Gender, Race and Social

Inclusion – Net Zero

Transitions
A Review of the Literature
BEIS Research Paper Number 2021/060

October 2021
Acknowledgements

This report was prepared by a team of Carbon Trust staff, working closely with independent
experts, and experts from the University of Sussex and the University of Manchester.

Authors

• Kate Hooper, Manager, Carbon Trust

• Lucy Fellingham, Analyst, Carbon Trust
• Joy Clancy
• Peter Newell, University of Sussex
• Saska Petrova, University of Manchester

Editor

• Helen Andrews Tipper, Senior Manager, Carbon Trust

Contributors

The Carbon Trust would like to thank everyone that has contributed their time and expertise
during the preparation and completion of this report. Special thanks goes to:

• Manu Ravishankar, Carbon Trust

• Anna Aberg, Chatham House
• Sandra Bell, Durham University
• Stefan Bouzarovski, The University of Manchester
• Vanesa Castan Broto, The University of Sheffield
• Lynda Dunlop, University of York
• Marielle Feenstra, University of Twente
• Kirsten Jenkins, The University of Edinburgh
• Max Lacey-Barnacle, University of Sussex
• Mari Martiskainen, University of Sussex
• Lucie Middlemiss, University of Leeds
• Caitlin Robinson, University of Liverpool
• Carmen Sanchez-Guevara, Technical University of Madrid
• Carolyn Snell, University of York
• Benjamin Sovacool, University of Sussex
• Karina Standal, Center for Climate Research, Oslo, Norway (CICERO)
• Gordon Walker, Lancaster University

Citation for this report:

Hooper, K., Fellingham, L., Clancy, J., Newell, P., Petrova, S. (2021), Gender, Race and Social
Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions: A Review of the Literature, Department of Business, Energy
and Industrial Strategy, October 2021.
© Crown copyright 2021

This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated.
To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the
Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.

Where we have identified any third-party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the
copyright holders concerned.

Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at:

enquiries@beis.gov.uk
Abbreviations

Abbreviation Definition

ADB Asian Development Bank

BAME Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic
BEIS Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
BLM Black Lives Matter
CBA Cost Benefit Analysis
COP Conference of the Parties
DFID Department for International Development
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment
EIGE European Institute for Gender Equality
ESMAP Energy Sector Management Assistance Program
EU European Union
EV Electric Vehicle
FCDO Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office
FiT Feed-in-Tariff
GAP Gender Action Plan
GBA Gender-Based Analysis
GCF Green Climate Fund
GESI Gender and Social Inclusion
GTA Gender Transformative Approaches
HMO House in Multiple Occupation
HTR Hard to Reach
IEA International Energy Agency
ILO International Labour Organisation
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
LEZ Low Emission Zone
LGBTQIA+ Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer (or Questioning),
Intersex and Asexual (or Allies)

LTN Low Traffic Neighbourhood

MDB Multilateral Development Bank

4
Abbreviation Definition

OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

PV Photovoltaic
PVE Participatory Value Evaluation
SIA Social Impact Assessment
TfL Transport for London
UK-PACT UK Partnering for Accelerated Climate Transitions
UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change
Users TCP Users Technology Collaboration Program
WFA Winter Fuel Allowance
WHD Warm Home Discount

5
Contents
Abbreviations ______________________________________________________________ 4
Executive summary _________________________________________________________ 7
Research objectives _______________________________________________________ 8
Methodology _____________________________________________________________ 8
Key findings _____________________________________________________________ 9
Introduction ______________________________________________________________ 13
Context and policy landscape _______________________________________________ 13
Objectives and scope _____________________________________________________ 13
Wider research context ____________________________________________________ 14
Report structure _________________________________________________________ 15
Methodology______________________________________________________________ 16
Research questions ______________________________________________________ 16
Approach and overview of research design ____________________________________ 16
Limitations of the review ___________________________________________________ 17
Overall results ____________________________________________________________ 19
User experiences of energy services and low carbon transitions ____________________ 22
Intersectionality and the complexities of overlapping and evolving exclusions __________ 22
Poverty and precarity _____________________________________________________ 23
Unequal access to low carbon energies and technologies _________________________ 24
Agency in decision-making _________________________________________________ 29
Approaches for inclusive policymaking in the literature ___________________________ 32
Conclusions ______________________________________________________________ 47
On user experiences______________________________________________________ 47
On inclusive approaches __________________________________________________ 48
Gaps in the literature _____________________________________________________ 49
Areas for further research __________________________________________________ 50
References _______________________________________________________________ 51
Appendices ______________________________________________________________ 64
Appendix 1: Methodology __________________________________________________ 64
Appendix 2: Glossary _____________________________________________________ 75
Appendix 3: Summary diagrams_____________________________________________ 82

6
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Executive summary
Highlights

• The representation of energy users’ diverse needs and interests, as well as their
meaningful participation in decision-making, is critical for an inclusive transition.

• An intersectional approach is required – experiences are made more complex by

overlapping social exclusions, and multiple vulnerabilities can have a compounding
effect on experiences and the ability to engage with low carbon technologies and
behaviours.

• Policy responses need to be differentiated – those with most responsibility for climate
change should be targeted in different ways to those who are least responsible and
less able to meet energy needs.

• Some groups have less freedom to engage with new low carbon technologies or
make changes to their behaviours. Access to information and adequate support for
decision-making around technologies and policies can be a significant challenge.

• Decentralised and participatory approaches have the potential to support inclusivity,

but this requires strong coordination, as well as political will and commitments.

• Deep structural changes are required to remove social and economic inequalities.
However, inclusive policies and policymaking can help prevent the net zero transition
from creating new or exacerbating old inequalities.

The necessity and challenge of transitioning to ‘net zero’ carbon emission economies is
widely acknowledged. Rapid transformation is needed to meet obligations under the Paris
Agreement, and governments and policymakers need to ensure that these pathways are
politically and socially viable, as well as technically and economically feasible.

The UK has a role to play to ensure a fair and inclusive transition to a low carbon future,
both domestically and internationally. As COP26 Presidency, the UK has committed to
championing inclusivity and amplifying the voices of those whose views are often most
marginalised, understanding how inclusion of diverse views is vital to drive better climate
outcomes. BEIS has commissioned this research to support the UK take this leading role and
provide a contribution to understanding how net zero can be achieved in a fair, socially
inclusive way.

The representation of users’ diverse needs and interests and their meaningful
participation in decision-making are critical for an inclusive transition. Users, who can be
thought of as individuals or groups that use low carbon technologies, energy or elements of the
energy system, are not homogenous. The capacity these users have to engage with the
transition depends on their access to technologies, agency in decision-making and their ability

7
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

to adopt and engage with low-carbon behaviours and technologies. It will also depend on how
their needs and aspirations are represented and understood. Misrepresentation of users can
result in their voices not being heard and their needs not being met by low carbon policies and
technologies. New inequalities can arise and existing ones can be reproduced.

Ensuring that transition policies acknowledge and seek to address social inequality is
necessary for their social acceptability and success.

Research objectives
BEIS commissioned the Carbon Trust and partners to summarise the evidence base on
different user experiences in the UK, and to explore what can be learnt from
international approaches to enhance inclusion in policymaking. The primary focus of this
report is technology and policy user experiences in the domestic sphere, with a focus on the
UK, and access and agency in decision-making in relation to energy services and low carbon
technologies and policies. The report also offers a discussion of approaches, including
practical frameworks and tools used and recommended by international authors to support
more inclusive policymaking.

Methodology
Two research questions were posed:

• Who are the users, and what are their characteristics and experiences of low carbon
technologies and policies in the UK?
• What positive experiences are there for promoting and mainstreaming gender equality
and social inclusion in low carbon technology/policy?

The literature review followed an approach guided by the principles of a systematic review. In
addition to a database search, we employed a ‘guided search’, whereby key articles, including
both peer-review and grey literature relevant to the research questions, were solicited from our
network of academic experts. In line with a systematic approach, a strict protocol was followed,
using pre-agreed inclusion and exclusion criteria, a coding tool and an appraisal tool. 155 full-
text articles and reports were included in the review, and the evidence was collated in a
database, summarised and analysed. The results of the analysis were written up in this
literature review.

8
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Key findings
User experiences

Social differences and resulting experiences are multifaceted. They often intersect and
change over time producing different, and sometimes deeper challenges to engaging
with the net zero transition. Inclusions and exclusions from decision-making about energy
and low carbon futures are frequently produced on the grounds of socioeconomic differences,
socio-cultural differences such as gender, race, class, and other natural differences
determined by user physiology.

These differences can intersect with physical factors, such as physical isolation or
informational factors associated with digital exclusion, potentially exacerbating challenges.
These factors can exclude groups from accessing technologies, energy services and
information, and can shape their experiences of these challenges through the adoption of
different coping mechanisms. They can limit users in their choices and decisions around low
carbon technologies and behaviours. Whether, and how users engage with the low carbon
transition will depend on their capacity and flexibility to act. Net zero policies and technologies
that are unresponsive to these differentiated needs and capacities risk exacerbating or creating
new social inequalities.

The poor are often the least responsible for climate change, are disproportionately
vulnerable to its impacts, and can face exclusion from the net zero transition. Where
high income groups have disproportionately high emission lifestyles, poorer groups already
facing challenges meeting basic energy needs have fewer resources to adapt to a changing
climate. Lower income groups often have few resources with which to engage in the low
carbon transition, since they can be excluded from low carbon technologies and policies.
Vulnerable households living in poor quality or inefficient homes, may face high financial
barriers to improving the efficiency of their properties and may therefore face continued high
energy costs. Renters, who tend to have lower incomes, often have limited power and agency
to make decisions around low carbon technology adoption in their homes. High upfront costs of
technologies such as rooftop PV and electric vehicles mean that high earners have greater
capacity to be early adopters, often disproportionately benefitting from technology subsidies.
Policymakers globally need to recognise how benefits and costs of low carbon technologies
and policies fall across different groups, and look both at ability and responsibility to engage in
low carbon activities.

Socio-cultural factors such as race, ethnicity and class can impact a user’s access to
low carbon technologies. While evidence on race and low carbon transitions is limited in the
UK, evidence from the United States suggests ethnic minority households and neighbourhoods
are being left behind – the uptake of energy efficiency measures in the home, rooftop solar,
and access to EV infrastructure is lower. In the UK, concerns of fairness and justice have been
raised in relation to the spatial distribution of Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs) in London. A
recent study found Black Londoners were slightly more likely to live in LTN areas, and overall,
privileged communities were not disproportionately benefitting from the policy. Communities of
higher ethnic diversity have been suggested to be associated with higher levels of energy
9
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

poverty. Recent migrants may face challenges to accessing technologies and energy services:
language barriers and reduced informal support networks, which can exacerbate experiences
of energy poverty.

Gender roles influence decision-making around low carbon technologies and

behaviours. Gendered divisions of labour within the household often result in the assertion of
‘ownership’ over specific domestic areas within the home. Since the domains of men and
women can be perceived differently, for example women may be more likely to undertake
tasks including laundry or cooking, women often engage in more energy-intensive activities
within the home relative to men, and be almost the sole users of some energy intensive
technologies. While it may appear that policies to reduce household consumption ought to
focus on women, to do so may unfairly burden many in this user group. Already a group more
likely to be balancing unpaid care work and domestic work, this burden could be compounded
through interventions targeting women to adapt organisational patterns to optimise energy use.
Gender roles can influence purchasing decisions of low carbon technologies.

Relative financial power within the home can impact purchasing decisions, and the perception
that ‘high-tech’ products are in the ‘man’s domain’ may mean women may be left out from
decisions around technologies such as EVs and rooftop solar.

Spatial inequalities, and physical factors such as housing quality can compound social
vulnerabilities. Spatial inequality, that is, inequality in economic and social indicators of
wellbeing across geographic areas, is high in the UK. Post- industrial and peripheral economic
regions lag behind, and this is often reflected in the geographic variation of energy deprivation.
Housing type can limit the options for investing in or taking advantage of low carbon
technologies. The poorer the quality of the housing, the greater the investment needed to
improve efficiency. Houses in multiple occupancy (houses with at least three tenants who
share facilities and form more than one household), typically poor-quality buildings, have
historically been poorly represented in housing data. This means the vulnerabilities of
occupants may not be recognised and receive adequate support. Physical isolation and
remoteness mean many rural households face limited access to lower-carbon transport and
energy services.

Differing physiological characteristics of users mean different needs when it comes to

energy and technologies. Energy needs differ for the young, the elderly, the disabled and the
ill. Often, this means higher energy bills, risking instances of energy poverty, and limitations on
the ability to engage with new technologies, from smart meters to active transport options.
Groups including elderly people and people with disabilities face reduced internet access and
lower levels of digital literacy, and this digital exclusion can compound energy vulnerability and
restrict access to services. Low levels of energy literacy, which is more prevalent in poorer
areas, mean that households can struggle to understand the energy market, with complex
terminology compounding the problem. It is important to recognise that the nature of
physiological factors relates directly to the barriers that users face, and these factors should
not be treated homogenously.

10
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Inclusive policymaking approaches

For policies and technologies to support a fairer and more equitable distribution of costs and
benefits, policymaking approaches worldwide need to better represent the interests and needs
of vulnerable groups, and meaningfully support their participation in decision-making.

Examining and addressing social inequities in the context of the net zero transition
requires an intersectional and holistic approach so that no-one is left behind.
Intersecting and evolving vulnerabilities make the effects of social difference on user
experiences and their needs difficult to examine and hard to generalise. Integrating energy
justice considerations into existing policymaking tools could enable social inclusion to reach
beyond siloed policy areas and become more embedded in policy processes.

The language that is used to describe exclusions and definitions of social categories
must avoid misrepresentation. Definitions of social categorisations can contribute towards
assumptions or reinforce stereotypes which ignore the complexity and intersectionality of
experiences. Terms such as ‘Hard-to-Reach’ can frame users as ‘passive’ rather than active
participants in the energy system.

Better data is needed to improve the visibility and accurate representation of excluded
groups, their needs, practices and capacities to act. Moving away from a reliance on
quantitative data alone can support this, and can enrich understanding of the complex
intrahousehold dynamics that shape decision-making in the adoption of low-carbon
technologies and behaviours.

Co-design methods and participatory approaches can support inclusive decision-

making and make policies and technologies more responsive to user needs. Approaches
for social inclusion must go beyond using ad-hoc tools and optional guidance, and citizens
must be empowered and provided with the agency to participate meaningfully. Building user
capacities, for example through the support of intermediaries and networks, can help to build
this empowerment and contribute to improved decision-making processes, as well as support
users in meeting their energy needs and engaging with the energy market.

Formal and informal networks are crucial stakeholders in the dissemination of

information and enabling uptake of low carbon measures. Users will rely on personal
contacts and organisations that they trust, such as advocacy groups or charities, to seek
information and support on energy services or low carbon technologies. These intermediaries
will often have a deeper understanding of vulnerable households and are well placed to
provide support. Building the capacities of such intermediaries could enable measures to reach
more vulnerable users and provides a channel through which effective participatory measures
can be developed and implemented.

Addressing information needs by using accessible language and methods of

communication will be key to enabling widespread and inclusive uptake of low carbon
measures. This could be supported through easier-to-understand energy bills, face-to-face
advisory services and clear eligibility criteria for support measures.

11
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Behaviour change measures can demand time, money and resources from those who
are adopting them, for already vulnerable individuals this can create additional burdens,
embedding and exacerbating existing vulnerabilities. For these users, the focus should
remain on enabling low carbon solutions through the provision of energy services to meet
basic energy needs, while incentivising those with the capacity and ability to shift to lower
carbon lifestyles, to do so.

Lessons can be drawn from approaches employed to support gender mainstreaming

objectives in development contexts, which include gender audits, gender-responsive
checklists and gender assessments. Such tools tend to focus solely on gender and will
require augmentation to integrate other dimensions of inclusion.

Political will and commitment are required to ensure that high-level strategies and
visions are meaningfully translated into action. Proactive measures, clear objectives and a
commitment to embedding inclusion considerations are key to achieve an inclusive net zero
transition.

Summary diagrams which outline the key findings of this report can be found in Appendix 3:
Summary diagrams.

12
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Introduction
Context and policy landscape
Meeting national net zero commitments requires an unprecedented scale of societal
change. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Special Report on 1.5
degrees calls for “transformative systemic change”, noting that there are no historical
precedents for the speed and scale of change now required to tackle climate change 1.
Ambitious policy decisions from government, from local to national level, are required to
support the implementation and enhancement of existing and emerging technologies at scale.
They are also necessary to drive the uptake of low carbon actions and choices by individuals,
communities and organisations.

Climate and energy transitions have social and political elements as well as
technological aspects; inequalities can persist, be produced and be reproduced in low
carbon energy systems. They may therefore be no more inclusive or empowering than
traditional systems. Political economy analyses of energy transitions have highlighted that, with
decision-making power largely concentrated in a small fraction of society, transitions will often
ignore or overlook the needs and vulnerabilities of poor and marginalised groups 2. Better
understanding and engagement with existing social disparities may present opportunities to
address these historical and current social injustices, whilst also addressing wider climate
goals.

Recent events, including the COVID-19 pandemic and Black Lives Matter (BLM)
movement, have highlighted existing and widening structural and systemic inequalities.
The BLM movement has drawn attention to the structural inequalities and institutional racism
that low carbon transitions must navigate. Low earners, younger people, women, ethnic
minority groups and disabled people are already more at risk when the labour market is
disrupted, and the pandemic has created new forms of inequality 3. Those in more deprived
areas and in Black and ethnic minority groups face higher COVID-related mortality rates 4-6.
Increased domestic energy costs as a result of lockdown measures have placed already
vulnerable households at higher risk of energy poverty 7.

Objectives and scope

The aim of this review is to contribute to building the growing evidence base on the
social implications of low carbon energy transitions, and the lessons the UK and other
countries can learn from these. This literature review sought to understand user experiences
of low carbon technologies and policies in domestic contexts, particularly in the UK, and to
examine positive experiences that can be drawn on to support a fairer, more inclusive net zero
transition. In asking these questions, we aim to examine the social categories, identities and
experiences that are represented and promoted in existing low-carbon measures and decision-
making processes. This report follows a definition of ‘users’ similar to that of Schot et al., who

13
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

define users as “individuals or groups that use energy, including elements of the systems (e.g.
solar panels) necessary to produce and distribute energy” (p.11)8. For those who are excluded,
we look at their needs and their relative power and agency to have those needs met. In looking
to literature and case studies from other geographies, we look for lessons for the UK about
how excluded groups can be better represented in policy design and implementation, and how
they could participate in the net zero transition. This review aims to synthesise and analyse
global insights, analysis and expertise related to social inclusion in climate and energy
technology and policy.

This report was commissioned by the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial
Strategy (BEIS) and comprises the first stage of the Gender, Race and Social Inclusion –
Net Zero Transitions project. This project supports BEIS and the UK government in taking a
leading role in ensuring the transition to a net zero economy at home, and globally is a fair, just
and inclusive one. This literature review compiles and draws recommendations from existing
evidence on user experiences in energy transitions, and the methods, frameworks and
approaches for inclusive policymaking. The findings from this stage will form the foundation of
the second phase, which will consider options for developing a framework, approach and/or
methodology for supporting inclusion in UK net zero policymaking. Positive examples of tools,
approaches for social inclusion from the global literature, identified in this review, will inform the
design of this new approach. The review is intended to contribute to furthering the
understanding of inclusive approaches in low carbon policymaking internationally through the
IEA Users TCP, of which the UK is a member.

Wider research context

Although there is burgeoning interest in addressing social inclusion and climate and energy
issues together, research in the Global North is slowly emerging 9-10, including research
focused on the UK. This review contributes to addressing that gap.

Literature on low carbon transitions has predominantly focused on the interactions

between social and technological aspects of innovations. To date, there has been limited
focus on the socio-political and socio-cultural processes involved. However, social dimensions
are becoming increasingly recognised in climate and energy research, and questions of
inclusion and justice have been brought into the debate 10,11.

The integration of equity and justice considerations into low carbon transitions is
increasingly receiving scholarly attention. The origins of ‘just transitions’ discourse are
linked to assurances of support and green jobs for workforces and communities, including
those reliant on polluting industries12. More recently it has combined scholarships of energy,
climate and environmental justice13, which concern the unfairness in processes of sharing
costs and benefits across society related to the environment, energy and climate change.
Energy justice, which has been adapted from environmental justice, has seen a notable
expansion in research in recent years, particularly raising important questions of affordability
and access to energy services10.

14
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Extensive research has been done on the gender equity aspects of energy systems in
the Global South. Such literature demonstrates how gender and social norms limit women’s
access to and participation in decision-making around energy 14-17. In the Global North,
examinations of social inclusion and exclusion in relation to low carbon transitions are more
scarce, though there are notable exceptions in the literature on energy poverty 18,19.

Report structure
This report is structured as follows:

• The Methodology chapter describes our broad approach and the design of the literature
review research.
• The Results chapter presents the overarching results and findings of the review,
including general statistics on the collected papers, followed by the results of the
analysis by key themes. A discussion of inclusive approaches from the literature are
presented.
• The Conclusions chapter reflects on the gaps in the literature, the limitations of the
review and policy recommendations.

15
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Methodology
Research questions
Two specific research questions were posed for this review:

• Question 1: Who are the users, and what are their characteristics and experiences of
low carbon technologies and policies in the UK?
• Question 2: What positive experiences are there for promoting gender mainstreaming
and social inclusion in low carbon technology/policy?

In answering these questions, we examined the evidence available on social differences and
differentiating characteristics of users and how experiences might differ based on these
characteristics and their intersections. We also looked to the importance of inclusion in low
carbon transitions, and sought to gather evidence on positive experiences of inclusion,
globally, from which the UK can learn.

Recognising the challenges in data collection and definitions, we sought to identify approaches
for addressing these challenges.

Approach and overview of research design

The literature review followed an approach guided by the principles of a systematic review.

• Data collection: To enhance the comprehensiveness of the search, we employed a

‘guided search’ as well as a database search. For the ‘guided search’ our experts
proposed up to five key articles relevant to the research questions. The team then
reached out to prominent academics in their respective networks to solicit between five
and ten academic papers each, as well as grey literature recommendations to support
the review. This was combined with a database search, for which we developed a
comprehensive search string, based on the key concepts in the research questions and
guided by subject-matter experts. The search string was designed to ensure that results
were relevant to both the primary topic areas, Gender, Race and Social Inclusion
(GRSI) and energy and net zero transitions.
• Screening, coding and analysis: Sources were screened first by title and then by
abstract. Those that met the inclusion criteria developed by the team prior to the search
were selected for full-text reading. A coding tool to extract key findings and organise
data was developed using a pre-established list of categories in order to minimise bias.
The tool was tested and adapted throughout the review process. An appraisal tool was
employed to assess the quality of the body of research. Following the collation of the
evidence in a database/map, the results of the review were summarised and then
analysed by the key themes that had emerged. The results of the analysis were written
up in the literature review.
16
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Further detail on the methodology, including the search strategy, search string, inclusion and
exclusion criteria, coding tool and appraisal tool is provided in Appendix 1.

Limitations of the review

Scope

We have focused on ‘the user’ in the domestic sphere in this review, looking at equity aspects
associated with demand for energy services and technologies at the individual, household and,
to a limited extent, community level.

We recognise that this is only part of the picture of socially inclusive and just
transitions to low or zero-carbon economies. There are many social inequalities around
participation and access to decision-making on low carbon policy that we have not covered
here. There are a range of new low carbon technologies which are likely to have access
implications for different user groups, but literature on these did not explicitly discuss social
inclusion issues and so were considered out of scope of the review. Our review also found
there to be limited discussions of the wider social and environmental impacts of energy
technologies. These include intergenerational impacts and the wider global impacts of their
development, manufacture and disposal. Important aspects of an inclusive, just and fair
transition not discussed in this review include:

• Ensuring workforces in polluting industries and dependent communities are not

‘left out’. We do not discuss here the inequalities and justice implications associated
with transition pathways resulting in the obsolescence of fossil fuel workforces, and
other social equity issues of ‘green’ workforces, but these are nonetheless fundamental
aspects of a fair and equitable transition 12.
• Diverse low carbon workforces. Research has shown that action is required to
address the lack of ethnic diversity in the UK low carbon and environment sectors 20.
While low carbon energy professions are more gender-balanced than those in traditional
energy sectors, such as coal, oil and natural gas 21, there is a need to ensure that the
‘green jobs’ created by the net zero transition are distributed among more diverse
groups. Ensuring workforces and surrounding communities reliant on fossil fuel
industries for livelihoods are not ‘left out’ is essential to a ‘just transition’.
• Environmental justice for communities impacted by low carbon projects. We also
acknowledge the importance of the environmental justice implications of building
climate-friendly infrastructure and renewable energy projects. Understanding and
minimising their negative impacts on nearby communities, particularly minority and
indigenous groups, needs to be central to net zero policymaking 14,22.
• This review does not discuss the cross-border and intergenerational aspects of
energy, climate and environmental justice. The UK’s choices in terms of net zero
technology solutions cannot be seen in isolation from their global and temporal impacts.
Low carbon technologies can shift demand for components internationally, often to
lower income countries. The responsibility for disposal of these technologies is also
17
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

likely to be shifted to lower income communities, displacing the responsibility onto these
communities, and to future generations 23,24. While these discussions are beyond the
scope of this review, we note Sovacool et al.’s work 24,25 on examining the international
energy justice implications of sourcing materials for technologies and their end waste.
Recognition of the multiple levels of impact of technologies would enable policymakers
to better understand the far-reaching justice implications of low carbon policies and
technologies.
• Adaptation and vulnerability to climate change. It is widely recognised that the
poorest and most vulnerable groups disproportionately experience the negative impacts
of climate change, and issues of equity and justice are fundamental considerations for
how societies adapt to a changing climate. Examinations of adaptation policies were
considered generally beyond the scope of this review, though we discuss in brief the
importance of considering the impacts of equitable access to cooling technologies and
green space26,27.
Gaps identified in the literature are discussed in the Conclusions section.

Methodological limitations

In addition to the limitations placed on the scope of our review, we acknowledge several
methodological limitations. Due to time and budget constraints, we were unable to do a full
systematic review and, as such, deviations from such an approach introduced additional
biases. We employed a ‘guided search’ method to reduce the biases of the core search and
review team, and to increase comprehensiveness.

Leveraging the immediate network of our review team is likely to have contributed to the larger
volume of works from the Global North and from UK academics. Further notes on the
methodological limitations have been included in the annex.

18
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Overall results
This section presents the results of the review, including article methodologies, geographies
and research approaches. In-depth discussions and reflections on key themes and approaches
identified during the review are discussed in subsequent sections.

Geographical concentration of the literature: 73 per cent of publications focused on case

studies from the Global North, 17 per cent were global, or had no geographical focus. 10 per
cent were from the Global South. Of those from the Global North, most focused on the UK.
Although the database search did not limit publications to those from the UK, experts
participating in our guided search were directed by our research questions, the first of which
focuses on the UK context. As such, our guided search results included a high percentage of
UK-focused papers.

Figure 1 Geographic concentration of the literature

Low carbon technologies and policies examined in the literature: Our literature review
focused on technologies and policies relevant to low carbon transitions in the domestic sphere.
Energy management, which includes energy efficiency measures, and behaviours and
strategies to reduce energy consumption was most often discussed, particularly in relation to
households struggling to meet energy needs. Energy management, heating, rooftop and solar
PV were discussed most often in the context of the Global North, whereas clean cooking was
discussed only in articles from the Global South 15, 28.

Social inclusion issues examined in the literature: Figure 3 shows the number of
publications that discuss impacts and experiences of users across a range of social issue
categories.

19
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

It should be noted that in both Figure 2 and Figure 3, publications may discuss multiple
technologies, and multiple issues.

Figure 2: Publications examining technology types

The most documented impacts broadly relate to income and socioeconomic status as it relates
to energy used in the home, and energy poverty. The concept of energy poverty encompasses
problems of energy deprivation that are experienced in the home, including an “inability to
secure a socially and materially necessitated level of energy services” 18,29. The term ‘fuel
poverty’, which is more commonly used in UK contexts, is more specific and describes the
situation where a household “has a residual income below the poverty line (after accounting for
required fuel costs)”, and “lives in a home that has an energy efficiency rating below Band C”
29–31. Energy poverty and energy precarity are largely driven by income, but much of the

literature discussed the impacts and experiences of having low income and at least one other
physical or social characteristic associated with social differences, leading to disadvantages
and privileges relating to technology use.

Much of the literature in the review discussed gendered outcomes and experiences of energy
technologies, including energy management practices in the home.

20
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Figure 3: Publications examining social inclusion issue

Energy justice is receiving increasing attention as a framework for examining energy,

climate and social inclusion issues. The use of the energy justice framework to examine
issues of exclusion and social inequalities related to energy and low carbon technologies is
increasing in prominence in the literature. The concept of energy justice aims to encompass
justice issues across energy access, use and policy 32,33, and is often divided into three distinct
tenets of justice. Firstly, distributional justice helps call into question how the costs and benefits
are distributed across society, and whether this is ‘fair’ – to who do benefits accrue? Who
pays? Do these distributions create, or exacerbate existing inequalities? 34. Secondly,
recognition justice asks: who is ignored, or misrepresented, and how are different needs and
vulnerabilities understood? 35. Finally, procedural justice examines what processes exist for
bringing the ignored or misrepresented into the decision-making process, revealing, or
remediating the injustices 10.

21
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

User experiences of energy services and low carbon

transitions
Inclusive policymaking requires recognition of which experiences and interests are
represented and which voices are excluded. Inclusions and exclusions from decision-
making about energy and low carbon futures are frequently produced on the grounds of
socioeconomic differences, socio-cultural differences such as gender, race, class, and other
natural differences determined by user physiology. These differences can intersect with
physical factors, such as physical isolation or informational factors associated with digital
exclusion, potentially exacerbating challenges.

The following section discusses themes related to experiences of inclusion and

exclusion from energy services, and access to technologies and information. Social
categorisations, characteristics and identities that represent patterns and relationships of
power are themselves complex, leading to complex and changing experiences and needs.
Social and cultural norms and other power dynamics can influence or even inhibit the ability of
users to make decisions around energy and technologies. A summary diagram outlining these
findings can be found in Appendix 3: Summary diagrams.

Intersectionality and the complexities of overlapping and

evolving exclusions
Social differences can intersect and change over time, making it difficult to capture user
needs and experiences of low carbon technologies and policies. Multiple forms of
inequality and vulnerability can overlap and interact with one another, deepening the severity
of the challenges. In the Global North, including the UK, such challenges are often presented
in relation to experiences of energy poverty, usually where there are intersections of low
income and one or more vulnerabilities. Energy users may, for example, be vulnerable as a
result of both gender and income inequalities, which may in turn exacerbate the other, and so
demonstrate how gender dimensions of vulnerability can overlap and intersect with energy
poverty and precarity. The intersection of gender and age, able-ness and ethnicity gives rise to
“diverse and complex geographies of gendered vulnerability” 36. The more diverse and the
greater the complexity of the intersections, the greater the severity of the challenge of energy
poverty 37.

The relationships and severity of these challenges will also evolve over time. These
characteristics of social inclusion or exclusion and their intersections will change as people’s
life circumstances, identities and values change 38. Research has suggested that people’s
needs and scope for participating in energy transitions through behaviour change is also likely
to be different at key moments in their life 39,40. The complexities of evolving and overlapping
social differences mean the experiences associated with a single characteristic are difficult to
isolate and examine, and difficult to generalise.

22
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Poverty and precarity

The poor are often the least responsible for climate change, but are disproportionately
exposed to the impacts. This key injustice is the starting point for climate justice analysis.
Historic and current inequalities have resulted in differentiated responsibilities for emissions.
High income groups have, in comparison to lower income groups, an “unequal ability to
pollute” 41 due to disproportionately high-emission lifestyles. Greater income enables luxury
consumption, such as the ownership of larger properties and bigger cars, as well as more
frequent air travel 42,43. In the UK, the highest-income earners contribute 40 per cent more
emissions than the poorest groups 44. Poorer groups already face multiple challenges and
often have fewer resources with which to respond and adapt to the further challenge of a
changing climate. Those who cannot afford to maintain a heated home, or who cannot invest in
cooling appliances, will suffer most through increasing weather variability and extreme
temperatures that are already locked in as a result of historic emissions 27. For coastal areas of
the UK, lower-income groups in poor quality housing risk being be disproportionately affected
by flooding, while those living in urban areas with least access to green space (again,
disproportionately poorer groups) will be more vulnerable to pluvial flooding and heatwaves 26,
27.

Meeting basic needs will be the priority for low income households experiencing energy
poverty. The social equity aspects of energy poverty are a prominent theme in the literature.
Households experiencing energy or fuel poverty, spend a high proportion of their income on
energy bills to meet their basic needs. Household income is the primary driver of energy
poverty, but it is also affected by energy costs and energy consumption (which is higher in less
efficient, poor-quality housing)45,46. In England, where fuel poverty is measured by the
combination of these drivers, energy poor households disproportionately live in older properties
and often face additional barriers to improving the efficiency of their home, such as those
relating to tenure, location and building fabric47. Households experiencing energy poverty may
employ coping strategies, which can include reducing the time the heating is on, the number of
rooms heated, cutting back on food and other essentials, using savings, and relying on family
and friends for financial support 48. A study by Anderson et al. showed households on the
lowest incomes in the UK may be in such dire financial circumstances that any heating cost at
all could be considered a burden 48.

The literature on energy poverty exemplifies how social differences impact experiences
of energy services in complex ways. Faced with energy services poverty, the coping
strategies households employ will depend on their priorities, capacities and the resources
available to them, as well as cultural and physiological factors. Experiences with energy
poverty can have detrimental impacts on the mental health and wellbeing of these vulnerable
households 49. People can be reluctant to invite guests into their home because they feel
ashamed that they cannot afford to heat their homes to a comfortable level, and elderly people
living in underheated homes are at particular risk of social isolation 50. In many cases, people
prioritise the needs of the most vulnerable family members and use more energy than they can
afford 51. Both young children and the elderly are at greater risk of illness or death from more
extreme weather variations, including heat waves and cold 27,50.

23
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Research demonstrates that the persistent ‘invisibility’ of some users and the
consequences that this can have on experiences of energy poverty are not well
understood or recognised. A lack of recognition puts these users at risk of ‘falling through
the cracks’ 52. A UK study found high levels of energy poverty among disabled people under
60, a group unlikely to be eligible to receive the Winter Fuel Allowance, and a group which has
previously struggled to access other energy support programmes such as the Warm Home
Discount scheme (the government has now published a consultation to better target Warm
Home Discount support to people in energy poverty). They also note the limitations of the
commonly used English Housing Survey in representation of disability 52.

‘Normalisation’ of energy poverty can prevent households from seeking support,

increasing the likelihood their experiences of deprivation are overlooked. Some
households experiencing energy poverty view coping strategies as part of everyday life,
sometimes as a form of resilience that includes a sense of autonomy and dignity. If this is
normalised, such strategies are seen as legitimate, not a form of hardship and therefore not
deserving of support 29,48,53. Petrova notes this kind of normalisation of energy poverty among
young people. Users accept the likelihood that they will be living in poor quality housing as
students or young people and may not be able to afford adequate heating 29. Research
focusing on low-income renters in England observed a tendency for participants to suffer the
consequences of under-heated homes, including adverse physical and mental health impacts,
for fear of increased rent and heating costs 54,55. Cauvain and Bouzarovski found students and
young people are also more likely to live in houses in multiple occupation, further limiting the
recognition of their vulnerability to energy poverty 56. This is because official planning data for
multiple occupancy housing is often inadequate due to the restricted recognition of what
constitutes a household. Without recognition of their vulnerability, they are unlikely to receive
adequate systemic support.

Low carbon technologies will be essential in supporting households to move out of

energy poverty, but this should not be the sole responsibility of the household. The
inability of energy services to meet the needs of users because of social exclusion is a
prominent theme across the literature. Bouzarovski and Petrova argue that states of energy
deprivation or energy poverty, both in the Global North and Global South, should be thought of
as energy services failing to meet the needs of the household 18. This implies that the
responsibility for meeting the needs of poor households lies not just with the household itself,
but across various actors in the energy system. In conceptualising energy deprivation in this
way, we recognise the need to provide affordable, accessible and low carbon services for poor
groups, rather than targeting them directly to encourage behaviour changes.

Unequal access to low carbon energies and technologies

Socioeconomic status and access

Access to energy technologies can reinforce inequalities as those in positions of power

will be able to take advantage of new technologies first 57. Wealth is a strong determinant
of access. The high upfront capital costs of technologies such as rooftop solar, electric vehicles

24
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

(EVs), and other measures such as retrofits mean higher-income earners have greater
capacity to be early adopters 25,58–61. Equity and justice concerns arise around the
accumulation of additional benefits to those already in positions of relative wealth and social
power. In Norway, Sovacool et al. showed that high-income earners were able to take
advantage of highly-subsidised EVs, in some cases buying multiple vehicles 24. A study in
Birmingham, England found early adopters of lower emission vehicles tended to be more
affluent, with higher car and home ownership62. Martiskainen et al. demonstrated how
injustices can arise between social groups; in Germany they found that wealthier landowners
were installing excess solar panels on their farms to take advantage of highly- favourable feed-
in-tariffs 61. In both cases, concerns were raised about the regressive nature of these policies,
where the poor may be paying to subsidise the financial benefits accruing to the rich.

Supporting behaviour change alongside investing in low carbon technologies will be

required to address the differentiated responsibilities for action. While research shows a
correlation between income and uptake of climate-friendly technologies, it cannot be assumed
that this will translate to an overall reduction in emissions, since the purchase of these
technologies may trigger a rebound effect. This means, for instance, improvements in energy
efficiency can encourage behaviour changes leading to an overall increase in energy
consumption 63.

Purchasing low carbon technologies will not be enough for higher income groups to address
their responsibility for emission reductions43. Newell et al. argue for targeting more radical
behaviour changes in higher-income groups, such as curbing unnecessary travel 43.

Socio-cultural aspects: Gender

Gender roles and gendered patterns of use impact experiences of transport modes,
including access to low carbon options. Persistent gendered inequalities can dictate travel
patterns; while men often have a simple, twice-daily commute to and from work, women are
more likely to balance trips for work, childcare and household responsibilities 64,65. Since
women are more likely to assume childcare and domestic responsibilities, they are also more
likely to be travelling with buggies and/or shopping 66. Perceptions of risk and personal safety
concerns limit women’s active travel options; women are more limited in the times they travel,
the routes they take, and the frequency and modes of transport that they use 67. Motherwell
argues that policies to promote active travel should address systemic issues and improve the
safety of routes to avoid placing additional burdens and responsibility on women to change
their travel behaviour 68. Considerations of gendered experiences in access to low carbon
modes of transport, including active travel and public transport, should inform planning for
policy and infrastructure.

Socio-cultural aspects: Race, ethnicity and class

While evidence in the UK is limited, access to low carbon technologies in the United
States has been shown to be differentiated along racial and class lines. Reames
demonstrated a correlation between ethnic minority headed households, lower incomes, and
less energy efficient housing, increasing the exposure of these households to energy

25
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

vulnerability 69. Sunter et al. found PV adoption to be significantly lower in majority Black and
Hispanic neighbourhoods, even when controlling for average income and tenancy and
ownership status 70. Hsu and Fingerman show that these areas have low access to public EV
chargers, suggesting this could not only discourage uptake of EVs (particularly older models
requiring more frequent charging) but also discourage travel to these areas and therefore
further widen inequalities 71.

Our review suggests literature explicitly examining the racial, and class aspects of
energy transitions in the UK is limited. The evidence presented here is from the United
States, so care should be taken in inferring socio-political and socio-cultural similarities
between the two countries. While inferences could be made from literature on socioeconomic
and spatial inequities in the UK, this presents a challenge, and generalising experiences
should be avoided. An exception to this is a study currently under review, looking at the equity
of the distribution of costs and benefits arising from the recent Low Traffic Neighbourhoods
(LTNs) policy in London. The recent findings of Aldred et al. 72 suggested people from ethnic
minority groups were slightly more likely to live in new LTNs than white people, though this
varied by ethnicity, with Asian residents slightly less likely to live in these neighbourhoods
compared to other groups. The authors found, too, that people in deprived areas in London
were much more likely to live in or near to LTNs.

Perceptions of costs and benefits of LTNs and Low Emissions Zones (LEZs), are complex, and
these policies are not without controversy. Those who rely on more polluting personal vehicles
may face physical or other impediments to travelling without a car, including safety concerns or
difficulties in negotiating public transport or crossing busy streets. However, Mullen and
Marsden assert that these forms of injustice must be examined in the context of the wider
impacts of these policies, including the benefits of cleaner air for all social groups 73. They view
the provision of affordable, low carbon transport options to a wide range of communities as a
priority for policymakers.

Recent migrants may face barriers to accessing energy technologies and services due
to language, confidence and trust barriers. Communities with high levels of ethnic diversity
and limited social integration have lower levels of social trust 58,74. This can translate into a lack
of trust in energy suppliers, which was found to be a barrier to engagement with the energy
market and low carbon measures in the UK 51. Households of recent migrants may face a
language barrier that can frustrate and even exacerbate experiences of energy poverty, for
example through an inability to understand what support is available or even how to engage
with energy companies 37. Furthermore, they may also have limited informal support networks
to help them navigate the system or provide financial assistance 75.

Physical aspects of access

Socioeconomic status may influence where you live and, in turn, your access to
technologies and energy services. High levels of spatial economic inequality exist in the UK.
Post-industrial and peripheral economic regions are particularly vulnerable, as are those living
in poor quality housing. This is often reflected in the geographic variation in energy deprivation.
In addition to poor housing quality, which exacerbates energy poverty in underheated homes,

26
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

high-rise apartments, which are typically lower-income homes, can experience severe
overheating 27. Similarly, households with limited access to green space, which can also serve
to cool buildings, tend to be lower-income 27. The quality of housing is correlated with energy
vulnerability; the worse the quality of the housing, the more of a physical and financial
challenge it is to upgrade and install heating systems with low carbon alternatives 25.

Rapid low carbon policy decisions may reinforce these inequalities or create new sets
of spatial winners and losers 76,77. For example, in the US, Hsu and Fingerman found that
areas of lower household income also have lower access to EV charging stations 71. This has
important implications for the ability of residents to take up low carbon technologies in the
future. Policy and technology decisions can reflect a bias towards certain types of housing or
geographic areas. For example, living in a high-rise flat or densely populated areas with limited
space can reduce access to convenient charging points 24.

Housing type can limit options for investing in, or taking advantage of low carbon
technologies, and this often relates to income. Households may be excluded from
technology programmes because of the nature of the dwelling. For example, smart meter
programmes may not be accessible to some mobile homes and certain blocks of flats 25. The
Grenfell Tower fire highlighted the disastrous implications of shortcutting on cost and quality in
insulating high-rise blocks. It also thrust into public consciousness the extremes of inequality in
housing quality that exists in the UK 78.

Improved recognition and representation of those in poor quality homes and houses in
multiple occupancy is crucial to address their needs. There is a risk that user
vulnerabilities are misrepresented due to insufficient housing data. Houses in multiple
occupancy contain “some of the UK’s worst housing stock”, and Cauvain and Bouzarovski
found that data from housing surveys on these types of residences are limited56. Consequently,
the vulnerabilities of tenants could be at risk of being ignored56. Such housing can include
illegal or informal housing, rooms in a shared house, groups of sharers, bedsits, and poorly
converted flats. Typical tenants include students, young people and other vulnerable persons:
households with a member with a long-term illness or disability make up over half of the social
rented sector and a quarter of private renters, and people under 35 are overrepresented in the
private rented sector79. Other groups that risk being overlooked in policymaking are those
newly out of prison, leaving the care system, or with drug dependency issues. Houses in
multiple occupancy are subject to less energy performance regulation and face an absence of
energy poverty measures 56.

Limited access to infrastructure and energy services creates vulnerabilities for rural
households. In the UK, rural areas can be limited in their choice of both transport and energy
services. Households in these areas are likely to be much more reliant on private transport due
to the lack of affordable public transport options 80. Rural households may face additional costs
imposed by the electricity network and may be excluded from certain energy choices through
restrictions based on land designations or limited access to gas mains 81–83. The efficiency of
houses in rural areas is often more difficult to improve due to solid walls and floors, which are
less efficient than cavity walls and more expensive to insulate. This increases the
vulnerabilities of these households and restricts efficiency improvement options 84. For low-

27
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

income households in rural areas, all these factors can significantly increase their risk of
experiencing ‘double energy vulnerability’ 80.

Rural and coastal areas may also be at risk of being excluded from newer and future low
carbon technologies. The provision of energy efficiency support measures to households in
rural and coastal areas tend to be more expensive and as such are less likely to receive
support85. Suppliers may face difficulties or higher costs in reaching rural homes, which may
lead to the exclusion of rural households where suppliers are aiming to meet efficiency targets
at the lowest cost 84. In addition to having limited access to energy management options such
as retrofitting or switching energy providers, and facing limited access to public transport as a
low carbon travel option, rural areas may also face a lack of EV charging infrastructure 24.
Concerns around geographic exclusion have also been raised in relation to the smart meters
programme in the UK, particularly in Scotland 24 and the high capital costs of heat pumps86,87,
and district heating88 can be prohibitive in rural areas, particularly as such technologies can
require an improvement in the efficiency in the home first89,90. Such exclusions could contribute
to reinforcing existing spatial inequalities.

Physiological aspects of access

Physiological characteristics can determine access to technologies and adequate

energy services. Physiological factors such as old age, disability and illness increase the
likelihood that marginalised groups will experience energy poverty 36. Disability and poor health
can increase the cost of living, introducing a further strain on the affordability of energy bills
54,91. Older households and households including a person with a disability or poor health are

likely to have different energy needs 92. For example, higher hours of home occupancy for
elderly people can contribute to increased energy costs 53,81. Certain disabilities may limit an
individual’s ability to engage with low carbon measures; for example, those with learning
disabilities may not be able to use smart meter interfaces 93. Furthermore, households where a
member has a health condition requiring a strict medical routine have expressed concerns
regarding the extent of potential home intrusion required for retrofits and installation processes
85.

Access to transport, including low carbon options such as active travel, is impacted by
physiological characteristics. Measures that aim to promote low carbon travel often use
assumptions about able bodies, but physiological factors will determine the extent to which
individuals can rely on active and public transport. For walking and cycling the assumed model
is often younger, healthier people. Disabled people travel less and for different purposes than
non-disabled people and, since disabled people are not a homogenous group, the nature of
their disability directly relates to their barriers to low carbon transport 94.

Digital exclusion, energy literacy and access to information

Accessible information on energy markets and technologies is necessary to enable

users’ agency. Users need both access to and understanding of information on low carbon
measures in order to make informed decisions around energy policies and technologies. This

28
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

includes information on how to engage with the energy market, understanding available
technologies, and eligibility for support schemes.

Digital exclusion can compound energy vulnerability. Elderly people are less likely to have
internet access or be digitally literate 95. This limits their awareness of and ability to understand
options to switch energy providers and they may be unable to negotiate with energy
companies 96. Similarly, people with disabilities can face a digital divide. 15 percent of disabled
adults in the UK had never used the internet in 2020, compared with 3.4 percent of non-
disabled adults 97. Low carbon technologies themselves may not be accessible to those with
disabilities. For instance, Bradley et al. suggested that smart meters could be made more
accessible through simpler user interfaces or audio features93.

Low levels of energy literacy can be a barrier to engagement with the energy market.
This can be particularly problematic for low-income households vulnerable to experiences of
energy poverty. A UK study found that residents in poorer areas often faced lower levels of
energy literacy and struggled to understand aspects of the energy market, including tariff
structures and payment schemes, with complex language being a compounding issue 96.
Consequently, these vulnerable households lacked awareness or understanding of benefits
such as switching providers, or the support services available to them. These services were
difficult to understand and time-consuming to access, or households may simply not have had
the confidence to engage with them 51,98.

Concerns about data and information privacy can limit uptake of technologies. UK
respondents were found to report high levels of concern regarding data and privacy compared
with respondents from other European countries in a study by Sovacool et al. 99. Smart meters
specifically have been resisted due to concerns about being 'spied on' or privacy violations
through cyber-attacks 100.

Digital exclusion and energy literacy factors raise concerns around the distribution of
benefits and costs from the low carbon transition. The literature raised concerns around
the distribution of costs, with the possibility of benefits only accruing to those who engage with
the energy market, and more vulnerable people missing out 61. Those who do not have
sufficient energy literacy may be unable to benefit fully from low carbon policies and
technologies 96. Meanwhile, early adopters of new technologies such as smart meters are often
better educated and may disproportionately benefit from more accurate billing, the avoidance
of billing problems or needing meter readings, and the avoidance of debt accumulation through
accurate information 61.

Agency in decision-making
Gender roles and agency in the household

Gender roles and norms influence individual agency to participate in decision-making

around energy and low carbon technologies. Perceptions of traditional roles and identities
influence the availability of choice and capacity to exercise choice, particularly in the domestic

29
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

sphere 50. In the UK, and other countries in the Global North, low carbon technologies can
reproduce gendered divisions in the home and in the workplace. In many heterosexual
partnered households, women and men assert ‘ownership’ or expertise over technologies or
specific domains in the home in accordance with traditional gendered roles and gendered
divisions of labour. ‘High-tech’ technologies, including solar PV, 101 installations and household
maintenance tend to be viewed as being in the masculine domain 19,102. The female domain
tends to include the spatial domains of the kitchen and laundry, and the labour of ‘everyday’
chores and habitual tasks. Bell et al. noted that these attitudes persist despite many
technologies more frequently used by men being no more complex than modern washing
machines 103.

Gendered divisions of labour mean that women engage in more energy intensive
activities in the home. Women are most likely to bear the burdens of energy intensive
household activities, such as cooking and laundry, relative to men9,19,32,104. However, in single
households, women were found to consume less energy compared to men in a UK study 105. A
study covering other European countries found similar results, although the authors in both
studies noted that the greatest differences were explained by vehicle ownership and
associated fuel usage 105,106.

Domestic gender roles impact women’s time availability and flexibility. This has
consequences for energy management and measures aimed at shifting energy- intensive
activities away from peak-load times. Targeting energy flexibility can create conflicts in
scheduling and impacts personal economy, leisure time and comfort. These impacts can be
reinforced by difficulties in balancing unpaid care work and domestic work, which more often
falls to women 105. Women are often left with the additional mental workload of organising
domestic work (the ‘third shift’) and this burden could be compounded through interventions
targeting women to adapt organisational patterns to optimise energy use 107. For example,
encouraging users to avoid morning peaks for doing laundry is likely to disproportionately
impact women and exacerbate existing inequalities within the household. As they are often the
primary caregivers, women with young children are further limited in their flexibility since
activities such as cooking and eating, cleaning, laundry and bathing are primarily organised
around the needs of the children, school and other structural routines 103.

Gendered experiences of energy poverty are compounded by spatial and other

inequalities across the UK. In a study in England, Robinson found that economic exclusion,
part-time employment and unpaid female carers tend to be concentrated in post-industrialised
areas in the north of the country, where there is also relative income deprivation 36. She also
noted that gendered vulnerabilities associated with unpaid caring roles and exclusion from a
productive economy can translate into vulnerabilities in later life, such as pension
accumulation. Bell et al. found that gendered roles are likely to be more entrenched in elderly
households in the UK 103.

Intra-household decision-making power may impact ownership and use of energy

technologies and services. Examinations of intrahousehold energy-related dynamics in the
Global North are only recently gaining attention in the literature 19,50. Lessons may be drawn
from years of scholarship on gender and energy access, and clean cooking in the Global

30
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

South. Winther et al. discussed the gendered dimensions of financial barriers to energy
services and technologies and highlighted how men, generally the homeowners and primary
earners, exercise greater agency relative to women in both decisions around access to energy
and appliance purchases 15. While Patnaik and Jha noted similar dynamics, they point out the
complexities of ownership and use 28.

Culture, class and race mediating low carbon decisions and activities

A user’s agency in decision-making is influenced by cultural norms and expectations.

Just as cultural gender norms often dictate the division of labour within the household and,
sometimes, how energy-related decisions are made, other cultural norms may influence how
energy and technologies are used. Examining the influence of culture on low carbon lifestyles,
Sovacool and Griffiths stated that in many cultures, aggressive and inefficient driving practices
tend to be associated with masculine behaviours, machismo, dominance and control, even to
the point of limiting the effectiveness of hybrid vehicles in reducing emissions 11. Conspicuous
consumption and other social signalling as a means of projecting wealth or influence, as well
as mistrust in technologies, spiritual beliefs and social customs, are cultural practices that may
act as a barrier to energy efficient behaviours, technologies and low carbon mobility 11.
Culturally-driven pressures to have large families can mean increased household size and
multiple-occupancy housing, which has a significant impact on energy use in the home 11,108.
For low-income households this may increase the risk of experiencing energy poverty.

Feelings of belonging and trust in a society may be positively correlated with pro-
environmental behaviours. A study using data from the European Social Survey by Caferra,
Colasante and Morone showed a strong positive relationship between social and political trust
and energy saving behaviour 58. The authors argue that social integration and a sense of
belonging to society enhanced the individual sense of responsibility for the environment, which
translated into improved energy saving behaviours. For liberal countries, including the UK, this
relationship is dependent on social trust, as some evidence suggests that political trust and
trust in institutions is low 58. Similarly, Awaworyi Churchill and Smyth found a positive
correlation between social integration and the prevalence of energy poverty in a study in
Australia 74. The authors argue that communities with high levels of ethnic diversity experience
reduced social trust, owing to, for instance, weaker social ties. The authors suggest this in turn
may have had implications for energy poverty; households may have fewer informal support
networks of family and friends nearby, have limited trust in energy service providers, and
limited access to adequate information. Both studies pointed to the importance of citizen-to-
citizen relationships and social cohesion in supporting low carbon transitions.

Low carbon technology preferences can be influenced by race, culture and class. In the
UK, white people are more likely to be able to invest in bicycles and have greater awareness of
cycle hire schemes 66, meaning policies such as LTNs may have distributional equity
implications for different racial groups 72. Cultural pressures and risk perceptions influence
women’s transport choices, they may change their transport behaviours to avoid unwanted
attention or harassment, and may avoid cycling to work due to perceived expectations relating
to how they present themselves 68,94. People from ethnic minority groups face greater barriers
to using public transport in the UK, including cost and personal safety concerns 65,109. The

31
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

notion that certain low carbon technologies are tied to class and affluence in the UK was
touched on by Adams et al. 110, and Fox 111 who noted a common perception that rooftop solar
PV tends to be something only for “posh” houses.

Tenancy status, and improvements to the home

Landlord-tenant power dynamics can limit the agency of renters. Tenants often have
limited recognition and agency when it comes to housing measures and this often intersects
with other vulnerabilities. In the UK, lower-income earners are more likely to be tenants, unable
to afford their own home, and therefore limited in their ability to make changes to improve their
housing 25,27,110,112. Some landlords invest in improvements but others do not, and some invest
to varying degrees of quality and effectiveness 75,91. Retrofitting policies targeting landlords can
result in unintended consequences for tenants, who may be subject to evictions or significant
rent increases to cover the costs of insulation 113. The relative power of landlords places
limitations on the choices of low-income renters, with the fear of rent increases exacerbated by
housing shortages 55. The capacities to resist tend to be fewer in groups with weaker social ties
to an area, often migrant populations and students113. Bouzarovski et al. 114 observed ‘low
carbon gentrification’ in Canada, Sweden and Poland associated with increased rents to fund
energy efficiency upgrades.

Approaches for inclusive policymaking in the literature

The second research question guiding this literature review sought to identify the positive
experiences of integrating inclusivity into research and policy that have worked in the UK and
globally. Case studies where inclusive approaches were employed and their impacts were
evaluated (as being positive, or negative) were limited, though there were some notable
exceptions 16,110. Many approaches (including frameworks, tools, guides and similar) identified
in the literature were used to evaluate the justice and equity implications of a policy after it had
been implemented, rather than having been integrated into the design or implementation
processes. To supplement these findings, we drew on authors’ recommendations for
policymaking in the literature based on both primary and secondary evidence. It was beyond
the scope of this review to analyse these recommendations and approaches in detail, or to
present them in actionable ways for the policymaker.

In the following section, we present a summary of recommended approaches for policymaking

from the literature. We aimed to contribute to an enhanced understanding of the options and
opportunities to intervene and improve the policy process for more equitable and inclusive
outcomes. A summary diagram outlining these approaches can be found in Appendix 3:
Summary diagrams.

32
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

The following policy recommendations follow and build on themes identified by Jenkins et al.
10:

• Enhancement of existing policy mechanisms used across policymaking to

incorporate energy justice and inclusion principles.
• Widening recognition of mis- and under-represented groups, considering the use of
inclusive language, and considering exclusions beyond rigid and discrete categories.
• Combining quantitative and qualitative data to support a more nuanced
understanding of user experiences and capacities to act.
• Attention to local contexts and actors, recognising the critical role that intermediaries
and support networks can have in building user capacities.
• Targeted technological investments and policies, supporting communities to
participate in decision-making and access to low carbon energy.
• Learning from gender mainstreaming approaches such as strategies, action plans
and audits for inclusive policymaking design and implementation.

Enhancement of existing policy mechanisms

Combining justice and equity principles and research frameworks with commonly used tools
across policymaking could support a more practical application of academic frameworks to
support inclusion.

The application of the energy justice framework to existing policy tools could support
an inclusive approach to be applied widely across policymaking. Adapting existing,
commonly-used policymaking tools by integrating justice considerations would allow social
inclusion considerations to be more wide-reaching, moving beyond siloed policy areas. Jenkins
et al. examined how existing policy planning and assessment tools (such as Environmental
Impact Assessments (EIA) and Social Impact Assessments (SIA)) address energy justice
objectives and highlighted opportunities for their enhancement to better address social equity
concerns 10. The authors also pointed to the need for energy justice to be incorporated into
policy assessment tools. They recommended the Participatory Value Evaluation (PVE) as a
promising approach. The PVE is similar to a cost benefit analysis (CBA), except citizens are
the co-owners and users of the tool, considering the personal and collective impacts of
interventions, and making recommendations 10.

33
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Figure 4: PVE for the Heat Transition Vision Utrecht Project Case Study115

PVE for the Heat Transition Vision Utrecht Project

PVE was used in the Heat Transition Vision Utrecht project, where 617 participants from
the local community fully completed the PVE. Via an online platform, residents allocated
100 points to different approaches based on how they thought the goal of making 22,000
homes gas-free could be achieved. Participants were given an overview of the
advantages and disadvantages of each option, and once points were allocated, were
asked to explain their preferences.

Key Lessons:

• Compared with other forms of participation, the average age of the participants was
lower, and level of education, higher

• Asking participants to explain their choices provided insights into the arguments for
and against the option ultimately put forward

• Uncertainty over some technical terms and arguments led to miscommunications

between participants, and misunderstandings of each other’s’ conclusions

• PVE was received well by the participants, particularly among those with lower levels
of education, who generally thought greater weight should be given to the advice of
residents relative to experts. The approach led to a greater feeling of inclusion in
decision-making, as participants were able to give their view in an “easy-to-access yet
nuanced way”.

The energy justice framework can support the integration of equity and justice
considerations across broad aspects of policymaking. Sari et al. argue that energy justice
conceptualised through the three tenets (distributive, recognition and procedural justice), can
be used throughout the policymaking cycle and can be applied at multiple scales 35. By
combining it with an increasingly used ‘whole systems approach’, Sovacool et al. demonstrated
how the equity and justice impacts of low carbon technologies can be represented across
spatial and temporal scales 24. The spatial scales range from the micro scale at community
level through to the transnational, macro scale, and the temporal scales from the production of
a technology to its disposal. Figure 5: Energy poverty as three tenets of energy justice (Source:
Gillard et al.117) Figure 5 illustrates how the energy justice framework can be used to examine
how different forms of inequality interact and be mutually reinforcing in energy poverty116. An
integrated view that considers recognition and procedural issues to address distributional ones,
can help policymakers understand how different vulnerabilities and energy needs are
recognised and addressed.

34
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Figure 5: Energy poverty as three tenets of energy justice (Source: Gillard et al.117)

Distribution Justice
(income, energy prices,
energy efficiency)

Recognition Justice Procedural Justice

(understanding (information access,
vulnerability, needs, decision-making, legal
respect) rights)

Widening recognition

Policymakers can enhance and widen the recognition of mis- and under-represented groups
and their interests by examining the language of inclusion, and how social categories are
defined and understood.

The language used around exclusion and careful consideration of definitions of social
categories are important to avoid misrepresentation. Defining social categorisations can
be problematic: social exclusions can be multi-dimensional, dynamic and context-specific.
Misrepresentation of excluded groups can mean that their needs remain invisible, and policies
leave these unmet 77. Rigid and inflexible social categorisations can reinforce stereotypes 118.
Categorisations can also stigmatize, especially where language around poverty and
deprivation is concerned119. Commonly-used terms in policy such as ‘Hard-to-Reach’ (HTR)
can frame users as passive and places the onus on them, implying that just ‘reaching’ the
users is sufficient 120. The significance of language for marginalised groups has been recently
demonstrated recently by the Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities recommendation
that the UK public service move away from using the term ‘BAME’120. The term’s failure to
represent the difference in experiences between groups is deemed to be ‘reductionist’, and the
report recommended the focus should instead lie with understanding the disparities and
experiences of specific ethnic groups 121. Such categorisation and aggregation of users by
social groups can risk ignoring key intersections and simplifies complex experiences 122.

Adopting an intersectional analysis approach can provide a richer understanding of

users and their needs. Users who are excluded will often have identities across multiple
social categories, which intersect and inform their needs and experiences. Examining social
inclusion, or exclusion, requires a multi- dimensional strategy that goes beyond the siloed
approach that has historically tended to drive policy. Intersectional analysis frameworks can be

35
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

mechanisms for analysing “power and processes of stigmatisation in policymaking” 123 (p.14).
Kaijser and Kronsell developed a series of broad questions to facilitate an intersectional
analysis when conducting research in climate change124. These include questions to prompt
the user to examine whether there are social categories missing, which identities are
neglected, and what assumptions (implicit or explicit) can be observed about these categories
and the relationships between them124. A similar approach was developed by Hankivski et al,
originally for use in the health sector: the Intersectionality-Based Policy Analysis (IBPA)
Framework123. Questions under the IBPA focus on processes involved in how policy problems
are identified, developed and addressed, steering the user towards more equity-focused
solutions123. Though such frameworks are increasingly being adopted125, they are not without
challenges, and may require significant changes to fit the context124. Hankivski et al. found the
IBPA was met with resistance by some who felt uncomfortable asking difficult questions about
power and structural asymmetries in the policy context. Combining such an approach with
other social impact analysis tools may help to overcome the limitations of both, as was
suggested by Cameron and Tedds125 in relation to poverty policies in British Columbia. The
authors propose an enhancement of Canada’s Gender-Based Analysis Plus (GBA+)
Framework, a federal policy tool designed to enhance inclusion, to better consider broader
issues of power and social exclusions associated with intersecting identity factors shaping
individual experiences125.

36
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Figure 6: The Canadian GBA+ Framework compared with selected IBPA Intersectionality
Framework guiding questions (Source: adapted from Cameron and Tedds)125

Gender-Based Analysis Plus Comparative Intersectional Analysis

(GBA+) Guiding Questions Framework (IBPA) Guiding Questions

1. Identification of the issue 1. Identification of the issue

• Identify the problem, and typical policy responses • What problem is under consideration?
• What are the intersectional issues? • When and for whom is it an issue?
• Which power structures lead to its creation?
• What data exists in relation to it?

2. Challenge assumptions 2. Challenge assumptions

• Explore representations and framing of the • How is the problem represented/framed?

problem. • How might the representations affect diverse
• What are root causes linking the problem to people?
intersectional barriers and experiences? • Do they shape how people are portrayed/
perceived?
• Does presumed neutrality of policies obscure bias?

3. Research and analyse 3. Research and analyse

• Assess the system and policy proposal along • How does the policy propose to address
intersectional lines. intersectional disparities and barriers?
• What issues could arise, and would there be
different experiences of these?

4. Recommend options 4. Recommend options

• Propose options that respond to issues and • Which design aspects are most vital for change?
opportunities raised through the analysis which • How might proper monitoring and evaluation be
could strengthen the policy proposal ensured? What does access look like?
• What is still not being addressed/ proposed or
discussed?

The Canadian GBA+ framework includes additional The key principles of intersectionality (including
guiding questions on intersectionality that were not included intersecting categories of identity, power relations and
in its predecessor, the GBA. Cameron and Tedds contend diverse forms of knowledge) underpin the IBPA. Cameron
that the GBA+ tends to limit its focus to immediate impacts of and Tedds argue guiding questions from this framework
policies, rather than challenge institutional norms and could enhance the GBA+ to allow policymakers to
structures to remove biases. challenge the assumptions underlying policies, and
examine how policies might be more transformative.

37
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Combine quantitative and qualitative data

An increase in the quality and quantity of data is required to ensure that excluded groups and
their needs are not mis-represented.

Combining quantitative methods of data collection with qualitative approaches provides

a richer, more nuanced view of user experiences. The limitations of quantitative data in
conveying complex social experiences are widely discussed in the literature. A focus on
quantitative measures can exclude the lived-experience of users 126, and a review of
ENERGIA’s Gender and Energy Research Programme emphasized the need for a holistic
understanding of energy users which incorporates both quantitative and qualitative data 127.
While quantitative data enables understanding of issues that may not be recognized by the
user, qualitative methods provide insight into the lived experiences that are not captured
through datasets 127. The use of quantitative socio-spatial indicators to represent and
understand the needs of households have been criticised in the literature 128,129. Socio-spatial
and area-based indicators assume homogeneity across geographic areas, potentially under-
representing certain vulnerabilities 128,129. As such, policies using area-based targeting alone
will be limited in their effectiveness 80.

More data is needed to better understand complex intrahousehold dynamics.

Increasingly, the rigid notion of the traditional household as an economically rational user is
being challenged in the literature. Configurations of households are complex and dynamic, as
demonstrated in Bell et al.’s 103 description of ‘households in flux’. This has consequences for
decision-making agency, responsibility and capacity to engage with the low carbon transition,
and the social, material and economic constraints that households face. The ‘household’ may
vary according to class, ethnicity, income and education, and will be dynamic over time
50,103,130. Multi-family households, families straddling more than one household and adult

children returning to the family home challenge the idea of a ‘typical household’, but these
dynamics are difficult to capture 103. Intra-household relationships may be impacted by low
carbon measures. For instance, incentives to reduce energy consumption may result in
household members monitoring each other's behaviours, or may create conflicts within
domestic decision-making 131.

Addressing needs and allocating responsibility

The differentiated needs, capacities and responsibilities of users to engage with the low carbon
transition require appropriately targeted policies.

A flexible approach to recognising the heterogeneity of experiences within different

groups can strengthen the political response and could help avoid simplistic
assumptions about vulnerabilities. Gillard et al. 117 argue a more holistic, flexible recognition
of vulnerabilities and experiences could help reduce stigma around energy poverty and lessen
the potential for misrepresentation of the experiences of vulnerable groups. The authors
contend that relying on simplistic criteria, or geographic eligibility criteria such as the Indices of
Multiple Deprivation can mean many energy poor households not residing in a deprived area
miss out, and of those that do, some will not be energy poor117. Flexibility in design and

38
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

eligibility criteria, and decentralised implementation has been found in policy assessments to
have potential in increasing uptake and improving targeting117. Schemes such as Energy
Company Obligation (ECO) Flexibility, which allows local authorities to assess household
need, can help with providing assistance to those who might otherwise be excluded by energy
poverty support eligibility criteria85. Snell et al.85 acknowledge the potential of such approaches
to be more responsive to needs they rely on both the local authority’s knowledge of vulnerable
groups in the area and capacity to act. The authors note that while in some areas within
England, some local authorities have worked successfully with ECO Flexibility to access
support, others have lacked capacity to do so.

Greater uptake of low carbon technologies and policies can be enabled through better
understanding of how and why households engage with schemes. This includes an
understanding of their awareness of the schemes, and the barriers they overcome to get
involved. Energy efficiency schemes such as the previous Warm Front Programme in England
have been shown to be successful in reducing levels of energy poverty132. However, eligibility
was based on self-selection by households. Sovacool133 found a significant percentage of the
energy poor did not participate, largely because people did not consider themselves as energy
poor or stigma associated with being classified as poor, or energy poor may have been such
they declined to participate. A study by Snell et al.85 highlighted how eligibility criteria in energy
poverty schemes, despite taking into consideration a range of demographic characteristics,
income, housing tenure and housing quality, can still exclude users in need of support. Such
complexity of eligibility criteria can also lead households to exclude themselves from support85.
Snell et al 85 argue for the need for policymakers to pay greater attention to how energy
efficiency schemes engage effectively with users.

Users’ capacities to change behaviours can determine how responsive they are to low-
carbon policies and technologies. Users have varying abilities to shift energy use patterns
and change behaviours, depending on the resources available to them. Their willingness and
ability to shift energy use to receive financial rewards is defined by Powells and Fell as
‘flexibility capital’ 134. Powells and Fell argue that the freedom of choice in relation to the energy
system can be limited by, among other things, financial resources, access to infrastructure,
and geographical location 134. An examination of users’ flexibility capital can support an
enhanced understanding of how responsive or unresponsive users might be to such carbon
policy measures if they were found to be too burdensome. Using such an approach should
acknowledge intrahousehold power dynamics and where the burden of action falls within the
household, for example, on carers, and those responsible for household budgets, who tend to
be women 19,107.

Building capacity to engage with energy saving behaviours and low carbon
technologies requires policies to support households to meet basic needs first. The
responsibility to adopt energy saving behaviours should not rest with the users with few
resources and limited flexibility. Households struggling with energy poverty should not be
further burdened by pressure to reduce energy consumption. Policies targeting households to
change behaviours on the basis of emissions alone could penalise low income households in
poor quality housing that lack adequate insulation 85. Newell et al. argue for the provision of
accessible and affordable low carbon energy infrastructures and services, including public
39
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

transport, bike lanes and employee schemes, and EV grants, to enable behaviour change 43.
They also argue that the responsibility to provide these lies with governments and energy
service providers.

Supporting energy literacy and meeting information needs is vital to enable widespread
uptake of low carbon measures. Information and language used around the low carbon
transition should be accessible and appropriate to user needs. Easier-to-understand
energy bills and clearer eligibility criteria for energy poverty support measures could help to
bridge the gap for those who struggle with digital exclusion and energy literacy 85,135. Methods
of communicating policies should be inclusive of those who do not participate in mainstream or
traditional forms of communication. Ambrose et al. highlighted the need for face-to-face energy
support for vulnerable people, including home visits for those with mobility issues 136, while
Bradley et al. recommended the co-development of telephone and web-based services that
are accessible to people with disabilities 93. Information and advice surrounding energy
efficiency measures is often provided in a generic manner that does not reflect a household’s
particular circumstances. Targeted messaging which acknowledges the varied and complex
experiences of households could appeal to and engage a greater number of vulnerable users
85.

Democratic deliberations and participatory decision-making

Bringing otherwise excluded groups into decision-making processes can increase visibility of
their experiences, and challenge dominant interests.

Empowering citizens to meaningfully participate in decision-making processes can

contribute to more equitable outcomes. Public participation is widely acknowledged as an
important means of allowing new perspectives to be heard 23. If people’s diverse needs and
interests are taken into account in decision-making, the chosen course of action chosen is
more likely to respond to these needs. Further, Jenkins et al. argue that demonstrating
people’s voices are recognised and respected, and that their inputs are considered seriously
can foster trust in the policymaking process and increase the acceptability of resulting
policies10. Bradley et al. demonstrated how a co-researcher model could deliver more equitable
outcomes for people with disabilities in the UK. This approach requires someone who directly
experience the impacts of the policy or technology to be represented part of the research team,
in this case, to investigate the fuel poverty experiences of people with disabilities93. The
authors argue the approach is crucial to grounding research in lived experiences, and in this
case had contributed strongly to feelings of trust and inclusion in the research process93.

Policymakers can employ a range of participatory approaches, which have different

values in different contexts. These methods can be online or in-person, involve polling and
surveys, consultations or workshops. They may be seeking new ideas from the public, advice
on where to allocate public funds, involvement in vision-setting or for co-designing of policy
solutions or to deliberate on topics and possible actions115,137–140. Inclusive approaches often
involve a combination of methods that consider the various barriers to engagement faced by
different user groups. The Oakland City Bike Plan employed digital engagement methods,
used in- person workshops, and developed partnerships with community-based organisations

40
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

to engage disadvantaged and underrepresented groups in infrastructure planning 141. While

digitisation of support and advisory services can support greater access to information,
facilitate wider engagement, and be less difficult to resource than face- to-face advice,
policymakers should be mindful this can also serve to limit the effectiveness of support for
vulnerable people85. Figure 7 details an example in a development context, where participatory
workshops were trialled to support gender equality in climate resilience142.

Deliberative democracy approaches may be used to build the capacity for deeper
participation. In both deliberative and participatory processes, citizens are empowered to
have their voices heard and contribute to decision-making. The difference is the emphasis on
participation as enabling citizen action and decision- making, where deliberation focuses on
discussion and debate, to inform decisions made by others143. Deliberative approaches
support participants to form views through multiple perspectives and expert information143.
They can involve the convening of small focus groups, workshops or citizen juries for short
periods to discuss one topic, through to large numbers of citizens over lengthy periods of time,
covering many topics. The emphasis and a key benefit of deliberative processes is the
commitment to the provision of balanced information by experts and to create spaces for
citizens to reflect on, debate and evaluate topics137,138,143.

Participatory approaches can still risk excluding some groups. Participation in decision-
making processes by marginalised groups is not a panacea. It is important to recognise the
limitations of participatory approaches, understanding that inclusion and representation may
not necessarily translate to empowerment and agency in decision-making. Participating
citizens may not be representative of the community, and some forms of engagements can
exclude already marginalised groups. Chilvers and Longhurst discuss the UK’s (former)
Department for Climate Change (DECC) 2050 Public Dialogue, a public participation process
designed to help citizens engage in a dialogue exploring different energy pathways. While the
processes enabled participants to become better informed, and supported deliberative
discussions, these small-scale forms of participation were by invitation, which the authors
suggest led to citizens from some geographies and social groups being left out. A lack of trust
in public bodies, lack of clarity around the purpose of engagement, complex language and a
gap between rhetoric around engagement and community experiences can all be barriers to
participation and meaningful engagement 144.

41
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Figure 7: Stronger Voices inclusive planning tool case study

Stronger Voices: An Inclusive Planning Tool for Gender- and Youth-

Transformative Climate Resilience

The objective of the Stronger Voices project was to test a participatory tool that could
enable women and young people to voice their priorities for climate resilience, to support
effective and ‘gender- and youth-transformative’ responses. The tool was adapted to suit
different contexts and employed approaches such as gender analysis and vision setting,
to understand the equity concerns around resource distribution, and how different people
seek improved resilience.

Participatory workshops were held over several days with three cooperatives in Zanzibar.
Careful selection criteria were used to determine who would participate in the workshops,
aiming to avoid local biases and elite capture. The participatory workshops took
participants through step-by-step processes to enable different groups to identify and
articulate their concerns. The workshops enabled women to voice their perspectives and
identify barriers to engagement in planning that men in positions of power had not
recognised. The workshops followed the following steps:

Exercise 1: Gender analysis

Exercise 2: Climate risk assessment
Review exercise: Reflection and preparation
Exercise 3: Cooperative action plan
Exercise 4: Governance analysis

Key Lessons:

• The tool facilitated problem solving by the community itself, which resulted in
appropriate solutions and ones that are likely to endure.

• Engaging men in the process was critical.

• Support must be provided to the community following the workshops to enable action
and robust monitoring should follow the solutions identified.

• Improving the governance of local resources and infrastructure can have a significant
impact on both gender outcomes and resilience.

• In contexts where climate and gender knowledge of both communities and

governments is low, practicality and affordability should supersede academic purity
and complex theoretical frameworks should be avoided.

42
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Attention to local contexts

Communities, intermediaries, and formal and informal networks including friends and family
have an important role to play in supporting many users’ engagement with the net zero
transition.

Intermediaries can enhance the representation of users’ needs in decision-making for

policy. The local knowledge held by independent organisations, such as advocacy groups and
charities, can enable services to better meet the needs of vulnerable households 55,85,93,120.
Supporting the role of intermediaries to build capacity for engagement echoes calls for co-
design of solutions with relevant community organisations to prevent or minimise social
exclusion 85,120,145. Building the capacity of intermediaries provides an opportunity for more
effective distribution of information, as well as resources within the community to support
participatory measures and community engagement in policy development. This positive
feedback loop can inform more responsive policies which are grounded in and closely informed
by users’ lived experiences. However, intermediaries should be provided with the resources to
provide this support to avoid unfairly displacing the responsibility and onus for action onto the
community.

Formal and informal networks can be crucial to support users’ access to technologies
and energy services. Snell et al. demonstrated that customers place greater trust in
messages from the public sector, including charities and advocacy organisations, in relation to
energy services, while information directly from energy suppliers is perceived as less
trustworthy 85. Access to advocacy groups, charities and community organisations has been
identified as instrumental in accessing energy services for vulnerable users 85,93. Perényi et al.
showed that energy efficiency support services provided to indigenous people by members of
the indigenous community can alleviate the stress of energy vulnerability146, demonstrating the
potential for ‘peer-to-peer’ support to increase the uptake of energy efficiency measures.
Policymakers should recognise the key role intermediaries play and the need to resource them
to provide such support85. Schemes such as ‘boilers on prescription’ in the UK, which
facilitated collaborations between energy scheme providers and health care organisations
could help to ensure that households access retrofit measures117. Similarly, evidence from
assessments of schemes such as the ECO Flexibility scheme85 and the Warm Front
Programme133 in the UK suggest building social capital, working within local governance
structures, and with intermediaries can support more engagement of vulnerable households
with policies.

Engagement with information is enhanced by feelings of trust. Trust and a sense of

belonging to society may translate to improved energy saving behaviours 58,74. A sense of trust
can have important implications for how marginalised groups engage with information related
to the net zero transition. Users will often rely on personal relationships, and people and
organisations they trust for information regarding the energy market, policies (including
eligibility for benefits), and technologies 51,93,147,148. Snell et al. pointed towards the role of
social media in enabling users to share and research energy efficiency schemes 85. They
highlighted the trust that individuals place in information mediated through their informal
networks. McMichael and Shipworth found that seeking information from personal contacts for

43
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

information on low carbon technologies, rather than from energy suppliers or formal
campaigns, is positively associated with uptake 148.

Targeted technological investments and policies

Supporting the uptake of low carbon technologies in communities can enhance equality.
Increased uptake can simultaneously address the issues of access to technologies and the
need for greater agency in energy services decision-making for marginalised groups.

Community energy projects have the potential to increase access to low carbon
technologies and democratise decision-making around energy. Community renewable
energy projects can support a transitioning to renewables at the local level, while also
strengthening public participation and inclusion 148. However, implementing such projects
depends on favourable policies, and availability of the necessary social capital, capacity and
know-how within the community to mobilise150. In the UK, limited choices in types of energy
supplied and vulnerability to energy poverty can be a driver for community energy, particularly
in rural areas. A study by Adams et al. of communities in the UK suggested that these projects
can serve to empower consumers, bring security of supply and even bring communities
together 110. Lennon discussed the potential to empower majority-Black communities in the US
and exercise energy justice through community energy150. In the Global South, Winther et al.
described examples of participatory women-led community energy projects, which enhanced
the status of women in their communities 15. However, policies need to be favourable enough
to ensure that economic returns cover the costs of installation and maintenance 83. Markantoni
and Woolvin contended that in rural Scotland, policies and funding initiatives targeting rural
communities have tended not to be well-coordinated or joined up 82. Sunter et al. also found in
the US, majority-Black neighbourhoods to have a disproportionate lack of access to the initial
deployment funding in community solar projects 70.

Learning from gender mainstreaming approaches

Gender mainstreaming describes the integration of gender considerations across all stages of
policy and programme design and implementation in order to embed the consideration of
gender disparities into policy interventions and to address inequalities151. Gender
mainstreaming is widely used in development contexts, and important lessons can be drawn
from the tools and frameworks that are used to support this.

Approaches used in the Global South to mainstream gender equality and social
inclusion could be applied to net zero policymaking. Tools and guidance used particularly
by development practitioners may support more inclusive decision- making, policy and
programme outcomes. In recent years, there has been an acceleration in the development and
application of gender mainstreaming approaches in climate and energy projects and policies.
Much of this work has been spearheaded by the likes of ENERGIA, an international network of
gender and sustainable energy 16,152, Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) such as the
World Bank, the Green Climate Fund (GCF) and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) have
developed guidance materials and toolkits in an effort to mainstream gender equality in
development projects and programmes 153–156. Overwhelmingly, the focus of these tools,

44
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

guidance and approaches has been on gender and development, with limited attention paid to
other social issues, though a notable exception is the recently published UK PACT guidance
on mainstreaming gender and social inclusion 157. While the sectoral focus has been on energy
access, some sector-specific work has been done in the development of toolkits for transport,
energy, agriculture and forestry 154,158. The IEA’s User TCP Gender & Energy Task, a network
of researchers in gender and energy policy and technologies, has the aim of understanding
and sharing ‘best practice’ globally in gender-inclusive policies, helping to bridge the gap
between the Global North and Global South 159.

ENERGIA: Mainstreaming gender in energy projects 160

Step Description

1: Getting started Introducing the process through orientation workshops for projectstaff and
partners.

2: Country Understanding the energy and gender national context. The CountryContext
Context Review Review should identify key issues, stakeholders and learnings from other
projects.

3: Project The Project Document Review should identify project gender goals,existing
Document Review gender-responsive activities and opportunities for intervention.

4: Organisational Assessing the capacity of the project or organisation to mainstream gender.

assessment Tools include briefings, interviews, workshops, focus groupsand self-
assessment questionnaires.

5: Stakeholder Understanding the gender and energy situation in the field. Tools include
consultations incorporating gender questions into planned project surveys,interviews and
workshops with project field staff, and Participatory Rapid Appraisal tools.

6: Gender Action The development of a Gender Action Plan (GAP) should follow a consultative
Plan process, and aim to define the gender objectives, usinggender analytic tools
to formulate outcomes and activities.

7: Institutionalising Institutionalisation should include a gender sensitive vision, the

the process engenderment of documents, frameworks and publications, and asex-
disaggregated monitoring and evaluation system. Staff shouldbe supported
through the establishment of a gender focal point, partnering with
organisations with gender expertise and the provision of management
support.

8: Monitoring and Monitoring progress of objectives, outcomes and activities, and ofthe
evaluation institutionalisation of gender-sensitive approaches.

9: Communications Effectively engaging all stakeholders in the gender mainstreaming process.

strategy

45
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Social inclusion frameworks and approaches can be combined, enhancing their

appropriateness to context. Our review of the literature suggests gender and social inclusion
tools tend to have limited focus on other social inclusion issues, and have to date, focused on
energy access in developing country contexts. As such, tools and guidance materials are likely
to require augmentation to ensure they themselves are more inclusive. Patnaik and Jha
demonstrated how the three tenets can be combined with other social inclusion frameworks to
interrogate the justice implications for low carbon energy policies 28. The authors combined
energy justice considerations with a gender and social inclusion framework to assess a clean
cooking programme in India. The focus here was on gender, but intersecting vulnerabilities
such as class, caste and low-income were also considered by the authors.

Gender audits could support more inclusive policymaking, but require political
commitment. Clancy and Mohlakoana assessed the effectiveness of Gender Audits in
mainstreaming gender in projects and policies in three contexts in the Global South 16. There
are no standard methodologies for gender audits, and the authors reviewed the eight-step
approach developed by ENERGIA. This approach incorporates gender assessments, gender
budget analysis and the use of Gender Action Plans (GAPs). The approach also includes a
step for validation and endorsement by key decision makers. The authors found the
methodology to be effective in integrating inclusion in policy, but the lack of political support
and ongoing commitment can be significant barriers to its effectiveness 16.

Setting a top-down vision or strategy can build political will, but this needs to be
translated into action. Sweden provides an example of gender inclusivity in the transport
sector and, through establishing a clear commitment and vision for equality in the sector, has
been referred to as the ‘gold standard’ of inclusive transport policy 68. Through the
establishment of a Gender Equality Council for Transport and IT, Sweden’s government
recognised the need for both women and men to influence transport systems design 68. The
EU Gender Equality Strategy sets out key objectives for the promotion of gender equality,
acknowledging that proactive and intentional actions are required to achieve these goals 161.
Setting directives, having clear objectives and embedding a vision for inclusion that key
decision-makers are committed to is crucial to integrating inclusion into the low carbon
transition.

46
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Conclusions
While a rapid transition to a low carbon economy is necessary to meet obligations
under the Paris Agreement and to prevent catastrophic impacts from climate change,
low carbon energy policies and technologies cannot be assumed to automatically
provide benefits to all of society. The pathways and consequences of low carbon transitions
are complex and it is difficult to predict the winners and losers under different scenarios.
Different technologies can lead to different outcomes depending on their context. These
contexts are informed by political, physical and socio-cultural dynamics, including prevailing
gender norms, power relations, social structures and stratification 23. Understanding the ways
in which policy and technology interact with social inequalities is vital, not only to avoid
reproducing or exacerbating existing inequalities, but also to ensure the effectiveness of the
measures themselves.

On user experiences
Social differences frequently determine the inclusion or exclusion of users from
decisions regarding energy and low carbon futures. These factors include gender, race,
class or social, cultural or economic differences. Intersecting and evolving vulnerabilities
make the effects of social differences on user experiences difficult to examine or generalise.
This also means their needs and capacity to participate in the low carbon transition are
differentiated:

• Those with the most capacity and greatest carbon footprints should be encouraged to
act first and go furthest in their actions.
• Those with limited means should be supported to meet their needs through the
provision of low carbon energy services, rather than be burdened by additional pressure
to change their behaviours.
• Persistent inequalities associated with race and ethnicity increase the likelihood that
energy needs will not be met at the household level, and community level access to low
carbon technologies will be limited.
• Age, ability and other physiological traits can lead to unequal access to adequate
energy services. These factors can further hinder access to technologies that are
central to the net zero transition.
• Physical barriers to access can be a compounding factor: those living in rural and
remote areas, or in certain types of housing, may have fewer energy and technology
options available to them.
• Gender roles and culture influence how, when and by whom technologies are used,
which has implications for technology and policy design.
• Landlord-tenant power dynamics can be a barrier to renters engaging with low carbon
technologies.

47
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

On inclusive approaches
Recognition of who is excluded requires recognition of historical and ongoing
disparities and injustices in society. Inequalities in representation and participation lead to
the exclusion of the perspectives and knowledge of marginalised communities, the result of
this being that their experiences are not recognised and their needs are less likely to be met.
Inclusivity in policymaking should aim to examine whose needs are being met and who is not
being heard:

• This will require challenging entrenched power dynamics, opening up new spaces for
participatory approaches to enable more meaningful engagements and inviting new
voices into the debate.
• Inclusivity measures should challenge discrete social categorisations: a more holistic
response is needed to challenge entrenched inequalities through the net zero transition
and to empower communities to participate fully.
• The literature challenges the reliance on quantitative data in understanding user
experiences and needs and calls for a combination of approaches to inform a richer and
more comprehensive understanding of users.

The capacity of marginalised groups to engage should be strengthened. Users need to

be empowered to participate in the transition at the local level, in their homes and in their
communities, and to be represented and participate in policy decision- making. Policy
decisions must be viewed as fair, just and representative or they risk being rejected by society.
Experiences from the literature demonstrated how participatory approaches could ground
research in users’ lived experiences and increase trust in those providing a service.
Recommended policy approaches, frameworks and methodologies identified in the literature
can support improved representation and participation of marginalised communities and guide
a more equitable distribution of costs and benefits arising from the transition. Approaches
include:

• The enhancement of existing policy mechanisms, through tools such as impact

assessments and cost benefit analyses, as well as the application of energy justice
principles.
• Widening recognition of mis-represented and under-represented groups through an
intersectional approach, and by challenging rigid and static categorisations and
definitions.
• Combining quantitative and qualitative data: using quantitative indicators alone can fail
to capture the full picture and can lead to the under- representation of vulnerabilities and
user experiences.
• Shifting attention to local contexts and actors who can be mediators of information
related to energy and technologies, and providing support for marginalised users to
ensure their needs are met.
• Targeted technological investments and policies to support access to low carbon
technologies, particularly through community initiatives.

48
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

• Learning from gender mainstreaming approaches and the use of frameworks such as
gender audits and gender strategies.

Gaps in the literature

Our review aimed to gather evidence on the diverse experiences of users in the UK by
examining how different social, economic and cultural factors can lead to exclusion. In seeking
to understand the impact of these social differences in the literature we found several gaps:

• We found no discussions of sexuality differences and the experiences of

LGBTQIA+, nor gender beyond the man-woman binary in relation to low carbon or
energy technologies. Despite calls by Fathallah and Pyakurel 163 not to conflate sex
and gender in the energy and climate change literature, there were limited discussions
in the gender-energy literature beyond the man-woman binary. A notable exception to
this was a study by Haimson et al. 163 which demonstrated how participatory approaches
could support technology development to reduce violence and address health and
safety concerns for transgender and non-binary people. However, this did not address
low carbon technologies. Technologies and policies for a net zero future, for instance,
low carbon transport, must be accessible to, and help maintain safety for marginalised
groups.
• Direct and explicit discussions of race and class outside of the US were also
lacking in the literature. We found two notable exceptions, mostly related to active and
public transport: Aldred et al. discussed the equity implications on majority-Black
neighbourhoods of LTNs 72, and a Transport for London study showed differences in
uptake of cycling and public transport options for different racial groups and ethnicities
109. Differences in uptake of technologies such as rooftop solar and EVs on racial or

class lines received little attention outside of the US. While we recognised that some
inferences can be made from exclusions and experiences resulting from deprivation and
income inequality, (e.g. ethnic minority families are two to three times more likely to live
in persistent poverty 165) the real picture is more complex. Inferred conclusions risk
masking the persistent impacts arising from social differences of race and class.
• We noted limited research on the justice and social equity issues of energy
conservation and energy management from the Global South. Much of the literature
has focused on the poorest in society, those suffering the deprivation of affordable,
continuous energy supplies, or are focused on specific technologies, such as clean
cookstoves.
• We found very limited assessments of the utility and effectiveness of the tools
and frameworks now widely used by development practitioners, and how this
contributed to better inclusion outcomes. These tools place significantly more
emphasis on the mainstreaming of gender equality and empowering women through
climate and energy policies and projects than on other social factors. They also tend
towards conflating sex and gender.

49
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Areas for further research

This study was commissioned to provide a summary of existing evidence, rather than to create
new evidence, based on a critical evaluation of approaches to inclusion. To better understand
the effectiveness of different approaches and methodologies for enhancing inclusion in net
zero policymaking, further analyses and evaluations are required. Key areas for further
research include:

• Understanding the role of existing policy processes and mechanisms in order to identify
points of entry for inclusive approaches. This may include looking at the flexibility of
public sector tools, particularly economic tools such as CBAs, to incorporate inclusion
and enhanced social assessments.
• Exploring appropriate governance structures for participatory approaches, and the role
of local organisations and institutions to support decision-making at the local level.
• Investigating how to integrate inclusive policy approaches related to the domestic
sphere into other aspects of justice and social equity, such as the just transition and
environmental justice.
• Further examinations of questions of racial equality and class, and experiences of the
UK low carbon transition, particularly technology uptake.
• Assessment of gender mainstreaming tools and frameworks employed in developing
contexts to draw lessons for application in a UK context.

50
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

References
1. IPCC. Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global
warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas
emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of
climate change,. in (ed. asson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J.
Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors,
J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I.Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and
T. W.) (2018).

2. Newell, P. & Mulvaney, D. The political economy of the “just transition.” Geographical
Journal 179, 132–140 (2013).

3. Blundell, R., Costa Dias, M., Joyce, R. & Xu, X. COVID-19 and Inequalities. Fiscal
Studies 41, 291–319 (2020).

4. Office for National Statistics. Updating ethnic contrasts in deaths involving the
coronavirus (COVID-19), England and Wales - Office for National Statistics. Office for
National Statistics (2020).

5. Platt, L. & Warwick, R. Are some ethnic groups more vulnerable to COVID-19than
others?

6. Nafilyan, V. et al. Ethnic differences in COVID-19 mortality during the first twowaves of
the Coronavirus Pandemic: a nationwide cohort study of 29 million adults in England.
medRxiv 2021.02.03.21251004 (2021) doi:10.1101/2021.02.03.21251004.

7. UKERC. How lockdown is disrupting the usual coping strategies of the fuelpoor. UK
Energy Research Centre (2020).

8. Schot, J., Kanger, L. & Verbong, G. The roles of users in shaping transitions tonew
energy systems. NATURE ENERGY | 1, (2016).

9. Johnson, O. W. et al. Intersectionality and energy transitions: A review of gender,

social equity and low-carbon energy. Energy Research and SocialScience 70, 101774
(2020).

10. Jenkins, K. E. H. et al. The methodologies, geographies, and technologies ofenergy

justice: A systematic and comprehensive review. Environmental Research Letters 16,
43009 (2021).

11. Sovacool, B. K. & Griffiths, S. The cultural barriers to a low-carbon future: A review of
six mobility and energy transitions across 28 countries. Renewableand Sustainable
Energy Reviews vol. 119 109569 (2020).

12. ILO. Guidelines for a just transition towards environmentally sustainable economies
and societies for all. https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_emp/---
emp_ent/documents/publication/wcms_432859.pdf (2015).
51
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

13. McCauley, D. & Heffron, R. Just transition: Integrating climate, energy and
environmental justice. Energy Policy 119, 1–7 (2018).

14. Lieu, J., Sorman, A. H., Johnson, O. W., Virla, L. D. & Resurrección, B. P. Three sides
to every story: Gender perspectives in energy transition pathways in Canada, Kenya
and Spain. Energy Research and Social Science 68, (2020).

15. Winther, T. et al. In the light of what we cannot see: Exploring the interconnections
between gender and electricity access. Energy Research andSocial Science 60,
(2020).

16. Clancy, J. S. & Mohlakoana, N. Gender audits: An approach to engenderingenergy

policy in Nepal, Kenya and Senegal. Energy Research and Social Science 62, 101378
(2020).

17. Kooijman-Van Dijk, A. ENERGIA’s gender and energy research programme:Findings

and experience from research for policy. IDS Bulletin 51, 91–110 (2020).

18. Bouzarovski, S. & Petrova, S. A global perspective on domestic energydeprivation:

Overcoming the energy poverty-fuel poverty binary. EnergyResearch and Social
Science 10, 31–40 (2015).

19. Petrova, S. & Simcock, N. Gender and energy: domestic inequitiesreconsidered.

Social and Cultural Geography (2019) doi:10.1080/14649365.2019.1645200.

20. Norrie, R. The two sides of diversity | Which are the most ethnically diverse
occupations? https://policyexchange.org.uk/publication/the-two-sides-of- diversity/
(2017).

21. Emmons Allison, J., McCrory, K. & Oxnevad, I. Closing the renewable energygender
gap in the United States and Canada: The role of women’s professional networking.
Energy Research and Social Science 55, 35–45 (2019).

22. Newell, P. Race and the politics of energy transitions. Energy Research andSocial
Science 71, 101839 (2021).

23. Newell, P. Power Shift: The Global Political Economy of Energy Transitions |
FifteenEightyFour | Cambridge University Press. (Cambridge University Press,2021).
doi:10.1017/9781108966184.

24. Sovacool, B. K., Hook, A., Martiskainen, M. & Baker, L. The whole systems energy
injustice of four European low-carbon transitions. Global EnvironmentalChange 58,
(2019).

25. Sovacool, B. K., Lipson, M. M. & Chard, R. Temporality, vulnerability, and energy
justice in household low carbon innovations. Energy Policy 128, 495–504 (2019).

26. Preston, I. et al. Climate change and social justice: an evidence review.
https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/climate-change-and-social-justice-evidence-review(2014).

52
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

27. Thomson, H., Simcock, N., Bouzarovski, S. & Petrova, S. Energy poverty and indoor
cooling: An overlooked issue in Europe. Energy and Buildings 196, 21–29 (2019).

28. Patnaik, S. & Jha, S. Caste, class and gender in determining access to energy:A
critical review of LPG adoption in India. Energy Research and Social Science 67,
101530 (2020).

29. Petrova, S. Encountering energy precarity: Geographies of fuel poverty amongyoung

adults in the UK. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 43,17–30 (2018).

30. DECC. Annual Fuel Poverty Statistics Report. (2016).

31. BEIS. Sustainable Warmth Protecting Vulnerable Households in England.(2021).

32. Feenstra, M. & Özerol, G. Energy justice as a search light for gender-energy nexus:
Towards a conceptual framework. Renewable and Sustainable EnergyReviews 138,
(2021).

33. Sari, R., Voyvoda, E. & Lacey-barnacle, M. Energy Justice : A Social Sciencesand
Humanities Cross-cutting Theme Report. (2017) doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.33861.35043.

34. Jenkins, K., McCauley, D., Heffron, R., Stephan, H. & Rehner, R. Energy justice: A
conceptual review. Energy Research and Social Science 11, 174–182 (2016).

35. Sari, R., Voyvoda, E. & Lacey-barnacle, M. Energy Justice : A Social Sciencesand
Humanities Cross-cutting Theme Report. (2017) doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.33861.35043.

36. Robinson, C. Energy poverty and gender in England: A spatial perspective. Geoforum
104, 222–233 (2019).

37. Großmann, K. & Kahlheber, A. Energy poverty in an intersectional perspective.in

Energy Poverty and Vulnerability 12–32 (Routledge, 2018).
doi:10.4324/9781315231518-2.

38. Middlemiss, L. Energy poverty: Understanding and addressing systemic inequalities. in

Inequality and Energy: How Extremes of Wealth and Poverty inHigh Income Countries
Affect CO2 Emissions and Access to Energy 99–114 (Elsevier, 2019).
doi:10.1016/B978-0-12-817674-0.00005-9.

39. Burningham, K. & Venn, S. Are lifecourse transitions opportunities for movingto more
sustainable consumption? Journal of Consumer Culture 20, 102–121(2020).

40. Groves, C. et al. Energy Biographies: Narrative Genres, Lifecourse Transitions, and
Practice Change. Science Technology and Human Values 41,483–508 (2016).

41. Kenner Dario. Carbon Inequality: The Role of the Richest in Climate Change -Dario
Kenner - Google Books. (2019).

53
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

42. Chatterton, T. J., Anable, J., Barnes, J. & Yeboah, G. Mapping household direct
energy consumption in the United Kingdom to provide a new perspectiveon energy
justice. Energy Research and Social Science 18, 71–87 (2016).

43. Newell, P., Daley, F. & Twena, M. Changing our Ways? Behaviour change andthe
climate crisis. https://www.rapidtransition.org/resources/cambridge- sustainability-
commission/ (2021).

44. Laybourn-Langton, L., Emden, J. & Hill, T. We are not ready: Policymaking inthe age
of environmental breakdown. https://www.ippr.org/research/publications/we-are-not-
ready (2020).

45. BEIS. Annual fuel poverty statistics report: 2021 - GOV.UK.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/annual-fuel-poverty-statistics-report-2021
(2021).

46. Bolton, P., Kennedy, S. & Hinson, S. Fuel Poverty.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8730/ (2021).

47. Emden, J., Murphy, L. & Lloyd, H. Beyond ECO: The future of fuel povertysupport.
IPPR https://www.ippr.org/publications/beyond-eco (2018).

48. Anderson, W., White, V. & Finney, A. Coping with low incomes and coldhomes. Energy
Policy 49, 40–52 (2012).

49. Mould, R. & Baker, K. J. Documenting fuel poverty from the householders’perspective.
Energy Research and Social Science 31, 21–31 (2017).

50. Feenstra, M. & Clancy, J. A View from the North: Gender and Energy Povertyin the
European Union. in Engendering the Energy Transition 163–187 (Springer
International Publishing, 2020). doi:10.1007/978-3-030-43513-4_8.

51. Ambrosio-Albala, P. et al. From rational to relational: How energy poor households
engage with the British retail energy market. Energy Research andSocial Science 70,
(2020).

52. Snell, C., Bevan, M. & Thomson, H. Justice, fuel poverty and disabled peoplein
England. Energy Research and Social Science 10, 123–132 (2015).

53. Chard, R. & Walker, G. Living with fuel poverty in older age: Coping strategiesand their
problematic implications. Energy Research and Social Science 18, 62–70 (2016).

54. Middlemiss, L. et al. Energy poverty and social relations: A capabilitiesapproach.

Energy Research and Social Science 55, 227–235 (2019).

55. Mccarthy, L., Ambrose, A. & Pinder, J. Energy (In)Efficiency: Exploring what tenants
expect and endure in the private rented sector in England Making thecase for more
research into the tenant’s perspective: An evidence review. (2016).

54
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

56. Cauvain, J. & Bouzarovski, S. Energy vulnerability in multiple occupancy housing: a

problem that policy forgot. People Place and Policy Online 10, 88–106 (2016).

57. Johnson, O. W., Gerber, V. & Muhoza, C. Gender, culture and energy transitions in
rural Africa. Energy Research and Social Science 49, 169–179(2019).

58. Caferra, R., Colasante, A. & Morone, A. The less you burn, the more we earn:The role
of social and political trust on energy-saving behaviour in Europe. Energy Research &
Social Science 71, 101812 (2021).

59. Dharshing, S. Household dynamics of technology adoption: A spatialeconometric

analysis of residential solar photovoltaic (PV) systems inGermany. Energy Research
and Social Science 23, 113–124 (2017).

60. Frondel, M., Sommer, S. & Vance, C. The burden of Germany’s energy transition: An
empirical analysis of distributional effects. Economic Analysisand Policy 45, 89–99
(2015).

61. Martiskainen, M., Sovacool, B. K. & Hook, A. Temporality, consumption, andconflict:

exploring user-based injustices in European low-carbon transitions. Technology
Analysis and Strategic Management (2020) doi:10.1080/09537325.2020.1841895.

62. Campbell, A. R., Ryley, T. & Thring, R. Identifying the early adopters of alternative fuel
vehicles: A case study of Birmingham, United Kingdom. Transportation Research Part
A: Policy and Practice 46, 1318–1327 (2012).

63. Sorrell, S., Gatersleben, B. & Druckman, A. The limits of energy sufficiency: Areview of
the evidence for rebound effects and negative spillovers from behavioural change.
Energy Research and Social Science vol. 64 101439 (2020).

64. Motherwell, S. “Are we nearly there yet ?” Exploring gender and active travel.(2018).

65. Burns, T., Man Oram, M.-Y. & Claris, S. Cycling for everyone - A guide forinclusive
cycling in cities and towns. (2018).

66. TfL. Travel in London: Understanding our diverse communities 2019.

https://content.tfl.gov.uk/travel-in-london-understanding-our-diverse- communities-
2019.pdf (2019).

67. Leung, A. & Le, T. P. L. Factors associated with adolescent active travel: Aperceptive
and mobility culture approach – Insights from Ho Chi Minh City,Vietnam.
Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 123, 54–67 (2019).

68. Motherwell, S. “Are we nearly there yet ?” Exploring gender and active travel.
https://www.sustrans.org.uk/media/2879/2879.pdf (2018).

69. Reames, T. G. Targeting energy justice: Exploring spatial, racial/ethnic and

socioeconomic disparities in urban residential heating energy efficiency. Energy Policy
97, 549–558 (2016).

55
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

70. Sunter, D. A., Castellanos, S. & Kammen, D. M. Disparities in rooftop photovoltaics

deployment in the United States by race and ethnicity. NatureSustainability 2, 71–76
(2019).

71. Hsu, C. W. & Fingerman, K. Public electric vehicle charger access disparitiesacross
race and income in California. Transport Policy 100, 59–67 (2021).

72. Aldred, R., Verlinghieri, E., Sharkey, M., Itova, I. & Goodman, A. Equity in newactive
travel infrastructure: a spatial analysis of London’s new Low Traffic Neighbourhoods.
(2021) doi:10.31235/OSF.IO/Q87FU.

73. Mullen, C. & Marsden, G. Mobility justice in low carbon energy transitions. Energy
Research and Social Science 18, 109–117 (2016).

74. Awaworyi Churchill, S. & Smyth, R. Ethnic diversity, energy poverty and themediating
role of trust: Evidence from household panel data for Australia1. Energy Economics
86, 104663 (2020).

75. Astbury, J. & Bell, S. Assessing and addressing energy vulnerability at the community
scale: an interpretive case study. People, Place and Policy Online12, 29–46 (2018).

76. Olner, D., Mitchell, G., Heppenstall, A. & Pryce, G. The spatial economics ofenergy
justice: modelling the trade impacts of increased transport costs in alow carbon
transition and the implications for UK regional inequality. EnergyPolicy 140, 111378
(2020).

77. Bouzarovski, S. & Simcock, N. Spatializing energy justice. Energy Policy 107,640–648
(2017).

78. Shildrick, T. Lessons from Grenfell: Poverty propaganda, stigma and classpower.
Sociological Review 66, 783–798 (2018).

79. Ministry of Communities and Local Government. English Housing Survey.Communities

(2020).

80. Robinson, C. & Mattioli, G. Double energy vulnerability: Spatial intersections of

domestic and transport energy poverty in England. Energy Research and Social
Science 70, 101699 (2020).

81. Adams, C., Taylor, P. & Bell, S. Equity dimensions of micro-generation: A whole
systems approach. Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy 4,53122 (2012).

82. Markantoni, M. & Woolvin, M. The role of rural communities in the transition toa low-
carbon Scotland: A review. Local Environment 20, 202–219 (2015).

83. O’Sullivan, K., Golubchikov, O. & Mehmood, A. Uneven energy transitions:

Understanding continued energy peripheralization in rural communities. Energy Policy
138, 111288 (2020).

56
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

84. Emden, J., Murphy, L. & Lloyd, H. Beyond Eco: The Future of Fuel PovertySupport.
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/Global/CitizensAdvice/Energy/Beyond ECO.pdf
(2018).

85. Snell, C., Bevan, M., Gillard, R., Wade, J. & Greer, K. Policy Pathways toJustice in
Energy Efficiency. 1–101 (2018).

86. Barnes, J. & Bhagavathy, S. M. The economics of heat pumps and the (un)intended
consequences of government policy. Energy Policy 138, 111198(2020).

87. Campos, J., Csontos, C., Harmat, Á., Csüllög, G. & Munkácsy, B. Heat consumption
scenarios in the rural residential sector: the potential of heatpump-based demand-side
management for sustainable heating. Energy, Sustainability and Society 10, 1–16
(2020).

88. Mazhar, A. R., Liu, S. & Shukla, A. Comprehensive Study of District Heating(DH) in the
UK. in Low Carbon Energy Supply Technologies and Systems 153–187 (CRC Press,
2020). doi:10.1201/9780429353192-12.

89. Barnes, J. & Bhagavathy, S. M. The economics of heat pumps and the (un)intended
consequences of government policy. Energy Policy 138, 111198(2020).

90. Campos, J., Csontos, C., Harmat, Á., Csüllög, G. & Munkácsy, B. Heat consumption
scenarios in the rural residential sector: the potential of heatpump-based demand-side
management for sustainable heating. Energy, Sustainability and Society 10, 1–16
(2020).

91. Middlemiss, L. & Gillard, R. Fuel poverty from the bottom-up: Characterisinghousehold
energy vulnerability through the lived experience of the fuel poor.Energy Research and
Social Science 6, 146–154 (2015).

92. Bradley, J. et al. Being Warm-Being Happy (BWBH) Understanding Disability,Fuel

Poverty and Energy Vulnerability for Adults with a Learning Disability. (2019).

93. Bradley, J. et al. Being Warm-Being Happy (BWBH) Understanding Disability,Fuel

Poverty and Energy Vulnerability for Adults with a Learning Disability. (2019).

94. Burns, T., Man Oram, M.-Y. & Claris, S. Cycling for everyone - A guide for inclusive
cycling in cities and towns.
https://www.sustrans.org.uk/media/7377/cycling_for_everyone-sustrans-
arup.pdf?utm_source=Sustrans&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=11735014_The
Network August_Cycling for
Everyone&utm_content=report_button&dm_i=6EB,6ZISM,5ARTBR,S50HX,1 (2018).

95. ONS. Exploring the UK’s digital divide. Office for National Statistics
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/householdcharacterist
ics/homeinternetandsocialmediausage/articles/exploringtheuksdigitaldivide/201 9-03-04
(2019).

57
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

96. Astbury, J. & Bell, S. Assessing and addressing energy vulnerability at the community
scale: an interpretive case study. People, Place and Policy Online12, 29–46 (2018).

97. Internet users - Office for National Statistics.

98. Ambrose, A., Baker, W., Batty, E. & MacNair Hawkins, A. “I have a panic attack when I
pick up the phone”: experiences of energy advice amongst ‘hardto reach’ energy users.
People Place and Policy Online 14, 58–64 (2020).

99. Sovacool, B. K., Heffron, R. J., McCauley, D. & Goldthau, A. Energy decisions
reframed as justice and ethical concerns. Nature Energy vol. 1 1–6 (2016).

100. Milchram, C., Hillerbrand, R., van de Kaa, G., Doorn, N. & Künneke, R. EnergyJustice
and Smart Grid Systems: Evidence from the Netherlands and the United Kingdom.
Applied Energy 229, 1244–1259 (2018).

101. Standal, K., Talevi, M. & Westskog, H. Engaging men and women in energyproduction
in Norway and the United Kingdom: The significance of social practices and gender
relations. Energy Research and Social Science 60, (2020).

102. Bell, S. et al. Sociality and electricity in the United Kingdom: The influence ofhousehold
dynamics on everyday consumption. Energy Research and SocialScience 9, 98–106
(2015).

103. Bell, S. et al. Sociality and electricity in the United Kingdom: The influence ofhousehold
dynamics on everyday consumption. Energy Research and SocialScience 9, 98–106
(2015).

104. Waitt, G. Energy, households, gender and science: A feminist retrofitframework for
transdisciplinary research. Area 50, 314–321 (2018).

105. Grünewald, P. & Diakonova, M. Societal differences, activities, and performance:

Examining the role of gender in electricity demand in the UnitedKingdom. Energy
Research and Social Science 69, (2020).

106. Räty, R & Carlsson-Kanyama, A. Energy consumption by gender in someEuropean

countries. Energy Policy 38, 646–649 (2010).

107. Fjellså, I. F., Silvast, A. & Skjølsvold, T. M. Justice aspects of flexible household
electricity consumption in future smart energy systems. Environmental Innovation and
Societal Transitions 38, 98–109 (2021).

108. Awaworyi Churchill, S. & Smyth, R. Ethnic diversity, energy poverty and themediating
role of trust: Evidence from household panel data for Australia1. Energy Economics
86, 104663 (2020).

109. TfL. Travel in London: Understanding our diverse communities 2019. (2019).

110. Adams, C., Taylor, P. & Bell, S. Equity dimensions of micro-generation: A whole
systems approach. Journal of Renewable and Sustainable Energy 4,53122 (2012).

58
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

111. Fox, N. Here comes the sun: the evolution of a prosuming project within asocial
housing estate. (2018).

112. Morton, A., Reeves, A., Bull, R. & Preston, S. Empowering and Engaging European
building users for energy efficiency. Energy Research and SocialScience 70, (2020).

113. Grossmann, K. Using conflicts to uncover injustices in energy transitions: Thecase of

social impacts of energy efficiency policies in the housing sector in Germany. Global
Transitions 1, 148–156 (2019).

114. Bouzarovski, S., Frankowski, J. & Tirado Herrero, S. Low-Carbon Gentrification: When
Climate Change Encounters Residential Displacement.International Journal of Urban
and Regional Research 42, 845–863 (2018).

115. TU Delft. Residents choose gas-free neighbourhoods. Participatory Value Evaluation

(PVE) Case Study: Heat Transition Vision Utrecht. TU Delft
https://www.tudelft.nl/en/tpm/pve/case-studies/heat-transition-vision-utrecht (2020).

116. Gillard, R., Snell, C. & Bevan, M. Advancing an energy justice perspective of fuel
poverty: Household vulnerability and domestic retrofit policy in the UnitedKingdom.
Energy Research and Social Science 29, 53–61 (2017).

117. Gillard, R., Snell, C. & Bevan, M. Advancing an energy justice perspective of fuel
poverty: Household vulnerability and domestic retrofit policy in the UnitedKingdom.
Energy Research and Social Science 29, 53–61 (2017).

118. Kaijser, A. & Kronsell, A. Climate change through the lens of intersectionality.
Environmental Politics 23, 417–433 (2014).

119. Reid, L., McKee, K. & Crawford, J. Exploring the stigmatization of energy efficiency in
the UK: An emerging research agenda. Energy Research andSocial Science 10, 141–
149 (2015).

120. Ashby, K. et al. Who are Hard-to-Reach energy users? Segments, barriers and
approaches to engage them. in ACEEE Summer Study for Energy Efficiency in
Buildings (2021). doi:10.47568/3false103.

121. Commission on Race and Ethnic Disparities. Commission on Race and Ethnic
Disparities: The Report – March 2021. (2021).

122. Phillips, J. & Petrova, S. The materiality of precarity: Gender, race and energy
infrastructure in urban South Africa. Environment and Planning A 0308518X2098680
(2021) doi:10.1177/0308518X20986807.

123. Hankivsky, O. et al. An intersectionality-based policy analysis framework: critical

reflections on a methodology for advancing equity. International Journalfor Equity in
Health 2014 13:1 13, 1–16 (2014).

124. Kaijser, A. & Kronsell, A. Climate change through the lens of intersectionality.
Environmental Politics 23, 417–433 (2014).
59
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

125. Cameron, A. & Tedds, L. M. Gender-Based Analysis Plus (GBA+) and Intersectionality:
Overview, an Enhanced Framework, and a British ColumbiaCase Study. SSRN
Electronic Journal (2021) doi:10.2139/ssrn.3781905.

126. Longhurst, N. & Hargreaves, T. Emotions and fuel poverty: The lived experience of
social housing tenants in the United Kingdom. Energy Researchand Social Science 56,
101207 (2019).

127. Kooijman-Van Dijk, A. ENERGIA’s gender and energy research programme:Findings

and experience from research for policy. IDS Bulletin 51, 91–110 (2020).

128. Robinson, C., Bouzarovski, S. & Lindley, S. Underrepresenting neighbourhood

vulnerabilities? The measurement of fuel poverty in England. Environment and
Planning A: Economy and Space 50, 1109–1127 (2018).

129. Roberts, D., Vera-Toscano, E. & Phimister, E. Fuel poverty in the UK: Is therea
difference between rural and urban areas? Energy Policy 87, 216–223 (2015).

130. Groves, C. et al. Energy Biographies: Narrative Genres, Lifecourse Transitions, and
Practice Change. Science Technology and Human Values 41,483–508 (2016).

131. Martiskainen, M., Sovacool, B. K. & Hook, A. Temporality, consumption, andconflict:

exploring user-based injustices in European low-carbon transitions. Technology
Analysis and Strategic Management (2020) doi:10.1080/09537325.2020.1841895.

132. Sovacool, B. K. Fuel poverty, affordability, and energy justice in England: Policy
insights from the Warm Front Program. Energy 93, 361–371 (2015).

133. Sovacool, B. K. Fuel poverty, affordability, and energy justice in England: Policy
insights from the Warm Front Program. Energy 93, 361–371 (2015).

134. Powells, G. & Fell, M. J. Flexibility capital and flexibility justice in smart energysystems.
Energy Research and Social Science vol. 54 56–59 (2019).

135. Emden, J. & Lloyd, H. Keep it simple: Energy bills made easy. (2017).

136. Ambrose, A., Baker, W., Batty, E. & MacNair Hawkins, A. “I have a panic attack when I
pick up the phone”: experiences of energy advice amongst ‘hardto reach’ energy users.
People Place and Policy Online 14, 58–64 (2020).

137. Canfield, C., Klima, K. & Dawson, T. Using deliberative democracy to identifyenergy
policy priorities in the United States. Energy Research & Social Science 8, 184–189
(2015).

138. Chilvers, J. & Longhurst, N. Participation in Transition(s): Reconceiving Public

Engagements in Energy Transitions as Co-Produced, Emergent and Diverse.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2015.1110483 18, 585–607 (2016).

139. Höfer, T. & Madlener, R. A participatory stakeholder process for evaluatingsustainable

energy transition scenarios. Energy Policy 139, (2020).

60
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

140. MacEwen, M. & Evensen, D. ‘Mind the gap: Accounting for equitable participation and
energy democracy in Kenya.’ Energy Research and SocialScience 71, 101843 (2021).

141. Champ, B. et al. Oakland Bike Plan. (2019).

142. Greene, S. Every Voice Counts in a Changing Climate. (2020).

143. Thomas, G., Demski, C. & Pidgeon, N. Energy justice discourses in citizen
deliberations on systems flexibility in the United Kingdom: Vulnerability, compensation
and empowerment. Energy Research and Social Science 66,101494 (2020).

144. Scottish Government. Barriers to Community Engagement in Planning - AResearch

Study. (2017).

145. Bull, R. & Eadson, W. Citizen engagement in local energy decision-making: literature
and policy background. (2020) doi:10.7190/cresr.2020.8937358309.

146. Perényi, Á. et al. Exploring the effectiveness of an energy efficiency behaviour change
project on well-being outcomes for indigenous households in Australia.Sustainability
(Switzerland) 11, 2285 (2019).

147. Middlemiss, L. et al. Energy poverty and social relations: A capabilitiesapproach.

Energy Research and Social Science 55, 227–235 (2019).

148. McMichael, M. & Shipworth, D. The value of social networks in the diffusion ofenergy-
efficiency innovations in UK households. Energy Policy 53, 159–168 (2013).

149. Burke, M. J. & Stephens, J. C. Energy democracy: Goals and policy instruments for
sociotechnical transitions. Energy Research and SocialScience 33, 35–48 (2017).

150. Lennon, M. Decolonizing energy: Black Lives Matter and technoscientific expertise
amid solar transitions. Energy Research and Social Science 30, 18–27 (2017).

151. EIGE. What is gender mainstreaming? | EIGE. OECD and Post-2015Reflections

(2016).

152. Pueyo, A. et al. Gender and Energy: Opportunities for All’ 1-6 | 1. IDS Bulletin 51,
(2020).

153. GCF. Mainstreaming gender in Green Climate Fund projects: a practicalmanual to

support the integration of gender equality in climate change interventions and climate
finance. (2017).

154. Asian Development Bank. Gender Tool Kit: Energy: Going Beyond the Meter.(2012).

155. ESMAP. Online resources for integrating gender into energy operations:Energy policy
analysis. https://esmap.org/node/2758 (2021).

156. World Bank. Integrating Gender Considerations into Energy Operations.Energy Sector
Management assistance Program (ESMAP).
https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/17479 (2013).

61
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

157. UK PACT. Guidance on Gender Equality and Social Inclusion (GESI). (2021).

158. ADB. Gender Tool Kit: Transport Maximizing the Benefits of Improved Mobilityfor All.
(2013).

159. IEA. Gender & Energy Task – UsersTCP. (2021).

160. Cecelski, E. & Dutta, S. A Practical Handbook Mainstreaming Gender inEnergy

Projects. (2011).

161. European Commission. Towards a gender-equal Europe. (2020).

162. Fathallah, J. & Pyakurel, P. Addressing gender in energy studies. EnergyResearch

and Social Science vol. 65 (2020).

163. Haimson, O. L., Gorrell, D., Starks, D. L. & Weinger, Z. Designing TransTechnology:
Defining Challenges and Envisioning Community-CenteredSolutions. in Conference on
Human Factors in Computing Systems - Proceedings 1–13 (Association for Computing
Machinery, 2020). doi:10.1145/3313831.3376669.

164. SMC. Measuring Poverty: A report of the Social Metrics Commission. CEO ofthe
Legatum Institute https://socialmetricscommission.org.uk/wp-
content/uploads/2020/06/Measuring-Poverty-2020-Web.pdf (2020).

165. Sovacool, B. K., Axsen, J. & Sorrell, S. Promoting novelty, rigor, and style in energy
social science: Towards codes of practice for appropriate methods andresearch
design. Energy Research and Social Science 45, 12–42 (2018).

166. Haddaway, N. R., Woodcock, P., Macura, B. & Collins, A. Making literature reviews
more reliable through application of lessons from systematic reviews.Conservation
Biology 29, 1596–1605 (2015).

167. FCDO (DFID). How to Note: Assessing the Strength of Evidence.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/how-to-note-assessing-the-strength-of-
evidence (2014).

168. Legislation.gov.uk. Equality Act 2010, ch. 15. (UK government legislation,2010).

169. Baker, S., DeVar, S. & Prakash, S. The Energy Justice Workbook.
https://iejusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/The-Energy-Justice-Workbook-2019-
web.pdf (2019).

170. BEIS. Fuel poverty statistics. Department of Business Energy and Industrial
Strategy/gov.uk https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/fuel-poverty- statistics
(2015).

171. European Commission. Energy poverty Factsheet. https://ec.europa.eu/energy/eu-

buildings-factsheets-topics-tree/energy- poverty_en (2020).

62
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

172. IPCC. Glossary — Global Warming of 1.5 oC. in Global Warming of 1.5°C. AnIPCC
Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre- industrial levels
and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in thecontext of strengthening
the global response to the threat of climate change, (2018).

173. Badstue, L., Eerdewijk, A. van, Danielsen, K., Hailemariam, M. & Mukewa, E. How
local gender norms and intra-household dynamics shape women’s demand for
laborsaving technologies: insights from maize-based livelihoods inEthiopia and Kenya.
Gender, Technology and Development 24, 341–361 (2020).

174. Geels, F. W., Sovacool, B. K., Schwanen, T. & Sorrell, S. The Socio-Technical
Dynamics of Low-Carbon Transitions. Joule vol. 1 463–479 (2017).

175. Jenkins, K., McCauley, D. & Forman, A. Energy justice: A policy approach. Energy
Policy vol. 105 631–634 (2017).

63
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Appendices
Appendix 1: Methodology
Approach and overview of research design

In an effort to contribute to more rigour in social science energy research as called for by
Sovacool et al.166, this literature review adopted principles and processes from a systematic
review. Systematic reviews are of a higher standard of review than a traditional literature
review approach, being more comprehensive and allowing for less bias. However, such an
approach is highly resource and time intensive, and was determined not to be feasible for this
review owing to time and budget constraints. To mitigate the introduction of further biases, the
team adopted an approach guided by the principles of a full systematic review and systematic
mapping similar to the approach taken by Johnson et al (2020), informed by Haddaway et al.
166.

In addition to applying such principles, we employed a ‘guided search’ method to reduce the
biases of the core search and review team, and to increase comprehensiveness. To help
mitigate biases introduced by our use of one lead reviewer (rather than the two or more
recommended for systematic reviews), a second reviewer read a sample of sources early in
the full-text review stage, comparing the screening and coding performed. Where there were
differences, these were discussed until consensus was reached. In addition, where the first
reviewer encountered articles which she felt might raise similar ambiguities or differences in
interpretation, the paper was read by the second reviewer.

We note the following methodological limitations:

• Leveraging the immediate network of our review team is likely to have contributed to the
larger volume of works from the Global North and from UK academics. Further notes on
the methodological limitations have been included in the annex.
• We limited our grey literature search to reports and websites that were recommended by
experts. A limited number of reports were retrieved using the ‘snowball method’
(consulting the bibliography in key documents for additional sources).
• Our Scopus search excluded articles not in English, and was limited to full- length, peer-
reviewed research submissions and review papers.
• We restricted our database reviews to a maximum of two (ensuring key journals were
covered).
• We were guided by leading experts to ensure the most important sources were
included.
• We used one lead reviewer to carry out the full-text reviews.

64
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Data collection

To enhance the comprehensiveness of the search given limited time and resource, in addition
to a database search, we employed a targeted approach: a ‘guided search’. This involved the
wider team reaching out to prominent academics in their respective networks to solicit between
five and ten academic papers, and grey literature for the review, that they deemed relevant to
the research questions.

Screening, coding and analysis

To avoid missing any key, relevant articles, we developed an appropriate, comprehensive

search string based on the key concepts in the research questions, guided by subject-matter
experts. The search string was divided into two key themes: (1) climate change, energy and
the net zero transition, and (2) gender, race and social inclusion. The search string was
designed to ensure that results included a key term from each of these primary topic areas. It
was tested against a selection of guided search sources to ensure that it was returning key
articles in the Scopus search, and refinements including limiting papers to those in English and
to relevant journals were introduced.

Table 1 Summary of Search Strategy

Search Source Description of Approach

Database Scopus The Scopus search was limited to scanning the titles of sources
for matches with the search string,rather than the title, abstract
and key words, in order to include only the most relevant
sources.
This approach resulted in 1469 results from the Scopus search,
which was carried out on 5th March, 2021. The titles of these
were screened byone primary reviewer according to the
inclusion and exclusion criteria below. An abstract screening
was carried out, resulting in 44 final sources from the Scopus
search for full text review.

Grey Relevant • UK government websites e.g. BEIS, local government

Literature institutional websites for publications
websites • International organisations website: E.g. World Bank, ILO,
EIGE, Gender Equality, OECD, IEA Policies and Measures
Database
• Relevant civil society websites: Rapid Transition Alliance

65
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Search Source Description of Approach

Guided Consultations: • Obtain a list of 4-5 peer-reviewed papers deemed to be

academic most note-worthy and important related to the review
experts questions. In the interest of time, we propose to send a
standardised email out to identified experts in the network
during or shortly after the initiation phase
• Liaise with UserTCP experts, to triangulate and cross-check
with their identified lists of relevant sources
• Carbon Trust expert policy advisors, network of policy
makers in the UK and overseas, including development
partners on publications, reports and findings (this will be
guided by academic experts to help assess for bias)

• Screening: The inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed by the team to support
screen the titles and abstracts of studies selected. Those that meet the inclusion criteria
were selected for full-text reading. Key data was extracted from these and coded using
a coding tool.
• Coding: The coding tool was developed as part of a strict protocol to minimise bias in
full-text reviews. The coding criteria was developed using a pre-established list of
categories with input from the wider review team and tested and adapted during the
process of analysis of a small number of articles from the ‘guided search’. For the
coding of policy recommendations and approaches or frameworks for analysis, the
categories were developed as we read – a similar approach to that of Jenkins et al.
(2021). The coding tool used in the analysis is shown below.
• Appraisal: To support our assessment of quality of the body of research, we employed
an appraisal tool based on the FCDO guidance note Assessing the Strength of
Evidence 168, to categorise articles of low, high or unclear quality, and to help assess
relevance to the research question.
• Analysis: Following the collation of the evidence in a database/map, the results of the
review were summarised, then analysed by key themes that had emerged. The results
of the analysis were written up in the literature review.

66
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Search String (date of search: 05/03/2021)

Search String Rationale Search Refinements

TITLE Terms including home, housing and transport AND

have been attached to a number of qualifiers
relating to net zero, in order to focus the
( LIMIT-TO ( PUBYEAR,2021) OR LIMIT-TO (
( ( energy AND ( use OR transition OR search on relevant sources. The inclusion of
PUBYEAR,2020) OR LIMIT- TO (
consumption OR demand OR efficiency OR ‘clean cooking’ and ‘development’ aim to
PUBYEAR,2019) OR LIMIT-TO (
poverty OR system OR justice ) ) OR ( fuel capture relevant development literature.
PUBYEAR,2018) OR LIMIT-TO (
AND poverty ) OR ( low AND carbon ) OR ( The term ‘solar’ has been attached to PUBYEAR,2017) OR LIMIT-TO (
decarbonis* ) OR ( ( low AND carbon ) AND ( qualifiers ‘panel’, ‘rooftop’, ‘photovoltaic’ and PUBYEAR,2016) OR LIMIT-TO (
energy OR transition OR electricity OR ‘pv’, to ensure that results are relevant to the PUBYEAR,2015) OR LIMIT-TO (
transport OR housing OR heating ) ) OR ( net zero transition, and to exclude terms which PUBYEAR,2014) OR LIMIT-TO (
may arise from other disciplines. PUBYEAR,2013) OR LIMIT-TO (
solar AND ( panel OR rooftop OR pv OR
PUBYEAR,2012) OR LIMIT-TO (
photovoltaic OR prosum* ) ) OR ( smart AND The terms used aim to focus the results on the
PUBYEAR,2011) ) AND ( LIMIT-TO (
meter ) OR ( electric AND vehicle ) OR ( experiences of energy users, rather than the
SUBJAREA,"ENER" ) OR LIMIT-TO (
energy industry itself. For example, the term
electric AND car ) OR ( active AND travel ) OR SUBJAREA,"SOCI" ) ) AND ( LIMIT-TO (
‘renewable’ is excluded as this brings up a
( clean AND ( cooling OR cooking ) ) DOCTYPE,"ar" ) OR LIMIT-TO (
significant number of sources that relate to the
DOCTYPE,"re" ) )
energy industry at a sector level. The
AND experiences of energy users and households
more specifically aim to be captured with the AND
terms specific to transport, housing and solar.
( LIMIT-TO ( LANGUAGE,"English" ) )

AND

( LIMIT-TO ( SRCTYPE,"j" ) )

67
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Search String Rationale Search Refinements

( gender OR woman OR race OR racial Key themes were identified as: age, disability, AND ( EXCLUDE (
OR household OR ethnicity OR justice gender, race and ethnicity, sexual orientation, EXACTSRCTITLE,"Journal Of Materials
social inclusion and socioeconomic factors. As
OR equality OR inclusive OR equity OR Chemistry A" ) OR EXCLUDE (
above, the key terms chosen to form the
disability OR ( disabled AND people ) EXACTSRCTITLE,"Journal Of Physical
search string aim to account for synonyms and
OR vulnerability OR vulnerable OR encompass other relevant terms. For example, Chemistry C" ) OR EXCLUDE (
class OR ( low AND income ) OR the terms listed under the gender theme aim to EXACTSRCTITLE,"Advanced Energy
minority OR socioeconomic OR rural capture relevant factors including gender Materials" ) OR EXCLUDE (
OR mobility OR intersectional* OR ( dynamics, gender roles,
EXACTSRCTITLE,"Nano Energy" ) OR
elderly AND people ) OR ( old AND In order to focus the search, a number of the EXCLUDE ( EXACTSRCTITLE,"Solar
people ) OR ( young AND people ) OR characteristics are attached to qualifiers
Energy Materials And Solar Cells" ) OR
including ‘people’, ‘group’, ‘community’,
youth OR mobility OR transgender OR EXCLUDE ( EXACTSRCTITLE,"ACS
‘household’ and ‘family’.
lgbt OR indigenous OR queer OR poor Applied Energy Materials" ) OR
Terms including ‘marginalised’, ‘inclusive’,
OR ( black AND ( people OR group OR EXCLUDE (
’equality’, ‘equity’ and ‘human rights’ aim to
community ) ) OR ( disabled AND ( capture the majority of relevant social inclusion EXACTSRCTITLE,"Biomass And
people OR group OR community ) ) OR factors. Bioenergy" ) OR EXCLUDE (
( transgender AND ( people OR group EXACTSRCTITLE,"ACS Sustainable
OR community ) ) OR ( black AND ( Chemistry And Engineering" ) OR EXCLUDE (
people OR group OR community OR EXACTSRCTITLE,"Applied
family ) ) OR ( asian AND ( people OR Thermal Engineering" ) OR EXCLUDE (
group OR community OR family ) ) OR ( EXACTSRCTITLE,"Chemsuschem" ) OR
EXCLUDE ( EXACTSRCTITLE,"Solar Rrl" )
bame AND ( people OR group OR
OR EXCLUDE (
community OR family ) ) ) )
EXACTSRCTITLE,"International Journal Of
Electrical Power And Energy Systems" ) OR
EXCLUDE ( EXACTSRCTITLE,"Journal Of
The Electrochemical Society" )

68
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Search String Rationale Search Refinements

OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"Bioresource Technology" )
OR EXCLUDE ( EXACTSRCTITLE,"Journal
Of Energy Chemistry" ) OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"Journal Of Industrial
Ecology" ) OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"IEEE Transactions On
Power Systems" ) OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"Journal Of
Petroleum Science And Engineering" ) OR
EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"Energy Sources Part A
Recovery Utilization And Environmental
Effects" ) OR EXCLUDE
( EXACTSRCTITLE,"Progress In
Photovoltaics Research And Applications" )
OR EXCLUDE ( EXACTSRCTITLE,"Iet
Generation Transmission And Distribution" )
OR EXCLUDE ( EXACTSRCTITLE,"Journal
Of Chemical Information And Modeling"
) OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"Food And Nutrition
Bulletin" ) OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"Social Science And
Medicine" ) OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"Materials Today Energy" )
OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"International Journal Of
Biological Macromolecules" )

69
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Search String Rationale Search Refinements

OR EXCLUDE ( EXACTSRCTITLE,"Journal
Of Nuclear Materials" ) OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"Advanced Science
Letters" ) OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"Annals Of Nuclear
Energy") OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"International Journal Of
Coal Geology" ) OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"Food Policy" ) OR
EXCLUDE (EXACTSRCTITLE,"IEEE
Transactions On Nuclear Science" ) OR
EXCLUDE ( EXACTSRCTITLE,"International
Journal Of Power Electronics And Drive
Systems" ) OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"Accident Analysis And
Prevention" ) OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"Biofuels Bioproducts And
Biorefining" ) OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"Fuel Processing
Technology" ) OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"Journal Of Natural Gas
Science And Engineering" ) OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"Nuclear Engineering And
Design" ) OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"Waste And Biomass
Valorization" ) OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"Biomass Conversion And
Biorefinery" ) OR EXCLUDE (
EXACTSRCTITLE,"Combustion And Flame" )
)

70
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

Category Description Inclusion Exclusion Rationale

Subject or At least one of • Climate-relatedand • Organisational • To focus on the experience of energy

Outcomes the following is energy policies and policy users and eliminate subjectmatter that
mentioned: technologies, • Employmentquotas has limited relevance toclimate/energy.
socioeconomic and recruitment • The sources must include both a
transitions or energy reference to energy transitions/netzero,
• Environmental
systems and social inclusion, to maintain a focus
impacts
and on the most relevant evidence.
• A term relating to
gender, race or
social inclusion

Populations Subjects studied • Households • Organisations • To maintain a focus on user groups,

• Individuals • Employees rather than organisation orsector
employment.
• Community
• Villages

Geography Countries / • Developed countries • None. • To draw lessons from a range of

areasin scope • Developing countries contexts.
• National (UK)
• 4 Home nation-level
• Subnationals/Cities

Timeframe Time since • <10 years since • >10 years since • Transitions/GESI are recent and
publication publication publication dynamic fields, and we want to capture
the most relevant sources.

71
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Category Description Inclusion Exclusion Rationale

Intervention Policy or policy • Employment • To focus on the impacts of policies and

modification / quotas technologies.
adaptation or
tool used with
the policy /
technology
implementation

Methodologies Research • Quantitative • None. • To draw from a range of knowledge,

methodologies • Qualitative understanding and methods.
used in the
• Primary research
paper.
• Secondary research
• Mixed

Language English Languages other than

English.

72
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Coding Tool

Category Information captured

Bibliographic Info Authors, organisation, title, year, journal

Bibliographic Info abstract

Research methods Qualitative, quantitative or mixed methods

Research methods Research Frameworks, applied

Research methods Description of methodology

Geography Global South/North

Geography Continent, region

Geography Country

Geography Urban, Rural, Peri-Urban

Technology Renewables, energy efficiency, transport, other

Technology Technology (e.g. rooftop solar, EVs, EE appliances, insulation, LED

lighting)

Technology Description of technology's use / application

Policy Title of low-carbon policy

Policy Description of policy (including objectives, national/sub- national)

Scale Individual, household, local/community, regional, national,

international

Users Population Studied

Users Differing characteristics (e.g. women, poor households, rural

households, elderly, isolated, disabled, single parents, racial/ethnic
minority)

Users Descriptions of behaviours, experiences related to characteristics in

the study

Social Inclusion Issue Examples: age, agency, class, energy access/poverty, fuel poverty,
transport poverty, gender equity, tenancy/housing status

Social Inclusion Issue Description of experiences and impacts

73
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Category Information captured

Inclusion policy, Name of the policy, framework, approach or methodology

framework, approach

Inclusion policy, Description of approach, including objectives and application

framework, approach

Inclusion policy, Description of the impact of the approach

framework, approach

Author reflections Author recommendations for policymaking (if any)

Author reflections Author recommendations for further research

Author reflections Limitations of the study including data limitations

Quality and Relevance Further comment on relevance to research questions

Quality and Relevance Comment on quality

74
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Appendix 2: Glossary

Term Definition

Bias Biases are prejudiced actions or thoughts towards a person or a

group of people based on their social characteristics. It can lead to
unequal and/or unfair treatment and discrimination. Bias can be
conscious orunconscious, explicit or implicit168.

Climate justice Climate justice examines climate change through a human rights
lens; focusing on the inequitable outcomes for people and
communities most vulnerableto the impacts of a changing climate
and responses formitigation and adaptation169.

Community energy/solar Community (renewable energy) is the cooperativegeneration of

renewable energy such as solar169

Disability A term used to describe people who have a mental orphysical

impairment which has a substantial and long-term effect on their
ability to carry out normal, daily activities168.

Discrimination According to the UK’s Equalities Act 2010, discrimination is the

unequal treatment of individuals and groups based on protected
characteristics such asrace, gender, class, sexual orientation,
physical ability,religion, national origin, age, physical or mental
abilities168.
This difference in treatment can be direct and explicit,or indirect (for
instance when a policy appears to be neutral but has a
discriminatory effect).

Distributive/substantive This tenet of energy justice is outcome-focused, that is,whether the

justice costs and benefits of the energy system, climate policy or technology
are shared fairly170

Diversity Diversity in a population, according to the Equalities Act 2010 means

people are from a range of backgrounds, ethnicities and cultures168

Energy democracy Energy democracy is a concept with the central goals of transitioning
to renewable sources, and strengthening democracy, social justice
and inclusion and public participation. It requires that communities
have a say and agency in shaping and participating in their energy
future169

75
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Term Definition

Energy justice Energy justice represents three tenets: distributional, recognition and
procedural justice. Where injustices arise from the distribution of
costs and benefits from an energy system, policy or technology for
example distributional justice is concerned. Where the needs and
interests of affected groups of society are not being considered, this
is recognition injustice, and procedural justice is concerned with
processes for inclusion, representation and remediation to correct
the injustices34.

Energy poverty, fuel Energy poverty and fuel poverty are taken to mean the same thing,
poverty though the measures may differ. Fuel poverty is a term more often
used in the UK, however, use of the terms energy poverty and
energy services poverty are becoming more common. Generally
speaking, energy or fuel poverty is a situation in which a household
has difficulty obtaining the necessary energy in their home to meet
basic needs170,171.

Energy services Energy services are central to the energy system can be understood
as the ‘benefits that energy carriers produce for human wellbeing’.
The concept of energy services supports of shifting of focus away
from perspectives of fuels (e.g. coal, gas) and technologies (e.g. fuel
cells) towards the needs and demands of households (e.g. mobility,
washing, heating, cooking, cooling and lighting)18.

Energy system IPCC Fifth Assessment Report defines an energy system as "all
components related to the production, conversion, delivery, and use
of energy”172.

Environmental justice Environmental justice concerns recognition and remediation of the

disproportionately high negative health and environmental effects on
communities of colour and low-income communities169.

Equality Under the Equalities Act, “equality is about ensuring that every
individual has an equal opportunity to make the most of their lives
and talents, and believing that no one should have poorer life
chances because of where, what or whom they were born, or
because of other characteristics. Equality recognises that
historically, certain groups of people with particular characteristics
have experienced discrimination.”168

76
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Term Definition

Equity The term “equity” (in the context of diversity) refers to proportional
representation (by race, class, gender, etc.) in opportunities, a
recognition of different needs and power based on characteristics,
and that these differences should be identified and addressed such
that the historical and social disadvantages can be addressed168,172.
Where equality means treating everyone the same regardless of
need, equity seeks fairness through treating people differently
depending on their needs. It should be noted that such different
treatment may be the key to reaching equality, through addressing
the unequal needs, conditions and positions of people and
communities (usually a result of institutional or structural barriers).

Fairness A fair outcome can be thought of as one that is just or appropriate in

the circumstances. While fairness is often used interchangeably with
equity, or equality, it can be often felt as something that occurs on a
more personal level, whereas equality and equity may be seen as
concepts legislated for or applied in policy.

Gender Gender is a term used to describe socially constructed ideas of the

roles, behaviours, activities, and attributes deemed socially
appropriate for men and women. It is separate from ‘sex’, which is
the biological classification of male or female based on physiological
and biological features.
As a social construct, gender varies from society to society and can
change over time.

Gender (based) analysis A gender analysis is performed to identify and examine different
gender roles, responsibilities, capacities, vulnerabilities, constraints
and power, and how these differences impact people’s lives in
different contexts. It provides the information necessary to support
integrating gender perspectives in policies, projects and
programmes125.

Gender identity and/or A person’s own sense of being male, female, or another identity
expression beyond this binary, and how they choose to appear. This may or
may not align with the biological sex assigned at birth. Where gender
identity includes how individuals experience their own gender, as
well as what they call themselves, gender expression includes how
people show their gender through clothing, appearance, behaviour
and so on151.

77
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Term Definition

Gender lens A perspective that helps to make gender more visible by asking how
and why gender differences and relations are relevant for a policy, or
project for example. The application of a gender lens to examine
power structures and roles within a specific context can provide
important insights into whether a policy supports or exacerbates
imbalances in gender-related power151.

Gender mainstreaming Gender mainstreaming was adopted as a strategy for promoting

gender equality at the Fourth World Conference on Women in
Beijing in 1995. It is a strategy aimed at including gender
perspectives in all activities and processes, including policy
development, and across projects and programmes. Gender
mainstreaming aims to make the needs and interests of all genders
an integral part of the design, implementation, monitoring and
evaluation of programs, policies and processes151.

Gender roles, gender Gender roles are socially assigned expectations or cultural norms
norms based on gender. These can be expectations about how people
ought to behave and interact with others, based on their gender and
can set standards for a range of decisions throughout individuals
lives, from career selection, family choices, to household chores.
Non-conformance with these can result in different forms of social
exclusion151.

Intersectionality Intersectionality recognises the complexity of experiences of

inequality that result from the interaction of social characteristics of
difference. Often the intersection of two or more characteristics in an
individual or group can compound the forms of discrimination or
constraints in access to opportunities. An intersectional approach
acknowledges and works to understand the differences within
groups of social categories, rather than defining and treating, for
example, men and women as homogenous groups123.

Intra-household Within the household, individuals and groups can have different
dynamics power relations, and therefore different levels of influence over how
decisions within the household are made. These power structures
within the household can be a result of unequal access to resources,
social norms and practices 173.

Just transition Within the household, individuals and groups can have different
power relations, and therefore different levels of influence over how
decisions within the household are made. These power structures
within the household can be a result of unequal access to resources,
social norms and practices 173.

78
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Term Definition

Justice The Equalities Act 2010 defines justice as “The moral principle
ensuring fairness and reasonableness in the
way people are treated, as well as the administration of the law, and
the authority in maintaining this process” 168.

Low carbon / net zero Net zero transitions, low carbon transitions, energy transitions –
transitions these ‘transitions’ refer to system change from one state to another:
from a fossil-fuel based economy, to a green, low carbon economy.
These transitions require transformation across electricity, heat,
agricultural, transport and other systems for effective climate
mitigation174.
Low carbon transitions involve social, political and cultural
processes, as well as technological and economic ones. The
processes involved in transitions are complex, often multi-
dimensional and involve a lot of uncertainties e.g. around innovation,
social acceptance, consumer interest and policy support172.

Marginalised Communities, individuals or groups who tend to be ignored by, or

communities, people, denied involvement in mainstream economic, political, cultural and
groups social activities.
Marginalised communities may include low-income and/or working-
class communities, frontline communities, and those historically
disenfranchised by racial and social inequity (e.g., identities based
on class, race, ethnicity, sex, gender, sexual orientation, and
ability)169.

Net zero According to the IPCC, “Net zero emissions are achieved when
anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere
are balanced by anthropogenic removals over a specified period”172.
In June 2019, UK Parliament passed legislation requiring the
government to reduce the UK’s net emissions of greenhouse gases
by 100% relative to 1990 levels by 2050. Achieving net zero will
likely involve both reducing existing emissions and actively removing
greenhouse gases.

Participatory methods Participatory methods include a range of approaches and activities

with the aim of enabling stakeholders to play an active role in
decisions that affect them. This means going beyond merely
listening to their concerns, but ensuring their interests and voices are
taken into account to help shape outcomes. In policymaking, this
means facilitating the inclusion of individuals or groups in the design
of policies in a way that achieves transparency and active
citizenship149.

79
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Term Definition

Procedural justice Procedural justice concerns fairness of process to support equitable

outcomes. This means ensuring that individuals and groups are
treated with dignity and respect, that their voices, interests and
concerns are considered and that these shape decisions in a way
that is consistent and transparent175.

Protected characteristics The Equalities Act 2010 defines protected characteristics as the
“grounds upon which discrimination is unlawful”. The characteristics
are: “age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil
partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex
and sexual orientation” 168.

Race, racism and racial A protected characteristic under the Equalities Act 2010, race refers
justice to a group of people defined by their race, colour, and nationality
(including citizenship), ethnic or national origins. Racism means
treating someone unfairly because of their race, colour, nationality or
ethnic or national origins. Racial justice is the systematic fair
treatment of people of all races that results in equitable opportunities
and outcomes for everyone168.

Sex The categorisation at birth of a person as male, female, or intersex

based on biological indicators.

Sexual orientation A person’s emotional, romantic, physical and/or sexual attraction to

others. This can include (but is not limited to) a person’s identity as
heterosexual, lesbian, gay, or bisexual. Sexual orientation is distinct
from gender identity and from gender expression.

Social inclusion Social inclusion can be seen as the process by which people who
are traditionally excluded because of characteristics such as gender,
ethnicity, age, disability, are brought into decision-making processes,
activities, or positions of power. Inclusion involves authentic and
empowered participation such that individuals and groups feel their
interests are represented, their voices heard and their contributions
valued.

Socio-cultural Combining social and cultural factors, in this case, social and cultural
rules, expectations and processes related to energy transitions174

Socio-technical Socio-technical transitions are where technological change is

transitions associated with social systems and the two are inextricably linked1.

Spatial inequality Spatial inequality is defined as inequality in economic and social

indicators of wellbeing across geographical units within a country77.

Transitions Transitions theory is used to analyse shifts in socio- economic

systems such as energy, mobility, or food174.

80
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Term Definition

Users Users in an energy system are the end users for which the energy
services are designed to serve. These can be individuals/
households, businesses and industry172.

Values Values can be defined as the “principles, fundamental convictions,

ideals, standards or life stances which act as general guides to
behaviour or as points of reference in decision-making” 168.

81
Gender, Race and Social Inclusion – Net Zero Transitions

Appendix 3: Summary diagrams

Please find two summary diagrams outlining the findings of this report:
www.gov.uk/government/publications/net-zero-transition-gender-race-and-social-inclusion-
literature-review

82
This publication is available from:
www.gov.uk/government/publications/net-zero-transition-gender-race-and-social-inclusion-
literature-review

If you need a version of this document in a more accessible format, please email
enquiries@beis.gov.uk. Please tell us what format you need. It will help us if you say what
assistive technology you use.