1 Private Sector Investment in Infrastructure and Operation of Airports in Turkey Zehra Şahin Đlkorkor * - Yunus Emre Đlkorkor ** Abstract: The purpose of this study is to determine airport privatization implications in Turkey. It is stated that airport privatization has brought lots of benefits to both public and private sector in Turkey. Through private sector participation, the capacity problems of airports have been solved in a short time, the airports have been integrated with advanced technology, and at the same time, private companies have gained know-how and reasonable profits. The article also includes main problems during airport privatization and concludes with a consideration of policy recommendations in order to cope with these problems. Key Words: Airport privatization, build-operate-transfer (BOT), long term lease agreement, concession. I TRODUCTIO Since 1990s, private sector participation has been increasing substantially in airport sector. Improving airport infrastructure, meeting higher levels of air traffic, responding bigger international trade or providing better air traffic control require better management and more capital investments in airports. In this context, private sector is an important player while meeting the needs of airport sector. Therefore, a number of countries are experimenting private investment of airport terminals, runways and facilities as a means of reducing the capital financing requirements of airport owners (Kapur, 1995: 17). However, there are some challenges for private sector involvement because some airport services are inherently natural monopolies (Juan, 1996: 1). For this reason; safety, quality, equality issues and environmental considerations become essential while providing airport services. Consistent with other countries like Japan and Austria, airports in Turkey started to be built and operated by private sector after 1990s. Within the context of public management, this paper will analyze the private sector investment in infrastructure and management of airports in Turkey. This paper will try to answer the question of how Turkey can achieve best practices for private sector participation in airport sector. In order to do that, the issues of concern will include Turkish airport sector, the privatization experience of Turkish airports, public-private network of airport privatization, and phases of airport privatiza- * Treasury Specialist. ** Prime Ministry Expert. Turkish Public Administration Annual, Vol. 38, 2012, p
2 24 Turkish Public Administration Annual tion. Finally, through management analysis, the paper will determine the main problems during privatization and develop some policy recommendations in order to cope with these problems. TURKISH AIRPORT SECTOR In Turkey, air transport has become more and more important in the course of time. There is an increasing trend in the number of passengers for both domestic and international flights. The following figure shows the increase in the air passenger traffic: Figure 1. Air Passenger Traffic in Turkey Passenger umber (in Millions) Domestic Passenger International Passenger Total Source: Prepared by using data from and As it is seen in the figure, the growth of air passenger traffic was especially driven by the demand for international flights in the last two decades and the demand for domestic flights in the last decade. While total number of passengers was about 9 million in 1987 and 33 million in 2002, this number reached to 102 million in On the other hand, while total air flight traffic was about 532 thousand in 2002, this number reached to 1.2 million in 2010 with 127.8% increase (Directorate General of Civil Aviation [DGCA], 2010: 35). Additionally, while total air cargo traffic was about 896 thousand tones in 2002, this number reached to 2 million tones in 2010 (DGCA, 2010: 36). For this reason, Turkey is one of the countries in Europe which has the highest traffic growth rate (General Directorate of the State Airports Authority [SAA], 2010: 14).
3 Private Sector Investment in Infrastructure and Operation of Airports in Turkey 25 In Turkey, there are currently 88 airports which have paved runways and 11 airports which have unpaved runways (Central Intelligence Agency, 2012). The total number of airports which are open to civil transportation is 67 (DGCA, 2010: 37). These 67 non-military airports are classified into two groups: civil airports which are operated without military authorities and civil-military airports which are operated together with military authorities. There are currently 40 civil airports and 27 civil-military airports (DGCA, 2010: 37). In Turkey, most of the airports are still operated by the state. State Airports Authority owns 43 airports, 25 of which are civil airports and 18 of which are civil-military airports (SAA, 2011: 26). Other than State Airports Authority, there are also other public entities and military authorities which have the ownership rights of airports. For instance, Eskisehir Anadolu University (state university) owns Eskisehir Anadolu Airport, Undersecretariat for Defence Industries owns Istanbul Sabiha Gokcen International Airport, and some military authorities (like Command of the Air Forces, Command of the Land Forces, and Command of the Naval Forces) owns various airports. Although most of the airports are operated by the state, the busiest airports in Turkey are privately operated. Turkey's busiest airports are Istanbul Ataturk International Airport, Antalya Airport, Istanbul Sabiha Gokcen International Airport, Ankara Esenboga International Airport, and Izmir Adnan Menderes Airport all of whose operations were granted to private companies (SAA, 2010: 38). On the other hand, if the airport revenues according to ownership structure are examined, it is seen that privately operated airports have an important share. The following table shows the revenue structure of State Airports Authority which is the main responsible public body for airport privatizion: Table 1. Revenue Structure of Turkish State Airports Authority Total Gross Sales (1+2+3) 1946 (1) Operating Services 889 Build-Operate-Transfer Revenues 5 Long Term Lease Agreement Revenues 567 Other 317 (2) Air Navigation Services 630 (3) Terminal Services 427 Million TL Source: Prepared by using data from SAA, 2011: 97. As it is seen in the table, 64.34% of operating service revenues comes from privately operated airports while 35.66% of operating service revenues comes
4 26 Turkish Public Administration Annual from other airports. Also, the revenues gathered from privately operated airports constitute 29.39% of total gross sales. THE PRIVATIZATIO EXPERIE CE OF TURKISH AIRPORTS In Turkey, Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) method has been used for airport privatization. BOT is a popular privatization method where, private company gets concession from governmental body to develop, construct, and manage the facility during a specified time, and after the completion of concession period, returns all ownership rights to the governmental body without asking any money (Llanto, 2007: 327). Traditionally, both the construction and operation of airports were in state hands in Turkey. General Directorate of the State Airports Authority (SAA) was the only responsible authority for operating airports while General Directorate of Infrastructure Investments (previously named as General Directorate of Railways, Ports and Airports) was the only responsible authority for constructing airports. However, during 1990s, Turkish airports started to encounter with capacity problems as a result of increasing demand for air transport (Ulku, 2011: 3). Consistent with the privatization wave in other infrastructure sectors, the private sector participation became essential for the airport sector. In this context, Turkey enacted a general law for BOT in 1994 so that infrastructure investments could be done through using this method (Kaya et al., 2007: 108). Since then, the Law No the Realization of Certain Investments and Services in the Build-Operate-Transfer Model has become the legal basis for BOT implementations in Turkey. In accordance with this Law, private sector participation has been implemented for building and operating airports. In Turkey, the airport privatization has been undertaken by SAA. Starting from 1993, SAA transferred the constructing and operating rights of airports to private companies through using BOT method. Additionally, in 2005, Turkish government made some regulations about airport privatization with the Law No In accordance with this Law, SAA became able to transfer ownership rights of airports to the private sector with long term lease concession agreement (SAA, 2011: 11). With this regulation, SAA started to transfer operating rights of airports to private companies through using lease agreement for a period of maximum 49 years. Also, after the completion of BOT concession period, SAA started to have a chance either to operate the airport itself or to transfer operating rights to a private company again (SAA, 2011: 11). The privatization implementations for Turkish airports can be summarized as follows (SAA, 2010: 41-43; SAA, 2011: ; Cetin, 2008): The Terminal I of Antalya Airport: In 1993, the terminal was granted to a Fraport AG-led consortium (Fraport and Bayindir) for 2 years investment pe-
5 Private Sector Investment in Infrastructure and Operation of Airports in Turkey 27 riod and 9 years operation period. The investment amount of the project was 65.5 million $ and there were 2 companies in the tender. In 2007, Fraport-Ictas consortium was awarded to operate both terminal I and terminal II for another 17 years under a long term lease concession agreement with 2.3 billion. Đstanbul Atatürk International Airport: In 1997, the airport was granted to a TAV consortium (Tepe and Akfen) for 30 months investment period and 3 years+8 months operation period. The investment amount of the project was 306 million $ and there were 12 companies in the tender. In 2005, after the completion of concession period, TAV consortium was again awarded to operate the airport for another 15.5 years under a long term lease concession agreement with 3 billion $ lease amount. Dalaman Airport: In 2003, the airport was granted to a ATM consortium (Aksa, Turkuaz, and Manas) for 2 years investment period and 6 years+5 months+20 days operation period. The investment amount of the project was 72.4 million $ and there were 4 companies in the tender. The Terminal II of Antalya Airport: In 2004, the terminal was granted to a Celebi-Ictas consortium for 1 year investment period and 3 years+5 months+26 days operation period. The investment amount of the project was 71.1 million $. In 2007, Fraport-Ictas consortium was awarded to operate both terminal I and terminal II for another 17 years under a long term lease concession agreement with 2.3 billion. Ankara Esenboğa International Airport: In 2004, the airport was granted to a TAV consortium for 3 years investment period and 15 years+8 months operation period. The investment amount of the project was million and there were 2 companies in the tender. Đzmir Adnan Menderes International Airport: In 2004, the airport was granted to a Havas-Bayindir consortium for 2 years investment period and 6 years+7 months+29 days operation period. The investment amount of the project was 125 million and there were 6 companies in the tender. In 2012, after the completion of concession period, TAV consortium was awarded to operate the airport for 20 years under a long term lease concession agreement with 610 million lease amount. Milas-Bodrum Airport: In 2006, the airport was granted to a Teknotes- Aerodrom Beograde consortium for 2 years investment period and 3 years+9 months operation period. The investment amount of the project was 84.5 million and there were 8 companies in the tender. Zonguldak Çaycuma Airport: In 2006, Zonguldak Ozel Sivil Havacilik Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. was awarded to operate the airport for 25 years under a long term lease concession agreement with an annual fee of 32,291 $ and 1,06 of its annual revenue.
6 28 Turkish Public Administration Annual Antalya Gazipaşa Airport: In 2007, TAV consortium was awarded to operate the airport for 25 years under a long term lease concession agreement. During the concession period, the consortium accepted to pay an annual fee of 50,000 $ and 65% of its annual profit. Đstanbul Sabiha Gökçen International Airport: In 2007, the airport was granted to a consortium formed by GMR, Limak, and MAHB for 1 year+6 months investment period and 20 years operation period. The investment amount of the project was 450 million with 3.1 billion $ lease amount and there were 5 companies in the tender. Zafer Regional Airport: In 2010, the airport was granted to IC Ictas Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S. for 3 years investment period and 29 years+11 months operation period. The investment amount of the project was 56 million $ and there was only 1 company in the tender. Çukurova Regional Airport: In 2011, the airport was granted to a consortium (formed by Sky Line Ulasim Ticaret A.S. and Zonguldak Ozel Sivil Havacilik Sanayi ve Ticaret A.S.) for 3 years investment period and 9 years+10 months+10 days operation period. The investment amount of the project was 357 million and there was 1 company in the tender. Aydın Çıldırlı Airport: In 2012, THY A.O. was awarded to operate the airport for 20 years under a long term lease concession agreement. During the concession period, the company accepted to pay 7% of its annual profit every year. There were two companies in the tender. The operation rights of other airports are still in state hands. However, there are also other privatization projects which have not been completed yet. Recently, Nevsehir, Samsun, Sinop, and Tokat airports are on the agenda (Ntvmsnbc, 2010). SAA has been planning to transfer the operation rights of these airports through long term lease concession agreement (Ntvmsnbc, 2010). PUBLIC-PRIVATE ETWORK OF AIRPORT PRIVATIZATIO The key actors of public-private network that must collaboratively address the implementation of BOT method for airports in Turkey can be summarized as follows:
7 Private Sector Investment in Infrastructure and Operation of Airports in Turkey 29 Figure 2. Turkish Public-Private etwork of Airport Privatization General Directorate of the State Airports Authority (SAA): SAA is a state owned enterprise which is responsible for operating aerodromes, managing ground services at airports, providing air traffic control services, and installing air navigation systems (SAA, 2010: 6). SAA initiates the airport investment project, prepares contract, manages procurement process, grants the concession, and monitors the implementation of project during concession period. Joint Venture Company: The joint venture company is typically a consortium of companies which is responsible for designing, financing, building, operating, and developing airport projects in accordance with the contract provisions (Llanto, 2007: 328). This company bears all risks during the specified concession period, tries to recover its investment through operating airports, and then transfers all ownership rights of airports to the government when the concession period ends (Kaya et al., 2007: 109). Contractor: The contractor builds the airport in accordance with project agreement. The contractor is generally hired by joint venture company to construct the airport but in some cases, it is one of the companies in the consortium (Llanto, 2007: 330). Operator: The operator manages and operates the airport which is build by licensed contractor. The operator is generally one of the companies in the consortium.
8 30 Turkish Public Administration Annual Various Private Subcontractors: Sometimes, licensed contractor works with multiple subcontractors while dealing with the issues mentioned in the contract. These private subcontractors take part in the project but licensed contractor still bears all responsibility (Kaya et al., 2007: 110). Undersecretariat of Treasury: Generally, joint venture company bears all risks during the concession period while getting revenues through operating airports. However, in some cases Undersecretariat of Treasury provides state guaranties for BOT projects and by this way, private companies become more willing to invest in airport sector. Ministry of Development: Ministry of Development is responsible for macroeconomic planning of investment projects. It determines the overall economic and development plans which will be taken into account while implementing BOT projects. Public Procurement Agency: Public Procurement Agency supervises tenders. Lenders: Joint venture company finances its investments through getting credits from lenders. Lenders are oftentimes commercial banks, insurance companies, multilateral lending institutions, and the like (Llanto, 2007: 330). If joint venture company manages to get certain guarantees or credit enhancements for BOT project, then lenders become more willing to provide credit financing (Llanto, 2007: 330). Ministry of Transport, Maritime Affairs and Communications: This Ministry is the related Ministry to which SAA affiliates. General Directorate of Infrastructure Investments under this Ministry is responsible for upgrading and constructing airports (General Directorate of Infrastructure Investments, 2012). Also, General Directorate of Civil Aviation under this Ministry is responsible for regulating and setting air navigation service fees (SAA, 2010: 10). Military Authorities: SAA operates some of the airports together with military authorities like Command of the Air Forces, Command of the Land Forces, and Command of the Naval Forces (SAA, 2010: 39). PHASES OF AIRPORT PRIVATIZATIO The phases of airport privatization can be classified into six stages: preliminary study, selection, project implementation, construction, operation, and transfer (Llanto, 2007: 331). Preliminary Study: Ministry of Development determines the priorities about infrastructure investments and prepares Medium Term Program which lists the priority infrastructure projects. According to Medium Term Program, SAA identifies projects in collaboration with Ministry of Development. After that, SAA conducts a feasibility study in order to determine desirability of the project, to make projections about profits, to forecast the fund requirements, and
9 Private Sector Investment in Infrastructure and Operation of Airports in Turkey 31 to evaluate alternatives about fund sources (Kaya et al., 2007: 111). Also, SAA determines the team that will manage the process of project implementation. Selection: SAA conducts studies to determine the qualifications of applicants, the evaluation criteria for proposals, tendering procedure, and the context of contract. SAA then solicits proposals from private companies. The proposals are evaluated according to both technical and financial merits (Kaya et al., 2007: 112). In most cases, SAA awards the concession to the company which offers the shortest concession period. However, for the success of the airport privatization, the factors such as consortium's experience and credibility, pricing of airport services, technology transfers, and environmental considerations should be taken into account (Kaya et al., 2007: 112). Project Implementation: After concession is awarded, the consortium of companies starts to satisfy their technical and financial promises. The joint venture company secures its capacity to fulfill the project, prepares a detailed work program, carries out necessary controls and tests before executing the project, obtains necessary permits and so on (Llanto, 2007: 332). Construction: The licensed contractor starts to build airport, [a]fter satisfying the necessary legal, environmental and social requirements (Llanto, 2007: 332). Operation: Upon the construction of airport, the joint venture company provides an operator which will manage, operate, and maintain the airport in accordance with contract provisions. Until the completion of concession period, the joint venture company tries to recover its investments, pay its loans, and earn profits. During this stage, the government, investors or lenders can monitor the performance of the operator or can ask for reports from joint venture company about airports' situation (Kaya et al., 2007: 113). Transfer: When concession period ends, the joint venture company returns all ownership rights of airports to the government. At this stage, the government might decide to enlarge the concession period with current joint venture company, or might choose to operate the facility itself or decide to hire an independent operator (Llanto, 2007: 333). ASSESSME T OF AIRPORT PRIVATIZATIO Airport privatization undoubtedly has brought lots of benefits to both public and private sector. With private sector participation, the capacity problems of airports have been solved in a short time, the airports have been integrated with advanced technology, and private sector dynamism has been applied while operating airports (Kaya et al., 2007: 123). At the same time, private companies have gained reasonable profits and experiences while constructing and operating airports (Kaya et al., 2007: 123). To illustrate, TAV consortium has become a
10 32 Turkish Public Administration Annual wellknown brand in the airport sector although it was founded at the end of 1990s (Gurkan, 2011). Now, this consortium not only operates some Turkish airports but also operates some foreign airports such as Tbilisi and Batumi International Airports in Georgia, Monastir and Enfidha Hammamet International Airports in Tunisia, and Skopje Airport in Macedonia (Gurkan, 2011). Despite the benefits gathered from airport privatization, there are also some problems during airport privatization that should be addressed in order to come up with solutions for better practices. One of the most important problems about airport privatization is the legal framework which does not fully satisfy the needs of airport sector (Kaya et al., 2007: 119). Current legislation regulates only limited number of Public-Private- Partnership (PPP) models in several sectors such as electricity, water supply, and transportation but it does not entirely cover the specific regulations related to air transport sector (ECORYS Research and Consulting, 2008: 117). Also, current legislation does not regulate the conflicting interests of related public bodies and does not provide objective criteria for selecting projects (ECORYS Research and Consulting, 2008: 70). This situation creates lots of problems and makes the bureaucratic obstacles inevitable during airport privatization. Conflicting interests of different actors in airport privatization creates another problem. As it is seen in the public-private network section, the main work of SAA is operating airports while the main work of General Directorate of Infrastructure Investments is upgrading and constructing airports. According to the Legislative Decree No. 655 (Organization and Duties of the Ministry of Transport, Maritime Affairs and Communication), General Directorate of Infrastructure Investments is responsible for building airports or having others build them and passing them to the relevant organization when they are completed. However, through BOT method, SAA transfers both constructing and operating rights to the private company. In this context, it is argued that the capacity, knowledge, and experience of General Directorate of Infrastructure Investments are not taken into account during airport privatization such as in the selection process of projects or construction process of airports (Turkish Court of Accounts, 2001: 6). This situation prevents to evaluate airport projects in a sufficient way and at the same time, it causes some problems such as disputes among related actors and criticism at the media. Other than SAA, there are also other public entities whic have the ownership rights of airports. This situation also creates a big problem during airport privatization. Recently, Istanbul Sabiha Gokcen International Airport has been granted to a private company. Since this airport is owned by Undersecretariat for Defence Industries, the privatization process has been managed by this public entity. However, the experience and expertise are so important to have sucessful
11 Private Sector Investment in Infrastructure and Operation of Airports in Turkey 33 privatization implementations. As it is known, SAA has undertaken lots of airport privatizations and by this way, it has gained experince and expertise for preparing contracts, managing procurement process, granting concessions, and so on. However, because of the ownership structure of airports, this experience and expertise could not be used during airport privatization. This situation causes disputes among related actors and also, results in a risk for unsuccessful privatization implementations. Additionally, tender preparation period for airport privatization constitutes another problem which has to be solved. Kaya and others claim that tender preparation period is too short for investors and this situation adversely affects the competition and the quality of project offers (Kaya et al., 2007: 120). On the other hand, according to selection policy of SAA, the consortium which offers the shortest operating period wins the tender. This situation adversely affects the competition because; due to this selection policy, there is small number of companies which are willing to take part in the airport privatization projects. Also, as a result of this situation, the concession period for airports becomes too short for companies to recover their investments easily. BOTs are widely used for infrastructure development and in airport privatizations generally have a long-term duration (20 to 50 years is typical) (Kapur, 1995: 18). However, concession period for airports in Turkey ranges from 3 to 30 years that is far lower than the average concession periods in other countries. For this reason, there are some risks which treat the success of airport privatization. To illustrate, operators might dismiss the necessary investments for improving service quality, they might not be able to attract qualified employees, they might increase the rent prices of space assignments for commercial companies which are doing business in airports, or they might want to cut their expenses like workforce training or technology development (Kaya et al., 2007: ). SOLUTIO S GOVER ME T SHOULD PURSUE In order to regulate the implementations of PPP models sufficiently, to promote efficiency, and to encourage competition, Turkish government has started to establish a new legal and administrative framework. For the success of privatization practices in airport sector and other infrastructure sectors, the government should finish the preparation of a draft law and enact this new law as soon as possible. This new law should also meet the challenges facing the airport sector. The success of airport privatization also depends on how successfully the interrelations of stakeholders are managed. As it is seen in the section of publicprivate network of airport privatization, there are different actors with different interests. To reconcile conflicting interests of these different actors, establishing legal framework is very important. With this new legal framework, the responsibilities of each actor should be determined clearly. Also, the problems arising
12 34 Turkish Public Administration Annual from the position of General Directorate of Infrastructure Investments should be solved immediately. The roles of authorities should be designed in such a way that both SAA and General Directorate of Infrastructure Investments could work cooperatively without contracting each other's scope of work. Moreover, in the process of privatizing airports which are owned by other public entities, SAA should also be integrated into the airport privatization process in order to benefit from its knowledge and experience. In this context, related public entities and SAA should work cooperatively and should have a meaningful dialogue while privatizing airports. Additionally, organizational capacity of SAA should be improved as soon as possible. SAA should hire new personnel in order to manage whole privatization process successfully, to make better contracts, to improve its judgments about company proposals, or to determine tender preparation period in a proper way. In Turkey, continuous traffic growth makes it inevitable to improve the existing system in order to satisfy the extra capacity needs. In this context, SAA should have enough personnel to improve the cooperation and coordination with airport authorities and airlines, to carry out feasibility studies, to follow infrastructural changes and so on. Development of organizational capacity is also important to determine the risk sharing between the state and the private company in a proper way. During airport privatization, SAA makes a projection about passenger numbers and becomes willing to guarantee a certain amount of passenger traffic during the concession period. If the passenger numbers stay below the guaranteed volume, the SAA will have to make extra payments. If the volume turns out to be larger than guaranteed, the SAA receives a larger revenue share by being also involved on the upside (Ulku, 2011: 11). In the privatization of Istanbul Ataturk International Airport in 1997, it is seen that the projections were not made sufficiently. Since the guaranteed number of passengers were forecasted too high, SAA had to make payments to the consortium (Kaya et al., 2007: 115). Therefore, determining guaranteed number sufficiently is very important in order not to encounter with problems in the future. In this context, organizational capacity is very crucial. On the other hand, scarce resources should be used efficiently during airport privatization. In the past, Turkish government pursued the mission of building at least one airport in each city without considering whether that airport would be used or not. This policy might have increased the popularity of the ruling party but its efficiency still remains controversial. For this reason, constructing regional airports rather than building an airport for each city is a better option. In this context, SAA s latest attempt to build Zafer Regional Airport (which covers three cities: Kutahya, Afyon, and Usak) and Cukurova Regional Airport (which covers two cities: Mersin and Adana) is a good strategy.
13 Private Sector Investment in Infrastructure and Operation of Airports in Turkey 35 Lastly, it is very important to carry out airport privatization activities strategically. As Kapur states a strategic framework will be needed to provide a blueprint for capturing the potential economic benefits of the airport sector to the national economy and to stimulate private sector involvement (Kapur, 1995: xiv). CO CLUSIO Turkey consititues a successful example for airport privatization. It has been transfering both constructing and operating rights of airports since 1993 through Build-Operate-Transfer method. The private sector participation in infrastructure and operation of airports in Turkey has resulted in lots of benefits for public sector as well as private sector. However, the policy recommendations mentioned in the previous section should be taken into account in order to cope with the problems arised during airport privatization. The experience of Turkey might be taken into consideration by other countries in order to achieve best practices. Airport privatization, when applied judiciously and strategically, is an alternative way for governments to finance their infrastructures. Developments at the aviation industry and the continuous growth of air flight traffic, air cargo traffic, and air passenger traffic result in inadequacies at the airports. These kinds of capacity problems can be solved through private sector participation. In this context, it is essential for countries which is considering airport privatization to examine Turkish experience in this area. REFERE CES Cetin, U. (2007), Sabiha Gokcen Nefes Kesti, Đpi 3.1 Milyar Dolara Limak Grubu Göğüsledi, Hurriyet, ( ). Central Intelligence Agency (2012), The World Factbook: Turkey gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/tu.html ( ). Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) (2010), SHGM 2010 Faaliyet Raporu, ( ). ECORYS Research and Consulting (2008), The ext Generation of PPP in Turkey: Review, Strengthening and Harmonization of Policy, Institutional and Legal Framework for the ext Generation of PPP Projects in Turkey. Rotterdam: ECORYS Nederland BV. General Directorate of the State Airports Authority (SAA) (2010), DHMI 2010 Annual Report, ( ). General Directorate of the State Airports Authority (SAA) (2011), DHMI 2011 Faaliyet Raporu, ( ).
14 36 Turkish Public Administration Annual General Directorate of Infrastructure Investments (2012), Hava Meydanları Yatırım Projeleri, ( ). Gurkan, E. (2011), TAV Brezilya ya Uçuyor, Ekonomist, com.tr/tav-brezilyaya-ucuyor-haberler/3131.aspx ( ). Juan, E. (1996), Privatization Airports-Options and Case Studies, Washington, DC: The World Bank, ( ). Kapur, A. (1995), Airport Infrastructure: The Emerging Role of the Private Sector, Washington, DC: The World Bank, Documents/ExternalPublications/.../B45.pdf ( ). Kaya, E. - Gerede, E. - Kuyucak, F. - Basar, M. - Surmeli, A. (2007), Havaalanlarında Yap Đşlet Devret Uygulamaları. Amme Đdaresi Dergisi, Vol. 40, No: 2, p Llanto, G.M. (2007), Build-Operate-Transfer for Infrastructure Development: Lessons from the Philippine Experience, N. Kumar (Ed.) ERIA Research Project 2007 o. 2, p , httt:// ( ). Ntvmsnbc (2010), Airports for Rent, ( ). Turkish Court of Accounts (2001), Havaalanları Yatırımları Hakkında Sayıştay Raporu, ( ). Ulku, T. (2011), Privatization of Turkish Airports, Conference on Privatization and Liberalization with a Focus on etwork Industries and Eastern Europe. Stockholm, Sweden 16 June ( ). ( ).