Climate mandates can backfire, weakening public support for environmental action

New research published in Nature Sustainability reveals a troubling paradox for climate policy: forcing people to adopt greener lifestyles through mandates and bans can actually undermine environmental values and trigger political backlash, even among those who already care about climate change.

The study, conducted by researchers at the Santa Fe Institute, surveyed over 3,000 Germans and found that people strongly resist policies they perceive as limiting their personal freedom—such as restrictions on thermostat temperatures, meat consumption, or urban driving bans. Surprisingly, opposition to climate-related mandates was 52% stronger than resistance to COVID-19 restrictions like mask and vaccine requirements. “I didn’t expect that people’s opposition to climate-mandated lifestyle [changes] would be so extreme,” said study co-author Katrin Schmelz.

Germany’s recent experience illustrates these risks in action. The country’s 2023 law effectively banning new gas heating systems became a symbol of government overreach, dubbed the “heating hammer” by opponents. The policy contributed to significant political backlash that helped bring down the governing coalition, demonstrating how restrictive climate policies can damage broader environmental progress.

The research suggests that successful climate policies should focus on making green alternatives more attractive and abundant through incentives and rebates, rather than restricting choices. As study co-author Sam Bowles explained, “People don’t feel like they are being controlled by a higher price” compared to outright bans. The findings emphasize that policy design matters as much as policy ambition—and that treating citizens as partners rather than obstacles may be key to lasting environmental progress.