Press Release: Heathrow delivers consistently higher infrastructure project costs – new independent analysis reveals 

Heathrow delivers consistently higher infrastructure project costs – new independent analysis reveals 

• Oxford Global Projects’ benchmarking study finds a systematic cost premium across all major infrastructure projects at Heathrow Airport –  with future expansion plans set to be even more expensive.
• Oxford Global Projects’ analysis using the world’s largest benchmark database finds projects delivered by Heathrow Airport Limited (HAL) to be among the most expensive globally.
• The report critiques HAL’s methodologies, which disguise Heathrow's true costs, showing that the airport ranks among the top 10-20% most expensive globally.
• Findings undermine HAL's investment case and raise serious questions about its ability to deliver value for money on future expansion.

London, 09 March 2026

An independent review by Oxford Global Projects has found that Heathrow Airport Limited (HAL) consistently delivers amongst the most expensive airport infrastructure projects in the world.

Oxford Global Projects (OGP), a leading research consultancy specialising in major infrastructure delivery, conducted a comprehensive benchmarking analysis comparing Heathrow's major investments with those of other international airports, using normalised pricing. The study reveals a systematic pattern of elevated costs at Heathrow, whether comparing baggage systems against other London airports or flagship terminals against global peers, even after controlling for factors such as location.

Heathrow Reimagined welcomes the report’s analysis, which provides robust evidence supporting the campaign’s claims that HAL’s projects are unjustifiably more expensive than other hub airports. Across all major projects – including terminals, runways, baggage systems and car parks – Heathrow is among the most expensive in the world. 

The findings undermine confidence in HAL’s capital efficiency and raise serious concerns about its ability to deliver value for money across future capital expenditure plans, including the 2027-31 investment period, the development of new terminals, and the third runway. 

The high charges faced by passengers are not the result of any single expensive project, but rather the compounding effect of decades of consistent, globally high-cost delivery across all major asset types. This cumulative pattern of upper-decile capital spending has driven today’s airport charges to among the highest globally.

The campaign calls for the ongoing Civil Aviation Authority review to address these concerns through the introduction of competitive forces and stronger regulation. 

A spokesperson for Heathrow Reimagined said:

“This independent analysis confirms what our campaign has long argued – Heathrow consistently delivers some of the world’s most expensive infrastructure projects, with a clear pattern that cannot be explained by West London premiums. 

“HAL’s ability to consistently increase costs reflects a structural problem with how Heathrow is regulated. The current model grants HAL substantial market power, with insufficient incentives to control costs, leaving passengers to bear the consequences through higher charges.
“With expansion on the horizon and increasingly expensive projects planned, the time for fundamental regulatory reform is now.”

Headlines from the report include:

• While other major hub airports benefit from economies of scale, HAL’s management and delivery of infrastructure projects means that, Heathrow fails to achieve the cost efficiencies typically seen at scale.
• Heathrow’s proposed third runway costs are above the 95th percentile, confirming that the third runway would be amongst the most expensive worldwide.
• Heathrow's terminals continue to be more expensive than global standards and are delivered at a higher cost than similar terminals at comparable international airports:
  
  • Despite plaudits for on-time delivery, the costs of Terminal 5 and Terminal 2 are in the top 15% for similar terminals worldwide.
  • The report suggests that, under the current system, this trend is likely to continue in the future.
• Heathrow's baggage handling systems are some of the most expensive in the world and are 10-20 times more expensive than Gatwick and Stansted, despite similar regional costs.
• Car park construction costs have jumped from an opening budget in the 10th percentile to the 90th percentile, reflecting ever-increasing spend that cannot be attributed to location, inflation or exchange-rate differences.

As part of the independent review, OGP also assessed three studies HAL uses to justify its high capital costs, including analysis by KPMG. The Interim Critique Report identified flawed methodologies that systematically bias results in Heathrow's favour. The review concludes that HAL's benchmarking studies do not provide statistically reliable evidence and cannot support regulatory decision-making without independent scrutiny. 

These findings are consistent with the CAA's own assessment, which stated that it had ‘concerns around the transparency and robustness of KPMG's analysis' (e.g. the small number of airports considered and the omission of relevant comparators), and that it had 'not been able to replicate KPMG's estimates based on the source data provided'. The CAA found that, even after removing most of KPMG's adjustments, Heathrow's charges remain above those of comparator airports.

A spokesperson for Oxford Global Projects said:

“We looked at Heathrow through objective data, and our benchmarking analysis shows that Heathrow’s infrastructure projects are among the most expensive globally. What is most striking is that this is not a one-off issue affecting a single project but consistently Heathrow development being more expensive than other airports in the world, pointing to structural issues rather than isolated project or location factors.

“International experience shows that sustained high-ranking project cost performance is rarely accidental and is typically associated with weak cost discipline, unmanaged scope growth, and governance arrangements that do not sufficiently incentivise efficiency.

“Taken together, the benchmarking findings provide a clear warning signal for Government and regulators: Heathrow’s persistent high ranking in project costs indicates structural issues and the evidence suggests Heathrow’s regulatory framework should be reassessed to ensure it drives efficiency, productivity and affordability for passengers.”

 

ENDS

 

Oxford Global Projects
Oxford Global Projects are the world’s leading experts on megaproject management. Oxford Global Projects team have pioneered research in behavioural science, including optimism bias, strategic misrepresentation, the planning fallacy, delivery, and reference class forecasting.  

With the largest project datasets worldwide (over 11,000 projects), they have been advising governments and business for over 30 years.

Co-founder, Bent Flyvbjerg, is the most cited scholar on the subject worldwide. Bent Flyvbjerg, Executive Chairman and Co-Founder of Oxford Global Projects is Professor Emeritus at Oxford, VKR Professor at ITU  Alexander Budzier CEO and Co-Founder of Oxford Global Projects is Fellow in Management Practice at Oxford University’s Saïd Business School.  
 
Normalised Pricing Methodology: 
The report uses Reference Class Forecasting, a data-driven benchmarking method, to assess whether the cost of HAL’s projects are typical, low or high when compared with similar, completed projects worldwide. 

• Reference class analysis requires a consistent and transparent basis for comparing costs across countries, with established practice relying on country level Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) conversion. 
• This study converted all project costs to 2024 GBP PPP, e.g., British pounds adjusted for purchasing-power parity and expressed in 2024 price levels. This ensures that Heathrow’s costs and those of its international peers are evaluated as if they had all been incurred in the same economic context. 
• For the purposes of this study, country level PPP adjustments remains the most transparent basis for comparison, capturing the variations in construction input costs while maintaining consistency across all reference classes.