ArticleHeliyon2024
Multidimensional energy poverty: A study of its measurement, decomposition, and determinants in Indonesia.
Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Family participation in dignity interventions for patients with cancer receiving palliative care: A scoping review.Asia-Pacific journal of oncology nursing · 2025Review
- Multidimensional energy poverty in Colombia: A department-level review from 2018 to 2022.Heliyon · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study estimated Indonesian households' Multidimensional Energy Poverty Index (MEPI) using Alkire-Foster's multidimensional poverty concept to capture the incidence, intensity, decomposition, and changes over time. The study used monetary and non-monetary variables to identify the availability, accessibility, affordability, consumption, and deprivation of modern energy services; and compared existing affordability indicators. Redundancy, robustness, and sensitivity tests were conducted with three weighting schemes and deprivation cut-offs. The study decomposed and determined household-head (HH) socio-economic, demographic, and geographic factors for MEP using the Logit, Probit, Tobit, and Heckman Selection models. The results show that the low-income and high cost (LIHC) was the most robust affordability indicator, followed by the ten percent rule (TPR). The complement-frequency weighting scheme gave the smallest and most robust MEPI compared to equal and principal component analysis (PCA) weighting. Three alternative deprivation cut-offs can show households as "vulnerable," "moderately," or "severely" energy poor. The MEP incidence decreased, but its intensity remained high and increased. Energy-poor households were averagely deprived of 55-60 % of all weighted indicators. The lack of modern cooking services was the primary cause. MEPI differed by geographical location and HH gender, education, business field, and employment status. Policies that boost education levels, raise household income, and increase the availability, accessibility, and affordability of modern cooking technology in the rural, hinterland, or non-coastal forested locations in the eastern islands of Indonesia may minimize the number of households experiencing MEP.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.