〈Research Article〉

Japanese airports and the decentralization of international visits:
current circumstances and future potential
David Williams

Abstract
In 2016 the Japanese government launched the New Tourism Strategy to Invigorate the Japanese
Economy with the dual aim of promoting regional development while making Japan’s hinterlands as
new places of discovery for foreign visitors. However since the majority of international visitors
arrive at the core international air gateways in Tokyo and Osaka, decentralization of visits to thehinterlands is limited. One way to assist visitor decentralization, which this paper proposes, is theenhanced internationalization of Japan’s regional airports. After tracing the historical precedents
particular to airport development in Japan, the paper examines the current international profiles ofJapan’s regional airports, and considers their existing infrastructure. Figures indicate that with the will
and cooperation of the localities, regional airports can be used as a strategy to boost local economies
and reduce tourism stresses elsewhere.
Keywords: inbound tourism, Japanese regional airports, regional development, visitor decentralization

1. Introduction
Tourist demand to experience the less visited hinterlands of destinations is an important feature ofmodern international tourism. Tourists, once satisfied to see locations and well-known sights, now
demand to have a “real” existential experience at destinations they visit (McCannell, 2011). Until
recently, due to the relatively low international visitor numbers to Japan, even heavily populated cities
such as Tokyo or Kyoto could offer such “real” experiences. However, with the dramatic rise in tourist
numbers since the Great Eastern Japan Earthquake (2011), the country’s key attractions are now
witnessing overcrowding with consequent effects on the transport system (Straits Times, 2018), theaccommodation sector (SGE, 2014), and the destination as a whole; even “over-tourism” is being warned
against (Palmqvist, 2017).
In response to such problems, and as a means to move inbound tourism beyond the so-called“Golden Route” of Tokyo-Mt. Fuji-Kyoto, the Japanese government now proactively promotes－1－

Japan’s regions as focal points of its international tourism policy under the New Tourism Strategy to
Invigorate the Japanese Economy (Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism (MLIT),
2016). This initiative encourages not only the promotion, but also the opening up and development ofJapan’s less well-known, geographically peripheral, tourism resources (Japan Travel Agency, 2018).
To enable this, emphasis is now placed on tourism’s strategic role in regional revitalization,international competitiveness and the overall tourist experience. For example, the Enjoy my Japan
campaign - launched in 2018 - reflects this new approach by enticing international visitors to sample a“richer and more personal” experience in Japan’s lesser-known regions. This effort to create a new
spatial distribution of visitors is essential since the country targets 60 million international visits by
2030 – more than twice the 2017 figure of 28.7 million (JNTO, 2018).
One factor hindering a spatial redistribution of visits to Japan is the existing concentration ofinternational visitors’ journeys that begin and/or end in Tokyo or Osaka – the two principal gateways
to Japan. This is emphasized by the 48% of all visitor nights in Japan that are taken in just three cities,
Tokyo, Osaka and Kyoto (McKinsey Research Group, 2016), and by MLIT statistics which indicate
some 77% of all arriving passengers to Japan doing so at one of just three airports [Tokyo Haneda(HND), Tokyo Narita (NRT) and Osaka Kansai (KIX)] (MLIT, 2018). This leaves visits to theregional hinterlands dependent on visitors utilizing domestic land or air transport. Should the 2030
target of 60 million visitors be realized, and should Tokyo and/or Osaka continue to be the principal
entry points, it is likely that Japan’s globally recognized reputation for transport efficiency andpunctuality will be compromised. As demand to access off-the-beaten track destinations grows, so an
expansion of international entry points to Japan becomes an increasing necessity.
To date Japan has tended to take a ‘business as usual’ approach to solve this issue, i.e. it has simply
increased the supply of domestic ground transportation from both Tokyo and Osaka, but in doing so it
has not solved the root problem of agglomeration of arrivals in the two cities. Thus althoughshinkansen bullet trains linking southern Kyushu to Osaka in 2011, and Tokyo to the Hokuriku regionin 2015 made previously less visited regions more accessible, from the viewpoint of aviation thisapproach has tended to promote the HND, NRT and KIX hubs: a more aviation-focused strategy
would be to offer point-to-point international air services directly to a regional airport. In similar
fashion to high-speed rail, overnight highway buses have also expanded services to regional cities but
have mostly targeted the 20-35 age demographic (JR Bus 2018), leaving other demographics
uncatered for. Despite this increase in the supply of ground transport, an increase in visits to tourism
hinterlands has not always followed. The steady decrease in domestic patronage of Japan’s rail
network over the last 20 years (Thomas, 2016) being evidence to suggest that rail is not as attractive totravellers wanting to make journeys within Japan as it was in the past.

－2－

2. Purpose and scope of study
As an alternative to handling increased visitor numbers through increased domestic transport supply,
the current essay proposes greater utilization of Japan’s regional airport network as international
gateways. By doing so regional tourism resources can become more accessible, and the regional
imbalance in visitors can be addressed. To examine this the current essay employs open source MLIT
statistics (MLIT, 2018b) for the 10-year period 2007 to 2016 and narrates the evolution, characteristics
and contemporary international usage of Japan’s airport infrastructure. In doing this it is hoped thepotential of Japan’s regional airports to welcome international flights can be presented.

3. Japan’s Airport Infrastructure
Japan currently boasts a nationwide network of 97 civilian airports incorporating some of the mostmodern and sophisticated facilities in the world (Yamaguchi, 2013). In 2007 under Japanese Aeronautical
Law these facilities were categorized into 4 classes: “Hub”, “Regional”, “Local” and “Joint-use”, withhub airports (5 locations) the most important in terms of size, passenger traffic, cargo and revenue
earned. A further 24 regional airports and 15 joint-use facilities were designated as additional
international gateways, making a total of 44 international entry points. The remaining 53 local airports
were categorized as suitable for domestic operations only. At the same time, a total of 66 of the 97
airports were deemed able to accept jet aircraft, and thus should be considered as de facto
international operations facilities. Other arguments notwithstanding, this suggests a surplus of at least
22 potential locations for international arrivals/departures (Table 1).
Table 1: Airports in Japan by type
Airportcategory

Role of airport

Number of
LocationsJet aircraft
enabledExampleAirports

Class 1“Hub”

Mainly International operations

5

5

Narita, Kansai

Class 2
“Regional”

Domestic and some int’l operations

24

23

Hiroshima,
SendaiClass 3
“Local”

Domestic operations

53

32

Saga, Toyama

Class 4
“Joint-use”

Shared with JSDF. Civilian domestic
use with limited int’l operations

15

6

Omitama,
ChitoseTotal =

97

66

Source: MLIT Airports in Japan (2007).
－3－

Although Japan has successfully built up an extensive nationwide network of airport infrastructurein the years since the end of World War 2, by global standards this infrastructure is surprisingly sparse.
According to the World by Map database (2018) in terms of “airport density” (i.e. airports per million
population), Japan ranks internationally in the lower 15% with just 1.4 airports per million inhabitants.
This compares unfavorably with similarly developed nations such as France or the UK which eachhave an equivalent figure of 7.3. This low-density of airports suggests air connectivity in Japan is lesswell-developed than might be imagined.

4. A narrative of airport development in JapanThe low density of airport infrastructure in Japan can be explained by a range of historical andpolicy imperatives. Firstly, under the terms of surrender at the end of World War 2, the development ofcivil aviation in Japan was severely restricted. Thus while countries such as the UK and United States
expanded their civil aviation capability, Japan was unable to do so until 1951. This delay wascompounded by the Korean War and strict Japanese government controls imposed on aviation for
more than 3 decades after the war. Moreover, not only did central government own and operate theairports during this time but it also controlled the rights to, and allocation of, international anddomestic routes. Since airports were run as state entities, infrastructure development policies for new
facilities tended to be time-consuming, costly, and inflexible, and upon completion were often outdated(Yamaguchi, 2013). These circumstances contrast starkly with those of the UK, which even before theend of World War II, had positioned itself to become the de facto center of global aviation. London’sHeathrow Airport was, for example, already operational in 1946, and by 1953 Britain as a wholehandled 200,000 civilian aircraft movements per year – more than Japan in 2007 (Rutherford, 2011).
In addition to issues connected with public ownership and management, airport infrastructure
projects in Japan have often been in response to public controversy. For example, the decisions todevelop NRT and KIX in the 1960s and 1970s were made in reaction to lawsuits filed by citizens
concerning noise at the existing HND and Itami (ITM) airports respectively. NRT’s development wasthen hampered further by vocal public disputes over land ownership. Today, even 40 years after its
inauguration, NRT continues to be plagued by the same disputes begun two generations ago. Thismalaise is not helped by a general public impression of undemocratic decision-making andgovernment high-handedness in matters concerning aviation (Shibata, 1999). Thus airports - and theirdevelopment - have been negatively stigmatized by the public while at the same time, operations havebeen bureaucratically stymied. As Shibata (1999, p.134) suggests, “the supply and demand balance [atJapanese airports] is politically maintained”.
Meanwhile at the juncture of the mid-1980s, two important changes occurred which had a－4－significant effect on the role of international airports: firstly, the depreciation of the dollar against the
yen after the Plaza Accord; and secondly, the privatization of the state carrier, Japan Airlines. Thesechanges paved the way for increased outbound travel and a more competitive aviation market
environment. As a result, in the period 1989 to 2009, 12 new airports were planned, developed andbuilt around Japan including large-scale hub facilities at KIX (1994) and NGO, Chubu Airport (2005).
This increase in new airport capacity was later supported by the emergence of budget airlines such
as Peach and JetStar (2012) and the ASEAN Open Skies Agreement (2015), both of which encouraged
international travel while providing passengers with greater choice and value. However, it is the
Airport Operation Private Utilization (AOPU) Act passed by the Diet in 2013 which is perhaps themost significant development in recent years. The act lifted strict central government control andallowed 28 former publically owned airports to tender operations to private operators, and in doing so
join hub airports already operating under similar agreements (Nikkei, 2013). In freeing up all aspects
of operations to private enterprise, regional Japanese airports can now work more closely with local
government and other entities and “realize their full potential” (MLIT, 2013). As Smith (2018) showssuch change can contribute considerably to the internationalization of regional airports.
The key strategic aim of the AOPU however is not just to “realize potential” but also to “shift theemphasis of Japan’s airports from development to operation”. Thus in place of building (i.e.
“development”) new infrastructure it proposes more efficient utilization (i.e. “operation”) of current
infrastructure. This policy shift is significant since airport “development” has been the status quo in Japanfor over 50 years. This change in thinking is based on the belief that sustained growth of domestic aviation
demand cannot be “anticipated” (MLIT, 2013) and with an ageing and declining population aviation
demand is most likely to fall in the future (Kato et al, 2011). However, with an additional 30 million foreign
visitors expected annually by 2030 there is good reason for greater optimism. This can be possible bydirecting inbound demand to regional airports capable of international operations. In this way, utilization
rates can advance and the Airport Operation Utilization Act (2013) can be strategically dovetailed onto
components of regional policy in the 2016 New Tourism Strategy to Invigorate the Japanese Economy.

5. Current international use of Japan’s airports
As a country with almost 210 million domestic air passengers (MLIT, 2018b), and as home to threeof the world’s busiest domestic routes (HND/CTS, HND/FUK, and HND/OKA), Japan can beconsidered as a global domestic aviation leader (Adams, 2018). By contrast, as a result of its poorly
performing outbound tourism sector (+2.4% in the 20 years to 2016 (Williams, 2018)), and a historicallysmall inbound market the country’s international aviation profile is somewhat less prominent: Narita
airport for example is modestly ranked as the world’s 18th busiest hub.
－5－In the 7 years since 2011 however the circumstances of the inbound market have changed dramatically.
Although outbound tourism growth remains relatively sluggish, annual inbound tourism growth rates
averaging 30% between 2011 and 2016 mean Japan is currently the 15th most visited country in theworld. Given this new context for Japan’s tourism, Table 2 describes international passenger growth
and the number of flights at Japan’s top 20 international airports for a 10-year period which includes
this dynamic growth cycle.
Table 2: Top 20 international airports in Japan in 2007 and 2016 (passenger /aircraft movements)

Airport Name

Passenger numbers(x1000)

Passenger
growth (%)

Number of flights(per year)

Growth in
number offlights (%)

2016

2007

2007/2016

2016

2007

2007/2016

Narita (NRT)

29574

31104

-5%

96275

90169

7%

Kansai (KIX)

18654

10848

72%

64628

38985

66%

Haneda (HND)

15175

1829

730%

39377

3900

910%

Chubu (NGO)

5185

5339

-3%

19584

20737

-6%

Fukuoka (FUK)

4991

2260

121%

16383

8214

100%

Naha (OKA)

2928

292

903%

10396

1370

659%

Chitose (CTS)

2580

802

222%

7170

2842

152%

Hiroshima (HIJ)

318

359

-11%

1583

1844

-14%

Shizuoka (FSZ)*

278

115

142%

1325

547

142%

Takamatsu (TAK)

202

39

418%

773

194

298%

Hakodate (HKD)

201

130

55%

775

674

15%

Kagoshima (KOJ)

193

91

112%

853

426

100%

Okayama (OKJ)

193

218

-11%

931

961

-3%

Sendai (SDJ)

187

352

-47%

808

1335

-39%

Komatsu (KMQ)

187

88

113%

964

558

73%

Omitama(IBR)**

165

59

180%

578

218

165%

Asahikawa (AKJ)

152

88

73%

548

344

59%

Niigata (KIJ)

115

231

-50%

583

1118

-48%

Toyama (TOY)

112

136

-18%

546

849

-36%

Miyazaki (KMI)

95

73

30%

411

311

32%

Japan Top 5

73579

51380

+43%

236247162005+46%

All Others

478

408

17%

2223

2001

1%

81963

54861

49%

26671417759750%

Total* Shizuoka Airport began full operations in 2009. Figures for 2007 are from 2009.
** Omitama began civilian operations in 2010. Figures for 2007 are from 2011.
－6－

Table 2 clearly shows the impressive growth in the number of both international passengers andinternational flights in the 10-year period to 2016. During this time the former grew by 49% to 81.96
million, and the later increased from just under 178,000 in 2007 to almost 267,000 in 2016 (+50%).
This overall pattern has not however been witnessed across all regions or localities; some airports
have seen exceptional expansion in the number of international flights/passengers handled, whileothers have seen contraction. Table 2 also highlights the dominance of Japan’s 5 main hubs (NRT,HND, KIX, NGO, FUK) which together account for around 90% of all international flights/passengers.
Those airports that have enjoyed significant growth in flights include, Haneda (+910%), Naha(+659%), New Chitose (+152%), Omitama (+165%), Takamatsu (+298%) and Fukuoka (100%).
Some local airports such as Saga (+700%) have also grown rapidly, thus examples of international
growth can be seen at all four classes of airport. The rise of low cost carriers (LCC) since 2012 is one
factor in this growth, as is the liberalization of air traffic in Asia through the Open Skies agreement. In
both cases however it is the supply of inbound tourists rather than outbound demand which is the key
driver.
A second important conclusion to draw from Table 2 is the dominance of four airports in increasing
the number of passengers. Excluding figures for NGO and NRT (which both experienced declines inpassenger numbers), it is apparent that HND, KIX, FUK and CTS accounted for 95% of the increase
in international passenger numbers and 83% of the increase in international flights between 2007 and2016. At the same time non-hub airports were responsible for the remaining 17% increase in international
flights but only 5% of international passengers. Aircraft size and other infrastructural restrictions may
explain some of this discrepancy, but it tends to emphasize the fact that the number of gateways
available to international passengers remains limited. The potential for hitherto relatively unused
regional airports to act as international gateways would therefore seem to be considerable.
To contrast those Japanese airports experiencing international expansion, several leading airports
have struggled to maintain their international flight profiles. This includes Niigata (-48% decline inflights over 10 years), Sendai (-39%), Toyama (-36%), Hiroshima (-14%) and Chubu (-6%). Even
NRT – Japan’s leading international gateway – has seen a decline in international passenger traffic of
5%. This lattermost example is largely due to the 2010 re-internationalization of HND which encouraged
foreign legacy carriers such as Lufthansa, British Airways and Delta to relocate routes (and thus
passengers) to the city airport.
The decline of Toyama and Niigata are also ironically tied to HND’s re-internationalization. The
two cities have had close economic ties - and hence air routes - with the Siberian cities of Vladivostok
and Khabarovsk spanning more than 30 years, but when flight “slots” became available at NRT in thewake of airline relocations to HND, former Siberian carrier Vladivostok Airlines ceased scheduled
operations at Niigata and Toyama in favor of expansion at NRT. At the same time the completion of－7－

the Hokuriku shinkansen in 2015 added to the decline in the number of international flight charters
originating from Toyama. Instead of flying internationally from the city, Hokuriku citizens can now
use the new bullet train link to Tokyo and fly from a global hub. Meanwhile, to compensate for theloss of Russia bound flights Niigata has, since 2012, offered a daily flight to NRT timed to connect
passengers to a range of international destinations, including Russia. Positive passenger numbers on
the 250km route during the first five years of operation suggest the strategy has been a resounding
success (Niigata Prefecture, 2016).
It is however Tohoku’s four main international gateways (Aomori, Akita, Sendai and Fukushima)that have experienced the most significant declines in international patronage (Table 3). On average
the four facilities saw a reduction of 60% with Fukushima (-94%) experiencing an almost complete
withdrawal of international operations. The principal cause of this decline was the loss in visitor
confidence after the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake, which temporarily affected all international
flights to Japan, but had a much longer lasting impact on Tohoku, particularly Fukushima which has
found it difficult to shake off the international stigma associated with its name (BBC, 2018). This may
be changing however as both Vietnam Airlines and Far East Air Transport (Taiwan) offered charter
flights from Fukushima in their winter 2018/2019 schedules (Fukushima Airport, 2018) indicating thatthe city is finally beginning to re-establish itself as a regional international entry point.
Table 3: Airports experiencing international flight attrition 2007/2016 (flights/year)
AirportInternational flights per year

Growth in flights

2016

2007

2007/2016

Fukushima

22

342

-94%

Akita

58

174

-83%

Nagasaki

178

358

-50%

Niigata

583

1118

-48%

Sendai

808

1335

-39%

Toyama

546

849

-36%

Aomori

190

272

-30%

Matsuyama

225

288

-22%

Hiroshima

3166

3688

-14%

Chubu (Nagoya)

19584

20737

-6%

All Airports

266714177597+50%

MLIT (2018b)
Note: Table 3 shows those airports averaging no less than one international flight per week in 2007.

－8－

Matsuyama (-22%) highlights another problem for Japan’s regional airports: weak local demand forinternational flights. In 2011 Matsuyama airport (MYJ) offered one scheduled international service (toSeoul Incheon (ICN)) and was the main international entry point to Shikoku. Although the city was
not directly affected by the 2011 Great East Japan Earthquake, the airport saw a decline in international
patronage, and when an LCC-operated Takamatsu/Seoul route was inaugurated in 2014, weak local
demand led to the MYJ/ICN route being periodically discontinued. A new scheduled MYJ/ICN
service has since been reestablished, but this is largely a result of inbound supply. This lack ofelasticity in local demand for international air services is a pattern repeated in other regions of Japan
with top-heavy demographic profiles such as Sanin and northwest Tohoku.
On Kyushu, Nagasaki (NGS) is a curious case of a city airport struggling to develop its international
profile. Despite the advantages of having an internationally recognizable name and being in an ideal
geographic location close to Japan’s key source markets, between 2007 and 2016 international flights
declined 50% (Table 3). At the same time the airport ironically turned a profit (MLIT, 2017) – anexperience repeated at Nagasaki’s sister city, Hiroshima (HIJ). Might it be that hosting international
flights is a financial liability for some regional airports, and that it is better to allow a nearby hub tohandle them instead? With the Nagasaki branch of the bullet train due for completion in 2023, it seems
NGS will need to innovate if it is to attract and sustain direct international flights in the future.
In addition to the airports described in Tables 2 and 3, there were no fewer than 18 other lesswell-known local airports nationwide that offered international flights in the 2007-2016 period. For
example, Ishigaki (144 international flights in 2016) and Oita (200 flights from locations in East Asia)
both have burgeoning international operations, while others such as Kitakyushu have seen flightnumbers fluctuate (850 flights in 2013, but 230 three years later). As we have already seen in
Nagasaki and Hiroshima, proximity to well-known tourist resources is also no guarantee of securing
direct international routes. The two Hokkaido regional airports at Obihiro and Mamonbetsu forexample have offered fewer than 30 international flights per year. Similar trends can also be found at
Hanamaki, Matsumoto and Nankai Shirahama, which have offered no more than 5 international
flights each per year.
The current circumstances described here demonstrate both the successes and failures of regional
Japanese airports to globalize their operations. Despite some negative outcomes the strategies
employed can form a body of experience to push the internationalization process forward on a larger
scale. There are however, first, some challenges particular to the Japanese aviation environment thatneed to be overcome.

－9－6. Challenges
Over the period 2007-2016 Fifty-seven different Japanese airports operated international passenger
flights (MLIT, 2018b). However, as we have seen the majority of these airports play a minor role, withjust 20 facilities accounting for 99% of all international movements (Table 1). Currently (December2018), 37 airports nationwide offer international flights (Flyteam, 2018) suggesting that there are no
fewer than an additional 20 facilities capable of handling international flights and passengers (i.e. they
have customs, immigration and quarantine [CIQ] facilities). Given the current throughput of 266,714
flights (Table 2), there appears to be considerable latent potential for future growth.
This potential however is not easily measured. It is a function of both tangible factors relating tophysical airport infrastructure such as runways (longer runways tend to allow more movements),
aprons (wider aprons facilitate faster throughput of aircraft), and terminals (including gates and theirusage), and less tangible factors such as regulatory constraints on air traffic, or the conditions ofpassenger ground transportation to/from an airport (Mirkovic and Tosic, 2014). Moreover - though not
the focus of the current paper – foreign awareness of a region a given airport serves, the region’s
destination marketing organizations’ (DMO) activity abroad, and the regions’ ability to welcome foreign
visitors all influence the potential an airport has to receive international flights (Andonian et al, 2016).
6. 1 Runways
The prevalence of sufficient runway-apron facilities is a key factor in an airport’s ability to offer
direct international flights (Mirkovic and Tosic, 2014). In Japan however, as 2/3 of airport facilities
have runways of 2000 metres or longer, i.e. they are capable of handling medium sized jet aircraft(150-200 passengers) which typically ply routes to Japan’s key tourism source markets, this factor
does not present a major constraint to international expansion. A more pressing problem for Japan in
expanding regional airports international capability is the airport gate.
6. 2 Gates – “single use” and “common use”
With the exception of gates from which passengers are bussed to the terminal (i.e. “remote” gates),
one airport terminal gate may appear very similar to any other at any other airport. However, on closer
inspection we can find gates have important usage differences determined by the size and number ofaircraft they can handle and operational constraints according to airline affiliation.
With regard to gate size it is important to emphasize that not all gates can accommodate all aircraft:some gate types may only be suitable for a certain aircraft size while others may be able to handle
several aircraft types. Thus an airport with gates that can only accommodate small aircraft will be
unable to expand beyond a given capacity, while one with a surplus of gates for larger aircraft may－ 10 －

find it difficult to develop new low demand or “thin” routes. To achieve full potential it is clear aflexible mixture of gate sizes is preferable.
In addition to gate size, “gate usage policy” is a key concept in understanding the potential
passenger throughput of an airport. There are two principal approaches to gate usage: “single use” and“common use”. The former describes gates designated for the exclusive use of a particular airline orairline alliance, a particular destination, or those dedicated for international or domestic operations
only. On the other hand, “common use” gates, as the name suggests, allow usage by any airline (oralliance), or to any destination. The “common use” gate is thus a more flexible and efficient means tomaximize throughput of aircraft and thus passengers. Despite the flexibility offered by a “common use”
approach, Japan’s regional airports tend towards “single use” gates according to aircraft type and/or
airline operator. To add to this, since many Japanese regional airports have dedicated “single use”
international gate(s) - but limited international traffic – considerable underutilization and inefficiency can
result.
To illustrate the issue of gates in determining airport capacity potential, lets consider the case of
Miyazaki. Miyazaki airport is equipped with 10 boarding gates, seven of which are connected to theterminal by a passenger boarding bridge (PBB) and, three of which are “remote” gates. Of the sevengates connected to the terminal, five are designated for large aircraft (250 seats or more), and two arefor medium sized aircraft (100-200 seats); the three remote gates are for the use of smaller aircraft of
60-80 seats. Thus if an operator proposes a new route for a medium sized aircraft at a time when thetwo gates designed for medium sized aircraft are in use, the operator will have to either: operate alarger aircraft type - and thus risk lower load factors and profits; alter the flight schedule to ensuregate/aircraft compatibility; or rethink its proposal completely – possibly operating the service from a
local rival (such as, Kagoshima) instead. Single use international gates exacerbate this situation evenfurther.
On the other hand, if an airport operates a “common use” gate policy (such as Okayama) it willoffer greater flexibility. Although Okayama has just 7 gates - only 3 of which are connected to theterminal - all gates can accommodate all aircraft types and are not carrier specific. There is also no
dedicated international gate and this has allowed international routes to develop more easily.
If local airports are to expand their international profiles, adaptive changes to promote a “commongate” policy are thus necessary. This needs to be supported by development to terminal infrastructuresuch as the provision of CIQ facilities, and consideration of airside and landside separation. After thechanges in legislation brought about by the 2013 AOPU regarding airport operations ownership, it isexpected that such adaptations will be simpler to implement, and will even allow for foreign
investment in Japanese airports. Many regional airports in the UK are run by non-UK operators andthere is evidence Japan is monitoring the success of such ventures closely (MLIT, 2013).
－ 11 －

6. 3 Other challenges
In addition to the condition of the physical airport infrastructure, two further non-infrastructural
factors are vital in assessing the scope for the expansion of international flights from Japan’s regional
gateways.
First, is the constraint presented by Japanese regional airports’ operating hours. Officially, Japan has
eight airports capable of 24-hour operations and although these eight offer a limited number of cargoflights through the night, only HND and KIX can be considered as offering a bona fide 24-hourpassenger service (MLIT, 2018b). On the other hand, the majority of Japanese airports operate 12 to
14 hours per day, typically from 07:30am or 08:00am to 21:00 or 21:30. These limited hours ofoperation reduce the potential for international flights a fact that is particularly significant in the era of
LCC operations since such carriers strategically utilize off-peak hours to maximize fleet utilizationand profit. Thus a major regional gateway such as Sendai, which opens at 07:30am, is unable tofacilitate the first ‘wave’ of LCC flights, which typically use departure slots between 06:00am and07:00am. Similar limited hours of operation also constrain Hokkaido’s regional airports and make it
difficult to attract non-domestic LCC business originating in cities such as Hong Kong or Taipei. This
leaves international visitors needing to connect through a hub such as HND or CTS slowing theinternationalization potential of regional airports.
A second constraint is the restrictive rules governing the use of airspace around Japan. This isparticularly evident at HND where proximity to the US military base at Yokota affects the flight pathsof departures and arrivals to the civilian airport. Although changes are planned to make better use of
the airspace (MLIT, 2018a), some restrictions will likely remain in place to placate local residents’concerns over aircraft noise. Any remaining restrictions could however offer an opportunity forregional airports located relatively near major hubs to expand their own international operations.
International expansion of Shizuoka or Matsumoto might be an effective way to reduce congestion at
HND, alleviate noise concerns and, by default, redistribute foreign visits to Japan. The announcementof new scheduled international flights to Kobe (MLIT, 2018c) in 2020 suggests such a process tofacilitate this outside the Kanto region may already be underway.

7. The international potential of regional airports
Gate policy, aircraft size and airport operating hours are central to the widely adopted United States
Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) graphical method for estimating potential throughput of aircraft –and hence passengers – at airports (Mirkovic and Tosic, 2014). This method is based on the formula:
N x G x S = hourly capacity, where N is the number of gates, G is the number of aircraft a gate canhandle per hour, and S is the gate capability ratio (based on aircraft size). Thus, it follows that the－ 12 －

length of time a gate is occupied will have a strong bearing on potential airport throughput.
Using MLIT figures but excluding Japan’s five leading international hubs (NRT, KIX, HND, NGO,
FUK) there were 52 regional, local and joint-use airports nationwide with sufficient runway, CIQ andother international facilities that accepted international flights in one or more years between 2007 and2016. In 2016 these 52 locations accepted 23,297 international passenger flights. At the same time,
proxy figures from the Flyteam airport database (2018) indicate the mean number of international
flights at Japan’s 5 leading airports was between 3 and 6 flights per gate per day (mean = 4.1 flights/gate/day). If we assume the lower value of 3 flights per day as a realistic baseline for the remaining
52 airports and that each airport has one gate for international operations, based on the FAA method,
we can expect the potential annual number of international flights in Japan to be 1 (gate) x 3 (flights)
x 7 (days) x 52 (weeks) x 52 (airports) = 56,784 flights. This is more than twice the recorded value for2016 (23,297). Regional airports, it would seem are operating considerably below their potential.
For a number of reasons, this resultant figure of 56,784 flights may however be a cautious
underestimate. For example, not only do Sendai (5 international flights per day), Hiroshima (5),
Kitakyushu (4), and Kagoshima (4.5) already exceed the 3 flights/day benchmark, but Shin Chitose
and Naha with 54 and 29 international flights/day respectively have profiles more similar to one ofJapan’s leading gateways than to their non-hub status (Flyteam, 2018) In addition to this there is aprocess of bringing international flights to new airport locations such as Kobe and since many
regional airports are set up to serve medium sized aircraft (up to 200 seats) such as those in LCC
operator fleets, this will offer even greater potential. Takamatsu and Saga are two such airports alreadytaking advantage of expanded LCC operations for example. With greater adoption of extended
operating hours it does not seem unreasonable to suggest that regional airports might be able to sustain
as many as 100,000 flights per annum in the near future.
This optimistic estimate does not of course take into account the international demand for flights toJapan’s regions. For such demand to be realized the inbound tourism advertising and publicity
strategies of individual regions need to be active internationally. Japan’s regional tourism resources
are poorly recognized outside Japan (Andonian et al, 2016), and without raising awareness of their
existence among overseas markets regional airports’ will remain underutilized. In addition, the willand desire of a region and its people to embrace the inbound tourism economy are vital to ensure any
such recognition is translated into repeat visits (Mainichi, 2016), and an economically sustainable
tourism strategy.
Inbound demand to Japan is highly buoyant and JNTO (2018) is already indicating the number ofinternational visitors in 2018 will reach 30 million for the first time. Even outbound tourism fromJapan, which contracted by 200,000 in the 10-year period to 2016, has grown 5% per year since 2016
and in 2018 is likely to attain a new high of more than 18.5 million travellers. These figures suggest－ 13 －

that a greater familiarity with inbound tourism and a greater propensity towards outbound travel isbeginning to take hold throughout Japan, which can only add to the attractiveness of regional airports
as new gateways to the country.

8. Conclusion
Rather than outlining the potential of Japanese regional airports to host international flights
according to economic measures or marketing strategies, the current paper focused on how existingregional airport infrastructure and the new political circumstances surrounding tourism may help
establish a new component of Japan’s buoyant tourism economy: the internationalization of Japan’s
regional airports. Other important factors such as security, airspace restrictions and rights affecting
passage between nations such as Open Skies agreements were considered beyond the scope of thecurrent study but would be very worthy of inclusion in any similar future assessment.
From the discussion presented here, we can see the contribution made by the majority of Japan’s
regional airports towards the country’s international flight profile has been limited. There is however
no reason why the experience to date cannot be used as the foundation for a strategy to manage theexpected increase in visitor numbers in the near future. If more regional airports play a role in inboundtourism, the regions they serve can develop their own tourism economies while alleviating visitor
pressure in major cities and their respective hub airports. Based on the FAA calculation we can see a
doubling in size of the contribution made by regional airports in receiving inbound tourists is withinreach, and often without major infrastructural changes. If this potential can be harnessed, the regions
and the national tourism economy can benefit.
In addition to improvements to terminal infrastructure, rethinking on gate usage, extended
operational hours and greater flexibility are key. Investment in new CIQ facilities is also a vital part ofany such strategy. Under the provisions of the 2013 AOPU Act, regional airports can now actively
seek private funding and this should ensure adaptations are easier to implement than before. Moreover,as regional airports can now look beyond Japan’s shores for investment and innovation, they will beable to take on a more global outlook, influence a broader public, and thus enhance internationalrecognition and civic pride.
Such developments will not however be realized without challenges. The upgrading of regional
airports to international gateways needs to be made in tandem with the establishment of better
regional Destination Marketing Organizations that have a global appeal, and which understand source
markets’ needs (Pike, 2004). By inserting new energy into Japan’s regional economies, regional
airports can take a leading role in ameliorating growing tourism stresses in Japan’s tourism centers,
while spatially distributing the benefits of the tourism economy. Finally, these changes can only be－ 14 －

realized if the will, cooperation and understanding of regional populations are secured. If this can beachieved, regional airports can be the stimulus for a better-distributed and a better-balanced tourism
development nationwide that can benefit all stakeholders.

References
Adams, C. (2018). Busiest flight route in the world is revealed. The Independent, Sept 13 2018. Retrieved
October 10, 2018 from <https://www.independent.co.uk>
Andonian, A., Kuwabara, T., Yamakawa, N. & Ishida, R. (2016). The future of Japan’s tourism: path forsustainable growth towards 2020. McKinsey Japan and Travel, Transport and Logistics Practice.
BBC (2018). Fukushima’s Long Road to Recovery. BBC homepage, March 11, 2018. Retrieved Nov. 25, 2018 from<https://www.bbc.com/news/business-43078960>
Flyteam. (2018). Website for aircraft patronage in Japan. <http://flyteam.jp>
Fukushima Airport. (2018). Announcement about charter flights to Vietnam. Retrieved Sept 17, 2018 from<http://www.fks-ab.co.jp/info/news_detail.php?news=565>
Japan National Tourist Organization, JNTO. (2018a). Tourism statistics, monthly press release November 2018.
Retrieved Nov. 25, 2018,<https://www.jnto.go.jp/jpn/statistics/data_info_listing/pdf/20181121_monthly.pdf>
Japan National Tourist Organization, JNTO. (2018b). “Enjoy my Japan” Global Campaign Targets Long-haul
Travellers. Feb. 8 2018. Retrieved Sept. 20, 2018<https://www.seejapan.co.uk/press-releases/consumer/2018/02/08/enjoy-my-japan-global-campaign-targetslong-haul-travellers-consumer>
The Japan Times. (2018). Calls for multilingual alert systems grow in Japan as visitors crowd mass transport. The
Japan Times, July 28, 2018.
Japan Tourism Agency. (2018). New Year’s reflections from the JTA Commissioner. Japan Tourism Agency.
Retrieved Oct. 10, 2018 from <http://www.mlit.go.jp/kankocho/en/about/message.html>
Kato, K., Uemura, T., Indo, Y. et al. (2011). Current Accounts of Japanese Airports. Journal of Air Transport
Management, 17(2), 88-93. DOI: 10.1016/j.jairtraman.2010.07.001
The Mainichi Newspaper. (2016). Editorial: Cultivating ‘Japan fans’ key to attracting repeat foreign visitors. The
Mainichi Newspaper, Nov. 1, 2016.
McCannell, D. (2011). The ethics of sightseeing. Los Angeles: University of California.
Mirkovic, B., & Tosic, V. (2014). Airport apron capacity: estimation, representation and flexibility. Journal ofAdvanced Transport, 48, 97-118.
Japan Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, MLIT. (2018a). Haneda Airport from now.
Retrieved Nov. 30, 2018 from <http://www.mlit.go.jp/koku/haneda/international/summary.html>－ 15 －

MLIT. Aviation. (2018b). The current circumstances of airport management in Japan. Retrieved September 20,
2018 from <http://www.mlit.go.jp/koku/15_bf_000185.html>
MLIT. (2018c). Internationalization of Kobe and Osaka International Airports. MLIT press release Sept. 13, 2018.
Retrieved Oct. 10, 2018 from <http://www.mlit.go.jp/common/001253902.pdf>
MLIT. (2016a). Tourism Strategy to Invigorate the Japanese Economy. Meeting of the Council for a Tourism
Vision to Support the Future of Japan. Retrieved January 5, 2019 from<http://www.mlit.go.jp/common/001172615.pdf>
MLIT. (2016b). Calculations on the balance of income at Japan’s airports. MLIT. Retrieved Oct. 10, 2018 from<http://www.mlit.go.jp/koku>
MLIT. (2014). Basic policies on operation of national airports utilizing skills of the private sector. MLIT.
Retrieved Sept. 12, 2018 from <http://www.mlit.go.jp/koku>
MLIT. (2013). Airport management and the rejuvenation of regional Japan. MLIT February 2013. Retrieved Sept.
12, 2018 from <https://www.pref.miyagi.jp/uploaded/attachment/129330.pdf>
MLIT. (2007). Airports in Japan. MLIT. Retrieved Sept. 5, 2018 from<http://www.mlit.go.jp/koku/15_hf_000124.html>
MacCannell, D. (2011). The Ethics of Sightseeing. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Niigata Prefecture. (2016). Niigata airport operations. Retrieved Sept. 12, 2018 from<www.pref.niigata.lg.jp/HTML_Simple/981/235/riyou.pdf>
Nikkei Shinbun. (2013). Cabinet pass bill to outsource functions at 28 airports to the private sector. Nikkei
Newspaper, April 5 2013.
Palmqvist, J. (2017). Japan’s major hotel markets see sustained demand growth. Hotel News Now, 27 November
2017.
Pike, S. (2004). Destination Marketing Organizations. Amsterdam: Elsevier
Rutherford, T. (2011). Air transport statistics. UK House of Commons Library. Retrieved Sept. 5, 2018 from<researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN03760/SN03760.pdf>
Shibata, I. (1999). Japanese laws related to airport development and the need to revise them. Journal of Air Law
and Commerce, 65, 125-136.
Smith, G. (2018). Edinburgh welcomes Emirates. Airliner World, Dec. 2018, 38-43.
Straits Times. (2018). Japan’s train services feeling the strain. The Singapore Straits Times, Feb 6. Retrieved
September 10, 2018 from <https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/services-feeling-the-strain>
Swiss Global Enterprise. (2014). Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games – infrastructure briefing. Swiss Business Hub
Japan. Retrieved Sept. 5, 2018 from<http://www.s-ge.com/de/filefield-private/files/167599/field_blog_public_files/64649>
Thomas, M. (2016). Research Fortran Committee – the Japanese transport system. European Parliament
Directorate General for Internal Policies. Paris: The European Union.
－ 16 －

West JR Bus. (2017). JR Nishi Nihon homepage. Retrieved Sept. 5, 2018 from<https://www.nishinihonjrbus.co.jp/inbound/en/>
Williams, D.A. (2018). The changing profile of Japanese inbound tourism between 1996 and 2016. Bulletin of theFaculty of Tourism, Josai International University, 26(6), 1-18.
Yamaguchi, K. (2013). Evolution of metropolitan airports in Japan. Discussion Paper No. 2013-3. International
Transport Forum: OECD.

－ 17 －