diez-Cañamero et al., 2020 ; Escrig-Olmedo et al., 2019 ).

The airline industry literature related to established KPIs and weighting methods to determine ESG performance is limited and requires enhanced development. This research addresses the gap through a new level of analysis.

3 Methodology

In this paper, a fifth-phase methodology was developed to address the research objectives and fill the respective research gap. In the first step, the main ESG criteria were identified based on one of the sustainability reporting standards. Then, the sub-criteria were determined conjointly with two aviation organizations. The sub-criteria reflect the key performance indicators required for further steps. In phase III, experienced aviation and sustainability professionals were selected and contacted to perform a questionnaire. Thereafter, the relative weights were calculated based on the answers of the respondents using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method. Lastly, two alternatives were compared to illustrate the functionality of the model using the intuitionistic variables. The flow diagram of the methodology is depicted in Fig.  1 .

Methodology flow diagram

3.1 ESG main criteria

The first step to address the research gap required an analysis of the main criteria in the airline industry. The scarcity of aviation literature led to the use of established standards. More than 1000 sustainability professionals consider the Dow Jones Sustainability Indices as the index with the highest credibility within worldwide endorsed ratings. They perform an individual questionnaire for different sector groups. Nonetheless, the airline industry copes with specific ESG issues outside the scope of other sectors (Chang et al., 2015 ).

The Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) identifies, manages, and communicates financial materiality and sustainability information to investors. SASB standards are industry-specific, identifying the subset of issues and providing the performance indicators in the corresponding industry to support their sustainability reporting. Frameworks and disclosure standards, including GRI and SASB, facilitate the comparison of ESG information, and therefore, provide the resources for rating agencies in their analysis (GRI & SASB, 2021 ).

This study deploys the SASB standards due to its financial materiality impact and industry-specific focus. The criteria selected are based on these standards but adapted according to the findings from air travel literature. The highest classification involves the dimensions of “Environment”, “Social”, and “Governance”. Economic factors are out of the scope of this research.

3.2 KPIs selection

Subsequently, this research elaborated on the selection of intrinsic performance indicators. Ultimately, the evaluation explored the SASB standards and expanded upon the field by covering additional specific airline industry issues. The influential organizations focusing on aviation activities are the Air Transport Association (IATA) and the International Civil Aviation Association (ICAO).

IATA is a non-governmental entity concerned with developing global commercial standards to ensure safety and efficiency for travelers. One of their priorities is environmental and social sustainability promoting green activities and programs as Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA), sustainable aviation fuel (SAF), and aircraft decommissioning (IATA, 2021c ). Furthermore, they launched industry-wide diversity and inclusion initiatives, considering them essential for business success (IATA, 2021a ).

ICAO is a United Nations agency whose core function is to support diplomatic interactions among national governments regarding air transport activities and research new air transport policies as standardization innovation. Their reports and recommendations in sustainability include topics regarding air pollution, aircraft noise, energy management, clean technology, and digitalization (ICAO, 2021 ).

The present study collected the criteria and KPIs according to IATA and ICAO literature and SASB standards, as shown in Fig.  2 . The criteria summary is depicted in Sect.  4.1 .

ESG criteria of airline industry

3.3 AHP method and survey design

The prioritization of KPIs requires a multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) approach. Shahin and Mahbod ( 2007 ) consider AHP the most powerful and universally used tool for MCDM. It permits the decision-maker to measure consistency and has proven its value by prioritizing performance indicators.

Creating a hierarchy of a problem is the foundation of the AHP method. The structure is generated based on the criteria selected, starting from the primary goal and subdividing it into lower levels. The ultimate goal is to rate the ESG performance of the airlines. Level 1 is represented by the main criteria, and level 2 by the KPIs. The description of the latter was shortened for illustrative purposes. Moreover, the criteria containing only one performance indicator were omitted from level 2. The survey follows this hierarchy to present the questionnaire to industry professionals. The hierarchical model diagram is given in Fig.  4 .

The size of respondents is relevant for an adequate analysis. Thomas Saaty, the architect of the AHP method, validates that a jury size between six and eight members is optimum to minimize errors (Saaty & Özdemir, 2014 ). According to Herath ( 2004 ), as cited by Rahman et al. ( 2019 ), AHP requires an analytical sampling rather than a statistical one. The experiment performed by Tsyganok et al. ( 2012 ) concluded that the expert competence of small group sampling should always be considered.

In the present research, seven experts participated in the AHP questionnaire. The study area is European airlines, and thus, the group was selected to focus on the sustainability issues in this region. The experts demonstrate at least 4–5 years of experience in the aviation field, and six of them have engaged in sustainability activities for at least 1–3 years. Table 4 provides details on the profiles of the participants.

The questionnaire given to the experts performs a pairwise comparison by Saaty’s nine-point scale that helps to identify the relative importance of one alternative from the other (Saaty, 1980 ). The scale is illustrated in Table 5 . For example, if the respondent determines that criteria A has moderate importance over B, then XAB = 3. On the contrary, XBA = 1/3.

3.4 Weights calculation

Once all the pairwise comparisons were completed, an average pairwise comparison matrix was created to interpret all the participant's judgments for the criteria and sub-criteria. The geometric mean method was used to aggregate the individual judgments, given that this method meets the axiomatic conditions of the reciprocal property.

The responses from the industry experts were computed by the AHP-OS software created by Klaus Goepel. The system handles all the standard AHP calculation steps and permits the visualization of the normalized weights of all the criteria and sub-criteria. Moreover, the software determines the group consensus based on Shannon entropy. The range categories are shown in Table 6 . Goepel ( 2018 ) calculates the consistency ratio (CR) based on the linear fit proposed by Alonso and Lamata ( 2006 ). This ratio determines the degree of reliability and consistency of judgments. The acceptable value in the method is ≤ 0.10. The ratio formula is given in Eq. ( 1 ).

3.5 Rating by intuitionistic variables

Intuitionistic fuzzy set (IFS) is a theory that incorporates expert’s influence as intuitionistic data into the multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) environment by using linguistic terms (Atanassov, 1986 ). The methodology is based on a decision matrix containing fuzzy data ranges derived from fuzzy intuitionistic variables. The variables used in this study are depicted in Table 7 .

Karaman and Akman ( 2018 ) developed a similar approach of linguistic variables in the airline industry as in this research. However, this study utilizes negative and positive indicators according to the type of criteria measured. Egilmez et al. ( 2015 ) addressed the sustainability performance of U.S. and Canada metropoles through this intuitionistic approach.

The calculation starts with the classification of intuitionistic datasets into histograms. The data are decomposed based on the percent distributions shown in Table 8 . An example is illustrated for the sub-criteria “Fuel Consumption”, which contains two types of key performance indicators: total jet fuel consumed and the percentage of sustainable aviation fuel used. The former is a negative sustainability indicator and the latter a positive one. For illustrative purposes, the negative indicator of jet fuel consumed by the airlines is shown in Table 9 and Fig.  3 .

Histogram of jet fuel consumption

The upper bound element determines the rest of the intervals of the histogram. It is worth mentioning that this model is relatively flexible due to its capacity of substituting the upper bound for a specific target that could match the Paris Agreement climate change framework. After the classification of the histogram intervals, the fuzzy variables are assigned to each element, where the values go from 0 to 1 (see Table 10 ). The resultant coefficients are considered for rating the airlines' ESG performance along with the global weights obtained from the AHP method.

4 Research results

4.1 criteria selection, 4.1.1 main criteria.

The resultant main criteria are presented in Table 11 . The attributes were chosen based on the SASB disclosures. The composition includes five environmental measures, three from the social dimension and three from governance. SASB “Air Quality” criterion was included as a sub-criterion in the “GHG emissions” category. The “Noise” and “Environmental Opportunities” were added to the overall model. “Waste and Material Management” and “Systemic Risk Management” were customized according to the airline industry issues. Figure  4 depicts a complete hierarchical model for measuring ESG performance.

Hierarchical model for measuring ESG performance

4.1.2 Key performance indicators

The key indicators gathered from the SASB in conjunction with the aviation organizations are given in Table 12 . The measures provided are not a definitive set of KPIs for the airline industry. The selection could expand by considering other standard-setting organizations. However, companies find it challenging to report numerous KPIs from different frameworks (Dissanayake, 2021 ). This paper exposes twenty indicators for the selected 11 main criteria.

The “Greenhouse Gas Emissions” criterion involves three sub-topics, same as the “Environmental Opportunities”. “Labor Practices” entail two sub-criteria in the social dimension, and “Employee Engagement and Diversity & Inclusion” in the same matter. “Critical Risk Management” considers flight accidents and governmental actions. Finally, “Systemic Risk Management” depicts three sub-criteria related to the travel system collapse.

4.2 Weighting results

Table 13 presents the analysis of the survey responses computed in the online system AHP-OS. The judgments were calculated based on the standard AHP linear scale. The system determined the overall weights of the first-level hierarchy and the second-level hierarchy. Moreover, the online tool permits the ranking of these levels.

In Table 14 , the global weights were assigned to each key performance indicator identified in Table 12 . These weights were obtained by multiplying the criteria weights by the sub-criteria weights. For example, the global weight obtained for the KPI “Number of accidents” is 0.173, the resultant product proceeds from the multiplication of “Critical Risk Management” criteria (0.217) and the sub-criteria “Flight Accidents” (0.795).

The software also computed the consistency ratio (CR) to determine the degree of reliability of the responses. The acceptable value for the AHP method is lower than 10%. Furthermore, the results were reviewed with the participants in case of inconsistencies. Additionally, the software measured the consensus for the aggregated group result. Table 15 presents the breakdown of these values obtained from the online tool.

4.3 Rating calculation

Table 16 simulates the calculation of the ESG performance of two airlines to demonstrate the functionality of the proposed model. The global weights (GW) were determined by the AHP method in Table 14 and the intuitionistic fuzzy numbers (IFN) from Table 10 . The intuitionistic variables were randomly assigned and converted into the respective coefficient.

The final scores determined that “Airline 02” obtained a higher ESG performance than “Airline 01”. The former accomplished its score due to its outstanding practices in environmental opportunities such as digitalization and clean tech, in conjunction with the mitigation of the number of impacted flights, restricted destinations, and parked aircraft.

5 Discussion of findings

5.1 relevant criteria and kpis.

According to the weights and ranking from Table 13 , the most relevant main criterion for the rating of ESG is “Critical Risk Management”. The questionnaire described it as a criterion related to the culture of safety and prevention of high-impact accidents. The experts acknowledged safety as the number one priority consistently with IATA’s primary goals (IATA, 2021e ). The aviation association mentions that safety risk assessment is vital to manage the risks raised by disruptions generated by COVID-19. For this primordial criteria, the KPIs determined include the “number of governmental enforcement actions of aviation safety regulations” and the “number of flight accidents”. The latter was the highest performance indicator overall, with 17.3%.

The second most critical main criterion was “GHG Emissions”. The subjects of “scope 1 emissions”, “fuel consumption”, and “air quality pollutants” defined the importance of this criterion. The representatives of the International Aviation Climate Ambition Coalition during the recent United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP26), recognized the impact of COVID-19 on the global aviation sector and the need to develop initiatives for reducing the aviation sector’s contribution to climate change (United Nations Climate Change Conference, 2021 ). As stated in Eurocontrol ( 2021 ), sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) is one of the key initiatives to deliver decarbonization goals toward net-zero emissions for the aviation sector by 2050. Additionally, the KPI, “total jet fuel consumed (tonnes) and percentage of sustainable aviation fuel used,” weigh 7.6% and is positioned within the second level of relevance and demonstrates a high impact on the ESG performance rating.

The third most relevant main criterion is “Systemic Risk Management”, which involves managing risks resulting from large-scale travel system collapse (unavailable routes). According to a study performed by Stauffer and Poolman ( 2020 ) from S&P Global, COVID-19 exposed the aviation industry’s lack of pandemic risk preparedness, where companies neglected to report mitigating actions related to COVID-19 disruptions. The proposed KPIs in this paper, such as the “number of impacted flights”, “restricted destinations”, and “parked aircraft”, support adaptive operations management in a crisis scenario. However, airlines should establish beforehand their disruption preparedness, response, and recovery plans.

The following criterion in the level of relevance was “Environmental Opportunities”. The KPI with the higher weight below this topic was “number of digital transformation initiatives fully implemented”, with a percentage of 7.2. Even though airlines find themselves in financial uncertainty, the surveyed experts considered this indicator relevant for sustainability development. After the pandemic, the consulting firm McKinsey & Company recommends investing more in IT and digitalization. Airlines are aware of their importance. Nonetheless, before the global health crisis, air travel companies spent roughly 5 percent of their revenue on IT, a relatively low percentage compared to other sectors (Bouwer et al., 2021 ). The introduction of digital initiatives is an area with considerable improvement for the airline industry.

The other explored sub-criterion regarding “Environmental Opportunities” includes “clean technology” and the “carbon offsetting scheme”. The industry professionals considered the sub-criteria to be of relevance in the second and third positions, respectively. The KPI “total airline carbon offset and percentage of voluntary passenger carbon offset” placed last in the set of indicators with 1.7%. The objective of CORSIA is to compensate for the growth of international aviation CO 2 emissions. By itself, the carbon offsetting scheme appears to hardly contribute to climate neutrality by 2050 (European Commission, 2021 ). This program, however, is a complementary mechanism to address climate change, which enables the aviation sector to continue to grow post-pandemic.

5.2 Strengths of the model

The vast number of ratings and rankings hinder the efficient and standardized sustainability reporting of the airlines. The AHP method, in conjunction with the intuitionistic variables, permits a holistic approach whereby airlines' ESG performance can be determined in a relatively more straightforward and standardized manner (Németh et al., 2019 ). The model ensures that stakeholder judgments are considered and provides transparency during the whole process. The proposed AHP model allows the identification of indicators with low performance. Consequently, companies can address the indicators immediately and perform a comparative analysis and ranking of KPIs without compromising the robustness of the model. Moreover, it can be replicated in similar processes, thereby reducing costs and effort related to the selection process (Mohammed Bahurmoz, 2020 ).

The addition of intuitionistic variables allows categorizing the performance of the airlines’ KPIs. The flexibility of the fuzzy theory enables benchmarking with other companies or with a specific target through simplistic terms for a general audience. Furthermore, the fuzzy coefficients generate a comprehensive process along with the global weights from the AHP method.

6 Conclusion

6.1 results and critical reflections.

This study proposes a comprehensive AHP model with intuitionistic variables to calculate the ESG performance of the airlines. The paper delimits a set of key performance indicators according to the issues and opportunities in the aviation sector. Additionally, the research determined appropriate weights based on the responses of aviation and ESG professionals.

By conforming to the proposed model, the results demonstrated that airlines with a strong focus on safety, risk management, GHG emissions, and environmental opportunities would obtain a higher ESG performance. Similarly, companies addressing digitalization and sustainable aviation fuel should perform more competently in the evaluations. On the other hand, the study determined that the carbon offsetting scheme represents the lower priority.

Further research findings are the lack of standardization in the sustainability reports from the airlines and the lack of transparency among the rating agencies.

6.2 Limitations and further research

The limitations of this study are related to the scope of the survey participants. The primary focus was the European airlines, limiting the validity of the results to the respective region. Additionally, the AHP model excels with a small number of criteria. However, the method obtains a higher degree of complexity when more indicators are added to the problem. Powerful software and effort from all the survey participants would be required in this scenario.

For further research, the ESG KPIs should be examined by the airlines and ESG analysts to validate this set of indicators for future theoretical and practical work. Moreover, the high weight of digital initiatives in this study presents an opportunity to address the correlation of sustainability and digital transformation.

6.3 Summary of implications

This study presents a novel approach in identifying, weighting, and ranking the ESG criteria and the most suitable KPIs in the airline industry. This approach addresses the industry's sustainability challenges, particularly in airlines, which would be valuable for academics, practitioners, and policymakers. Furthermore, the results of this paper are applicable to practice. The recent United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP26) exposed the necessity of addressing the environmental initiatives represented in this research. These initiatives have positive to firm value, as explored by Qureshi et al. ( 2020 ) and Xie et al. ( 2019 ).

The paper’s findings can also enhance the airline industry’s sustainability and resilience after COVID-19 impact. By focusing on ESG KPIs, airline practitioners and policymakers can better prepare for future disruptions and demonstrate their commitment to long-term sustainability. On the other hand, the proposed model could be replicated by the airlines and benchmark their results with their competitors and improve their ESG performance as airlines with higher ESG ratings could gain a competitive advantage in the post-COVID-19 recovery phase. This is in line with the previous research results from Abdi et al. ( 2020 , 2021 ) and Kuo et al. ( 2021 ) that it brings more returns on invested funds in terms of company financial performance.

Abdi, Y., Li, X., & Càmara-Turull, X. (2020). Impact of sustainability on firm value and financial performance in the air transport industry. Sustainability, 12 (23), 9957. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12239957

Article   Google Scholar  

Abdi, Y., Li, X., & Càmara-Turull, X. (2021). Exploring the impact of sustainability (ESG) disclosure on firm value and financial performance (FP) in airline industry: The moderating role of size and age. Environment, Development and Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01649-w

Air France-KLM Group. (2018). Sustainability Report . https://csrreport2018.airfranceklm.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/Air-France-KLM-Sustainability-Report-2018.pdf .

Air France-KLM Group. (2020). KLM Sustainability: 2020 at a glance . file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/klmsustainabilityataglance2020(1).pdf.

Alonso, J. A., & Lamata, M. T. (2006). Consistency in the analytic hierarchy process: a new approach. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-based Systems, 14 (04), 445–459. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218488506004114

Al Sarrah, M., Ajmal, M. M., & Mertzanis, C. (2021). Identification of sustainability indicators in the civil aviation sector in Dubai: A stakeholders’ perspective. Social Responsibility Journal, 17 (5), 648–668. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-06-2019-0203

Atanassov, K. T. (1986). Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 20 (1), 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(86)80034-3

Berg, F., Koelbel, J., & Rigobon, R. (2019). Aggregate confusion: The divergence of ESG ratings. SSRN Electronic Journal . https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3438533

Bouwer, J., Saxon, S., & Wittkamp, N. (2021). Back to the future? Airline sector poised for change post-COVID-19. McKinsey & Company. https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/travellogisticsandinfrastructure/ourinsights/backtothefuturepoisedforpostcovid19/back-to-the-future-airline-sector-poised-for-change-post-covid-19_vf.pdf?shouldIndex=fa .

CDSB. (2020). Global sustainability and integrated reporting organisations launch prototype climate-related financial disclosure standard. Retrieved November 5, 2021, from https://www.cdsb.net/corporate-reporting/1139/global-sustainability-and-integrated-reporting-organisations-launch .

Chang, D.-S., Chen, S.-H., Hsu, C.-W., & Hu, A. (2015). Identifying strategic factors of the implantation CSR in the airline industry: The case of Asia-Pacific airlines. Sustainability, 7 (6), 7762–7783. https://doi.org/10.3390/su7067762

Coles, T., Fenclova, E., & Dinan, C. (2014). Corporate social responsibility reporting among European low-fares airlines: Challenges for the examination and development of sustainable mobilities. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 22 (1), 69–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2013.790391

European Commission. (2021). Impact assessment report . https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=SWD:2021:0603:FIN:EN:PDF .

Cowper-Smith, A., & de Grosbois, D. (2011). The adoption of corporate social responsibility practices in the airline industry. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19 (1), 59–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2010.498918

Díaz, V., Ibrushi, D., & Zhao, J. (2021). Reconsidering systematic factors during the Covid-19 pandemic—The rising importance of ESG. Finance Research Letters, 38 , 101870. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.frl.2020.101870

Diez-Cañamero, B., Bishara, T., Otegi-Olaso, J. R., Minguez, R., & Fernández, J. M. (2020). Measurement of corporate social responsibility: A review of corporate sustainability indexes. Rankings and Ratings. Sustainability, 12 (5), 2153. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12052153

Dissanayake, D. (2021). Sustainability key performance indicators and the global reporting initiative: Usage and challenges in a developing country context. Meditari Accountancy Research, 29 (3), 543–567. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEDAR-08-2019-0543

Egilmez, G., Gumus, S., & Kucukvar, M. (2015). Environmental sustainability benchmarking of the U.S. and Canada metropoles: An expert judgment-based multi-criteria decision making approach. Cities, 42 , 31–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2014.08.006

Escrig-Olmedo, E., Fernández-Izquierdo, M., Ferrero-Ferrero, I., Rivera-Lirio, J., & Muñoz-Torres, M. (2019). Rating the raters: Evaluating how ESG rating agencies integrate sustainability principles. Sustainability, 11 (3), 915. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11030915

Eurocontrol. (2021). Aviation sustainability briefing. Eurocontrol . https://www.eurocontrol.int/sites/default/files/2021-10/eurocontrol-aviation-sustainability-briefing-edition-4.pdf .

European Environment Agency. (2021). Greenhouse gas emissions from transport in Europe . European Environment Agency. Retrieved November 20, 2021, from https://www.eea.europa.eu/ims/greenhouse-gas-emissions-from-transport .

Gillan, S. L., Koch, A., & Starks, L. T. (2021). Firms and social responsibility: A review of ESG and CSR research in corporate finance. Journal of Corporate Finance, 66 , 101889. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2021.101889

Global Sustainable Investment. (2021). GSI Review 2020 . http://www.gsi-alliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/GSIR-20201.pdf .

Goepel, K. D. (2018). Implementation of an online software tool for the analytic hierarchy process (AHP-OS). International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process . https://doi.org/10.13033/ijahp.v10i3.590

GRI & SASB. (2021). A practical guide to sustainability reporting using GRI and SASB standards . https://www.sasb.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/GRI-SASB-V4-040721.pdf .

Herath, G. (2004). Incorporating community objectives in improved wetland management: the use of the analytic hierarchy process. Journal of Environmental Management 70 (3), 263–273 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2003.12.011

Hristov, I., & Chirico, A. (2019). The role of sustainability key performance indicators (KPIs) in implementing sustainable strategies. Sustainability, 11 (20), 5742. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11205742

IAG Group. (2020). Annual sustainability report . https://www.iairgroup.com/~/media/Files/I/IAG/documents/sustainability/sustainability-report-2020.pdf .

IATA. (2019b). Sustainable aviation fuels fact sheet . https://www.iata.org/contentassets/d13875e9ed784f75bac90f000760e998/saf-fact-sheet-2019.pdf .

IATA. (2019a). IATA aviation ground handling report . file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/IATA_Aviation_Ground_Handling_Report_201.pdf.

IATA. (2020b). Guidance for flight operations during and post pandemic . https://www.icao.int/MID/Documents/RPTF/iata-guidance-flight-operations-during-post-pandemic.pdf .

IATA. (2020a). Carbon offsetting for international aviation . https://www.iata.org/contentassets/fb745460050c48089597a3ef1b9fe7a8/paper-offsetting-for-aviation.pdf .

IATA. (2021d). Industry statistics fact sheet . https://www.iata.org/en/iata-repository/pressroom/fact-sheets/industry-statistics/ .

IATA. (2021e). Safey: IATA’s number #1 priority . International Air Transport Association (IATA). Retrieved November 20, 2021e, from https://www.iata.org/en/programs/safety/ .

IATA. (2021c). IATA programs . International Air Transport Association (IATA). Retrieved 2021c 5, 2021c, from https://www.iata.org/en/programs/ .

IATA. (2021a). Building back better with diversity and inclusion at IATA . International Airport Review. https://www.internationalairportreview.com/article/154339/diversity-inclusion-iata/ .

IATA. (2021b). Helping aircraft decommissioning . International Air Transport Association. Retrieved November 1, 2020, from https://www.iata.org/en/programs/environment/aircraft-decommissioning/ .

ICAO. (2010). Environmental report . https://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/documents/environmentreport-2010/icao_envreport10-ch1_en.pdf .

ICAO. (2016). Environmental report . https://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/Documents/EnvironmentalReports/2016/ENVReport2016_pg63-64.pdf .

ICAO. (2019a). Electric, hybrid, and hydrogen aircraft—State of play . https://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/Documents/EnvironmentalReports/2019/ENVReport2019_pg124-130.pdf .

ICAO. (2019b). Environmental report aviation & environment . https://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/Documents/ICAO-ENV-Report2019-F1-WEB(1).pdf .

ICAO. (2020). Digital innovations important to aviation ‘building back better’ from COVID-19 . International Civil Aviation Organization. Retrieved November 1, 2021, from https://www.icao.int/Newsroom/Pages/Digital-innovations-important-to-aviation.aspx .

ICAO. (2021). About ICAO . International civil aviation organization. Retrieved November 8, 2021, from https://www.icao.int/about-icao/Pages/default.aspx .

Karaman, A. S., & Akman, E. (2018). Taking-off corporate social responsibility programs: An AHP application in airline industry. Journal of Air Transport Management, 68 , 187–197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jairtraman.2017.06.012

Karaman, A. S., Kilic, M., & Uyar, A. (2018). Sustainability reporting in the aviation industry: Worldwide evidence. Sustainability Accounting, Management and Policy Journal, 9 (4), 362–391. https://doi.org/10.1108/SAMPJ-12-2017-0150

Kılıç, M., Uyar, A., & Karaman, A. S. (2019). What impacts sustainability reporting in the global aviation industry? An institutional perspective. Transport Policy, 79 , 54–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2019.04.017

KPMG. (2020). Survey of sustainability reporting 2020 . https://assets.kpmg/content/dam/kpmg/xx/pdf/2020/11/the-time-has-come.pdf .

Kuo, T.-C., Chen, H.-M., & Meng, H.-M. (2021). Do corporate social responsibility practices improve financial performance? A case study of airline companies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 310 , 127380. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.127380

Lee, S., Kim, B., & Ham, S. (2018). Strategic CSR for airlines: Does materiality matter? International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 30 (12), 3592–3608. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-10-2017-0697

Lufthansa Group. (2020). Sustainability fact sheet 2020 . https://www.lufthansagroup.com/media/downloads/en/responsibility/LH-Factsheet-Sustainability-2020.pdf .

Lydenberg, S., Rogers, J., & Wood, D. (2010). From transparency to performance: Industry-based sustainability reporting on key issues . https://iri.hks.harvard.edu/files/iri/files/iri_transparency-to-performance.pdf .

Mazareanu, E. (2021). CO2 emissions of selected European airlines as of 2021 . Retrieved October 30, 2021, from https://www.statista.com/statistics/1113177/co2-emissions-by-airline-europe/ .

Mohammed Bahurmoz, A. (2020). Measuring corporate social responsibility performance: A comprehensive AHP based index. Corporate social responsibility . IntechOpen.

Google Scholar  

Németh, B., Molnár, A., Bozóki, S., Wijaya, K., Inotai, A., Campbell, J. D., & Kaló, Z. (2019). Comparison of weighting methods used in multi-criteria decision analysis frameworks in healthcare with focus on low- and middle-income countries. Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research, 8 (4), 195–204. https://doi.org/10.2217/CER-2018-0102

OECD. (2020). Building back better: A sustainable, resilient recovery after COVID-19 . https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/view/?ref=133_133639-s08q2ridhf&title=Building-back-better-_A-sustainable-resilient-recovery-after-Covid-19&_ga=2.15461942.1241570091.1638241372-1089278552.1637260554 .

Qureshi, M. A., Kirkerud, S., Theresa, K., & Ahsan, T. (2020). The impact of sustainability (environmental social and governance) disclosure and board diversity on firm value: The moderating role of industry sensitivity. Business Strategy and the Environment, 29 (3), 1199–1214. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.2427

Rahman, M., Islam, R., Wan Husain, W. R., & Ahmad, K. (2019). Developing a hierarchical model to enhance business excellence in hotel industry of Bangladesh. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31 (4), 1836–1856. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-02-2018-0110

Ryanair Group. (2020). Annual report . https://investor.ryanair.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Ryanair-Holdings-plc-Annual-Report-FY20.pdf .

Saaty, T. L. (1980). The analytic hierarchy process: Planning, priority setting . University of Pittsburgh.

Saaty, T. L., & Özdemir, M. S. (2014). How many judges should there be in a group ? Annals of Data Science, 1 (3–4), 359–368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40745-014-0026-4

SASB. (2014). Airlines SASB standards . https://www.sasb.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/TR0201_ProvisionalStandard_Airlines.pdf .

Shahin, A., & Mahbod, M. A. (2007). Prioritization of key performance indicators. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 56 (3), 226–240. https://doi.org/10.1108/17410400710731437

Stauffer, I., & Poolman, A. (2020). Early identification of pandemic risk and mitigating actions in the airline industry. S&P Global . https://www.spglobal.com/esg/csa/static/docs/SAM_Article_Early_identification_of_pandemic_risk_and_mitigating_actions_in_the_airline_industry_August2020.pdf .

Stevenson, I., & Marintseva, K. (2019). A review of corporate social responsibility assessment and reporting techniques in the aviation industry. Transportation Research Procedia, 43 , 93–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trpro.2019.12.023

Tsyganok, V. V., Kadenko, S. V., & Andriichuk, O. V. (2012). Significance of expert competence consideration in group decision making using AHP. International Journal of Production Research, 50 (17), 4785–4792. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2012.657967

United Nations Climate Change Conference. (2021). COP26 declaration . UK Government. Retrieved November 20, 2021, from https://ukcop26.org/cop-26-declaration-international-aviation-climate-ambition-coalition/ .

Xie, J., Nozawa, W., Yagi, M., et al. (2019). Do environmental, social, and governance activities improve corporate financial performance? Business Strategy and the Environment, 28 (2), 286–300.

Download references

Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Constructor University, Campus Ring 1, 28759, Bremen, Germany

Alan Francisco Caraveo Gomez Llanos, Annas Vijaya & Hendro Wicaksono

Universitas Ma Chung, Villa Puncak Tidar N-01, Malang, 65151, Indonesia

Annas Vijaya

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Annas Vijaya .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 4197 kb)

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Caraveo Gomez Llanos, A.F., Vijaya, A. & Wicaksono, H. Rating ESG key performance indicators in the airline industry. Environ Dev Sustain (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-03775-z

Download citation

Received : 19 January 2023

Accepted : 03 August 2023

Published : 29 August 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-03775-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Sustainability
• Performance
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research