The policy implications of energy poverty indicators

Mora, José Carlos Romero; Llamas, Pedro Linares; López, Xiral

doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2017.12.054

Cited by 169 publications

(87 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Whilst the 10% indicator is flexible, easy to calculate and easily understood, it has come to be seen as imprecise and unresponsive. Rather than identifying the ‘unusual or abnormal’ (Liddell et al, 2012, p.28), it was thought to bring too many people into the ambit of fuel poverty (Heindl, 2015), and to include many higher income households living in energy inefficient homes (Romero et al, 2018). The indicator did not help to target assistance to those in most need, nor demonstrate the effectiveness of energy efficiency measures.…”

Section: Understanding Fuel Poverty and The Role Of Occupant Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

Occupant behaviour as a fourth driver of fuel poverty (aka warmth & energy deprivation)

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A conceptual framework for occupant behaviour as a driver of fuel poverty is presented, comprising: housing and use of the home; heating and energy arrangements and thermal comfort; household structure and dynamics; health and well-being; household finances; and social activity and relations. This framework informs longitudinal analysis of movements into and out of fuel poverty among households in deprived communities in Glasgow. Household surveys across ten years yielded a longitudinal sample of 3297 cases where initial and subsequent fuel poverty status was recorded using an experiential measure. A third of households changed their fuel poverty status over time: 18% moving out of fuel poverty and 16% moving in. Factors strongly associated with movements into fuel poverty included: being a single parent (OR 2.27); experiencing a mental health problem (OR 2.74); and remaining out of work (OR 1.89). Movement out of fuel poverty was less likely among those with infrequent family contact (OR 0.55) and who moved home (OR 0.66); home improvements had no effect upon the experience of fuel poverty. It is argued that the policy problem should be considered one of ‘warmth and energy deprivation’, accompanied by a broader interpretation of vulnerability to as well as from fuel poverty.

show abstract

Section: Understanding Fuel Poverty and The Role Of Occupant Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 99%

Occupant behaviour as a fourth driver of fuel poverty (aka warmth & energy deprivation)

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Pye et al [28] categorized the different interpretation of the concept according to each Member State, highlighting the recurrence of a user as a receipt of social welfare, while in France, Sweden, and Italy, it reflects the relationship between low income and high expenditure. Recent studies include vulnerable users, low-income families with children, elderly people in nursing homes, rented persons, and those with an unstable employment situation [52,53]. Directive 2019/944 of 5 June 2019 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and amending Directive 2012/27/EU, in Article 28 identifies users as "vulnerable customers", stating that "member States shall take appropriate measures to protect customers and shall in particular ensure that vulnerable customers are adequately protected".…”

Section: The User Dimension Of Energy Povertymentioning

confidence: 99%

Future Design Approaches for Energy Poverty: Users Profiling and Services for No-Vulnerable Condition

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Analyzing data from the Energy Poverty Observatory in Europe, it emerges that more than 50 million households in the EU live in energy poverty (people that cannot heat their homes during winter; cannot make their homes comfortable during the summer; pay their energy bills late). Research studies realized in the last 20 years highlight that making energy demand efficient and effective is the more significant and socially important the more it is able to involve users who are unable to sustain energy demand. The evolution of the research sees a narrowing of the field of investigation by focusing on the user dimension of energy poverty, stressing the role of citizens not only as consumer but also as producers of solutions to tackle energy poverty, real energy communities of agents. The paper aims to provide a systematic literature review highlighting the major findings of the topic, investigating the relationship between spatial and social issues, and looking at the state of energy poverty by addressing the profiling of users and consequently of services useful to overcome their current vulnerable condition. The paper is structured in two core sections. The first one gives the results of a systematic literature review on the energy/fuel poverty topic, the second one deepens the role of communities and individuals need, crucial in defining new design approaches for supportive solutions to tackle energy poverty.

show abstract

“…Irrespective of terminology differences, review of multiple definitions reveal the following commonalities: lack of affordable heating; low household income; high cost of heating fuel; low house energy efficiency; lower energy consumption levels, and restricted access to energy (Day, Walker & Simcock 2016;Bazilian, Nakhooda & Van De Graaf 2014;Birol 2018). Even though debates range on common definitions of energy poverty, and despite the many commonalities identified, there is no universal agreement as to the term that define and assess the complex concept of energy poverty (Birol 2018;Romero, Linares & López 2018).…”

Section: Defining "Energy Poverty"mentioning

confidence: 99%

Synergetics as a Systems Theoretical and Methodological Lens in Structuring Energy Poverty

Inda

Lalk

2020

INCOSE International Symp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Energy poverty, as part of the energy trilemma, remains a global challenge in the 21st century. More than 1.7 billion people remain without access to modern energy sources while more than 3 billion people rely only on fossil fuel resulting in negative health and environmental impacts. While admittedly modern biomass fueled energy systems benefit from newer technologies their use is still blamed for detrimental effects on social, economic and environmental aspects of human existence. No wonder then that in many parts of the world distributed renewable energy systems show promise in addressing some of the more important issues of energy access challenges, particularly energy poverty and fuel poverty; this is specifically evident in the global south through improved efficiency, effectiveness, access and quality of energy services. Nevertheless, understanding the complexities and subsequent structuring of energy poverty becomes a complex systems issue since energy technology plays a dual role in enhancing and inhibiting energy access. This paper, borrowing from systems thinking theory, applies a synergetic elements framework where the authors attempt to enhance the comprehension and structure of the wicked problem of energy poverty; this is done by developing a conceptual model. The paper continues by showing the critical role played by interactions between socio‐technical system elements, notably those between soft and hard systems. This includes energy poverty depicted in multiple and complex synergetic subsystems, micro and macro elements, exogenous and internal barriers, control parameters and the environment.

show abstract

The policy implications of energy poverty indicators

Cited by 169 publications

References 28 publications

Occupant behaviour as a fourth driver of fuel poverty (aka warmth & energy deprivation)

Occupant behaviour as a fourth driver of fuel poverty (aka warmth & energy deprivation)

Future Design Approaches for Energy Poverty: Users Profiling and Services for No-Vulnerable Condition

Synergetics as a Systems Theoretical and Methodological Lens in Structuring Energy Poverty

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About