This article examines Greek households’ energy and transport poverty and vulnerability, two concepts often intertwined in policy, making use of both single and composite indicators. The methodology employed aligns with the European Social Climate Fund regulation, using household income from economically active members and the share of expenditures on fossil-based energy use in buildings and transport, as well as the required investment costs in energy efficiency improvements for dwellings or transport decarbonization measures. Through these indicators, the proportion of energy-vulnerable households in Greece ranges from 19% to 40%, while transport vulnerability varies between 22% and 43%. Notably, the analysis reveals that households in higher income categories can still be highly vulnerable, depending on household size, composition and dependency, which impact energy and transport needs. As such, the research findings reveal that the current legislative frameworks may not fully capture the vulnerability of certain demographic groups in the event of additional costs of fossil fuels due to new climate policies. Therefore, it is strongly recommended that policymakers adjust criteria to better target vulnerable households based on their unique characteristics and needs, and use improved data collection systems to monitor energy and transport poverty and vulnerability.

Peer-reviewed paper 4-078-26 With the transposition of the Energy Efficiency Directive (EED) still lacking uniformity across the European Union (EU), the European Commission urges prompt implementation of decarbonisation actions. The design and implementation of energy efficiency-oriented measures are reportedly lagging, as energy planning requires expert knowledge and resources to capture, assess, and monitor the multiple impacts (MI) of energy efficiency (EE). At the same time, Article 3 of the EED recast explicitly promotes the integration of cost-benefit analysis to enhance transparency and evidence-based justification through appropriate context-sensitive tools. This paper discusses how capacity-building activities support EU planners in capturing and integrating EE and MI into planning processes, enabling them to overcome persistent planning barriers and to achieve set objectives. For this reason, a contextual analysis of empirical evidence was conducted, based on qualitative data collected during trainings on the use of the Multiple Impacts Calculation Tool (MICATool), involving representatives from ministries, research institutes, and energy agencies from 7 EU countries. By confronting current practices, insights were derived regarding planning goals and barriers, as well as the added value of capacity-building for capturing MI and for the successful implementation of EE measures. The results reveal that planners need to address complexity and data gaps, while facing cross-sectoral communication challenges that hinder planning processes. The study further discusses the incremental role of capacity-building within planning systems, portraying it not only as a means for knowledge distribution but also as a vehicle for situational analysis and awareness across planning contexts. Finally, the paper argues that despite the numerous available EU capacity-building activities, common planning barriers across countries demand structural changes in planners’ training, based on greater institutionalisation, continuity, contextualisation, and silo-breaking across disciplines, sectors, actors, and borders. Ultimately, only through such systemic reforms can EU energy planners be adequately equipped to bridge the gap between policy ambition and on-the-ground implementation, accelerating the transition toward a decarbonised EU.