Aerial photo of Bodø Airport in Norway
Photo: Kent Wang, CC BY-SA 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons

2. Methodological choices

Research design

The regional case studies use a combination of qualitative methods and are based on a two-step research design:

Desk research: this initial phase involved comprehensive examination of previously published reports within the scope of this project, as well as relevant grey and academic literature, local policies, relevant documents and media articles. The primary objective was to provide a holistic overview of regional factors critical to the prospective integration of electric aviation. Those factors encompass geographical characteristics, the state of transport and energy infrastructure, the regional economy and the landscape of policies and initiatives pertaining to electric aviation.

Ten-year scenario development: in the second phase, a ten-year scenario was drawn up by forming focused discussion groups for each of the five selected case studies. Those discussion groups typically comprised four to seven key stakeholders in electric aviation and related fields within their respective regions. Participants included regional development experts, representatives from regional and local authorities, other relevant local actors, aviation specialists and experts in the field of energy. The objective of this phase was to extrapolate and envision the trajectory of electric aviation over the course of the next decade, informed by the insights and expertise of those diverse stakeholders.

Case study selection

A comprehensive approach integrating both quantitative and qualitative data was used to select the case study routes in the five Nordic countries. The initial phase was based on the outcomes of the accessibility study conducted within the project framework (Nordregio, 2022). That study used key indicators such as a route length not exceeding 200-400 km, urban-rural connections and travel time benefits provided by electric aviation in comparison to alternative modes of transport, including both public transport and cars. In this way, about 200 routes resulted as potentially beneficial for implementing electric aviation.

To enhance and complement the quantitative findings from the accessibility study, consultations were held with the project’s reference group, regional experts and Nordic Energy Research.

Nordic Energy Research is a platform for cooperative energy research and policy development under the auspices of the Nordic Council of Ministers.

Those discussions aimed to provide additional insight and perspectives with regard to selection of case study routes.

The selection of the case studies was guided by the overarching objectives of broad geographical representation, identification of routes with diverse regional potential and exploration of the connections between urban hubs and more remote and rural areas.

Based on the above, the following routes were selected:

Copenhagen-Bornholm (Denmark)
Kuusamo-Kajaani-Oulu (Finland)
Leknes-Bodø (Norway)
Akureyri-Reykjavík (Iceland)
Skellefteå-Oulu (Sweden)

The study is limited in scope to a ten-year horizon, with a specific emphasis on shorter routes, ideally with a distance of approximately 200 kilometres or less and not exceeding 400 kilometres. Additionally, the study concentrates on aircraft models accommodating up to 30 seats. For a detailed overview of the aircraft model employed in this study, see Table 1.

Time frame of the case study	Ten years into the future (~2033)
Example aircraft https://heartaerospace.com/es-30/	ES – 30 HEART Aerospace
Assumed max. distance	200 km (max. 400 km)
Operating cost https://liu.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1631695/FULLTEXT01.pdf	15-22% cheaper than conventional airplanes - reduction in oil and fuel expenses - no (or lower) CO2 quotas But - high initial costs/ unclear ownership costs - higher weight: higher landing fees
Ticket price	Difficult to evaluate: lower operating costs vs. lower passenger volume Likely to be lower than for a conventional flight
Assumed passenger capacity	19–30 seats
Emissions	Could be more than 60% lower than for conventional flights (depending on the covered distance and lifetime). There is no clear advantage compared to land-based modes of transport (Baumeister et al., 2020)
Speed	300km/h (vs. 900 km/h for conventional airplanes) (other sources: 30% slower than conventional airplanes)
Energy consumption	570 Kw/h per 200 km and 19 passengers
Source of propulsion power	Batteries. Fuel cells and hybrid solutions may be accepted in individual use cases (this needs to be specified; hybrid solutions might affect the data provided in this table)

Table 1: Aircraft model employed for this study (Heart Aerospace).

The ten-year scenario approach

As described in Porter (1985), a scenario is “an internally consistent view of what the future might turn out to be – not a forecast, but one possible outcome”. Scenario planning uses scenarios in order to explore and describe possible future conditions. The aim of scenario planning is to offer a holistic perspective of the interconnected advantages and disadvantages of potential futures.

Within the framework of this project, a ten-year future scenario approach was developed to identify the key driving forces in the selected regions that may potentially influence the future implementation of electric aviation. The concept of driving forces is central to scenario planning. A driving force can be both an enabler and a hurdle to a specific change (Edgar et al., 2013). Furthermore, the scenario planning focused on possible impacts of electric aviation in the region. The term “impacts” is taken in this research project as referring to the possible effects – in terms of regional, economic and technological development, service accessibility and social implications – that electric aviation may have in different Nordic regional contexts.

In order to develop the future scenarios, focus group discussions were conducted for each case study with four to seven participants. The steps involved were as follows:

1. Identification of key driving forces (desk research)

Key forces that drive or hinder the development and future of electric aviation in the region were identified.
The concept of a PESTEL analysis was used to place the identified key driving forces into six overarching categories:
Political: this refers to the influence of political will and government policies on electric aviation.
Economic: this includes factors like economic growth and regional development.
Social: demographic trends, cultural attitudes, social values and lifestyle changes fall under this category.
Technological: this involves assessing the impact of technological development on electric aviation. It includes factors such as innovation, research and development, automation and the pace of technological change.
Environmental: environmental factors focus on ecological and environmental aspects. That includes considerations like climate change, sustainability and environmental regulations.
Legal: legal factors involve the impact of laws and regulations on electric aviation.

PESTEL analysis, which is commonly used in business development, is a useful tool in research to examine systematically and understand the external factors that may impact the subject being studied. It is an analytical approach based on certain contextual variables that can outline existing and future scenarios. Its purpose is to identify which variables may be relevant to the occurrence of those scenarios (Cordova-Pozo & Rouwette, 2023).

2. Ranking of key driving forces. Before the focus group discussion took place, participants were asked to rank the identified driving forces according to two main factors: the probability of their occurrence in the next ten years and their level of significance for electric aviation. The probability of occurrence refers to the likelihood or chance that a specific event or outcome will happen. The level of significance in this context refers to the critical importance or influence of a specific driving force in terms of facilitating the realisation of electric aviation. In essence, it measures the pivotal role played by a particular factor in making electric aviation reality

3. Focus group. The focus group discussions were conducted either online via Teams or in person and lasted approximately two hours. It should be noted that in some of the focus groups the process of ranking the driving forces occurred beforehand, rather than during the session itself. That ranking process was facilitated by using Mentimeter, an audience engagement platform that enables real-time surveys and collection of feedback. During the sessions, participants were asked to individually rank the driving forces, providing reasons for their choices, and engage in discussion with their fellow participants to explore each topic in greater detail. Additionally, participants were encouraged to brainstorm and propose potential additional driving forces, as well as to reflect on the potential impacts that the adoption of electric aviation might have on the region.

4. Description and interpretation of the scenarios. Based on the focus group discussions, a future scenario for electric aviation was developed for each of the regional contexts analysed.

Methodological limitations

Focus group discussions are recognised as a valuable tool for gaining in-depth insight into social issues (O.Nyumba et al., 2018). Nevertheless, it is crucial to acknowledge certain methodological limitations. Several levels of bias, limitations and challenges warrant consideration:

Discussion biases:

The participants across different focus group discussions had varying levels of expertise, potentially influencing the results. Certain topics might have been given more in-depth consideration based on the participants' diverse backgrounds.
Given the wide-ranging levels of knowledge about electric aviation among participants, there is a risk of dominance bias. Less expert participants may be less inclined to express their opinions, potentially skewing the overall perspective.
The desire for group harmony may deter individuals from expressing diverse or conflicting views and ideas. That dynamic could limit the range of perspectives presented during the discussions.

Interpretation of the results:

As the data from the focus groups are rooted in personal opinions and anticipation of future events, researchers must approach the interpretation with extreme caution. It is important to note that this study does not aim to predict future developments in electric aviation, but rather to construct scenarios or hypotheses about what the future might hold in this field.

Limited generalisability:

The study deliberately selected a specific set of cases based on predefined parameters. Consequently, caution should be applied when attempting to generalise the results to other routes, as some insights are closely tied to the unique characteristics of the specific cases and may not be universally applicable.

In light of those considerations, meticulous attention to the potential biases and limitations is essential to ensure the reliability and validity of the insights derived from focus group discussions.