The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Fuel poverty from the bottom-up: Characterising household energy vulnerability through the lived experience of the fuel poor
Open accessAbstract
Recent quantitative and qualitative evidence documents a dramatic reduction in average direct UK household energy consumption in the last decade. The ‘fuel poverty gap’ in the UK (average shortfall that fuel poor households experience in affording their energy bills) has also grown substantially in that period. Here we draw on the literature on vulnerability and on recent qualitative interviews with fuel poor households to characterise the experience of energy vulnerability in the UK. Using our qualitative data, we explore energy vulnerability from the point of view of our interviewees. In doing so we identify six challenges to energy vulnerability for the fuel poor: quality of dwelling fabric, energy costs and supply issues, stability of household income, tenancy relations, social relations within the household and outside, and ill health. In analysing these challenges we find that the energy vulnerable have limited agency to reduce their own vulnerability. Further, current UK policy relating to fuel poverty does not take full account of these challenges. Any attempt to address energy vulnerability coherently in the future must engage with structural forces (policies, markets, and recognition) in order to increase household agency for change.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Sen, A. (2009) · Rugman Reviews · doi:10.1007/978-1-137-28787-8_94 · Cited by 15,837
Clapp, J., & Sen, A. (1999) · International Journal · doi:10.2307/40203469 · Cited by 13,411
Adger, W. N. (2006) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.02.006 · Cited by 5,417
Grounded Theory and Sensitizing Concepts
Bowen, G. A. (2006) · International Journal of Qualitative Methods · doi:10.1177/160940690600500304 · Cited by 1,894
A Pragmatic View of Thematic Analysis
Aronson, J. (1995) · The Qualitative Report · doi:10.46743/2160-3715/1995.2069 · Cited by 1,758
Hinkel, J. (2011) · Global Environmental Change · doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.08.002 · Cited by 1,084
Resilience as embedded neoliberalism: a governmentality approach
Joseph, J. (2013) · Resilience · doi:10.1080/21693293.2013.765741 · Cited by 1,065
Walker, G., & Day, R. (2012) · Energy Policy · doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2012.01.044 · Cited by 632
Definitions of fuel poverty: Implications for policy
Moore, R. (2012) · Energy Policy · doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2012.01.057 · Cited by 577
Resilient life: the art of living dangerously
(2015) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.186065 · Cited by 562
Cited by
Energy justice: A conceptual review
Jenkins, K., McCauley, D., Heffron, R., Stephan, H., & Rehner, R. (2016) · Energy Research & Social Science · doi:10.1016/j.erss.2015.10.004 · Cited by 2,116
Sovacool, B. K., Axsen, J., & Sorrell, S. (2018) · Energy Research & Social Science · doi:10.1016/j.erss.2018.07.007 · Cited by 1,092
Metadata
- Authors
- Middlemiss, L., & Gillard, R.
- Venue
- Energy Research & Social Science
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-03
- Volume
- 6
- Pages
- 146-154
- ISSN
- 2214-6296 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2087770338
- Cited by
- 490
- References
- 26
- FWCI
- 14.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Fuel poverty from the bottom-up: Characterising household energy vulnerability through the lived experience of the fuel poor. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.erss.2015.02.001
- The paper
- Middlemiss, L., & Gillard, R. (2015). Fuel poverty from the bottom-up: Characterising household energy vulnerability through the lived experience of the fuel poor. Energy Research & Social Science. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.02.001
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.