Energy Poverty in Poland: Drivers, Measurement and National Policy

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to diagnose the extent of energy poverty in Poland and identify the instruments used in the public sector at the national level to address this challenge. In the theoretical part of the paper, we will review the literature related to the definition of the concept of energy poverty and the classification and measurement methodology of this phenomenon. In the research part, we will analyze the extent of the energy poverty phenomenon in Poland, review the Polish energy policy, and identify and characterize the instruments for tackling energy poverty in Poland implemented within the framework of national government programs. According to official statistics in Poland, depending on the adopted method of measuring energy poverty, in 2019, it affected between 4.2% and 15.4% of the population (the average across four indicators was 9% of the population). Our analyses confirmed the presence of energy poverty in Poland, which is a consequence of high energy prices and low energy efficiency of buildings. Energy poverty primarily affects people with the lowest incomes. Those particularly vulnerable are homeowners, especially residents of rural areas. The analysis of national strategies showed that although energy poverty is recognized at the government level, it is not a priority for the Polish government. There is a lack of a detailed diagnosis of energy poverty and a comprehensive, dedicated program for its reduction. Poland’s energy policy focuses primarily on limiting emissions and improving energy efficiency in buildings, which leads to the marginalization of the energy poverty issue.

1. Introduction

Energy is a fundamental resource essential for human daily functioning. It is inextricably linked to health, quality of life, mobility, communication, and security. Access to electricity is becoming crucial not only from the perspective of individuals and households but also for the development of society and the entire economy. However, an increasing number of households in Poland and Europe are struggling to meet their energy needs. Energy poverty is a condition in which a household is unable to meet its basic energy needs due to limited income, high energy costs, or low energy efficiency of the building.

In 2023, 10.6% of the European Union’s population was unable to heat their homes during winter. This marks a significant increase compared to 2021, when the rate of energy poverty stood at 6.9% [1].

Successive energy crises, delays in the transformation of the energy sector, and international armed conflicts (e.g., the war in Ukraine) have made energy poverty one of the main topics of public debate in recent years. The instability of global energy markets, rising energy costs, and inflation are limiting access to affordable energy sources. Energy poverty does not only affect low-income households dependent on social benefits, unemployment assistance, or those experiencing poverty. It is also felt by middle-income households that struggle with low energy efficiency in their homes and high energy expenditures [2]. The problem of energy poverty is particularly noticeable in Southern and Eastern European countries (e.g., Greece, Portugal, Spain). However, it does not spare countries with advanced social and energy security policies, such as Finland or Sweden [3]. This indicates that the causes of energy poverty vary between countries. The determining factors may include climatic conditions, the level of socio-economic development, infrastructure and energy systems, as well as the nature of short- and long-term policies related to energy transition and energy poverty.

Energy poverty is a social, economic, environmental, and health issue. Despite protective measures undertaken by European countries to support households, the percentage of people reporting difficulties in adequately heating their homes continues to rise. The effects of these measures are often short-term. While they primarily mitigate the severity of price shocks, they do not comprehensively solve the problem, further highlighting the phenomenon of energy poverty. Therefore, systemic actions aimed at eliminating the root causes of energy poverty—such as improving the technical standards of buildings and their energy efficiency—are essential. Priority should be given to measures aimed at reducing the scale of energy poverty in the long term. In this context, the European Union’s initiatives play a significant role, particularly in legislation and strategic documents, such as the Fit for 55 package, the implementation of the European Green Deal, climate policy, and the new Social Climate Fund, set to be introduced in 2026. A measure of the European Union’s resilience to energy poverty is the way in which member states mitigate its effects and prevent its deepening.

The definition of energy poverty in Poland is specified in the Energy Law Act. Energy poverty refers to a situation in which a household—consisting of either a single person or multiple individuals living together in an independent residential unit or a single-family house, where no business activity is conducted—is unable to secure an adequate level of heating, cooling, and electricity to power appliances and provide lighting. This applies when the household simultaneously meets the following conditions: it has a low income, incurs high energy-related expenses, and resides in a dwelling or building with low energy efficiency.

Poland is significantly affected by energy poverty, with approximately 9% of the population (3.5 million people) experiencing it [4]. Moreover, Poland has the highest share of household income spent on energy among EU countries [5]. In response to this identified problem, the need to set a target for reducing energy poverty, and the requirement to define policies and measures to combat it in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 of the European Parliament and the Council [6], the first steps have been taken towards formulating a direct public policy aimed at reducing energy poverty. In the 2019 National Energy and Climate Plan, Poland committed to developing a comprehensive state policy to tackle energy poverty. The 2024 update of this plan outlines the basic framework for this policy. Accordingly, the aim of this article is to diagnose the scale of energy poverty in Poland, assess national policies for its reduction, and identify instruments used in the public sector at the national level to address this challenge. The article analyzes statistical data on energy poverty from Eurostat, the Polish Economic Institute, and the Polish scientific foundation Institute for Structural Research, as well as government strategies and legal acts. This study contributes to understanding the specifics of energy poverty in Central and Eastern European countries. Furthermore, the authors propose a comprehensive approach to analyzing public policy on energy poverty at the national level, incorporating sectoral policies related to energy, climate, social welfare, and building renovation.

This article makes a significant contribution to the existing literature by combining an assessment of the extent of energy poverty in Poland with a comprehensive analysis of the instruments implemented at the national level to mitigate it. While energy poverty is widely studied in an international context, in-depth analyses focused on the specific characteristics of this phenomenon in Poland remain scarce. This article addresses that gap by presenting a systematic overview and evaluation of actions undertaken by the Polish public sector, based on national strategies and government programs.

This study is also innovative in its inclusion of various methods for measuring energy poverty and in highlighting inconsistencies and shortcomings in national energy policy regarding efforts to combat this issue. This type of comprehensive approach—integrating diagnosis, public policy, and measurement aspects—represents a unique added value to the existing academic body of work.

2. Literature Review

The presence and prominence of energy poverty in public debate have translated into increased scientific interest in this phenomenon. In the literature, particular attention is given to household energy poverty, focusing on (a) the availability and affordability of energy required to meet basic needs, (b) disposable income, (c) energy expenditures, and (d) consumption behaviors [7,8,9,10]. Energy poverty is also considered in relation to energy-dependent needs, such as information and communication technologies, entertainment, education, transport, and commercial activities [11]. This confirms the multidimensional nature of energy poverty and the challenges in defining it. The perception of energy poverty differs between developing countries—where it is seen as a lack of access to energy services—and developed countries, where it is analyzed through the lens of energy expenditures and household income [4,12].

In the broadest sense, energy poverty can be defined as the inability to meet or difficulty in meeting basic household energy needs, particularly heating, lighting, and powering appliances [13]. Bouzarovski and Petrova [14] describe energy poverty as a household’s inability to achieve a socially and materially necessary level of energy services. It is generally accepted that energy poverty occurs wherever affordable, reliable, high-quality, safe, environmentally friendly, and development-supporting energy services are lacking [3].

Although the concept of energy poverty has been recognized for a long time, few countries have developed their own definition of it. The United Kingdom has the most extensive experience in this area. In 1991, Boardman [15] defined a household as experiencing energy poverty (fuel poverty) if it must allocate more than 10% of its income to maintaining an adequate level of heating. This approach was adopted in the United Kingdom for national use as a foundation for efforts to address energy poverty. In other European Union countries, the concept has not been clearly defined [16,17]. In Belgium, the Constitution guarantees every individual the right to live in suitable conditions with respect for human dignity. This right includes access to housing free from dampness, with natural light and proper ventilation. In France, energy poverty is considered in the broader context of poverty and the inability to pay energy bills. Spain and Italy do not have an official definition of energy poverty, but this does not mean that measures to counteract it are not being implemented.

Recognizing that energy poverty is becoming an increasing problem in member states, the European Union launched the European Fuel Poverty and Energy Efficiency Project (EPEE) in 2007. This initiative aimed to improve the energy efficiency of buildings for low-income individuals [17].

In 2023, the European Commission, in its recommendations on energy poverty, emphasized the multidimensional nature of the issue and identified three primary causes: (a) high energy expenditures relative to household income, (b) low income levels, and (c) poor energy efficiency of buildings and appliances. Additional factors influencing a household’s situation regarding energy poverty may include geographical conditions, household characteristics, gender, health status of household members, and energy and transportation needs [18]. Furthermore, in the Directive of the European Parliament and the Council on Energy Efficiency of 13 September 2023, the first EU-wide definition of energy poverty was introduced [19]. According to its provisions, energy poverty is defined as a household’s lack of access to essential energy services, where such services provide basic levels and decent standards of living and health, including adequate heating, hot water, cooling, lighting, and energy to power appliances, in the relevant national context, existing national social policy and other relevant national policies, caused by a combination of factors, including at least non-affordability, insufficient disposable income, high energy expenditure and poor energy efficiency of homes (Art. 2(52)).

In Poland, energy poverty was treated as a marginal issue for many years, which meant that, like most EU countries, it did not have a fully developed definition. The first step towards defining this phenomenon was the introduction of the concept of a vulnerable electricity and gas consumer into Polish legislation in 2013, under the Energy Law Act [20]. This legislation also established conditions for providing support to vulnerable energy consumers in the form of an energy allowance to compensate for electricity costs, as well as a support program for overdue and current payments for electricity, gas, or related services [20]. A vulnerable electricity consumer is a person eligible for a housing allowance, while a vulnerable gas consumer is a person receiving a fixed fuel purchase allowance—both of whom are included in the social welfare system. It was not until 2022, following amendments to the Energy Law Act [20], that a definition of an energy-poor household was introduced. Such a household is characterized by low income, residence in a low-energy-efficiency dwelling, and high energy expenditures, making it unable to ensure sufficient heating, cooling, and electricity for appliances and lighting [20]. Under this definition, energy poverty occurs when all the following conditions are met:

• The household has a low income;
• The household incurs high energy expenses;
• The household resides in a dwelling or building with low energy efficiency.

The Polish Economic Institute defines energy poverty through four distinct forms [21]:

• Fuel poverty—characterized by a high share of energy expenses in a household’s budget.
• Structural poverty—affecting households where economic poverty is exacerbated by high energy expenditures.
• Municipal poverty—concerning households unable to meet their energy needs due to a lack of adequate infrastructure or living in an energy-inefficient building.
• Hidden energy poverty—manifested in low energy expenditures resulting from extreme restrictions on energy consumption.

Energy poverty is the result of the simultaneous occurrence of several interconnected socio-economic, infrastructural, and institutional factors. In the Polish context, the key drivers include rising energy prices [22], low income levels among segments of the population [23], and the significant energy inefficiency of the housing stock, particularly in rural areas [24]. The problem is exacerbated by outdated heating systems and poor building insulation. Inadequate tax mechanisms, limited investment in modern energy infrastructure, and low levels of knowledge and awareness regarding energy efficiency also contribute to the persistence of energy poverty [25]. The consequences of this phenomenon are multidimensional, affecting both the social and environmental spheres. It has negative impacts residents’ health and overall well-being [26,27]. On a macro scale, it can also hinder the implementation of national climate policies and the achievement of energy transition goals. A lack of investment capital and institutional support means that for many households, the energy transition remains economically out of reach, leading to the reproduction of social inequalities [28]. In extreme cases, households resort to alternative, often illegal methods of obtaining heating energy—such as burning waste or wood sourced from forests—yet these are last-resort strategies that reflect a critical level of deprivation [29]. Although national energy policy emphasizes environmental goals, the marginalization of energy poverty issues in national strategies may paradoxically slow down the achievement of climate targets and weaken the social dimension of a just transition.

The complexity of defining energy poverty has led to the use of multiple empirical approaches and indicators aimed at quantifying the phenomenon [30]. Measures of energy poverty vary significantly depending on the chosen method of assessment. Some of these measures may not always be applicable in the context of economic, social, or climatic differences between regions. The large number of factors that define energy poverty further complicates the adoption of universal metrics for this phenomenon. Households affected by energy poverty may exhibit different characteristics [31]:

• They have access to reliable and clean energy but lack sufficient income to afford it.
• They rely on cheaper energy sources (such as wood or coal), which have negative health and environmental impacts.
• They do not meet the criteria for income poverty but qualify as energy-poor (e.g., single individuals living in uninsulated buildings).
• They have an income above the poverty threshold but must reduce energy expenditures due to other financial obligations.
• They earn at the poverty threshold but are not energy-poor (potentially due to low energy costs or high energy efficiency of their home).
• They have low energy expenditures but are still energy-poor due to forced energy-saving measures or reliance on low-quality fuels (e.g., burning waste).
• They incur high energy costs and are also income-poor (e.g., large families living in homes with high energy demand and low efficiency).

Measures used to determine which households experience energy poverty can be divided into objective measures, which refer to measurable categories such as income and expenses (e.g., the 10% Indicator, LIHC), and subjective measures, which are based on respondents’ perceptions, experiences, and expert assessments. Subjective indicators are represented by survey variables such as an inadequately heated home, a dark apartment, arrears on utility bills, a leaking roof, damp walls/floors/foundations, or rotting window frames or floors [32]. The most commonly used indicators for measuring household energy poverty include the following [10,15,32]:

• The 10% Indicator—This expenditure-based indicator classifies a household as energy-poor if it spends 10% or more of its income on energy services (energy expenditures). However, it does not account for fluctuations in fuel prices, income levels, or improvements in energy efficiency.
• The 2M Indicator (Double Median Energy Expenditure)—Households are considered energy-poor if their actual energy expenditures, as a share of income, exceed twice the median value for the population. This indicator highlights the number of households whose absolute energy expenditures fall below the national median.
• Low-Income–High-Cost Indicator (LIHC)—This indicator focuses on households with low incomes (disposable income below the officially defined poverty threshold) and high required energy costs (above the national median level). It is commonly used in European Commission analyses and public statistics.
• The M2 Indicator—This defines energy-poor individuals as those whose equivalent household energy expenditures are lower than half of the national median.
• The After Fuel Cost Poverty Indicator (AFCP)—This measures the number of households that fall below the poverty threshold after paying their energy bills.
• The Minimum Income Standards Indicator (MIS)—This shows how much income households need to live with dignity. Based on public consensus, it is used to monitor how many people live below this standard. A household is considered to be in energy poverty if its income, after deducting energy expenditures, falls below the minimum standard income.
• Hidden Energy Poverty Indicator—Hidden energy poverty refers to shortages and deprivation in household energy services, affecting energy-poor households that are not adequately reflected in established indicators. It is based on extremely low energy expenditures (below half the median), high dependence on solid fuels (coal, wood, biomass), and a very high share of energy costs in income (above 25%).
• Bills Indicator—This represents the scale of arrears on electricity and energy payments and households’ inability to pay their bills on time.
• Leaks Indicator—This assesses housing conditions, measuring the share of buildings with leaking roofs, damp walls, floors, or drafty windows.
• Insufficient Thermal Comfort Indicator—The declared inability to sufficiently heat a home or apartment.

At the European Union level, a set of aggregated indicators has been developed. The European Commission’s 2020 Recommendation on Energy Poverty presents two groups of suggested indicators, mostly based on Eurostat data, such as indicators focusing on the affordability of energy services and additional indicators (Table 1) [33]. These indicators can also be divided into the following categories [33]:

• Comparing energy expenditures and income—These indicators quantitatively determine energy poverty by comparing the amount a household spends on energy with its income level.
• Self-assessment-based indicators—These involve directly asking households whether they believe they can afford their energy costs (e.g., whether they are able to maintain an adequate temperature in their home during the winter and summer seasons).
• Direct measurement indicators—These indicators involve measuring physical variables to determine whether energy services are at an adequate level (e.g., room temperature).
• Indirect indicators measuring related factors, such as arrears in utility payments, the number of disconnections, and housing quality.

Table 1. Indicators for measuring energy poverty in line with the European Commission’s 2020 recommendations.

Indicators Based on the Affordability of Energy Services

Complementary Indicators

The percentage of the population at risk of poverty (below 60% of the national median equivalent disposable income) who are unable to provide adequate heating in their home, based on the following question: Can your household afford to provide adequate heating? The percentage of the overall population unable to provide adequate heating in their homes, based on the following question: Can your household afford to provide adequate heating? Arrears in utility payments—the percentage of the population at risk of poverty (below 60% of the national median equivalent disposable income) with arrears in utility payments. Arrears in utility payments—the percentage of the population with utility payment arrears; energy expenditures on electricity, gas, and other fuels as part of total household expenditures. The percentage of households whose energy expenditure as a share of income is more than twice the national median. The percentage of households whose absolute energy expenditures are lower than half of the national median.

Electricity prices for households (average consumption range). Gas prices for households (average consumption range). Gas prices for households (lowest consumption range). The percentage of the population at risk of poverty (below 60% of the national median equivalent disposable income) with dampness, moisture in apartments, or rotting elements in their homes. The percentage of the population with dampness, moisture in apartments, or rotting elements in their homes—total population. Final energy consumption per square meter in the housing sector, with climate adjustment taken into account.

Source: [33].

Table 1. Indicators for measuring energy poverty in line with the European Commission’s 2020 recommendations.

Indicators Based on the Affordability of Energy Services

Complementary Indicators

The percentage of the population at risk of poverty (below 60% of the national median equivalent disposable income) who are unable to provide adequate heating in their home, based on the following question: Can your household afford to provide adequate heating? The percentage of the overall population unable to provide adequate heating in their homes, based on the following question: Can your household afford to provide adequate heating? Arrears in utility payments—the percentage of the population at risk of poverty (below 60% of the national median equivalent disposable income) with arrears in utility payments. Arrears in utility payments—the percentage of the population with utility payment arrears; energy expenditures on electricity, gas, and other fuels as part of total household expenditures. The percentage of households whose energy expenditure as a share of income is more than twice the national median. The percentage of households whose absolute energy expenditures are lower than half of the national median.

Electricity prices for households (average consumption range). Gas prices for households (average consumption range). Gas prices for households (lowest consumption range). The percentage of the population at risk of poverty (below 60% of the national median equivalent disposable income) with dampness, moisture in apartments, or rotting elements in their homes. The percentage of the population with dampness, moisture in apartments, or rotting elements in their homes—total population. Final energy consumption per square meter in the housing sector, with climate adjustment taken into account.

Source: [33].

The independent network of experts, OpenExp, proposes an alternative energy poverty index, the European Energy Poverty Index Tool (EDEPI), which is defined by the share of the following [34]:

• Energy expenditure in total household expenditures;
• The population in the first income quintile who are unable to keep their homes warm during winter;
• The population in the first income quintile living in homes that are not comfortably cool during summer;
• The population in the first income quintile living in homes with leaks.

In defining the scale of energy poverty in Poland, a relatively flexible approach is used, as the exact criteria are defined for specific support programs. The following five energy poverty indicators are primarily monitored: 2M, LIHC, Bills, Thermal and Leaks.

The EU has imposed on member states the obligation not only to introduce the definition of energy poverty into national law and carry out a diagnosis of this phenomenon but also to describe the policies and measures to combat energy poverty in their national energy and climate plans [6]. Most EU countries have met this requirement; however, only about half of the member states have provided detailed definitions, clear measurements, and direct policies addressing the issue of energy poverty [35]. Therefore, in accordance with the European Commission’s recommendation 2023/1791 [18], member states were required to update their national energy and climate plans by June 2024. The updated plans are also to serve as the basis for the development of socio-climate plans, funded by the Social Climate Fund, which member states must submit by June 2025. These will be another tool to support households in difficult situations, including those suffering from energy poverty. Both plans are intended to provide stable frameworks for reducing energy poverty in member states.

The academic literature has so far given limited attention to the issue of national public policy on energy poverty. The most comprehensive analysis is presented by Bouzarovski et al. [36], who assess the extent to which energy poverty is integrated into national climate plans across EU member states. Their findings indicate that countries adopt diverse approaches. For example, Belgium, Cyprus, Lithuania, Italy, Malta, Romania, Spain, and France have well-developed energy poverty policies within their climate plans. These policies address both the procedural and recognition justice dimensions (e.g., formulating a distinct definition of energy poverty; identifying challenges more broadly; defining appropriate indicators; recognizing local, regional, and best practices; and developing effective engagement mechanisms), as well as the distributional and spatial domain (e.g., outlining social assistance and tariff support measures; investing in energy efficiency; regulating energy markets; developing infrastructure; and exploring new financing models).

Member states from Southern and Eastern Europe were rated more favorably in terms of distributional aspects. Their climate plans tended to focus more on identifying the causes and consequences of energy poverty, particularly the low energy efficiency of buildings and low household incomes. Countries with more advanced mechanisms in social and energy policy tended to perform better in the procedural dimension, prioritizing governance capacity to address energy poverty effectively.

In an earlier article, Bouzarovski et al. [35] also recognized the influence of the scale of energy poverty on how countries design public policy responses. In regions with lower levels of energy poverty, governments tend to integrate it into broader social policy frameworks. For example, Germany, Denmark, and Sweden address energy poverty as part of overall income poverty, applying comprehensive welfare measures to ensure equal access to energy services. In contrast, Eastern and Southern European countries—despite experiencing higher levels of energy poverty—have not always developed ambitious policies to address the issue (e.g., Bulgaria).

The package of tools provided in national policies to combat energy poverty should combine both short-term financial instruments and long-term structural ones [18]. The first group includes price-related measures to support households in difficult situations in order to reduce the marginal costs of energy consumption, such as tax reductions, social tariffs, energy vouchers, and heating supplements. Income-related measures, which also have a short-term character, are financial support for households that increase their ability to pay energy bills, without directly affecting the marginal cost of energy consumption. Long-term structural measures involve investments in energy efficiency and renewable energy sources. Key to the permanent reduction of energy poverty are structural measures supported by appropriate social instruments and the independence of vulnerable consumers from fossil fuels. Public policy to combat energy poverty should be comprehensive and multi-sectoral, primarily combining energy, social, and climate policies.

Poland, meanwhile, is still at the early stages of developing a mature policy framework to combat energy poverty. Research on Polish energy policy shows that, from the beginning of the energy sector transformation in the 1990s until 2021, Polish policymakers did not recognize households as stakeholders in the energy transition process [37]. Issues concerning the residential energy sector and individual end-users—such as energy poverty and low emissions—were not addressed in earlier energy strategies and lacked dedicated policy solutions.

It was not until 2021 that a national energy policy was adopted which acknowledged the needs and challenges faced by households in the energy transition. From the perspective of decarbonization, the transformation of the residential sector in the 1990s did not significantly alter the energy mix, as Polish households have remained the largest coal consumers in the EU. It was only after 2017 that new regulations and support policies began to focus attention on households. The government’s “Clean Air” program is primarily aimed at accelerating the phase-out of coal use. However, it still requires improvements in its support mechanisms for low-income households in order to effectively contribute to both decarbonization efforts and the reduction of energy poverty.

Additionally, Poland’s public policy on energy poverty has evolved under the influence of external shocks, such as the COVID-19 pandemic and Russia’s war against Ukraine. The resulting increase in energy prices—caused by disruptions in supply chains and constraints in energy commodity trade—has deepened energy poverty among Polish households. In response to these challenges, the government implemented targeted support instruments for the most vulnerable social groups, including protective energy allowances and a freeze on energy prices for certain consumers.

3. Materials and Methods

The main objective of our article is to evaluate Polish public policy aimed at reducing energy poverty. In addition, we conduct an analysis of the scale of energy poverty in Poland. Measuring energy poverty is not our primary goal; however, we include it in order to demonstrate that the phenomenon under study represents a significant public policy challenge in Poland.

We seek to answer the following research questions:

• What are the prevailing approaches to defining energy poverty?
• What indicators and measures are used to assess energy poverty?
• What is the current level of energy poverty in Poland?
• What are the causes and consequences of energy poverty in Poland?
• What institutional framework exists in Poland for addressing the challenge of energy poverty?

In the article, two methods were used (Figure 1):

• Analysis of statistical data on energy poverty in Poland and the EU in order to determine the scale and dimensions of this phenomenon;
• Analysis of Poland’s national energy poverty policy in order to identify and assess tools aimed at reducing and counteracting energy poverty.

Figure 1. Methods used in the study.

Figure 1. Methods used in the study.

Statistical data on energy poverty in Poland presented in the Results Section comes from the report by the Polish Economic Institute [21], Eurostat [5,38], and the report of the Institute of Structural Research [39]. The analysis focused on basic energy poverty indicators in Poland and compared them with the average indicator levels for the EU as well as with those of selected EU countries. The analyzed indicators are as follows:

• Expenditure-based indicators:

  -

  2M—high share of income spent on energy expenditure;

  -

  M2—low absolute energy expenditure.

• Income-based indicators:

  -

  AUB—arrears on utility bills;

  -

  IKHW—inability to keep the home warm.

Eurostat measures energy poverty by using the joint income, consumption and wealth (ICW) dataset, which provides the possibility to analyze overlaps of energy-related indicators originating from different social statistics. The ICW dataset combines microdata on income, household composition, and individual weights from the EU statistics on income and living conditions (EU-SILC) with household consumption expenditure from the household budget survey (HBS) [38].

The analysis of Poland’s national energy poverty policy included government strategies and legal acts obtained from the websites of individual ministries and the Internet System of Legal Acts of the Chancellery of the Sejm of the Republic of Poland. It is assumed that national strategies are written public policies that already take into account EU guidelines. From the perspective of reducing the scale of energy poverty in Poland, five government strategies are important: Poland’s Energy Policy Until 2040 (PEP 2040) (adopted in February 2021) [40]; National Energy and Climate Plan 2021–2030 [41]; National Energy and Climate Plan Update in October 2024 [42]; Long-Term Building Renovation Strategy (LBRS) (adopted February 2022) [43]; National Program for Combating Poverty and Social Exclusion, update 2021–2027; and public policy with a perspective to 2030 (National Program 2030) [44]. The selection of strategies for analysis stems from the complexity of the phenomenon of energy poverty, which is closely related to the technical quality and energy efficiency of buildings, general poverty, and greenhouse gas emissions from heating sources. PEP2040 outlines the goal of reducing energy poverty, with a focus on building thermal retrofitting and the replacement of heating sources with environmentally friendly alternatives. The NECP links the issue of energy poverty to a just and sustainable energy transition. The LBRS introduces a centralized registry of building emissions, which enables the collection of data on heating sources. The NPCPSE assesses the extent of material deprivation in Poland and identifies instruments aimed at mitigating social exclusion. To identify the political priorities of the Polish government regarding the reduction of energy poverty, we conducted a content analysis of the aforementioned documents according to the protocol outlined in

Table 2. Protocol for evaluating government strategies regarding the programming of actions to reduce energy poverty in Poland.

Analysis Area	Analysis Criteria
Diagnosis of energy poverty in Poland	The scale of energy poverty in the country has been diagnosed Contextual indicators are indicated—energy poverty in Poland compared to the EU The causes of energy poverty have been diagnosed The effects of energy poverty have been diagnosed Vulnerable groups have been identified
Programming of activities to reduce energy poverty in Poland	Reducing energy poverty has been identified as one of the goals of the strategy Designed measures to reduce energy poverty in Poland
Monitoring of energy poverty in Poland	Indicators for monitoring the phenomenon of energy poverty have been adopted Rules for monitoring the phenomenon of energy poverty have been defined

Source: own study.

.

The strategies were analyzed based on the above criteria. Two coders were trained and then tested a draft version of the protocol on two plans. After this trial phase, the protocol was refined and enhanced. The two coders worked independently. The researchers evaluated references to each criterion on a scale from 0 to 2, where 0 indicated the absence of the criterion in the strategy, 1 represented a partial reference to the criterion, and 2 signified that the criterion was fully addressed in the strategy.

In the next step, we analyze the priority programs identified in the update of the National Energy and Climate Plan as tools for combating energy poverty: Stop Smog, Czyste Powietrze (Clean Air), Mój Prąd (My Electricity), Ciepłe Mieszkanie (Warm Residence), Moje Ciepło (My Warmth), and TERMO. Additionally, we expand the analysis to include a supplementary instrument for beneficiaries of the Clean Air Program in the form of thermal modernization relief. We then analyze protective instruments, which are directly or indirectly aimed at households affected by energy poverty, such as energy allowance, shielding allowance, energy voucher, housing allowance, and support programs for overdue and current electricity or gas fuel bills, or services provided.

4. Results

4.1. Analysis of the Scale of Energy Poverty in Poland

Previous analyses of the phenomenon of energy poverty in Poland, while confirming a reduction in its scale after 2010 [45,46], still indicate a significant extent of the problem. According to various estimates, energy poverty in Poland affected between 3.35 and 3.5 million people (approximately 9% of the population) in 2017–2018 [4,46]. An official assessment of the scale of energy poverty in Poland was conducted in 2019 as part of the development of the draft National Energy and Climate Plan (NECP). The diagnosis presented four indicators of energy poverty (for the year 2019):

• Inability to maintain adequate indoor temperature (4.2%);
• Arrears on utility bills (5.8%);
• Population living in dwellings with a leaking roof, damp walls, floors, or foundations, or with rotting window frames or flooring (10.8%);
• At-risk-of-poverty rate (15.4%).

The arithmetic average of these four indicators amounted to 9.05%.

According to measurements by the Polish Economic Institute, in 2022, energy poverty affected over 40% of households in Poland [21]:

• Fuel (income-based) poverty affected 16–30% of households, depending on the threshold used for the share of energy expenditures in disposable income;
• Structural energy poverty affected 8–12% of households, where economic poverty is exacerbated by high energy costs;
• Communal energy poverty affected 3–5% of households that are unable to meet their energy needs due to a lack of access to adequate infrastructure or residence in energy-inefficient buildings;
• Hidden energy poverty affected 13–16% of households, whose low energy expenditures result from extreme reductions in energy consumption.

In terms of the share of household expenditure on electricity, Poland, along with Slovakia, has the highest indicators among EU countries [47]. According to Eurostat data, 16.3% of Poles are affected by energy poverty according to the high share of energy expenditure in disposable income indicator (2M) (more than twice the national median), which exceeds the EU average [5]. Higher indicator values have been recorded in countries such as Sweden (28.0% in 2015), Denmark (22.9% in 2020), and Estonia (22.9% in 2020). Additionally, this type of poverty most significantly affects individuals with the lowest incomes (1st–3rd decile)—ranging from 4.9% to 2.4%, but also the middle class (4th–6th decile)—1.8–1% (

Table 3. Energy poverty in Poland and the EU by income deciles of disposable income in 2021 (percentage of the population in total, %).

Income-Based Indicator
deciles of disposable income		D1	D2	D3	D4	D5	D6	D7	D8	D9	D10	Total
arrears on utility bills (AUB)	EU	1.7	1.2	0.9	0.7	0.5	0.4	0.3	0.3	0.2	0.1	6.2
	Poland	1.3	1	0.7	0.6	0.3	0.4	0.3	0.4	0.2	0.3	5.5
inability to keep home warm (IKHW)	EU	1.6	1.2	0.9	0.7	0.5	0.5	0.3	0.2	0.2	0.1	6.3
	Poland	0.9	0.5	0.4	0.4	0.3	0.2	0.1	0.1	0.2	0	4.1
Expenditure-based indicator
high share of income on energy expenditure (2M)	EU	5.3	3.1	2.2	1.6	1.1	0.8	0.6	0.5	0.3	0.2	15.7
	Poland	4.9	2.9	2.4	1.8	1.3	1	0.8	0.8	0.5	0.3	16.3 (2015)
low absolute energy expenditure (M2)	EU	2.3	1.8	1.5	1.3	1.2	1.2	1.1	0.9	0.9	0.8	13
	Poland	2.5	2.1	1.7	1.6	1.7	1.4	1.4	1.2	1.1	0.7	19.5 (2015)

Source: Eurostat experimental statistics—income, consumption and wealth 2020, 2021 [5,38].

). The report by the Institute for Structural Research specifies that the risk of energy poverty in Poland is more significant among individuals receiving social benefits and pensioners [39].

Above the EU average is also the indicator for low absolute energy expenditure (M2) (more than twice as low as the national median). Only in the Czech Republic and Estonia does this indicator reach higher values (20.9% and 23.9%, respectively, in 2020) [5]. This indicator affects 19.5% of Poles, among whom some experience hidden energy poverty, meaning exceptionally low energy expenditure. This indicator is somewhat more evenly distributed across the deciles of disposable income (ranging from 2.5% for the 1st decile to 0.7% for the 10th decile). Among the less affluent residents, the percentage is slightly higher, which could be the result of energy-saving measures. On the other hand, in higher-income groups, the indicator level may result from the ability to spend more on improving the energy efficiency of homes (including investments), which can ultimately lead to lower energy costs.

Indicators of arrears in utility bill payments (AUB) and inability to keep the house warm (IKHW) in Poland are below the EU average. Significantly higher values for both indicators are recorded in countries such as Bulgaria (AUB = 22.5%; IKHW = 17.8%) and Greece (AUB = 18.7%; IKHW = 34.1%), while lower values are observed in countries like Sweden (AUB = 1.4%; IKHW = 2.2%) and the Czech Republic (AUB = 1.9%; IKHW = 2.9%) [5]. A total of 5.5% of Poles (approximately 2 million people) have arrears in paying bills, while 4.1% (approximately 1.5 million people) are unable to keep their homes warm. However, it should be noted that these are indicators based on subjective data. Both arrears and inability to keep a home warm are most noticeable in the lowest income deciles.

Energy poverty in Poland is more prevalent among homeowners than renters, across every indicator analyzed, with the largest differences being seen in expenditure-based indicators (2M and M2) (

Table 4. Energy poverty in Poland according to the right to housing and place of residence (percentage of individuals in the total population, %).

Indicator		Homeowners	Tenants	Cities	Towns and Suburbs	Rural Areas
AUB	EU	3.3	2.9	2.5	1.9	1.8
	Poland	3.9	1.5	1.9	1.5	1.9
IKHW	EU	3.4	2.8	2.8	2	1.6
	Poland	2.5	0.7	1.1	0.8	1.3
2M	EU	9.8	6	5.9	5.2	4.6
	Poland	13.9	2.9	5.8	4.9	6.1
M2	EU	8.1	4.9	4.9	4.1	4
	Poland	13.7	1.6	2.2	3.4	9.8

Source: Eurostat experimental statistics—income, consumption and wealth 2020, 2021 [5,38].

). Considering the place of residence, energy poverty most significantly affects rural residents, especially in terms of hidden energy poverty (9.8% of rural residents have low absolute energy expenditures). Therefore, homeowners in rural areas are the group most at risk of energy poverty.

The risk of energy poverty in Poland is therefore exacerbated by the poor condition of residential buildings and the lack of central heating, which contribute to the low energy efficiency of these buildings [39]. According to the Buildings Performance Institute Europe report [48], 70% of buildings in Poland are still energy inefficient, with approximately 15% having the worst standard. Approximately one-quarter of Poles (over 9.4 million people) face the so-called sick building syndrome, which refers to inadequate indoor temperatures, overheated or undercooled rooms, insufficient daylight, excessive noise levels, or issues with humidity and mold. The latter problem affects 4.2 million Poles.

4.2. National Policy on Energy Poverty in Poland

4.2.1. Strategic Planning for Interventions to Reduce Energy Poverty in Poland

The analysis of national strategies revealed that energy poverty is not a priority area of action in Poland, although it is recognized by decision-makers at the national government level. In Polish governmental strategies, energy poverty is clearly linked to low energy efficiency in buildings and the issue of low emissions. It is, in essence, treated as a secondary issue, identified as a phenomenon related to other public policy challenges. This means that energy poverty is not analyzed separately, resulting in a lack of a comprehensive diagnosis of energy poverty, identification of its causes and consequences, precise intervention directions, and monitoring methods, as well as characterization of vulnerable groups—particularly those at risk. It can be inferred that, in its current form, Poland’s energy policy addresses the horizontal environmental and economic problem of low emissions, linking it simultaneously with the socio-economic challenge of reducing energy poverty. The proposed method for addressing these challenges is improving the energy efficiency of buildings and expanding district heating networks. The most frequently mentioned tools for reducing energy poverty are infrastructural solutions, supported by government and local government subsidy systems. The Energy Policy of Poland until 2040 (PEP 2040) strongly emphasizes the crucial role of the public sector in implementing energy policy, and in relation to local government units, it highlights the need to develop planning for meeting fuel and energy demands in municipalities.

The National Energy and Climate Plan 2021–2030 (NECP) advocates for the creation of a comprehensive public policy addressing the problem of energy poverty. The program’s provisions clearly indicate the limited presence of energy poverty in the current government policy. Fundamental actions to reduce energy poverty, such as developing its official definition in Poland, preparing measurement methodology, monitoring guidelines, and monitoring the protection of vulnerable energy consumers, are planned.

On the other hand, the draft National Energy and Climate Plan Update from 2024 (NECPU) identifies the fight against energy poverty and the protection of vulnerable consumers as conditions for a fair transition of the energy sector in Poland. This is the only document in the analyzed group of government strategies that includes a strategic goal: reduction of energy poverty, with specific financial instruments assigned to its implementation. As part of the indirect measures, government campaigns have been programmed to increase awareness about available methods for improving energy efficiency. These campaigns are primarily targeted at public sector entities.

Unfortunately, the content analysis of the National Energy and Climate Plan Update (2024) does not suggest that Poland implements a comprehensive state policy for reducing energy poverty in 2024. The program provides basic data on the level of energy poverty, without citing any information on the conducted diagnosis of the issue. Importantly, the data on the level of energy poverty in Poland is outdated, as it comes from 2019. There is also a lack of contextual data—regarding energy poverty levels in the EU or other Central and Eastern European countries. Additionally, no national data is presented in a spatial (regional or local) breakdown. The document fails to justify why the proposed methodology for measuring energy poverty is appropriate for the Polish context. The causes of energy poverty are presented only theoretically, without referencing results from studies and analyses conducted in Poland. The consequences of energy poverty are completely omitted, as is the characterization of vulnerable energy consumers. Furthermore, no action model for reducing energy poverty within public policy is presented.

The Long-Term Building Renovation Strategy (LTBRS) focuses exclusively on ensuring high energy efficiency and low emissions in private and public buildings in Poland. Energy poverty is not described in this strategy, nor are there any actions aimed at its reduction. However, it identifies the Clean Air government program as a tool for reducing energy poverty.

Interestingly, the National Program for Combating Poverty and Social Exclusion NPCPSE), which is Poland’s public policy on social inclusion, does not address energy poverty either. Although energy poverty is recognized in this context, it is not further developed in either the diagnostic or the programmatic sections. It has been diagnosed that households experiencing energy poverty face additional material and social hardships. People in these households are entitled to general income-dependent social security benefits and specific support instruments outside the social security system, such as housing allowances and energy allowances. In the strategy, it was emphasized that energy poverty is part of the strategic actions outlined in Poland’s Energy Policy Until 2040. However, our analysis does not confirm this assumption.

The overall results of the strategy analysis are presented in

Table 5. Strategies of the Polish government to reduce energy poverty—a review of strategic documents.

Analysis Criteria	PEP 2040	NECP	NECPU	LBRS	NPCPSE
The scale of energy poverty in the country has been diagnosed	1	0	2	0	0
Contextual indicators are indicated—energy poverty in Poland compared to the EU	0	0	0	0	0
The causes of energy poverty have been diagnosed	1	0	0	0	0
The effects of energy poverty have been diagnosed	0	0	0	0	1
Vulnerable groups have been identified	0	0	0	0	0
Reducing energy Poverty has been identified as one of the goals of the strategy	0	0	2	0	0
Designed measures to reduce energy poverty in Poland	0	2	2	1	1
Indicators for monitoring the phenomenon of energy poverty have been adopted	1	0	0	0	0
Rules for monitoring the phenomenon of energy poverty have been defined	1	0	0	0	0

0—criterion not present in the strategy; 1—criterion partially present in the strategy; 2—criterion fully present in the strategy. Source: own study based on [40,41,42,43,44].

, and detailed information is provided in Appendix A.1.

4.2.2. Priority and Protective Programs as National Policy Instruments for Combating Energy Poverty

The National Energy and Climate Plan 2024 outlines a package of financial instruments aimed at reducing energy poverty, primarily in the form of priority programs funded mainly by EU resources. The general characteristics of these programs are presented in

Table 6. Priority programs.

Program	Beneficiaries	Objective	Form of Support
STOP Smog	Municipalities with anti-smog resolutions and air quality issues	Thermal modernization and replacement of heat sources in the homes of the poorest	Grants for municipalities
Clean Air	Individuals—owners of single-family homes, categorized by income level	Replacement of heat sources, heat pumps, heat recovery ventilation, insulation, energy audits	Grants, grants with pre-financing, loan repayment, loans for municipalities
Warm Home	Municipalities, individuals (units in multi-family buildings), housing cooperatives (3–7 units)	Replacement of heat sources, improvement of energy efficiency in individual units, and comprehensive thermal modernization of housing cooperatives	Grants—three income levels for individuals; grants for housing communities
My Heat	Individuals—owners of newly built single-family homes	Support for the purchase of heat pumps in new residential buildings (heating, domestic hot water)	Grants
My Electricity	Individuals generating electricity for their own use (PV micro-installations)	Installation of photovoltaic micro-installations and devices for energy storage and increased self-consumption	Grants
TERMO	Local government units (LGUs), housing cooperatives and associations, social housing associations (TBS), social housing initiatives (SIM), commercial companies, individuals	Thermal modernization/renovation of buildings, installation of renewable energy sources, reinforcement of large-panel buildings	Thermo-modernization/renovation bonuses, grants (including RES and compensatory), partial loan repayment

Source: [49,50,51,52,53,54].

, while their detailed description—including information on income criteria, forms, and amounts of support—can be found in Appendix A.2. The beneficiaries of these priority programs include individuals, municipalities, and housing associations. The programs target the elimination of high-carbon heat sources and the implementation of renewable sources of heat and electricity, as well as improving the energy efficiency of buildings through thermal modernization. Additionally, these measures contribute to improving air quality and achieving climate goals. Support provided under the priority programs for households is in the form of grants, with higher funding allocated to lower-income beneficiaries. However, these grants typically do not cover 100% of investment costs, which may pose a barrier for economically disadvantaged individuals.

Moreover, the programs are not explicitly targeted at energy-poor households. A significant portion of this financial aid benefits households that can afford investments in renewable energy sources or thermal modernization. Similarly, municipalities and housing associations use these funds for projects in multi-family buildings. The criteria for individuals to receive support are based on income. However, indicators specifically measuring energy poverty are not used, meaning there is no mechanism to directly identify beneficiaries affected by this issue. The Stop Smog Program is likely the only initiative that effectively covers energy-poor households, as it targets low-income households for low-emission projects, particularly those receiving social assistance. These eligibility criteria align with the characteristics of energy-poor households identified in our study.

A complementary instrument to priority programs is the thermal modernization tax relief [55,56]. It serves as a financial incentive for households to undertake thermal modernization investments, including those related to renewable energy sources. Beneficiaries of the “Clean Air” program can also take advantage of this relief by deducting thermal modernization expenses from their income (revenue). The deduction amount cannot exceed PLN 53,000 (USD 13,054). The relief applies to expenditures on thermal modernization projects involving the following:

-

Improvements that reduce the demand for energy supplied for heating, domestic hot water heating, and heating of residential buildings;

-

Improvements that reduce primary energy losses in local heating networks and the local heat sources supplying them, provided that the residential buildings receiving energy from these networks meet legal energy-saving requirements or actions have been taken to reduce their energy consumption;

-

Construction of a technical connection to a centralized heat source, in connection with the elimination of a local heat source, resulting in reduced heating costs for residential buildings;

-

Total or partial replacement of energy sources with renewable energy sources or their application.

Protective instruments aimed at combating energy poverty have been introduced in Poland through legislative acts (Appendix A.3). The key law that initiated this type of support is the Energy Law Act. Since 2014, the Energy Law Act has allowed vulnerable electricity consumers (i.e., individuals receiving a housing allowance who meet income and residential space criteria) to apply for an energy allowance—a financial benefit compensating for household electricity expenses. The energy allowance was paid by municipalities and funded through targeted state budget subsidies. Payments continued until 2021 but were suspended between 2022 and 2024 due to the introduction of the Protective Allowance Act, passed as part of the Government’s Anti-Inflation Shield on 17 December 2021 [57]. The protective allowance, granted in 2022 and 2024, aimed to offset rising costs of food, electricity, and gas. This benefit supported low-income individuals and helped combat energy poverty. Unlike the energy allowance, the protective allowance expanded the pool of beneficiaries beyond vulnerable electricity consumers. This made it possible to extend support to households residing in larger residential units with higher incomes. In mid-2024, under the Act of 23 May 2024, on the Energy Voucher, a new financial instrument was introduced to mitigate the effects of rising electricity prices for households at risk of energy poverty [58]. The energy voucher set higher income thresholds than the protective allowance, further expanding the group of beneficiaries affected or at risk of energy poverty.

The energy voucher, like its predecessors, is a direct instrument for alleviating the effects of energy poverty. To some extent, this role is also played by the housing allowance, which municipalities provide from local budgets under the Act of 21 June 2001, on Housing Allowances [59]. The eligibility criteria for this support, which include household income and the usable area of the dwelling, result in assistance being granted only to a portion of households affected by or at risk of energy poverty. The granting mechanism excludes many energy-poor households living in single-family homes (due to the maximum usable area criterion) and households with incomes slightly exceeding the threshold but facing relatively high energy expenses (due to the income criterion).

Another instrument for mitigating energy poverty is the support program for vulnerable consumers struggling with overdue and current payments for electricity, gas, or related services, as established by the Energy Law Act [20]. Electricity and gas suppliers, as part of support programs, may offer consumers the following: deferral of payment deadlines for overdue and current electricity or gas bills or related services, installment plans, debt forgiveness, or waiving interest charges for late payments. The program provides households struggling to meet their energy and gas-related obligations with more flexible payment mechanisms.

5. Discussion

The statistical data analyses conducted in this article confirm the presence of a clear energy poverty problem in Poland, the main source of which is high electricity prices. The problem of energy poverty intersects with other social issues faced particularly by households in difficult financial situations. Therefore, it can be concluded that energy poverty in Poland replicates economic poverty, leading to its reinforcement. The issue of energy poverty in Poland is exacerbated by low energy efficiency and the poor technical condition of buildings. For this reason, energy poverty significantly affects households that are not economically impoverished. High energy costs are felt most acutely by households living in rural areas, both due to their low energy efficiency and the larger-than-necessary size of the properties. Additionally, this group of households has been identified as having the highest level of hidden energy poverty. Similar conclusions emerge from research conducted by Sokołowski et al. [4]. They identify three groups most at risk of multidimensional energy poverty in Poland: (a) households living in buildings constructed before 1946; (b) households whose primary source of income is a pension or disability pension; and (c) households residing in rural areas. Other analyses highlight the situation of women experiencing energy poverty (they make up 12% of energy-poor households), 80% of whom are older women living alone. For 84% of women living in energy poverty, the main source of income is a pension or other social benefits [60]. Despite this, Poland does not report high levels of inability to maintain heating in homes, with figures below the European average, which can be explained by the subjective nature of this indicator.

At the same time, the variation in the scale of energy poverty depending on the adopted measurement suggests the possibility of an inadequate assessment of the phenomenon at the national level. The Polish Economic Institute compared 14 different measures of energy poverty, and in 2022, it ranged from 3% to 40% in Poland [61]. A thorough diagnosis of this type of poverty at the local level is necessary, taking into account its various forms, in order to estimate the true scale of the phenomenon and design tailored support instruments [62]. The need for a standardized methodology is recognized by the authorities of Polish municipalities [63]. At the same time, research indicates that energy poverty in Poland is a challenge for the country’s sustainable development, which, for over a decade, has not been properly identified, defined, or addressed in the context of programming and implementing public policy [64]. As a result, support for those affected by energy poverty is relatively underdeveloped [65].

Poland has fulfilled the European Commission’s recommendations concerning the introduction of a definition of energy poverty into national law (slightly different from the EU definition, as it omits the issue of lack of access to hot water as a manifestation of energy poverty, as well as the impact of energy poverty on quality of life and health), the adoption of indicators for measuring poverty, and the setting of targets for its reduction in the National Energy and Climate Plan Update. However, an analysis of national strategies leads to the conclusion that there is a lack of a comprehensive, multi-sectoral policy on energy poverty in Poland. The framework for this policy has been formulated in a very general way in the National Energy and Climate Plan Update to 2030. Strategies concerning the state’s energy policy, social policy, and building modernization do not address this issue either diagnostically or programmatically. National strategies are not integrated in terms of policy for energy poverty.

The package of instruments aimed at reducing energy poverty in Poland, designed at the national level, consists of both short-term financial instruments (protective instruments) and structural ones (priority programs). Therefore, it can be stated that Poland has tools in place to ensure a fair energy transition and protect households at risk of energy poverty. Protective instruments provide direct financial support for energy-poor individuals, reducing the marginal cost of energy, but these are instruments that alleviate the symptoms, not the root cause, of the problem. They have an indirect impact on energy poverty because they are not systematically defined as measures to fight energy poverty and are related to housing deprivation (housing allowance) [66]. Furthermore, they are transfers from the state budget distributed through local governments. The social assistance sector does not diagnose the scale of energy poverty in a comprehensive and in-depth manner, and therefore does not monitor the effectiveness of protective programs aimed at reducing energy poverty. An important initiative that serves as an example of testing approaches to evaluating the effectiveness of protective programs is the Diagnosis of the Causes of Energy Poverty in the Mazowieckie Voivodeship from 2023 [67]. The report provides, among other things, subjective assessments of the effectiveness of protective instruments and can serve as a starting point for standardizing the system of measuring energy poverty across the country. It is particularly recommended to expand the set of energy poverty indicators to include subjective measures. These allow not only for determining that respondents are experiencing energy poverty, but also for identifying how they cope with meeting their energy needs under specific conditions. The authors of the report also point to the seasonality of research on the phenomenon, noting that conducting surveys during the summer may influence respondents’ perceptions of energy poverty [68]. The perception of the problem of heating one’s home changes with the seasons. To summarize, protective instruments do not give local authorities the opportunity to support energy-poor residents in a way that is tailored to their specific needs. The issue of the lack of financial tools to support energy-poor individuals by local governments is also pointed out by other authors [63].

Priority programs are focused on removing the causes of energy poverty through investments in renewable energy sources and building thermal modernization, which aligns with the guidelines of the European Commission. Additionally, the results of the Polish Economic Institute’s study confirm that support for the installation of photovoltaic panels, heat pumps, building thermal modernization, and the replacement of boilers is a much more effective method of long-term reduction of household energy costs than short-term subsidies for coal and energy bills [61]. In the case of priority programs, the criteria for selecting beneficiaries include income levels, and the support is in the form of grants, usually covering part (or, in the case of the Clean Air Program, up to 100%) of the expenses for thermal modernization investments, heat source replacements, or renewable energy sources. These guidelines may exclude the most impoverished households from structural support (due to a lack of funds for the required own contribution) or may direct support to households that are not affected by the issue (due to the lack of other criteria related to energy poverty). According to the analysis by Lipiński and Juszczak [61], support from priority programs does not reach households in municipal poverty (living in poor technical and sanitary conditions, with malfunctioning heating systems and inadequate building insulation, using solid fuel stoves such as coal or biomass) and hidden poverty (with extremely low energy expenditures, a high reliance on solid fuels, and a very high (above 25%) share of energy expenditures in their income). Only the Stop Smog Program is aimed at the poorest individuals receiving social assistance, but the subsidy, which is received by the municipality, can cover a maximum of 70% of the expenses, creating a problem for municipalities in securing funds for their own contribution. Moreover, municipalities with documented poor air quality and an anti-smog resolution adopted by the regional assembly are eligible for the program. Therefore, rural areas that do not experience poor air quality are excluded from the program’s impact. To date, the Podlaskie and Warmińsko-Mazurskie voivodeships have not adopted an anti-smog resolution, which also excludes municipalities in these regions from receiving program support. There is a need to ensure a fair redistribution of funds so that households in the most difficult energy situations are not excluded from support.

It seems that energy poverty is not a key issue but rather a secondary one addressed by the priority programs. These programs focus on the goal of reducing emissions and improving air quality. As a result, the effectiveness of the programs in reducing energy poverty may not meet expectations. The information on the implementation of priority programs focuses solely on the number of applications accepted, the amount of support provided, and the number of energy installations installed. It is therefore difficult to link the outcomes of priority programs with changes in the scale of energy poverty in Poland based on the available data.

Moreover, as the experiences of some Polish cities (e.g., Kraków) indicate, investments in low-emission heating sources among low-income households can lead to an increase in the scale of energy poverty within local communities [69]. Economically disadvantaged households connected to municipal heating networks may become energy-poor households due to the rising costs of heating energy and their inability to pay heating bills. Energy poverty, which involves the inability to maintain warmth in the home and leads to savings on heating costs from high-emission heating sources, can therefore transform into energy poverty characterized by a high share of energy expenditures in disposable income or the inability to pay bills. It is essential, therefore, to provide comprehensive support for energy-poor households, where changing the heating source will be accompanied by thermal modernization and protective support. Priority programs should thus counteract the risk of energy poverty arising from the support offered. This should also imply a shift in the approach to monitoring program outcomes. The monitoring indicators of these programs should reflect the achievement of the goal of reducing energy poverty.

6. Conclusions

Our analyses confirmed the presence of energy poverty in Poland, which is a consequence of high energy prices and low energy efficiency of buildings. Energy poverty primarily affects people with the lowest incomes. Those particularly vulnerable are homeowners, especially residents of rural areas. The analysis of national strategies showed that although energy poverty is recognized at the government level, it is not a priority for the Polish government. There is a lack of a detailed diagnosis of energy poverty and a comprehensive, dedicated program for its reduction. Poland’s energy policy focuses primarily on limiting emissions and improving energy efficiency in buildings, which leads to the marginalization of the energy poverty issue. The support instruments implemented in Poland, such as short-term or one-off financial transfers and long-term investments in thermal modernization or district heating network expansion, do not provide a comprehensive solution to the problem. These instruments often fail to address the specific needs of households.

In light of our findings, it is crucial to develop an approach that integrates the environmental, infrastructural, and social aspects of the energy transition, enabling effective intervention in the reduction of energy poverty. We propose the development of a separate, integrated program to combat energy poverty, linked to energy, social, housing, and climate policies. This would allow energy poverty to be treated as a distinct issue of public policy, rather than merely a component of income poverty or a side effect of climate policy. To achieve this, local in-depth diagnoses should be conducted using a standardized methodology for measuring energy poverty and determining its causes and effects in different types of households. These diagnoses should be a mandatory component of local development strategies and local strategies for addressing social problems. They should include both objective and subjective indicators, based directly on research conducted among residents. The report by the Mazovian Center for Social Policy can serve as a good practice example in this regard.

Systemic tools for reducing energy poverty should address the actual needs of households. These needs may vary depending on the type of household, place of residence, income levels, or the age of residents, which requires well-tailored solutions. Temporary or inadequately adapted forms of social support do not eliminate the problem but only partially address its income-related aspect. Better identification of local needs and conditions, as well as the development of energy poverty monitoring and evaluation of the effects of programs aimed at its reduction, requires strengthening the role of local governments in this area. To this end, actions should be taken to integrate protective support with structural interventions in order to minimize the risk that pro-climate measures (e.g., connecting households to district heating networks) will exacerbate energy poverty. This requires increased funding for protective measures at the local government level. Improving the monitoring of energy poverty should involve measuring the actual impact of interventions on reducing the phenomenon, using effectiveness indicators such as the number of households lifted out of energy poverty. A starting point is to standardize the approach to defining this issue. The evaluation of public policy on energy poverty should also include identifying unintended consequences of interventions (e.g., increased costs following a change in heat source).