The structural fragmentation of energy poverty metrics limits global comparability and policy targeting

Energy poverty (EP) measurement has expanded from affordability-based indicators to increasingly complex multidimensional frameworks. However, this diversification has also generated a fragmented measurement landscape, marked by uneven dimensional coverage, weak methodological integration, and a strong reliance on context-specific assumptions. This study examines the structural organization of EP metrics by analyzing 25 widely used indices through a standardized coding of variables into 18 dimensions and seven methodological approaches. Using network analysis, similarity metrics, and coverage assessment, we identify systematic imbalances in how EP is conceptualized and operationalized. Results show that most indices capture less than 35% of the total dimensional space, while approximately 96% rely on only one or two methodological approaches. In parallel, around 92% of indices are developed within specific national or subnational contexts, limiting their transferability across climatic and institutional settings. These patterns reveal a structurally fragmented system dominated by a narrow set of economic and technical dimensions, with limited incorporation of contextual and structural drivers. The network structure further shows that measurement outcomes emerge from the interaction between variables, methodological choices, and analytical scale, rather than from the inclusion of individual dimensions. Based on these findings, the study reframes EP metrics as integrated evaluation frameworks rather than isolated measurement tools and proposes a three-layer conceptual structure that distinguishes between core outcome, determinant, and structural vulnerability dimensions. This approach provides a basis for improving comparability, interpretability, and policy relevance, supporting the development of more coherent and context-sensitive energy poverty assessments.