The climate cost of mistrust: when environmental policy backfires in traditional communities

A well-meaning environmental tax turned into a cultural flashpoint: a new study shows that Israel’s 2021 tax on single-use plastics caused a sharp and lasting drop in climate support among the ultra-Orthodox community. Driven by a deep sense of political victimization—not financial burden—many saw the tax as an attack on their way of life. Even years after the tax was repealed, the damage to environmental trust still lingers.

A new study by Leah Bloy from Business Administration at Hebrew University, in collaboration with Dr. Nechumi Malovicki-Yaffe, Dr. Boaz Hameiri, and Dr. Ram Fishman from Tel Aviv University, reveals that Israel’s 2021 tax on single-use plastics—though short-lived—triggered a long-lasting decline in pro-environmental attitudes among the country’s ultra-Orthodox (Haredi) population. Published in Policy Sciences, the study sheds light on the unintended psychological consequences of well-intentioned environmental regulation.

The researchers conducted six rounds of surveys among ultra-Orthodox participants from 2021 to 2024. Immediately after the tax was enacted, the study observed a sharp drop in “pro-climate” attitudes within the community—driven not by the economic burden of the tax, but by a powerful sense of victimhood. Many respondents believed the tax was politically motivated and unfairly targeted their community rather than genuinely aimed at environmental protection.

"These findings are both fascinating and concerning," said Leah Bloy. "Our data show that when environmental policies are perceived as punitive or politically charged, they can provoke a backlash that undermines long-term climate goals—even after the policy itself is revoked."

Indeed, even two years after the tax was repealed, negative attitudes toward climate-related issues persisted. While the sense of victimhood diminished, resistance to environmental messaging remained high. The authors argue that this lasting impact highlights the importance of accounting for psychological and social dynamics when designing policy—especially in marginalized or politically sensitive populations.

The study underscores that marginalized groups may react to environmental regulation not only through financial concerns but through a lens of identity, fairness, and social exclusion. The ultra-Orthodox community, which has among the highest per capita use of single-use plastics in Israel, initially responded with decreased consumption. However, this short-term behavior change came at the cost of long-term erosion in environmental support.

According to the authors, the key takeaway is the need for moral reframing—the process of aligning policy communication with the values of the target population. “In the case of the ultra-Orthodox community,” said Bloy, “connecting environmental protection to the Torah principle of bal tashchit—'Thou shalt not destroy'—could have fostered a more constructive dialogue.”

This research has broader implications for climate policy worldwide, especially in diverse societies where trust in government varies and political polarization is high. The authors call for more culturally informed and psychologically sensitive approaches to environmental legislation to avoid alienating the very populations whose cooperation is most needed. 

These insights may hold lessons far beyond environmental policy. As Israel grapples with deepening societal rifts over contentious issues like ultra-Orthodox enlistment in the IDF, this research offers a potential roadmap for fostering cooperation. Policies perceived as externally imposed or culturally insensitive can entrench resistance and mistrust. But when framed in alignment with the values and narratives of the target community, even difficult conversations can become opportunities for partnership rather than polarization.