In the previous article of the thematic focus series, we have seen that energy poverty is complex, requiring a comprehensive understanding to ensure equitable action. The energy transition is not only a technical challenge requiring the deployment of renewable energy, improvements in energy efficiency, and the decarbonisation of energy systems, but also a profound social and cultural transformation. Beneath energy and climate targets lies a fundamental question: who is being involved and who is at risk of being left behind?
The European Union’s (EU) energy transition requires the participation of all Europeans to ensure both its comprehensiveness and its social acceptance. Still, in addition to being more susceptible to energy poverty, vulnerable households face structural barriers that hinder their participation and can make them hard-to-reach by multi-level policies and measures. A recent multidimensional assessment shows that the interaction between building energy inefficiency and household constrained adaptive capacity can amplify energy poverty vulnerability.
Vulnerability is not homogeneous. It is a highly diverse, often hidden, and rapidly mutable condition that arises from personal and demographic characteristics, behavioural and situational drivers, deficiencies in access to energy services, and complex energy market offers. Vulnerability often emerges through the intersectionality of multiple factors, including income, education, rurality, building type, tenant status, age, migrant background, health, ethnicity, and gender, among other context-specific factors. To better target and tailor energy poverty actions, vulnerability must be fully comprehended in all its dimensions. An in-depth analysis of vulnerable and hard-to-reach groups has shown that vulnerable households represent a significant share of the EU population; key results are summarised below.
Although the most mentioned aspect of vulnerability is usually reduced income, it is far from being the only driver and often reflects other prior conditions. Households with low incomes not only tend to spend a larger share of their income on energy bills but also face financial, informational, and social barriers that hinder technology adoption – approximately 30% of the EU’s population is at risk of poverty after deducting housing costs. People with lower education levels may have limited energy and digital literacy, as well as a lack of awareness of energy measures – 15% of the EU’s population has less than lower secondary education.
Those living in rural and remote areas experience geographic isolation, reliance on biomass or on expensive fuels, and limited access to skilled contractors – 25% of the EU’s population lives in areas classified as rural. Conversely, multi-family buildings, particularly in disadvantaged areas, are characterised by fragmented ownership structures, which, coupled with financial barriers, can hinder collective investments – 48% of the EU’s population lives in flats with wide variation between Member States, from 65% of the population in Spain to 10% in Ireland. Tenants are considered one of the hardest-to-reach groups for the energy transition, mainly due to the split incentive problem, where the benefits of energy efficiency investments do not directly accrue to the party making the investments (landlords) – 32% of the EU’s population lives in rented dwellings, varying from 53% in Germany to 6% in Romania.
Furthermore, elderly people can be particularly vulnerable due to low pensions, fragile health, social isolation, distrust in new technologies, and higher energy needs – the EU has an ageing population with 17% being 65 years old or over and living independently. On the other hand, younger people may experience precarious housing and employment conditions, which hinder the uptake of energy interventions – young people (between 18 and 34 years old) not living with their parents represent 10% of the EU’s population.
Another potentially vulnerable group is migrants that may face discrimination, poor housing and employment conditions, legal and language barriers, and limited access to energy support schemes – 14% of the EU population consists of people born in a country other than their current country of residence, from 51% of the population in Luxembourg to just 3% in Romania. In addition, people with ill-health or disabilities may have higher energy needs due to medical equipment, lower incomes due to limited employment opportunities, and difficulties accessing information – 30% of the EU’s population reports having a long-standing illness or health problem. Other marginalised groups, such as ethnic minorities, indigenous groups, homeless people, people living in informal settlements, travellers and nomads, and LGBTIQ+ have started to receive increasing attention in energy poverty research, but data are still scarce at the EU level.
Reality is more complex than statistical data, and the heterogeneity and intersectionality within vulnerable groups further complicate the mitigation of energy poverty. In fact, a significant share of the EU’s population compounds at least two vulnerabilities. For instance, 10% of the EU’s population lives in a rural area and has ill-health, 9% have low incomes and live in a multi-family building, and 8% have a migrant background and rent their dwelling. Although this analysis identifies the main vulnerable groups in the EU and its Member States, it remains essential to engage smaller groups not captured by statistical data.
Deploying effective approaches for identifying and supporting vulnerable and hard-to-reach households has been a major challenge for national and regional governments and other cross-sectoral stakeholders. One-size-fits-all energy policies risk obscuring vulnerabilities and perpetuating energy injustices while failing to direct resources where they are most needed. Conversely, energy poverty measures should promote accessibility and cultural sensitivity, for instance, on formal requirements (e.g., for migrant populations and those living in informal housing), upfront investment (e.g., for households with low incomes or unstable employment), and engagement methods (e.g., for those with limited digital skills). To further increase the breadth and depth of energy poverty actions, multi-stakeholder collaboration may be established, including with local intermediaries and frontline workers, to better diagnose local vulnerabilities, overcome trust barriers and facilitate the uptake of measures.
Designing multi-level energy poverty policies begins with understanding the target audience and tailoring regulations to their needs. For example, policymakers developing equitable funding schemes for building renovation or renewable energy may find the following guiding questions useful – “Does this funding meet the upfront cash needs of low-income households? Is it aligned with market supply and ambitious change? Is it inclusive towards people of advanced age? Is it available in several languages so that our immigrant communities and/or ethnic minorities can apply? Does it tackle head-on the split incentive challenge in the private rental sector? Are installers available in rural or remote areas?”, among others.
Energy poverty practitioners – for instance, regional energy agencies running energy advisory services or one-stop-shops, non-governmental organisations supporting vulnerable households on energy bills, or energy communities deploying inclusive energy sharing schemes – face similar challenges for identifying and engaging vulnerable and energy-poor households. Practitioners may ponder the following guiding questions for designing more effective on-the-ground actions – “Are there trusted intermediaries in place to ensure that our actions reach people with ill-health and disabilities? Is our message applicable to people inhabiting informal housing? Do we have the necessary buy-in to engage with Indigenous communities? Can people living in flats implement the proposed measures?”, among others.
For an equitable transition that eradicates energy poverty while meeting decarbonisation goals, national and local best practices must be shared, scaled up, and replicated to have a broader European impact. Through its thematic focus on Equity and Vulnerable Consumers, the European Commission’s Initiative EPAH will publish a series of articles, tools, and practical resources in the coming months, providing deeper insights into how to recognise and address energy poverty. EPAH invites you to reflect on this article and its guiding questions, and to share insights on how you identify and engage vulnerable groups within your context.
Miguel Macias Sequeira, Researcher at CENSE, FCT-NOVA University of Lisbon.
Details
- Publication date
- 21 October 2025