Taking steps to lift people out of energy poverty may involve a range of technical measures. But before such interventions can be implemented, ECs need to identify and engage with vulnerable people.
Relying solely on technically oriented staff to fulfill this role – without providing additional training or upskilling – can be problematic. Ultimately, putting energy solidarity principles into action requires integrating technical and social processes. ECs are typically experts in the first but may lack specific training in the ‘soft skills’ needed to interact effectively with vulnerable households.
Different clients with different needs
Many poor people believe more in buying a lottery ticket on Friday the 13th than the government will do anything to help them.
Frank Billeau, Founder, Réseau Eco-Habitat, France
At present, according to various studies, most EC members are quite energy-savvy. They join ECs because they are keen to participate in the clean energy transition and feel knowledgeable enough to make informed decisions and investments.
In sharp contrast, literature on energy poverty emphasises the extent to which people in such situations are likely to: be facing multiple vulnerabilities; feel a sense of shame or stigma with respect to their situation and home; and to have had negative experiences when engaging with government agencies or other organisations.
In fact, lack of access to adequate, affordable energy is typically just one element of a complex web that ‘traps’ low-income households. Inadequate energy may be the cause of mould and damp that undermines their health. Distress with respect to the condition of their home may trigger depression and self-isolation, eroding their mental well-being. Economic hardship is often linked to inadequate nutrition, inability to upgrade or maintain dwellings, and low levels of attainment in education, which limit employment opportunities. In some cases, other factors such as disability or poor physical/mental health also come into play.
Collectively, these factors can lead to a sense of shame on the part of vulnerable people and/or a degree of stigma within society – whether perceived or real. In turn, many will self-isolate and avoid social interaction; some may live in severe deprivation and exhibit signs of desperation.
A second consideration is that many vulnerable people have legitimate reasons to avoid or even mistrust government agencies or other authorities or civil society organisations (CSOs). Or, in general, to be wary of new offers from unknown people. A single parent living in a degraded home, for example, may fear that his or her children will be removed. An elderly person who falls behind on energy bills, in part because heating the now oversized family home is no longer affordable on a reduced pension, may worry about being forcefully relocated to a retirement home. In rural areas, government agencies may be under-resourced and known to be slow to respond to requests, thus seeming disinterested, unhelpful or even dismissive.
Start by building trust
ECs must thus begin with engagements that seek to build trust, rather than immediately proposing services or works, or even asking people for something – including basic personal information typically needed to evaluate their living situations and/or eligibility for support. Beyond avoiding judgment or blame, anyone in contact with energy-poor households should actively express empathy and show support. For example, they should carefully explain why they are asking for any personal information and be clear about who will have access to it and for what reasons. A key role for ECs can be to try to simplify the complicated and burdensome processes and systems often linked to assistance schemes, or to patiently guide people through them.
In turn, ECs must consistently act in ways that are trustworthy and respectful. This implies also being conscious of not over-promising and of following through, in a timely manner, on what they say they will do. Finally, ECs should make sure each household can easily reach them if questions arise or more information is needed. Ideally, each household would have a single point of contact and mechanisms within the EC would be set up to share information as needed. Households should also be made aware of the mechanisms by which they could file a complaint if dissatisfied with the interactions with a representative of the EC.