Download PDF
Read media summary
APA style

Wilson, N., Baker, M., & Curl, A. . Rapid fuel crisis interventions with public health co-benefits. Public Health Expert Briefing. https://www.phcc.org.nz/briefing/rapid-fuel-crisis-interventions-public-health-co-benefits

Vancouver style

Wilson N, Baker M, Curl A. Rapid fuel crisis interventions with public health co-benefits. Public Health Expert Briefing. . https://www.phcc.org.nz/briefing/rapid-fuel-crisis-interventions-public-health-co-benefits

Summary 

In this Briefing we detail five specific interventions that could be used promptly in Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ) to both enhance energy security and reduce fuel costs to households. All these interventions could also provide other benefits – particularly for health. These interventions are: (1) Improving access to public transport (eg, better scheduling, reliability, increased subsidies for fares); (2) Improving cycling infrastructure; (3) Subsidising e-bike purchases (eg, targeted programmes); (4) Reducing open road speed limits; and (5) Encouraging more flexible work hours and voluntary working from home (where appropriate). 

We also describe potential barriers to implementation (eg, the upfront costs and the political difficulty of lowering speed limits). Nevertheless, we also outline options for meeting upfront costs, including cancelling the proposed LNG terminal and the $200 million gas exploration fund.

Adapting constructively to the current fuel crisis in NZ could yield enduring gains across health, household budgets, environmental sustainability, and resilience.

The conflict in the Middle East is having severe regional1 and global impacts. It is raising the possibility of a global recession according to the IMF2 and may push 30 million people into poverty according to the United Nations (ie, via higher fuel and fertiliser prices).3 In high-income countries, it may also exacerbate poverty and inequities, and is already causing social unrest (eg, recent protests in Ireland).4 

Nevertheless, this fuel crisis does provide an opportunity for governments to make changes that enhance long-term energy security, reduce costs for households and generate other co-benefits. In this Briefing, we highlight five potential changes that policy-makers in NZ could consider, along with their health and other co-benefits. It expands on a valuable recent Briefing that covered “neighbourhood-level changes to make walking and cycling easy”, “safe, connected cycleways” and “getting people on bikes through free bike/e-bike programmes”.5 

Five fuel crisis-related interventions

Below is a summary table of five possible interventions. All are likely to reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, and some will also generate other health benefits through increasing active transport (eg, via walking, cycling and e-bike use). 

While establishing these interventions as necessary energy security and household cost-saving measures during this crisis,6 policymakers should also emphasise to the public the health and other co-benefits (environmental sustainability, equity and resilience building). Ideally, both central and local government politicians should work together on these interventions and forge support across political parties. 

The interventions in the table do not include new subsidies for electric vehicles, as we consider better immediate investments are those that reduce demand for car-based travel, such as improving cycling infrastructure and subsidising e-bike purchases (see a previous Briefing).7 We also do not address the important issues of how urban planning can reduce travel demand,8 and the benefits of greater electrification of the vehicle fleet, trucking, rail and industry. This is because these issues are generally more complex and potentially harder to leverage quickly during a fuel crisis. Nevertheless, the benefit of improved urban design is an essential consideration for policymakers as they reform the Resource Management Act (1991) this year.

Table: Five fuel crisis-related interventions with co-benefits for public health, society and the environment

InterventionCo-benefits for public health, society and the environmentPotential disadvantages / costs / limitations
1) Improving quality and access to public transport or alternatives

Making public transport more attractive is one of the key policy levers to support mode shift to expand travel choices and keep cities moving. Mode shift from private car to public transport can reduce fuel demand and travel costs. Improvements might include bus lanes, to support speed and reliability of services.

            Public transport is important for equity by helping lower-income households, older people, disabled people, and non-drivers maintain access to jobs, education, healthcare, and social activities. Half-price fares showed clear benefits to lower-income groups.9

            In areas where public transport does not exist, consideration should be given to flexible services or providing support to community transport or demand-responsive transport.

            There are many health co-benefits to promoting public transport with reduced: air pollution (including greenhouse gases), noise, stress from traffic congestion, and crash exposure per passenger-km. Furthermore, public transport use often adds some incidental walking to/from stops. NZ research shows the health, equity and economic benefits10 and the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends investments in public transport for the above reasons.11

Requires additional upfront public spending by central and/or local government on operations and subsidies (albeit typically cost-beneficial from a societal perspective). While the arguments for subsidies are widespread, some argue the case against entirely “free” public transport.12 
2) Improving cycling infrastructure (cycleways, protected lanes, traffic calming)Previous Briefings provide NZ-relevant details around the benefits of cycling infrastructure and traffic calming (eg, 5,13). There is also notable public support based on NZ survey data.13 Some councils have already signalled support for rapid rollout of cycleways and road space reallocation.14 In summary, the co-benefits to health include increases in physical activity (with reduced chronic disease risk); and reduced air pollution, noise, and stress (from congestion). Cycling was a component of NZ research on decarbonising the transport sector, which found health, equity and economic benefits.10There is the up-front capital cost for central and local government. There is also sometimes resistance over road-space reallocation or parking loss (which need to be considered with appropriate consultation). 
3) Subsidising e-bike purchases (eg, targeted programmes for highest need groups)Previous Briefings detail the value of e-bikes in the NZ context,5,7,15 and e-bike promotion interventions in NZ have shown favourable results.16,17 In summary: e-bikes can broaden cycling to people deterred by hills, distance, age, or lower fitness, so they can potentially expand active transport faster than conventional bikes alone. Health co-benefits arise as they still provide physical activity (and the other health benefits of improved cycling infrastructure also apply – see above). There is the upfront fiscal cost, albeit probably much less than EV subsidy schemes.
4) Reducing open road speed limits (eg, from 110 km/h to 100 km/h or 100 to 90 km/h)Speed limit reductions are one of the fastest and clearest measures to save fuel and reduce fuel costs for households. They can also reduce road crash-related injuries and deaths, reduce noise and reduce emissions (air pollution and greenhouse gases). They can make travel more predictable, less stressful, and provide for conditions more supportive of walking and cycling. In the NZ context, previous Briefings have outlined the problems with increasing speed limits.18,19This may be the most politically contentious intervention in this table. Enforcement, signage changes, and public communication would all be needed. 
5) Encouraging more flexible work hours and voluntary working from home (WFH) in the short-term (where appropriate)More flexible work hours can help minimise congestion in traffic and crowding in public transport at peak times. Voluntary WFH can reduce commuting fuel use almost immediately for suitable jobs, ease peak congestion, lower commuter stress, and reduce commuter time loss and travel costs. It may improve work-life flexibility, allow more family time, and reduce exposure to traffic injury and transport-related air pollution for commuters. A systematic review found “many environmental, social, and economic benefits associated with WFH”. Nevertheless, “a decrease in overall travel distance is only accrued when most employees … work from home three or more times a week.”20Voluntary WFH is only feasible for some occupations. Also, for some people it has the downsides of increasing social isolation, blurring work-home boundaries, and creating mental-health and ergonomic issues.

How government could pay for any upfront costs

Some of the interventions in the above table may involve substantial upfront costs eg, expanding subsidies for public transport. Government could use a range of fiscal measures to obtain the necessary revenue. For example:

  • Using savings from: (i) cancelling the proposed LNG terminal for Taranaki (which has been widely criticised already)21; (ii) cancelling the government’s $200 million gas exploration fund (given this would only increase unreliable fossil fuel dependency)22; and (iii) deferring and cancelling planned additional motorway construction.
  • Introducing specific additional sales taxes on heavier (more polluting) vehicles as implemented in parts of Europe (see this Briefing that covers the problem of “supersized vehicles” in NZ23).
  • Increasing taxation of fuels that are particularly hazardous eg, “Avgas 100LL” used by some light aircraft and which contains the neurotoxin lead (Pb). 
  • Using a proportion of existing charges (road tolls and road user charges), as well as any future congestion charges.

Other taxes on health-harming products could also raise the additional revenue eg, higher alcohol taxes,24 introducing taxes on vape products (albeit lower than tobacco excise levels), and introducing taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages.25 

Potential lasting benefits of responding constructively to this fuel crisis

Ideally, the impact from adopting these five interventions would be evaluated and potentially made into longer-term responses as appropriate. The process of adoption and embedding these interventions would be facilitated if there was collaboration across political parties, potentially with a “multi-party fuel crisis response group”. This group could draw on expertise across the relevant sectors and allow for some sharing of political risks. Such collaboration could reduce the risk of policy abandonment when political administrations change, as we have argued previously around abandoned smokefree legislation.26 

These proposed “demand side” measures are supported by organisations such as the International Energy Agency.27 They sit alongside current demand side NZ Government initiatives such as replacing diesel boilers in schools28 and a media campaign for more energy efficient driving.29 However, they contrast with one government response which is targeted fiscal support (a $50 weekly payment to working families with children), which may do little to reduce petrol demand and “may do the opposite by blunting the price signal discouraging people from driving”.30

Adapting constructively to the current fuel crisis in NZ could also help build momentum towards the more complex steps around further improving urban design and the greater electrification of transport and industry. These advances are necessary to improve national energy security (given the unreliability and price volatility of imported fossil fuels) and the need to achieve the international climate goals that NZ has signed up to.31 Building such increased resilience would also help with surviving any future trade-ending catastrophic risks impacting NZ, a topic of concern to a majority of NZ citizens.32

In summary, we need to treat this current fuel crisis as an opportunity for more future-focused policymaking and governance,33 where long-term energy security, health benefits, social wellbeing, and environmental sustainability are prioritised.

What this Briefing adds

  • This Briefing details five rapid interventions that could be used in the current fuel crisis to enhance energy security and lower fuel costs to citizens: (1) Improving access to public transport; (2) Improving cycling infrastructure; (3) Subsidising e-bike purchases; (4) Reducing open road speed limits; and (5) Encouraging more flexible work hours and more voluntary working from home (where appropriate). 
  • As well as improving energy security and reducing costs to households, all these interventions could provide health, environmental sustainability, and resilience benefits, particularly if they are extended beyond the current crisis period. Nevertheless, some have potential downsides with upfront costs and political challenges (eg, resistance by some to lowering speed limits). 

Implications for policy and practice

  • Citizens and NGOs can use the opportunity of this fuel crisis to advocate more strongly for these five interventions.
  • Central and local government politicians can build cross-party agreements to ensure that these types of interventions are enacted, funded and retained across electoral cycles. 

Authors details

Prof Nick Wilson, Co-Director, Public Health Communication Centre, and Department of Public Health, Ōtākou Whakaihu Waka, Pōneke | University of Otago, Wellington

Prof Michael Baker, Director, Public Health Communication Centre, Department of Public Health, Ōtākou Whakaihu Waka, Pōneke | University of Otago, Wellington

Assoc Prof Angela Curl, Department of Public Health, Ōtākou Whakaihu Waka, Ōtautahi | University of Otago, Christchurch

Creative commons

Public Health Expert Briefing (ISSN 2816-1203)

References

  1. Doucet L. Lyse Doucet: Under fragile ceasefire, Iranians wonder if US deal can be done. BBC News 2026;(16 April). https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4g44gj7rgno
  2. Rappeport A. Middle East War Will Slow Global Economic Growth, I.M.F. Warns. New York Times 2026;(14 April). https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/14/business/iran-war-imf-economic-growth.html?searchResultPosition=2.
  3. United Nations Development Programme. Military escalation in Middle East could push more than 30 million people into poverty worldwide, UN Development Programme warns. UNDP 2026;(13 April). https://www.undp.org/press-releases/military-escalation-middle-east-could-push-more-30-million-people-poverty-worldwide-un-development-programme-warns.
  4. Specia M. Fuel Protests Cause Transport Chaos in Ireland as Iran War Spikes Prices. New York Times 2026;(10 April). https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/10/world/europe/ireland-fuel-protests-oil-prices-iran-war.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share.
  5. Osborne E, Miller A, Randal E, et al. Rapidly reducing oil reliance: Quick wins in active transport. The Briefing 2026;(2 April). https://www.phcc.org.nz/briefing/rapidly-reducing-oil-reliance-quick-wins-active-transport.
  6. Welch T. The government has boxed itself in over fuel saving strategies – but there is a way out. The Conversation 2026;(8 April). https://theconversation.com/the-government-has-boxed-itself-in-over-fuel-saving-strategies-but-there-is-a-way-out-280131
  7. Shaw C, Mizdrak A. E-bikes are the new cars- why don’t transport policy makers treat them seriously? The Briefing 2020;(3 August). https://www.phcc.org.nz/briefing/e-bikes-are-new-cars-why-dont-transport-policy-makers-treat-them-seriously.
  8. International Transport Forum (ITF). Urban Planning and Travel Behaviour: Summary and Conclusions. ITF Roundtable Reports, No. 189, OECD Publishing, Paris, 2022. https://bit.ly/4cra9Bp
  9. Curl A, Coppens A, Dares C, et al. Accessibility and affordability impacts of half price public transport fares in Aotearoa New Zealand. Findings 2025; https://findingspressorg/article/92735-accessibility-and-affordability-impacts-of-half-price-public-transport-fares-in-aotearoa-new-zealand
  10. Shaw C, Mizdrak A, Gage R, et al. Policy approaches to decarbonising the transport sector in Aotearoa New Zealand: modelling equity, population health, and health-system effects. The Lancet Planetary Health 2024;8(9):e647-e56. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(24)00171-2
  11. World Health Organization. Environment, Climate Change and Health: Strategies for healthy and sustainable transport. https://www.who.int/teams/environment-climate-change-and-health/healthy-urban-environments/transport/strategies.
  12. Gleason E. The arguments for and against making NZ public transport free during the fuel crisis. The Spinoff 2026;(15 April). https://thespinoff.co.nz/society/15-04-2026/the-arguments-for-and-against-making-nz-public-transport-free-during-the-fuel-crisis.
  13. Wilson N, Jarman J, Kerr J. Public support for investing in urban cycleways outweighs opposition – National Survey. The Briefing 2025;(16 December). https://www.phcc.org.nz/briefing/public-support-investing-urban-cycleways-outweighs-opposition-national-survey.
  14. Girao L. Fuel crisis: Council urged to fast-track cheap ‘Park Tce’-style cycleways across Christchurch. The Press 2026;(8 April). https://www.thepress.co.nz/nz-news/360981499/council-asked-fast-track-cheap-park-tce-style-cycleways-across-christchurch-fuel-costs-hurt.
  15. Osborne E, Davies C, Shaw C. Fun, confidence and better health: Inside a year on an e-bike. The Briefing 2026;(27 February). https://www.phcc.org.nz/briefing/fun-confidence-and-better-health-inside-year-e-bike.
  16. Osborne E, Davies C, Raerino K, et al. “It's good for the community to see real people like them on the bike”: Exploring e-bike support in Aotearoa New Zealand. Journal of Transport & Health 2025;43:102061. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2025.102061
  17. Osborne E, Davies C, Shaw C. Health benefits of the HIKO e-bike programme: a qualitative study. New Zealand Medical Journal 2026;139(1630):13-21. https://doi.org/10.26635/6965.7008
  18. Kingham S, Curl A. Increasing speed limits defies the science - more deaths and pollution expected. The Briefing 2024;(8 July). https://www.phcc.org.nz/briefing/increasing-speed-limits-defies-science-more-deaths-and-pollution-expected.
  19. Keall M, Beanland V, Chapman R, et al. Increases in speed limits: Unjust and unjustifiable. The Briefing 2024;(1 October). https://www.phcc.org.nz/briefing/increases-speed-limits-unjust-and-unjustifiable.
  20. Halefom TH, Moglia M, Nygaard C, et al. Sustainability implications of working-from-home (WFH): a systematic review of the travel behavior literature. Journal of Planning Literature 2025;40(1):17-31. https://doi.org/10.1177/08854122241259414
  21. Newton K. Organisations call on government to ditch LNG import terminal. Radio NZ 2026;(10 April). https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/591939/organisations-call-on-government-to-ditch-lng-import-terminal.
  22. Gibson E. Budget backsliding on climate change 'defies belief', say advocates. Radio NZ 2025;(22 May). https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/561847/budget-backsliding-on-climate-change-defies-belief-say-advocates.
  23. Wild K, Woodward A, Shaw C, et al. We need to tackle vehicle ‘supersizing’ for health, climate and energy security. The Briefing 2026;(10 April). https://www.phcc.org.nz/briefing/we-need-tackle-vehicle-supersizing-health-climate-and-energy-security.
  24. Wilson N. Public Health Solutions Series: Two Injury Prevention Strategies to Reduce Pressure on the Health System. The Briefing 2022;(29 August). https://www.phcc.org.nz/briefing/public-health-solutions-series-two-injury-prevention-strategies-reduce-pressure-health.
  25. Andreyeva T, Marple K, Marinello S, et al. Outcomes following taxation of sugar-sweetened beverages: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Network Open 2022;5(6):e2215276. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.15276
  26. Edwards R, Thomson G, Broadbent A, et al. Parliamentary voting for smokefree over two decades: Implications for future progress. The Briefing 2024;(6 August). https://www.phcc.org.nz/briefing/parliamentary-voting-smokefree-over-two-decades-implications-future-progress.
  27. IEA. Sheltering From Oil Shocks. Paris: International Energy Agency (IEA), 2026. https://www.iea.org/reports/sheltering-from-oil-shocks
  28. Otago Daily Times. Bump for relief teachers, funding to replace diesel boilers in schools. Otago Daily Times 2026;(20 April). https://www.odt.co.nz/news/national/bump-relief-teachers-funding-replace-diesel-boilers-schools-rnz.
  29. EECA. Stretch every tank (Campaign). Energy Efficiency & Conservation Authority (EECA). https://bit.ly/3OJOWcC
  30. Welch T. Free public transport the fuel crisis response that makes sense. Newsroom 2026;(27 March). https://newsroom.co.nz/2026/03/27/free-public-transport-the-fuel-crisis-response-that-makes-sense/.
  31. Newton K. Fuel crisis chance for government to reduce greenhouse gas emissions - scientists. Radio NZ 2026;(17 April). https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/environment_climate/592615/fuel-crisis-chance-for-government-to-reduce-greenhouse-gas-emissions-scientists.
  32. Kerr J, Boyd M, Wilson N. Public Attitudes to Responding to Global Catastrophic Risks: A New Zealand Case Study. Risk Analysis 2025;45(11):3533-39. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.70096
  33. Boston J. Safeguarding the Future: governing in an uncertain world. Wellington: Bridget Williams Books 2017.

About the Briefing

Public health expert commentary and analysis on the challenges facing Aotearoa New Zealand and evidence-based solutions.

Subscribe

Briefing CTA

Public Health Expert Briefing

Get the latest insights from the public health research community delivered straight to your inbox for free. Subscribe to stay up to date with the latest research, analysis and commentary from the Public Health Expert Briefing.

Contact

Email [email protected]
43 Hanson Street, Mt Cook, 
University of Otago, Wellington | Ōtākou Whakaihu Waka, Pōneke 
PO Box 7343, Wellington South 6242
New Zealand | Aotearoa

 

Public Health Expert Briefing (ISSN 2816-1203)

PHCC

The PHCC is funded by a philanthropic endowment from the Grant and Marilyn Nelson Charitable Trust and hosted by the Department of Public Health, University of Otago, Wellington.