ABSTRACT
In England, policy-makers have sought to measure energy poverty using two indicators, formerly a 10% indicator and more recently a Low Income High Cost indicator (LIHC). We interrogate the spatial distribution of energy poor households according to each indicator using a vulnerability framing. Our analysis demonstrates that each indicator succeeds in representing only a narrow sub-section of socio-spatial vulnerabilities, failing to capture the spatial complexity of vulnerability to energy poverty. An explicitly geographic approach to the design of composite indicators, that recognises the unique spatial distributions of vulnerability dimensions, is required if indicators are to reveal those most in need.
