The Geography of Transport Systems

Previous Next
th_giniairportsworld.gif (1074 bytes)
Lorenz Curve of the Top 10 Airports of the World, 1997

th_giniairportscanada.gif (1063 bytes)
Lorenz Curve of the Top 10 Canadian Airports, 1996


Gini Coefficient Airports and Ports Dataset


Container Traffic of the top 100 Ports, 1970-2000

Exercise: the Gini Coefficient

Author : Dr. Brian Slack and Dr. Jean-Paul Rodrigue

1. Demonstration: Airport Concentration

The methodology used in the exercise is explained in Chapter 4, Method 1. To illustrate the Gini coefficient we will examine the degree of concentration of air traffic among the top 10 airports in the world and among the top 10 airports of Canada.

Passenger Traffic at the Top 10 Airports of the World, 1997
Airports Passengers % of airports % of pass. X-Y cum % of pass. cum % of airports
Chicago 69153528 0.1 0.14 0.04 0.14 0.1
Atlanta 62885282 0.1 0.13 0.03 0.27 0.2
Los Angeles 57974559 0.1 0.12 0.02 0.38 0.3
Dallas/Ft W. 57335669 0.1 0.12 0.02 0.5 0.4
London 55722752 0.1 0.11 0.01 0.61 0.5
Tokyo 46598715 0.1 0.09 0.01 0.71 0.6
San Francisco 38560085 0.1 0.08 0.02 0.79 0.7
Frankfurt 38097201 0.1 0.08 0.02 0.86 0.8
Seoul 34441726 0.1 0.07 0.03 0.93 0.9
Miami 33504579 0.1 0.07 0.03 1.0 1.0
Total: 494274096 1.0 1.0 0.23

Source: ACI Airport Statistics. Note values are rounded up to 2 digits.

The Dissimilarity Index (DI) is the sum of the differences between the share of airports and share of passengers (X-Y) multiplied by 0.5, so DI = 0.23*0.5 = 0.115. The Gini Coefficient (GC; calculated in this spreadsheet) is very similar, with a value of 0.138. The distribution has a somewhat uniform Lorenz curve, which indicates no specific concentration of traffic among the largest airports, a reasonable assumption since each is a hub servicing its own market area and is not competing with other large airports. However, an analysis at the national level may reveal a different pattern. In this example, we determine the extent of concentration of traffic at Canada’s top ten airports.

Passenger Traffic at the to 10 Canadian Airports, 1996
Airports Passengers % of airports % of pass. X-Y cum % of pass. cum % of airports
Toronto 22669189 0.1 0.36 0.26 0.36 0.1
Vancouver 13090057 0.1 0.21 0.11 0.56 0.2
Montreal (D/M) 8533798 0.1 0.13 0.03 0.7 0.3
Calgary 6662242 0.1 0.11 0.01 0.8 0.4
Edmonton 2896578 0.1 0.05 0.05 0.85 0.5
Winnipeg 2830044 0.1 0.04 0.06 0.89 0.6
Ottawa 2763420 0.1 0.04 0.06 0.94 0.7
Halifax 2462256 0.1 0.04 0.06 0.98 0.8
Victoria 879367 0.1 0.01 0.09 0.99 0.9
Quebec 640304 0.1 0.01 0.09 1.0 1.0
Total: 63427255 1.0 1.0 0.81

Source: Statistic Canada, 1996.

The Dissimilarity Index is 0.405 (0.81 * 0.5) and the Gini Coefficient is 0.514 with a steeper Lorenz curve. The results of the analysis produce very different coefficients. For the top 10 airports in the world, the Gini Coefficient of 0.138 indicates a very low level of concentration, a result that is confirm visually by the graph. On the other hand there is much more concentration in the Canadian airport system, with a Gini coefficient of 0.514 with a much steeper graph tracing. This is explained by the fact that Toronto, as Canada's major hub, accounts for more than a third of all passenger traffic among the top 10 airports.

2. Exercise: Port Concentration

Consider the following two tables, the first ranking the world's largest container ports and the second ranking North America's largest container ports.

The World's 10 Largest Container Ports, 2000
Container Port Traffic (TEU)
Hong Kong 18,100,000
Singapore 17,040,000
Busan 7,540,387
Kaohsiung 7,425,832
Rotterdam 6,275,000
Shanghai 5,613,000
Los Angeles 4,879,429
Long Beach 4,600,787
Hamburg 4,248,247
Antwerp 4,082,334
North America's 10 Largest Container Ports, 2000
Container Port Traffic (TEU)
Los Angeles 4,879,429
Long Beach 4,600787
New York / New Jersey 3,050,036
San Juan 2,333,788
Oakland 1,776,922
Charleston 1,632,747
Seattle 1,488,020
Tacoma 1,476,379
Hampton Roads 1,347,364
Vancouver 1,163,178

The following tasks are to be completed:

Copyright © 1998-2008, Dr. Jean-Paul Rodrigue, Dept. of Economics & Geography, Hofstra University. For personal or classroom use ONLY. This material (including graphics) is not public domain and cannot be published, in whole or in part, in ANY form (printed or electronic) and on any media without consent. Permission MUST be requested prior to use.

07/22/08