• 9.1 Individual Costs
• 9.2 Societal Costs of Transport Related Benefits and Subsidies
• Footnotes

Page 101

The following section considers the costs of blindness in relation to transport and mobility. Please note that this section does not include transport associated with employment or education. Transport to and from or within work is considered in the Employment section (section 7) and transport to and from a place of study is covered in the Education section (section 6)..

9.1 Individual Costs

9.1.1 Financial Costs

Short Distance Travel

Almost all (98%) respondents to the Costs of Blindness survey report travelling short distances (21) in the last twelve months. Forms of transport most commonly used to do this include someone else's car (75%), walking (62%), taxis (57%), public transport (40%), and own car (34%).

While only 9% of taxi users use taxis every day or almost every day, 67% of taxi users aged under 18 years use taxis on a daily basis. In comparison, only 8% of users 18 to 65 years and 6% of users over 65 years use taxis every day or almost every day.

Over a third (35%) of taxi users use this transport mode once a week or more, while approximately one in five (19%) use taxis once a month or more. Over a third (37%) of users use taxis less than once a month.

Rural respondents use taxis less frequently than those in provincial and urban areas. Over half (57%) of rural users use taxis less than once a month. Only 18% of rural respondents use taxis once a week or more and none use them every day or almost every day. This may be due to the higher cost of taxi travel in rural areas, perhaps because of further travel distances when compared to provincial or urban areas. Lack of use in rural areas may also represent a lack of readily accessible taxi services.

Taxi users report spending an average of $27 a week on taxis. Users under 18 years of age spend an average of $59 a week. While travelling by taxis less frequently, rural users ($27) spend on average more than urban users ($22) but less than provincial users ($33).

Accounting for Total Mobility subsidies, the average additional weekly spend for those using taxis amounts to $15 per week. Previous differences by sub-groups are still apparent, with those under 18 years of age spending on average the most ($40 per week).

Page 102

Differences between urban ($13), provincial ($17) and rural ($15) locations are also still apparent.

All respondents travelling short distances in the last twelve months were asked why they had not used taxis at all or why they had not used taxis more frequently over the last twelve months. Forty-four percent report not needing to use taxis any more frequently while 29% report cost as the main reason. Cost is a particularly common barrier for those aged 18 to 65 (42%) as well as urban respondents (42%). Other reasons identified for not using taxis or not using them more frequently include having someone else available to drive (5%) and taxi services being unavailable in the location lived in (4%).

While cheaper public transport options may be available, the difficulties of using such transport can mean that these options are less than feasible. Difficulties can be experienced walking to and from stops and identifying the appropriate service or connecting service to catch. Some participants also discuss their safety concerns about getting on and off vehicles such as buses. When there is a need to ensure punctuality (for example, getting to work), the potential for delays and difficulties may be considered too great and taxis are then relied upon. People also report leaving very early to allow additional time to cover any potential difficulties, to ensure punctuality. Some participants also report favouring taxis to cope successfully with new or unfamiliar trips or when a trip would require a number of connecting public transport services. Comments include:

"...compared with the time it would take to catch a bus I don't mind paying, but then I have this thing, 'Oh my god, I have had x number of taxis this week and it has cost me this many dollars....But I will still much rather take a taxi. What makes me decide to take them is that the whole process of taking the bus is pretty full-on at times." (Female Youth)

"...I had to get someone to look after my children while I went, like after school while I was in [another city] training. That's a cost to the family. They might pay your travel, but there are always extraordinary costs involved, like getting the taxi to the train station". (Female Older Adult)

A sense that the constant feeling of reciprocal obligation is suggested as a cost in itself for those highly reliant upon others for transportation:

"I can't just hop in a car and drive myself, so I have to pay somebody to take me there and pay somebody to bring me back. Always paying and that has been my life." (Working Age Male)

Page 103

Total Short Distance Travel Financial Costs

Total annual financial costs associated with short distance travel are estimated at $4.6m for the Foundation membership. This includes costs to the individual for taxis not covered by the Total Mobility subsidy.

Table 38: Annual Short Distance Travel financial costs to the individual and society

Elderly (65+ years) vision impaired account for 54% ($2.5m) of total financial costs associated with short distance travel, followed by blind youth under 18 years (12%, $563,000) and working aged (18-65 years) vision impaired (12%, $537,000). Vision impaired youth account for the lowest financial costs associated with short distance travel (4%, $204,000).

Long Distance Travel

Over two thirds (69%) of respondents report having undertaken long distance (22) travel in the last twelve months. Rural respondents (83%) are most likely to have travelled long distances, compared to those in provincial (66%) and urban (60%) areas.

Over three quarters (77%) of those who travel long distances report requiring assistance to make such trips. The requirement for assistance is high for those blind (83%) as well as for those living in rural areas (94%).

9.1.2 Time Costs

Reliance on others for transportation is reported to result in substantial time costs for the blind or vision impaired traveller. For example, time can be lost by waiting for arranged transport to arrive or in needing to delay activities until transport is available. Planning the efficient use of one's time can also be difficult if movements are reliant upon the availability of drivers. Comments from participants in the research include:

"You spend a terrible lot of time waiting about, waiting to be picked up." (Male Older Adult)

Page 104

"My eldest [child] is eighteen and she drives me. But if she is an hour late, that is nothing to her, whereas I'm sitting there for an hour waiting for her to come and pick me up." (Working Age Female)

"... That is a cost in itself, waiting. That means frustration and arguments." (Male Older Adult)

If travelling by public transport, additional time can be incurred planning the trip, identifying and making connecting services and getting to and from pick up points. Aligning appointments with public transport schedules may also mean significant extra amounts of time having to be dedicated to a single appointment.

Inevitably, the need for transport assistance translates to time costs for those providing this assistance. Survey respondents travelling in someone else's car or their own car most commonly identify family members (40%) as those driving them. Respondents under 18 years of age are particularly reliant on family members as drivers (69% of respondents this age).

Other drivers commonly identified include wives (19%), husbands (14%), friends (15%), neighbours (6%), drivers employed by the respondent and/or their family (4%) and volunteers (3%). On average, family drivers are reported to spend 126 minutes a week driving, and society drivers 112 minutes per week. Parents of vision impaired children report transportation comprising a significant time cost for them and one not necessarily likely to reduce as children get older.

Public transport is also typically less available and frequent in smaller centres, resulting in greater reliance on family and friends for transportation. Limited public transport options may mean having no choice but to use taxis. Limited services to and from smaller centres may also require overnight stays in areas which the traveller would not have chosen to stay in otherwise. Limited rail services in smaller centres may also mean that the bus is the only feasible long distance travel option for the vision impaired - an option, however, providing a number of potential difficulties (e.g. negotiating stops and toilet requirements).

Blind parents may also face a greater requirement to walk to after-school or weekend activities, incurring extra time costs to do this. Getting children to activities inevitably requires substantial planning and effort, be the transport mode walking, taxis, or public transport. Because of their transport difficulties, blind parents also note less ability to leave children at activities and do something else during the time the children are occupied. Having to stay at the activity until it is completed can result in a loss of time for other activities to be carried out, and less ability to have time out from their children. One participant who is a parent comments on this further:

Page 105

"...There is no provision for time out. As I said, sighted people could drop kids off at the kindergarten for the afternoon, but if it took you half an hour to walk to the kindergarten and then stay with them, it would take you half an hour to walk home again." (Female Older Adult)

Total Short Distance Travel Time Costs

Total annual time costs associated with short distance travel are estimated at $13.1m for the Foundation membership. This includes costs for time spent by family and society in driving for blind or vision impaired persons.

Table 39: Annual Short Distance Travel time costs to the individual and society

Elderly (65+ years) vision impaired account for 39% ($5.1m) of total time costs associated with short distance travel, followed by working aged (18-65 years) vision impaired (25%, $3.2m) and elderly blind (13%, $1.7m).

9.1.3 Opportunity Costs

Transport related opportunity costs identified in the study include restricted ability to travel when and where as desired, the loss of ability to travel independently, and reduced time to undertake other activities.

"...I think people as a whole like their independence. They want to move when they want to move. You've got to move when they say move." (Female Older Adult)

Reliance on public transport can severely restrict movements and result in a loss of flexibility in travel decisions. For example, planning longer distance travel may be totally based around public transport schedules and connecting services.

The cost of taxis can require being selective in what trips are undertaken, potentially leading to further opportunity costs. One mother discusses the impact of this further:

"With the children now we have coffee groups occasionally, and I do still weigh it up, 'even with half price it's going to cost me $35 return. Should I

Page 106

go or should I skip this one, or go to every second one?' So I think it results in lost opportunities because of that." (Working Age Female)

A blind parent also notes reduced opportunities to link into existing parent support networks as a result of being unable to contribute to such networks, for example, a car pool. Restrictions on the range of activities that could be undertaken as parents with their children are also identified.

Thirty-two percent of survey respondents report not having travelled long distances (trips more than 80kms) in the last twelve months. Of these 56% report their blindness or vision impairment as stopping them from undertaking long distance travel. Difficulties identified with travelling centre around a lack of someone to help, difficulties with boarding and alighting from planes, trains and buses, and the distance and difficulty of getting to an airport.

9.2 Societal Costs of Transport Related Benefits and Subsidies

9.2.1 Total Mobility Scheme

The Total Mobility Scheme (TMS) is a subsided Taxi scheme run by Transfund New Zealand (23) in conjunction with participating regional councils throughout New Zealand. The programme is designed to address issues of mobility for disabled persons by improving access to taxis and making them more affordable.

As of 2003, the typical level of subsidy is 50% although some regional schemes are run differently. For example, the Northland scheme provides a 50% subsidy for the first half of the year with a 25% subsidy being made available for the latter part. All regional councils have their own restrictions on the service such as minimum and maximum fares or travel distances able to be travelled. In some regions, the service excludes certain geographical areas.

Users of the scheme are typically provided with a set number of subsidy vouchers to last them the year. Blind or vision impaired Total Mobility users would usually access the scheme through their local RNZFB branch. Alternatively the scheme may be accessed via the regional council's Total Mobility co-ordinator. Most regional councils require users to carry a Total Mobility identification card issued by either the RNZFB or the Total Mobility co-ordinator.

Page 107

Annual Cost of the Total Mobility Scheme

In calculating the annual cost of the Total Mobility Scheme to both blind and vision impaired individuals and society, information was collated using Transfund's 2003 survey of the scheme. Direct communication was also undertaken with individual regional councils. The amount of information available and the level of detail that could be provided is unique to each regional council. Table 40 summarises the information available on total numbers of blind and vision impaired users of the scheme by regional council:

Table 40: Blind and vision impaired users of the Total Mobility Scheme (2002)

Table 38 shows that in 2002 there were 38,720 Total Mobility Scheme users of which 5,442 or 14% were blind or vision impaired users. In Marlborough and Auckland, blind and vision impaired persons comprise a large portion of all Total Mobility Scheme users (26.5% and 25.1% respectively). By comparison, blind or vision impaired users comprise a relatively small proportion of users in the West Coast and Taranaki regions (1.4% and 2.0% respectively).

Page 108

The annual cost of the Total Mobility Scheme is shared by both the regional council and Transfund New Zealand. As of 2002, Transfund incurs 40% of the cost with the Regional council funding 60%. In 2002, the scheme cost regional councils and Transfund a total of $7.4m.

While blind and vision impaired users of Total Mobility comprise a particular proportion of total users in each region, this proportion does not necessarily correspond to their total use of funds. Blind and vision impaired total mobility users use less funding than would correspond with their portion of the total population. The following table summarises the total cost for 2002 experienced by Transfund and regional councils in subsidising taxis for blind or vision impaired users:

Table 41: Cost to Society of blind and vision impaired users of the Total Mobility Scheme (2002)

Page 109

The total annual cost to society of blind and vision impaired users of the Total Mobility scheme in 2002 was $712,107, with an average cost per blind or vision impaired user being $131. This compares with an average of $192 for non-blind or vision impaired users.

With the subsidy typically standing at 50% it is conceivable that individuals would have faced the same annual costs in 2002, therefore doubling the total expenditure on taxi fares.

9.2.2 Public Transport Subsidies

Various public transport concessionary fares are offered to disabled persons throughout New Zealand. Administered by local authorities, a general concession is often provided to beneficiaries, senior citizens, and the disabled, although specific details again differ across the country.

As of 2003, in Auckland, North Shore and Waitakere, blind passengers are able to travel on bus, train and ferry services on a senior citizen fare. A special photo ID is required for such concessions. Wellington City Council offers a general discount to beneficiaries and anyone over 60 years of age. The concessionary fares are, however, only available off peak (so not before 9am or between 4pm and 6pm). ID is also required. The minimum saving is $0.20 and the maximum saving available is $2.10. Nelson City council has a flat fare of $1.50 for beneficiaries, senior citizens and the disabled.

Information on blind or vision impaired users' uptake of these concessionary fares is unavailable because users they are grouped in with other persons (e.g. senior citizens, other disability groups).

9.2.3 Summary of Costs Associated with Transport and Mobility

Costs of Blindness experienced in relation to Transport and Mobility (excluding travel associated with employment or education - see sections 7 and 6 respectively) as covered in the RNZFB Costs of Blindness survey are summarised in Table 42 below. The individual and their family bear a greater cost than society in relation to Transport and Mobility costs, accounting for 77% of total costs. Greater cost is experienced by the vision impaired population when compared to blind counterparts.

It is important to note that these figures cannot be used to derive a meaningful average cost per individual Foundation member. For example, the financial cost of non-work related transport is quoted as $4.64m and if this is divided by RNZFB membership an average would be $8 per week. But this disguises the fact that a high proportion of RNZFB members do not use taxis at all.

Page 110

Summary Table 42: Annual Costs to the individual and society of Transport and Mobility

Footnotes

21. If employed or a student, excludes travel to and from work or place of study

22. Travel over 80km

23. Now Land transport NZ.

Return to the Contents Page