Same name, different indicator: A systematic review of how energy poverty is measured when viewed through a wellbeing lens

Definition and measurement of energy poverty determines whose hardship is recognised and whose is overlooked. However, the literature is characterised by fragmentation of conceptions and measurement. In this systematic review, we investigate whether more consistent multi-dimensional measurement of energy poverty could arise from a movement towards a wellbeing-focused conception where the social necessity of adequate energy services is recognised. Of 103 measurement-focused publications, we identify 50 that frame energy poverty in wellbeing terms. We investigate these to understand which dimensions underpinning energy poverty are represented in indicator selection and how practices of energy use are captured. We find that global north publications still skew towards measuring affordability dimensions while global south publications skew towards measuring access indicators. That is, publications with similar framing utilise very different measurement approaches. Considering practices of energy use, we find that these are often captured only by technology access, not in ways that address whether a household is using energy services sufficient to flourish. We saw no examples of entertainment, IT, and refrigeration being measured in terms of benefit, and these energy services are measured most frequently in the global south. The limited measurement of benefit from practices in energy use remains a large and critical gap in understanding whether people are getting what they need from energy, and our findings suggest that there are regional differences in the visibility of energy underconsumption. The growing use of wellbeing terminology without accompanying breadth of measurement indicators may further obscure differences in energy poverty experiences internationally.