Justice, Fuel Poverty and Vulnerable Groups: a Comparative Analysis

Energy justice is an emerging field that has gained much attention and geographical reach over the past decade. It draws heavily on both social and environmental justice theories, bringing together the concepts of ‘distributive’, ‘procedural’ and ‘recognition’ justice. It has gained a particular resonance amongst fuel poverty researchers, as it provides a framework for analysing the negative impacts (and associated policies) on various vulnerable groups. Looking beyond just distributional patterns enables critical reflection of the policy process, and the assumptions contained within it. For example Walker and Day (2012) argue that addressing fuel poverty must involve seeking justice for marginalised groups in terms of transparent decision-making, and Snell et al (2015) combine analysis of distributional and recognition injustices to show how the needs of disabled people are hidden by official measures of fuel poverty. Despite these developments in understanding fuel poverty as a justice issue, there remain gaps in knowledge. Firstly, whilst there is a substantial evidence base around the extent and impact of fuel poverty, there is limited work on how patterns of fuel poverty have co-evolved with changes in policy (e.g. definitions and eligibility criteria) over time. Secondly, there is virtually no empirical work that considers how low-income families with children and disabled people (two groups that are considered vulnerable to fuel poverty) are impacted by, and have influence over, different styles of policy and governance. This paper reports on initial findings from a two-year research project funded by the UK’s Energy Research Centre. Drawing on the energy justice literature, the paper investigates the development and impact of fuel poverty policies across the four nations of the UK. It also considers the extent to which disabled people and low-income families with children have been recognised and included in the policy process, and the impact that this had on policy outcomes.