Airport Security from a Passenger’s Perspective

Airport Security from a Passenger’s Perspective

Airport Security from a Passenger’s Perspective Introduction The level of airport security has increased significantly in recent years. Most of these security measures were taken due to incidents such as the Lockerbie bombing and the 9/11 attacks. The measures influence all parties involved in the aviation industry. This document focuses on the passenger experience during aviation security checkpoints. Passengers currently experience security checkpoints as the most stressful part of their trip. On the other hand, passengers do not want to enter aircraft without passing at least one security checkpoint. These counteracting emotions create an environment in which there is a lot of room for development. This fact sheet aims to inform the reader of today’s technology and the related passenger experience. It will also discuss technological developments in the aviation security industry, and how they will influence the passenger experience.

The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) is responsible for Current Airport Security Procedures international civil aviation regulations, which are divided into 19 annexes (ICAO Annexes and Doc Series, 2016). ICAO Annex 17 concerns security and Aviation terrorism is not a new issue. Since the end of World War II, there contains a number of worldwide standards for security checks, which each have been dozens of airline hijackings with hundreds of fatalities (Figure 1). of the contracting states must meet. These standards can be met in Security checks are therefore used to protect passengers, staff and aircraft different ways, depending on the country (Airport Operations, 2013). from accidental or malicious harm, crime and other threats (Chen et al., Regulations for EU countries will be discussed below. 2015).

The screening process can be divided into passenger screening and cabin baggage screening. Since this paper is about the passenger’s experience, it will not discuss hold luggage and freight screening.

Before screening, passengers are required to take off their jackets or coats and have them screened as cabin baggage. If necessary, screening personnel may request that the passenger remove additional clothing, such as shoes. Passengers are screened by at least one of the following methods:

- A hand search - Walking through metal detection equipment (WTMD) - Explosive detection dogs - Explosive trace detection equipment (may be combined with hand- held metal detection) - Security scanners which do not use ionizing radiation Figure 1: Airline hijackings and fatalities in the past (Nagdy & Roser, 2016)

Airport Security from a Passenger’s Perspective Before cabin baggage screening begins, liquids, aerosols and gels (LAGs), Clearly, security measures make travelling less convenient for passengers. portable computers and other large electrical items are removed from One example of this inconvenience is the need to arrive at the airport two cabin baggage and screened separately. LAGs are packed inside one hours before flight departure. The security measures don’t just impact transparent and re-sealable plastic bag with a capacity not exceeding 1 passengers – they also impact airlines and airports. Bialock et al. (pp. 736, litre. Each LAG is packed in a container smaller than 100 millilitres. Cabin 2007A) found a significantly-reduced passenger volume of 6% on all flights baggage may be screened by X-ray equipment, or by one of the previously- due to baggage screening after implementation of the 9/11 security mentioned methods, except WTMD and scanners that do not use ionizing measures. The decrease in passenger volume at airports recovered after radiation (Commission implementing regulation (EU) 2015/1998, 2015). three years in the United States (CAPA, 2011). As a result, airlines claimed The time it takes for each passenger to pass security checks is 15 seconds at billions in lost ticket revenues, as some potential travellers opted to not fly. best, 25 seconds on average and 60 seconds at worst. This is based on an However, studies have shown that passengers do accept the increased ideal situation, in which no additional screening needed and all documents inconvenience and are even willing to pay extra to feel more secure are correct (Kirschenbaum, 2013). Exact processing times depend on the (Bialock et al, pp. 735, 2007). screening technology used (Manataki, & Zografos, 2009). During the past few months, several terrorist attacks have occurred in and Passenger Experience of the Current Security Procedures around major international airports (Brussels, Istanbul, etc.) and public According to Chen et al. (2015), an airport passenger’s trust can be areas. Although these incidents didn’t necessarily happen at or after the increased through a security check. However, a security check is also airport security checkpoint, they still influence passenger perception associated with the highest rate of negative emotions during a passenger’s negatively. This emphasizes the effect of security checks on passengers’ journey – from booking to bag collection at the arrival airport, (SITA, 2016). feelings of safety. Studies have revealed that the security check is the most This is visualized in the following figure: influential factor in airport customer satisfaction, followed by airport accessibility and terminal facilities (Chen et al., 2015). The more that passengers are satisfied, the more they value the airport. This could be a competitive advantage for airports.

Airport security is evaluated by passengers based on (Chen et al., 2015): 1. The amount of time required for a security check 2. The professionalism of security staff 3. Confidence in the security process to make passengers feel safe

There is a significant relationship between passenger satisfaction, wait times and perceived security quality. Shorter wait times and better

Figure 2: Emotional extremes during the journey, percentages of passengers feeling perceived security quality lead to higher passenger satisfaction. positive/negative emotions (SITA, 2016)

Airport Security from a Passenger’s Perspective “A traveller’s perception of safety is of utmost importance because it Both parties can therefore create a delay in the process. In order to determines the traveller’s willingness to take airplanes and pay for the cost minimize the duration of the security process, an innovation called of the screening process,” according to Sakano et al. (2016). Centralized Image Processing (CIP) was introduced. Professionalism in security officers also have a positive contribution to play in the feeling of safety and the intention to fly more frequently and for The conventional checkpoint process requires an X-ray operator at each longer distances. active lane. CIP works on the basis of a network between the X-ray scanners located at the security checkpoints and a central area where the Satisfaction can also be increased by providing more information to footage is analyzed. The main advantage of a centralized area is the travellers about the expected procedures at security points and by possibility to analyse multiple security lanes simultaneously (Future Travel requesting their full support and cooperation. The use of images can Experience, 2015). This innovation leads to higher efficiency and improved summarize and simplify complex information about the procedures. In cost effectiveness (IATA, 2015). The improved lane throughput also results 2005, Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport started enhancing their in a more continuous flow, which results in better use of capacity (Krüger, security checkpoints to improve travellers’ experiences. One of the 2015). The benefits for passengers are a shorter queuing time and faster solutions to communicate more clearly with passengers was to replace access to the checkpoint. Throughput can be increased from 180 to 450 written messages with illustrative signs and floor arrows. This resulted in passengers per hour (IATA, 2015). faster understanding and a quicker process for passengers (DFW, 2006). Operationally, the collected X-ray images are queued and presented to an New Developments to Improve the Passenger Experience image processing system. This system categorizes the images and sends As discussed above, passengers appreciate security measures but still them to the next available security officer. Depending on the content, the experience inconvenience during their trip. This section focuses on the bag is sent directly back to its owner or to a side track for a more thorough development of security measures that improve the passenger experience investigation. Both cases facilitate a continuous flow. while providing an improved level of security. Use of CT scans for Hand Baggage Screening Centralized Image Processing Computed tomography (CT) scans are widely used in the medical world, but Aside from technology, two main factors determine the lead time of the can also be used for cabin baggage screening. In 2015, the use of CT scans traditional security process: the pace of the passenger and the pace of the was tested at London Luton Airport and Amsterdam Airport Schiphol (The security operator(s). A higher pace leads to a shorter lead time. The pace of new tech changing airport security, 2015). The advantage of CT scans is that the passenger is defined by the time it takes them to remove all electrical passengers do not need to remove large electronic items or LAG’s from items from their bags (and body) and put their bags on the belt. The pace of their bags. CT scans can collect enough data to determine the potential the security officer is determined by their motivation, staff capacity, threat of a bag’s contents. This reduces waiting and processing time, which number of passenger bags and the passengers themselves (IATA, 2015). contributes to a better passenger experience (New technologies and strategies strive to increase airport security and passenger experience, 2016). Even though CT Scans are more expensive than the regular X-Ray scans, passengers are willing to pay more for the convenience. In the

Airport Security from a Passenger’s Perspective United States, a Travel Association survey found that nearly half of air noted that within this ever-changing environment, developments in travellers are willing to pay up to $150 per year for less hassle at airports security and passenger satisfaction will be ongoing. (PR Newswire, 2011). Over twenty sources have been used to gather information for this fact sheet. The intention was to use scientific studies primarily, but some Conclusion and Discussion information was gathered from other websites or surveys. For example, the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport study was published on their own With a growing number of passengers and a continuous security threat, it is website. That study also raises the question of whether their results will be important to maintain and even increase the level of security. While the same if the study is conducted at other airports. It is therefore passengers accept security measures to ensure their safety, it still is the important that these facts not be generalized. Sources such as IATA are not most stressful part of the travelling experience. From a passenger, airline necessarily scientific, but are credible due to the fact that it is an and airport point of view, it is important to increase passenger satisfaction. internationally-recognized organisation. The developments discussed in the fact sheet could play an important role in doing this. These methods decrease waiting and processing times and inconvenience for passengers – all points of satisfaction. It should also be

Airport Security from a Passenger’s Perspective

Glossary 8. Dallas / Fort Worth DFW International Airport (2006). Security checkpoints, Tiger Team 2005, Improving througput. Planning CIP Centralized Image Processing Department. Texas. CT Computed Tomography 9. Future Travel Experience. (2015, April). (Schiphol) Opgeroepen op ICAO International Civil Aviation Organisation October 2016, van LAGs Liquids, aerosols and gels http://www.futuretravelexperience.com/2015/04/behind-scenes-new- WTMD Walk-Through Metal Detection equipment schiphol-security-experience/

10. Hunter, J.A. & Lambert, J.R. J Transp Secur (2016) 9:35. References 11. IATA. (2015). Smart Security. Airports council international . IATA. 1. (2013). In N. J. Ashford, H. M. Stanton, C. A. Moore, P. Coutu, & J. R. 12. ICAO Annexes and Doc Series. (2016, April 18). Retrieved October 5, Beasley, Airport Operations (pp. 257-287). United States of America: 2016, from Skybrary: McGraw-Hill. http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/ICAO_Annexes_and_Doc_Series 2. Beck, M. J., Rose, J. M., Merkert, R., (2015) Air Safety & Security: 13. ICAO Annexes and Doc Series. (2016, April 18). Retrieved October 5, Traveller Perceptions Post the Malaysian Air Disasters. Retrieved Online 2016, from Skybrary: [2016/28/09]: http://www.skybrary.aero/index.php/ICAO_Annexes_and_Doc_Series http://www.iatbr2015.org.uk/index.php/iatbr/iatbr2015/paper/view/1 14. Kanter, R. M. (2012, September 25). Ten Reasons People Resist Change. 60. Retrieved October 10, 2016, from Harvard Business Review: 3. Bialock, G., V. Kadivali and D.H. Simon (2007). “The Impact of Post 9/11 https://hbr.org/2012/09/ten-reasons-people-resist-chang Airport Security Measures on the Demand for Air Travel.” Journal of 15. Krüger, A. B.-A. (2015). How Smart Is “Smart Security”? Exploring Data Law and Economics 50(4), 731-755. Retreived Online [2016/25/09]: Subjectivity and Resistance. University of Tübingen. Tubingen: http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/10.1086/519816.pdf. University of Tübingen. 4. Chen, J. C., Batchuluun, A., Batnasan J. (2015) Services innovation 16. New technologies and strategies strive to increase airport security and impact to customer satisfaction and customer value enhancement in passenger experience. (2016, August). Retrieved October 3, 2016, from airport. Asia University. Taichung: Asia University. Future Traveler Experience: 5. Chronology of aviation terrorism: 1968-2004. (2016, September 30). http://www.futuretravelexperience.com/2016/08/new-technologies- Retrieved from Skyjack: http://www.skyjack.co.il/chronology/ strive-to-enhance-airport-security/ 6. Cletus C. Coughlin, J. P. (2002). Aviation Security and Terrorism: A 17. Sakano, R., Obeng, K., Fuller, K. (2016) Airport security and screening Review of the Economic Issues. Washington. satisfaction: A case study of U.S. Pp. 129-138. 7. Commission implementing regulation (EU) 2015/1998. (2015, 18. Survey: Travelers will pay for better airport security experience. (2011, November 5). Annex 4. Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- Jun 27). PR Newswire retrieved from: content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32015R1998&from=EN http://search.proquest.com.rps.hva.nl:2048/docview/873736218?acco untid=130632

Airport Security from a Passenger’s Perspective 19. The new tech changing airport security. (2015, May 19). Retrieved Dutch Summary October 3, 2016, from BBC: Als luchthavenbeveiliging wordt vergeleken met die van 20 jaar geleden is http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150519-how-airport-security-is- te zien dat er een groot aantal veranderingen heeft plaats gevonden. Deze changing veranderingen zijn een gevolg van terroristische aanslagen. De luchthaven 20. Zhang, B. (2016, June 30). This machine could cut airport wait times in beveiliging wordt door de passagier op twee manieren ervaren. Aan de ene half, but the TSA won't buy it. Retrieved October 7, 2016, from Business kant voelt de passagier zich niet veilig om zonder beveiliging het vliegtuig in Insider: http://www.businessinsider.com/analogic-cobra-ct-scanner- te stappen, maar aan de andere kant is het beveiligingsdeel wel stressvol airport-tsa-2016-6?international=true&r=US&IR=T voor de passagier. 21. Kirschenbaum, A. A. (2013). The cost of airport security: The passenger

dilemma. Journal of Air Transport Management, 30, 39-45. Om beide emoties te pareren wordt er aan nieuwe methodes gewerkt. Een 22. Manataki, I. E., & Zografos, K. G. (2009). A generic system dynamics van deze nieuwe beveiligingsmethoden is die van de Centralized Image based tool for airport terminal performance analysis. Transportation Processing (CIP). De CIP maakt gebruik van een verbinding tussen de Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 17(4), 428-443. verschillende passagepunten met een centrale ruimte. In deze centrale 23. CAPA (2011, Sept 9), Aviation’s lost decade? 9/11 and beyond. Cause ruimte worden alle verkregen beelden afkomstig van de X-Ray for optimism in the wake of 9/11 changes. geanalyseerd. Vervolgens wordt de bagage die verdachte beelden laat zien

op een apart spoor gezet dan de bagage die veilig is verklaard. Het resultaat

hiervan is dat de passagier die geen verdachte bagage bij zich heeft direct Image references (top to bottom, left to right) door kan en niet hoeft te wachten op de bagage die wel als verdacht wordt beoordeeld. Dit resulteert in een kortere doorlooptijd en daarmee ook een 1 Front page: kortere wachttijd voor de passagiers. https://www.amba-defence.com/defence-blog/how-can-airport-security- be-improved Het gebruik van CT-scans voor handbagage zorgt ervoor dat passagiers niet 2. meer vloeistoffen en elektronische apparaten uit hun bagage hoeven te Nagdy, M., & Roser, M. (2016) – ‘Terrorism’. Published online at halen. Hierdoor is de wachttijd korter en zijn er minder handelingen voor OurWorldInData.org. Retrieved from: de passagiers. https://ourworldindata.org/terrorism/

3.

SITA (2016), Air Transport Industry Insights: The Future is Connected, pp. 4. Retrieved Online [05-10-2016]: https://www.sita.aero/globalassets/docs/surveys--reports/360-degree- report-the-future-is-connected-2016.pdf

Airport Security from a Passenger’s Perspective This is a Luchtvaartfeiten.nl / AviationFacts.eu publication.

Authors: S.Y. Choi, E. van der Kooij, W. Veenstra Editorial staff: R.J. de Boer PhD Msc, G. Boosten MSc & G.J.S. Vlaming MSc

Copying texts is allowed. Please cite: ‘AviationFacts.eu (2017), Airport Security from a Passenger’s Perspective Fact sheet, www.AviationFacts.eu’

AviationFacts.eu is an initiative by the Aviation Academy at the Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences (AUAS). Students and teachers share knowledge with politicians and the general public to ensure discussions are based on facts.

August 2017