I have been working on this for a number of years and I agree with what my colleague Mr. Gradek said.
The problem with this model is that air travel is considered a goal in terms of regional development. I think that is misguided. In the Scandinavian model, that dynamic is actually reversed. In Scandinavian countries, air travel is considered a driver of regional development and regional development is considered essential, both economically and for tourism. They found that involving local stakeholders in regional development creates demand.
In Quebec, we have lovely regions, but the tourism infrastructure is lacking. If you land at a regional airport, you will not find car rentals, hotels and so forth. The tourism potential is not fully developed.
In Denmark, on the other hand, regional airports have been built even in very remote regions in northern Denmark, and economic activity has been created around those airports. So the demand was created. In Norway, industrial zones were developed around regional airports, with the participation of local stakeholders. Companies were encouraged to set up shop near those airports. That proximity boosted the airport's activities and stimulated the economy. So they created demand, including from business people who travel from those regions to the big cities.
Once the demand has been created, whether from tourism or industry, companies set up shop and projects develop, making regional economic activity permanent. That is the approach we should take. Unfortunately, people think the problem will be solved if an airline is established. That has never been the case.