Women's Work: Making Sense of Energy Poverty through Gendered Social Practices in Kanaleneiland, Utrecht

Abstract

In 2022, over half of Dutch households have difficulties paying their general expenses and 602.000 households (7.4% of the total) are estimated to live in energy poverty. Energy poverty – a term popularised in the 1990s – is traditionally characterised as a combination of low incomes, high energy bills and poor quality housing (Boardman, 1991). While official definitions do not (yet) exist, many define it as the inability of households to attain sufficient energy services in the home. In line with perspectives which view ‘energy’ as part of realising social practices (Shove & Walker, 2014), ‘energy services’ refer to space heating (or cooling), cooking, ICTs or the efficiency of domestic white goods. Poor energetic housing conditions due to a lack of insulation or poor maintenance are uncomfortable, but can also be detrimental to physical and/or mental well-being. However, current energy poverty approaches do not (yet) address the highly gendered dimensions of the phenomenon which make women more vulnerable to energy poverty than men. Herein, ‘gender’ intersects with other mutually coexisting personal factors such as age, socio-economic position, health status, and migrationbackground. Using a social practice approach, this qualitative study makes use of ethnographic fieldwork, (in)formal interviews, and participatory action research (PAR) to study how energy poverty is understood and acted upon through gendered energy practices in Kanaleneiland, Utrecht. Kanaleneiland is a neighbourhood in Utrecht, the Netherlands, with a significant social housing stock, large migrant population, and widespread income poverty problems. This study showcases how a gendered practices perspective can reveal the higher likelihood of women experiencing energy poverty and their role in acting upon it at home. Findings indicate that by association with femininity, low-technical solutions to energy poverty are placed in the female domain, while masculinity is attached to financial or technical strategies. Due to cultural differences and language barriers, informal networks and active citizens were found to be crucial in knowledge transfer and sharing. The disproportionate impacts and responsibilities carried by women make energy poverty a distinct gender inequality problem. To ensure a more inclusive energy transition, recognition of women’s distinctive energy-user experiences, cultural sensitivity through (in)formal networks, and acknowledgement of the structural and systematic inequalities underlying energy poverty is recommended.