Hoy, ChristopherKim, Yeon SooImtiaz, SaadRojas Mendez, Ana MariaMeyer, MoritzCanavire Bacarreza, Gustavo JavierKim, LydiaSeitz, William HutchinsHelmy, ImaneUochi, IkukoTouray, SeringSingh, JuniSjahrir, Bambang SuharnokoPape, Utz JohannFuchs, AlanNguyen, Trang VanGencer, DefneLee, Min ASagesaka, AkikoContreras, Ivette2025-10-202025-10-202025-10-17https://hdl.handle.net/10986/43868Public opposition is a major barrier to economic reforms, such as subsidy removal. Using multilayered, randomized survey experiments with 10,000 respondents across ten surveys in five countries, this paper shows that opposition to energy price reforms is shaped more by design and communication than by cost. Around 70 percent of respondents strongly opposed a 100 percent immediate price increase, but resistance was nearly halved when reforms were phased in, targeted at high-energy consumers, or paired with compensation. Informational messages also reduced opposition by as much as halving the price increase. An expert prediction survey revealed systematic misunderstandings: specialists underestimated the influence of design features and greatly misperceived coping strategies and compensation preferences. These findings demonstrate that behavioral biases—such as present bias, loss aversion, and fairness heuristics—are as influential as economic costs in shaping people’s opposition to economic reforms, underscoring the importance of careful design and communication of politically sensitive reforms.en-USCC BY 3.0 IGOPOLITICAL ECONOMYPUBLIC FINANCESUBSIDIESCLIMATE CHANGEENERGY POLICYWorking PaperWorld Bank