[Public Voices] Fragmented Aviation Safety: Time to Unite Under a Single Control Tower

Recently, the debate surrounding the integration of Incheon International Airport Corporation, Korea Airports Corporation, and the Gaduk New Airport Construction Agency has grown increasingly heated. While there are strong and divergent opinions across society regarding balanced development of airports nationwide, revitalization of regional economies, and fostering a global hub airport, as a safety expert, I would like to address the integration of these three institutions from the essential perspective of "safety and disaster management," which is directly linked to the lives of the people. Economic and social considerations are important, but the core issue is public safety.

Changyoung Song, Professor in the Department of Disaster Prevention and Safety at Gwangju University

원본보기 아이콘

First, there is the issue of unifying the disaster response system. Airport disasters can take many forms, including aircraft accidents, fires, terrorism, and natural disasters. In particular, natural disasters such as typhoons, heavy rainfall, and heat waves can cause widespread damage across the Korean Peninsula, and as the frequency and scale of such disasters increase, there is a growing need for a unified nationwide disaster response capability.

However, if we consider the future opening of Gaduk New Airport, the operation of airports across the country is currently divided among three separate entities. While this structure may appear efficient during normal times, in terms of disaster and safety management, it can hinder consistency and integration, as each institution manages and responds to disasters independently rather than in a unified manner.

Second, it is important to ensure consistency in the level of safety management. Currently, Incheon International Airport Corporation and Korea Airports Corporation each operate as independent airport operators, each with its own safety and disaster management systems and organizational structures. The level of investment in safety and disaster management also differs depending on their financial conditions. This can lead to discrepancies in safety levels across airports, and the same would be true for the new Gaduk New Airport once it begins operations in the future.

Third, there is the efficient allocation of disaster response resources. In the event of a major disaster, it may be necessary to concentrate resources at a particular airport. However, when institutions are separated, there can be delays in sharing equipment, personnel, and information. In contrast, in an integrated organization, resources can be swiftly redeployed, greatly enhancing response speed and effectiveness. For example, if multiple airports are simultaneously affected by a typhoon or localized heavy rainfall, a unified control center can more effectively set priorities and allocate resources accordingly.

Spain’s airport operator, Aena, is also recognized as a representative model of integrated airport management. Aena centrally manages the major airports throughout Spain under a single public operating system, standardizing safety, security, and operational criteria at the central level. This structure minimizes confusion in command and delays in disaster response that can arise from having separate operators for each airport. In particular, the same safety management system and crisis response protocols are applied at both Madrid Barajas Airport and Barcelona El Prat Airport, which handle large volumes of air traffic. This means that resources can be mobilized nationwide and decisions made rapidly in the event of a disaster-an approach that should be highly valued. These two airports can be compared to Incheon and Gimpo airports in Korea, illustrating that integrated operation is not only about administrative efficiency but also about strengthening actual disaster response capabilities.

Of course, there are arguments against integration. The most common concerns are inefficiency due to organizational bloat and the difficulty of reflecting local characteristics. However, these can be sufficiently addressed by properly decentralizing authority and employing a regionally-based management system. In other words, strategy and standards can be managed centrally, while implementation is tailored to each local airport-a "centralized integration, on-site decentralization" model. Additionally, if a digital, integrated safety management system is established, much of the inefficiency that could come with a larger organization can be alleviated.

Another opposing view is that the expertise and achievements of existing institutions may be diluted. However, integration is not simply about merging organizations, but about consolidating the expertise each institution has accumulated.

If the global operational experience of Incheon International Airport, the nationwide airport management capabilities of Korea Airports Corporation, and the advanced technological expertise from the construction process of Gaduk New Airport are combined, it will be possible to establish an even higher level of safety management system.

Disasters can occur anytime and anywhere, and at national core infrastructure such as airports, even a single failure in response can have fatal consequences for both public safety and national trust. Therefore, from the perspective of disaster and safety management, a unified disaster command system and an integrated framework for efficient resource allocation spanning all airports in Korea is without doubt the best way to more reliably protect the lives of the people. In the face of disaster, more than organizational logic, what is needed is the "power of integration" to save even one more life.

© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.