Table 3 Stakeholder perceptions of advantages and disadvantages of policy options for energy and transport poverty

Energy

Landlords obligated to improve energy efficiency (to EPC band C*).

Targets low-income households (LHIs), who tend to be in rented accommodations.

Could reduce LHI energy expenditure.

Begins to address poor condition of UK (particularly private rental) housing stock.

EPC system is flawed generally and for this purpose.

Without additional subsidy, landlords may sell their properties, depressing sale prices locally.

Landlords likely to pass costs on to tenants unless prevented.

Enforcement required; current resourcing is inadequate.

Expand eligibility for financial assistance (Warm Home Discount, WHD).

Could be immediate and have some, even if limited, impact.

The level of WHD (£140–150 yr⁻¹) is far too low to offset annual home energy costs of £2,000–3,000).

It is not clear how well targeted the WHD is, and in any case, arguably too high a proportion of the population is now affected for even a limited-income subsidy to be affordable if financed from consumer tariffs (as the WHD is).

Other finance-related options mooted: more frequent payments to LHIs; universal basic income; wider welfare system reform; entitlement to a minimum energy service level (universal basic service); social tariffs; fairer distribution of wealth.

New homes to be more energy efficient.

Reduces the energy demand of future householders.

Necessary for net zero.

LHIs generally occupy older houses, so of little to no short- or medium-term benefit to them.

Consumers offered smart meters.

Interface provides information that can underpin behaviour change.

Data flow necessary for smart grid functioning.

LHIs already budget extremely carefully and rather need tailored support packages that address multiple needs.

Observing expenditure and engaging with additional controls likely to further stress LHIs.

Smart grids with time-of-use tariffs risk penalizing those who cannot adjust for health reasons; similarly, those who cannot afford tariff-related technology (for example, EV, battery, PV panels).

Landlords able to offset higher spending on energy efficiency.

As the energy efficiency (EPC band C) obligation.

As the energy efficiency (EPC band C) obligation.

Increase finance to large energy suppliers to help fuel poor.

Large energy suppliers know who is struggling to pay their energy bills among their customers and have the organizational and skill base to administer and deliver energy efficiency measures.

Conflict of interest.

Mistrust of these suppliers.

Large suppliers do not need external financial support, particularly during times of high energy costs.

Several interviewees critiqued the existing UK Energy Company Obligation scheme as not being well targeted at energy poverty.

Transport

Bus and train ticketing cheaper and simpler.

LHIs often cannot afford to buy or run a car: improving public transport is therefore key to addressing transport poverty.

Outside of London, deregulation of public transport in the United Kingdom is considered by many to have led to a deterioration of services.

Politically challenging: requires some adjustment of national expenditure priorities away from motorways and highways.

Ban sales of new petrol and diesel cars.

Necessary to meet decarbonization objectives; new vehicles will become more affordable in a developing second-hand market.

Even with price reductions, LHIs will still not be able to afford EVs, new or used.

Diverts resources and attention from active travel, public transport and planning for accessibility (’20-minute neighbourhoods’).

Increase support to local authorities for EV recharging.

As above.

As above.

Expansion of cycling infrastructure.

Has health and environmental benefits.

Few LHIs unlikely to use cycling infrastructure.

UK starts from a low base.

Better to construct ’20-minute neighbourhoods’ that are walkable.

Barriers constructed to keep motorbikes and cars from using cycle lanes are also obstructing disabled access.

Restoring bus routes post-COVID-19.

LHIs often cannot afford to buy or run a car: improving public transport is therefore key to addressing transport poverty.

Politically challenging: requires some adjustment of national expenditure priorities away from motorways and highways.

Increasing the sustainability of aircraft fuel.

Important as part of maintaining connectivity for geographically peripheral regions.

LHIs cannot afford to fly: not directly relevant to transport poverty.