Malaysia’s increasingly urbanised population may enjoy greater access to infrastructure and services, but living in a city does not necessarily mean enjoying equal access to the systems that keep urban life affordable, connected and liveable.
This is the central argument in “Energy, Infrastructure and Inequality: Understanding Unequal Impacts in Urban Areas” by Theebalakshmi Kunasekaran of the Khazanah Research Institute (KRI). The commentary highlights how energy price volatility can amplify existing inequalities, with the impact shaped not only by household income but also by where people live, how they travel and the type of homes they occupy.
About 77.9% of Malaysian households live in urban areas, with urbanisation exceeding 90% in states such as Selangor, Penang and Melaka. Yet, even in highly urbanised areas, gaps remain in the availability and accessibility of essential services.
Urban infrastructure is not equally accessible
Basic services such as water, electricity, sanitation and waste collection are often taken for granted in cities. However, the commentary points to persistent disparities.
Garbage collection, for instance, had the lowest level of service coverage among the basic amenities measured in the 2024 Basic Amenities Survey. While access to garbage collection at urban households’ living quarters improved from 82.8% in 2022 to 87.5% in 2024, geographical access to collection services remained uneven.
Around 2.3% of urban households still lacked access to garbage collection in 2024, while 2.8% did not have piped water. The differences are particularly stark between states, with urban households in Penang and the Federal Territories reporting universal access to garbage collection, compared with 7.5% of urban households in Johor.
For Theebalakshmi, these gaps matter because infrastructure inequality is not simply a question of whether a service exists. It is also about whether that service is reliable, accessible and affordable.
Energy shocks ripple through city life
Energy sits at the centre of this equation.
Electricity powers water treatment plants, pumping systems, buildings and other critical infrastructure, while petrol and diesel underpin transportation, logistics, waste collection and the movement of goods. Consequently, increases in energy costs can feed through into the cost of delivering essential urban services.
The effects are not confined to utility bills. Higher fuel prices can raise transportation and logistics costs, while higher electricity costs can increase the operating expenses of water systems and shared facilities in high-rise buildings.
This means an energy shock can ultimately show up in household expenses in ways that are not immediately obvious.
The cost of living depends on where you live
Income remains an important determinant of vulnerability, but it is not the only one.
Lower-income households are generally more exposed to increases in living costs, although government subsidies can provide some protection. At the same time, middle-income households — particularly those that fall outside eligibility thresholds for assistance — can face significant pressure from rising costs despite having higher incomes.
Location adds another layer.
Urban sprawl has allowed households to find relatively more affordable homes outside major employment centres. But the lower cost of housing can come with a higher transportation bill.
Longer commutes often increase dependence on private vehicles, leaving households in suburban and secondary urban areas more exposed to fuel-price increases. While initiatives such as BUDI95 can cushion some of the impact, households with long daily commutes and workers in e-hailing and delivery services can remain particularly sensitive to fuel costs.
The problem is compounded by gaps in first- and last-mile public transport connectivity. Where buses are infrequent or rail stations are difficult to reach, private vehicles remain the more practical option for many commuters.
High-rise living carries another energy burden
Housing type also determines how households experience energy costs.
Malaysia’s growing supply of serviced apartments and mixed-use developments means more urban residents are living in stratified buildings with shared facilities such as lifts, water pumps, lighting, security systems, swimming pools and gyms.
These facilities consume electricity, and their operating costs are ultimately borne by residents through maintenance charges. Unlike owners of landed homes, residents in high-rise developments have limited control over energy consumption in common areas.
The burden can be even greater for serviced apartments and mixed-use developments operating under commercial titles, where commercial utility rates and higher building operating costs can translate into higher maintenance charges despite the properties being used as homes.
The commentary also highlights an important distinction in the provision of urban services. In some serviced apartments and mixed-use developments, waste collection may be managed by Joint Management Bodies or Management Corporations through private contractors, with residents bearing the cost through maintenance fees.
Building resilience beyond income
The broader lesson is that urban inequality cannot be measured solely through household income.
Two households earning similar incomes can face very different financial pressures depending on whether they live close to employment centres or far from them, whether they live in landed housing or a high-rise development, and whether basic services are directly provided by local authorities or funded through building management fees.
Energy volatility can therefore expose inequalities that are embedded in the design and management of cities.
As Malaysia’s urban population continues to expand, the challenge for policymakers is not simply to build more infrastructure but to ensure that infrastructure remains accessible, affordable, reliable and resilient when costs rise or disruptions occur.
The consequences of failing to do so extend beyond household finances. Poorly maintained infrastructure and disruptions to water, sanitation, waste management and transport can affect public health, environmental quality, economic activity and community wellbeing.
For Malaysia’s cities, therefore, energy resilience is increasingly inseparable from social resilience. The question is not merely how much infrastructure a city has, but who can access it, who pays for it and who bears the greatest cost when the system comes under pressure.
Article attributed to Theebalakshmi Kunasekaran. 2026. Energy, Infrastructure and Inequality: Understanding unequal impacts in urban areas. Kuala Lumpur: Khazanah Research Institute. The original article has been rewritten to fit BusinessToday format.
