{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019886363636363636, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.9068627450980395, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Energy poverty indicators: A critical review of methods

The widespread recognition of energy poverty as a distinct societal and policy challenge in the EU has resulted in a surge in the number and complexity of energy poverty metrics. Drawing from the body of white and grey literature on domestic energy deprivation indicators now available, the paper offers a review-based discussion on the risks of uncritically elaborating and reporting energy poverty statistics. It identifies key conceptual and methodological challenges including: the diversity of domestic energy services and household needs accounted for; the distinction between actual and required domestic energy expenditures; the setting of thresholds and energy poverty lines; the equivalisation of household incomes and energy expenditures; the consideration of housing costs; the stated, subjective character of responses to survey questionnaires; the measurement of the ‘depth’ of energy poverty; issues surrounding measurement units and weighted indices; and issues around the socio-demographic, spatial and temporal representativeness of data. Based on the reviewed evidence and author’s experience, the paper argues against official, single-indicator energy poverty metrics like the UK’s low income-high cost and advocates for multiple-indicator approaches that explicitly acknowledge the shortcomings of each of the methods implemented.