Identifying double energy vulnerability: A systematic and narrative review of groups at-risk of energy and transport poverty in the global north

Simcock, Neil; Jenkins, Kirsten; Lacey-Barnacle, Max; Martiskainen, Mari; Mattioli, Giulio; Hopkins, Debbie

doi:10.1016/j.erss.2021.102351

Cited by 69 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 170 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These groups usually have poor mobility. As Simcock et al [ 59 ] stated, they are more likely to be limited by transport poverty. For such groups, the freedom of housing location selection is relatively low, and car ownership may be an economic burden.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the Nonlinear and Threshold Effects of Travel Distance on the Travel Mode Choice across Different Groups: An Empirical Study of Guiyang, China

Shi

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Examining how travel distance is associated with travel mode choice is essential for understanding traveler travel patterns and the potential mechanisms of behavioral changes. Although existing studies have explored the effect of travel distance on travel mode choice, most overlook their non-linear relationship and the heterogeneity between groups. In this study, the correlation between travel distance and travel mode choice is explored by applying the random forest model based on resident travel survey data in Guiyang, China. The results show that travel distance is far more important than other determinants for understanding the mechanism of travel mode choice. Travel distance contributes to 42.28% of explanation power for predicting travel mode choice and even 63.24% for walking. Significant nonlinear associations and threshold effects are found between travel distance and travel mode choice, and such nonlinear associations vary significantly across different socioeconomic groups. Policymakers are recommended to understand the group heterogeneity of travel mode choice behavior and to make targeted interventions for different groups with different travel distances. These results can provide beneficial guidance for optimizing the spatial layout of transportation infrastructure and improving the operational efficiency of low-carbon transportation systems.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring the Nonlinear and Threshold Effects of Travel Distance on the Travel Mode Choice across Different Groups: An Empirical Study of Guiyang, China

Shi

et al. 2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consideration of transportation dynamics in energy burden research is particularly lacking in the U.S. [38,39], but is more prevalent in Europe (e.g. [40][41][42][43]), where domestic and transport energy poverty has been coined 'double energy vulnerability' [41]. Transport energy poverty, or transportation energy burden in the U.S. [44][45][46][47], is analogous to household energy burden and falls under the larger umbrella of transport poverty [40,41], or 'the inability to attain a socially-and materiallynecessitated level of transport services' [40, p 2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[40][41][42][43]), where domestic and transport energy poverty has been coined 'double energy vulnerability' [41]. Transport energy poverty, or transportation energy burden in the U.S. [44][45][46][47], is analogous to household energy burden and falls under the larger umbrella of transport poverty [40,41], or 'the inability to attain a socially-and materiallynecessitated level of transport services' [40, p 2]. The U.S. is highly car dependent, with private vehicles representing more than 80% of person trips taken compared to just 2.5% taken via public transit [48].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A few studies of transportation energy burden in the U.S. have found that low income households [44][45][46][47], particularly Black, Latinx, and Native American households [45], face disproportionate burdens. Additionally, suburban and rural households tend to experience higher transportation energy burdens than do urban households [40,[44][45][46][47], primarily due to lack of public transit and greater distances to essential services and employment locations [40]. A recent justice-focused analysis found that adopting EVs in the state of Illinois can reduce regional differences in transportation energy vulnerability [47].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mapping electric vehicle impacts: greenhouse gas emissions, fuel costs, and energy justice in the United States

Vega-Perkins

Newell

Keoleian

2023

Environ. Res. Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The transition to electric vehicles (EVs) will impact the climate, the environment, and society in highly significant ways. This study compares EVs to vehicles with internal combustion engines for three major areas: greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs), fuel costs, and transportation energy burden (i.e. percentage of income spent on vehicle fuels). Excluded in the analysis is the purchase cost of the vehicles themselves. The results reveal that over 90% of vehicle-owning U.S. households would see reductions in both GHGs and transportation energy burden by adopting an EV. For 60% of households these savings would be moderate to high (i.e. >2.3 metric tons of CO2e reduction per household annually and >0.6% of energy burden reduction). These reductions are especially pronounced in the American West (e.g. California, Washington) and parts of the Northeast (e.g. New York) primarily due to a varying combination of cleaner electricity grids, lower electricity prices (relative to gas prices), and smaller drive-cycle and temperature-related impacts on fuel efficiency. Moreover, adopting an EV would more than double the percentage of households that enjoy a low transportation energy burden (<2% of income spent on fuel annually). This equates to 80% of all vehicle-owning U.S. households. Nevertheless, over half of the lowest income households would still have a high EV energy burden (>4% income spent on fuel annually), and if at-home charging is unavailable, this rises to over 75 percent. Addressing this inequity hinges on three major interventions: 1) targeted policies to promote energy justice in lower-income communities, including subsidizing charging infrastructure; 2) strategies to reduce electricity costs; and 3) expanding access to low-carbon transport infrastructure (e.g. public transit, biking, and car sharing).

show abstract

“…Researchers are paying increasing attention to the relevance of carbon emissions and household elements, and they have proposed many macro and micro policies to achieve carbon emission reduction [ 3 , 4 , 5 ]. However, China’s long-term dual structure has caused urban residents to have different production and lifestyles than rural residents, and their energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions characteristics also differ [ 6 ]. Therefore, the study of household carbon emissions in urban villages is conducive to the implementation of sustainable consumption patterns and is of great significance to coordinating the development of humankind and cities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influencing Factors of Direct Carbon Emissions of Households in Urban Villages in Guangzhou, China

Chen

Jiang

2022

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

China’s household energy consumption has obvious regional differences, and rising income levels and urbanization have changed the ability of households to make energy consumption choices. In this paper, we analyze the energy consumption characteristics of urban village residents based on microlevel household survey data from urban villages in Guangzhou, China. Then, the results of modeling the material flows of per capita carbon emissions show the most dominant type of energy consumption. OLS is applied to analyze the influencing factors of carbon emissions. We find that the per capita household carbon emissions in urban villages are 722.7 kg/household.year, and the average household carbon emissions are 2820.57 kg/household.year. We also find that household characteristics, household size, household appliance numbers, and carbon emissions have a significant positive correlation, while income has no significant effect on carbon emissions. What is more, the size and age of the house have a positive impact on carbon emissions. Otherwise, the new finding is the demonstration that income is not significantly correlated with household carbon emissions, which is consistent with the characteristics of urban villages described earlier. On the basis of this study, we propose more specific recommendations regarding household energy carbon emissions in urban villages.

show abstract

Identifying double energy vulnerability: A systematic and narrative review of groups at-risk of energy and transport poverty in the global north

Cited by 69 publications

References 170 publications

Exploring the Nonlinear and Threshold Effects of Travel Distance on the Travel Mode Choice across Different Groups: An Empirical Study of Guiyang, China

Exploring the Nonlinear and Threshold Effects of Travel Distance on the Travel Mode Choice across Different Groups: An Empirical Study of Guiyang, China

Mapping electric vehicle impacts: greenhouse gas emissions, fuel costs, and energy justice in the United States

Influencing Factors of Direct Carbon Emissions of Households in Urban Villages in Guangzhou, China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About