What is energy poverty? Traditionally, this term referred to households without adequate heating, cooling or lighting. It meant some people didn’t have enough money to cover electricity costs or homes with working systems to keep them comfortable. However, that doesn’t capture the full picture of energy poverty in today’s economies. With Europe accelerating toward carbon neutrality, many households face new forms of vulnerability that aren’t identified or measured by existing metrics.
Current frameworks for measuring access can overlook quality issues, like frequent power outages. The existing frameworks don’t account for how different social groups and regions don’t get equal access because of changes in energy systems. In response, policymakers need better measurement tools to design processes that protect vulnerable households.
The Evolving Landscape of Energy Poverty in Europe
The global energy poverty landscape has changed significantly over the past few years. Costs have fluctuated wildly, such as when they skyrocketed in 2021 and 2022 due to COVID-19. Since then, it’s been harder for some vulnerable households to remain solvent. Although prices have stabilised somewhat in the current economy, they are still higher than before the pandemic. This leaves millions of families struggling in an extended cost-of-living crisis period.
The push toward electrification adds another layer of complexity. Heat pumps and electric vehicles can increase the demand for energy in households already struggling to stay afloat. This can leave homeowners looking for ways to reduce costs, such as phasing out fossil-fuel heating systems. Homeowners might also turn to supportive solutions like insulation, which can reduce heat loss by 50% by blocking leaks and installing energy-efficient windows.
The cost of making these types of changes to a property can create barriers for people with lower incomes, who would benefit the most from long-term power savings. Regional differences also affect energy poverty issues. Eastern European nations, which depend heavily on fossil fuels, face different problems than Nordic countries, which have abundant renewable resources.
Limitations of Traditional Energy Poverty Metrics
Many European countries developed traditional energy poverty metrics decades ago. Systems looked very different then. The metrics were based on the expectation that costs would remain static over time and that a household spending more than 10% of its net income on power is in energy poverty.
While these income-based measures provide some information, they also create blind spots. A household might spend only 10% of its net income on energy but also live in a structure with inadequate insulation or unstable power service. Alternatively, a household investing heavily in efficiency improvements might spend more than 10% of its income while improving long-term energy security.
Expenditure-based measurement frameworks face similar limitations. The metrics can’t distinguish between households that choose to spend more on power for enhanced comfort and those forced to do so due to inefficient systems. Existing frameworks also miss hidden energy poverty, where spending stays low because people accept inadequate heating, lighting or cooling.
Emerging Frameworks: Beyond Income and Expenditure
The research community across Europe has begun asking different questions. Instead of simply measuring how much families spend on energy bills, they’re examining what those bills actually deliver. Can a pensioner in Warsaw keep their flat warm during January? Does a single parent in Lisbon have enough hot water for their children to bathe?
This shift toward measuring energy services rather than costs has produced some genuinely innovative approaches that examine whether households can maintain the indoor temperatures they need. They ask if people can handle unexpected financial shocks without cutting back on heating and then bounce back when circumstances change.
Britain’s approach takes a practical angle. It identifies homes that are both income-poor and those living in energy-inefficient homes. The logic is straightforward. A family struggling financially in a drafty house faces different challenges than a similar-income family living in a well-insulated home. Recognising this helps leaders direct energy-efficiency programmes where they’re most needed.
Climate resilience and digital access have also entered the conversation as key factors. Modern frameworks now consider whether households can maintain safe conditions during harsh weather and where they can access smart technologies that help reduce energy costs. Some families end up paying premium rates because they can’t afford the digital tools that would enable cost-cutting measures.
Global Perspectives: Lessons From Other Developed Economies
One interesting detail — when you look beyond Europe’s borders, you start seeing approaches that could transform how people think about this problem. For example, Australia has built its indicators on the fact that one in five households is vulnerable to or is experiencing some form of energy hardship. For someone working on policy in Greece or Spain, that perspective would likely shift how to frame the entire discussion. It shows it’s not just about winter heating anymore.
After a disaster, the understanding of what energy poverty means also changes. Reliable power switches instantly from a comfort issue to a matter of life and death for vulnerable communities. The measurement frameworks began as a way to see if people could afford to pay their bills, but the story is bigger now, with the potential impact of grid failure as a valid thing to measure.
The U.S. Weatherization Assistance Program offers another approach. Instead of debating income thresholds, WAP identifies and fixes underlying problems in compromised areas. Some services provided to reduce energy insecurity include sealing door and window leaks, upgrading electrical systems and ensuring proper insulation.
Families benefit from weatherisation services that focus on solving root causes because they spend less on energy, may notice improved health and can benefit from the knowledge for decades. The approach turns the focus away from short-term bill assistance to long-term, practical results.
The Path Forward for Measuring and Addressing Energy Poverty
These power poverty measurements face something unprecedented — tracking a moving target while the entire energy system changes around it. The metrics developed today need to make sense in a world where people rely on heat pumps, where community energy storage might include streetlights and where solar panels could meet nighttime needs.
Getting energy poverty measurement right requires sustained commitment to data collection, regular system updates, and honest evaluation of what is and isn’t working. Political cycles are short, and energy transitions are long. The frameworks now in development as solutions to energy poverty will influence how resources get allocated for decades, and they need to ensure everyone gets the assistance that’s needed.
About the author
Rose Morrison is the managing editor of Renovated Magazine and an experienced writer specializing in energy demand and sustainability. With eight years of experience in the field, she provides EnergyInDemand readers with expert analysis and practical strategies for achieving energy efficiency and reducing carbon emissions. Connect with Rose on LinkedIn.
Energy in Demand - Sustainable Energy - Rod Janssen 