My perception is that all it needs is a law that defines public infrastructure as a term and then declares airports and airfields of any size public infrastructure. Being public means that everyone has a fair use right and needs to be charged proportionally.
Which countries around the world / in Europe have that and how is the situation for airports there?
“Are some airports intentionally pricing out light GA?”
That’s a damn good question !
I would say very positive AFFIRMATIVE, but then the question is why ?
Which countries around the world / in Europe have that and how is the situation for airports there?
I think most airports in the world are publicly (taxpayer) owned.
In Europe it is more patchy. In France, probably most are. In the UK, almost none are (a few exceptions e.g. Rochester, Welshpool, some Scottish island ones; Shoreham used to be till about 10 years ago) and the general local-political pressure is against it because the activity is seen as elitist so the local council is under pressure to divest itself of the airport even if it means selling it to a bunch of crooks.
but then the question is why ?
Yes – nearly all airport costs are fixed costs so every 20 quid you get from some plane landing is an extra 20 quid which, as they say in management accounting 
goes straight to the bottom line. It has to be purely stupid management. In some cases (e.g. Aberdeen) the indications are that the management has literally been seduced by the sound of a jet engine and women in high heels stepping out (Donald Trump and his escorts in that instance) and they regard piston GA as “dirty” (a word actually used).
Could it be they think to humour their main customers, the airlines, by keeping the small rag-tag* out of the way? One can imagine the swearing of an airliner crew when the Cessna or whatever that landed just before them is unsure about which exit to take, so they need to go around. Excuse me for playing the devil’s advocate…
*cited from “The Lord of the Rings”, book 3, chapter 10: Saruman belittling hobbits.
Well, given that the CAT guys are still human and sometimes land on an INOP runway by mistake, I think we can all get along.
That said, I can see why e.g. Heathrow or O’Hare would discourage small GA, and I don’t really consider it out of line. It’s the airports that get two CAT planes an hour but want to pretend they are the next JFK that piss me off.
But you can land at JFK, ORD without problems. I landed in D/FW (Dallas Fort Worth) in a C-150 …
At what cost?
The main reason is cultural. That is that the airlines hate GA and don’t see us as part of aviation. It’s the classic unionist stinking of “I’m a professional, we must keep the hobbyists” out. And the legislators cater and listen to airlines only, so they have a huge influence. There would never have been class A airspace to the ground at Heathrow, just to keep GA out, anywhere else but in Europe. There the airlines say jump and the legislators just say how high. It’s a culture. Europeans are more susceptible to it because we grow up never questioning state and authority and they run our lives from day one. They know what’s best for us after all, don’t they?
I suspect that the regional airports don’t want GA, because they see the income as small fry compared to the commercials.
If they only have 2 CAT per hour then they really can’t afford to lose any of those. I’m sure they’d much prefer to lose all GA than 1 CAT per hour. CAT contributes far more than landing fees/handling fees. They bring passengers through the terminal which makes the retail space rentable to shops, cafes/restaurants and car hire companies. It makes the advertising space valuable to hotels and restaurants, and it bring in car parking income.
In an ideal works it will not be one or the other and both will happily exist.
But when an airline chooses to fly to “Sleepyville Airport” then they can drive a hard bargain with that airport. One thing they don’t expect (and won’t be pricing into their decision) is delays and holds. So if they are given the long way in, rather than a direct, because there is a C150 slowly moving through the zone or a 172 doing circuits who needs to clear off out of the way, then they will start to complain. “Why are we wasting extra fuel waiting because this airport has so much GA going on? This is costing us extra money and delays!”. The airport probably thinks “That isn’t fair….but we can’t afford them to pull out. We can’t afford to lose the business. Ban all circuits and training, and try to reduce the number of GA aircraft here, and for goodness sake when we’re expecting in a CAT in the next 30 minutes get everyone out of here! We won’t really miss the GA income but we’ll miss that CAT if we lose it because of GA!”
