Haredi (ultra-Orthodox) families living in the periphery are not simply replicating the same patterns of community life seen in Jerusalem and Bnei Brak – rather, they are developing measurably different household profiles, including smaller families, higher reliance on cars, and greater exposure to screens, according to a Shoresh Institution study released on Monday.
The research, authored by Dr. Pavel Jelnov, examines how the accelerating migration of haredi households out of central Israel – driven in part by surging housing prices – intersects with transportation, spending patterns, and fertility decisions.
Relying on the Central Bureau of Statistics’ data on periphery clusters, the study illustrates the geographic shift using predominantly haredi municipalities such as Beit Shemesh and Beitar Illit, where the number of haredi households buying homes increased severalfold in recent years as similar purchases in core cities like Jerusalem and Bnei Brak fell sharply.
One of the study’s central findings is demographic: among haredi households headed by individuals aged 30-39, families in the periphery average 3.9 children, compared to 4.8 children among similar households in the center – nearly one less child per family.
The findings likewise describe a widening gap at later ages, with haredim in the periphery reaching “about four children… vs five in the center” by ages 35-39.
Lower housing and higher transportation
Shoresh’s analysis links part of the divergence to the practical constraints of life outside dense haredi hubs, where daily needs can often be met on foot, through nearby institutions, and within tightly knit community infrastructure.
While haredi households in the periphery spend substantially less – about 30%-40% less – on housing than their counterparts in the center, their transportation and communication expenses are higher, reflecting longer commuting distances and weaker access to public transit.
Additionally, among ages 18-29, monthly per-capita transportation and communication spending averages to about NIS 1,483 in the periphery vs NIS 1,107 in the center, rising at ages 40 and older to NIS 2,134 vs NIS 1,589, respectively.
Income, however, the research shows, does not rise in tandem. It places per-capita monthly income for haredi households at roughly 3,500-3,700 shekels in the periphery compared to 4,300-4,500 shekels in central Israel, even as lower housing costs partially offset the gap and enable higher savings.
The study found that the relationship between car ownership and fertility among haredi households is not uniform, but shifts over the life cycle. Among younger families, access to a private car is associated with higher fertility, likely reflecting the practical advantages of mobility in areas lacking dense, walkable community infrastructure.
At later stages, however, the pattern reverses: older haredi households with cars tend to have fewer children than comparable households without cars, suggesting that reliance on private transportation may substitute for the close-knit institutional environment that traditionally supports larger families.
The study also points to indicators beyond mobility. Among haredi households aged 30-39, television ownership was found to be markedly higher in the periphery – 6.9% vs 1.5% in the center – described as evidence that a larger share of periphery households maintain a “relatively modern lifestyle” on at least this measure.
Another finding with broader socioeconomic implications concerns women’s education. The research shows higher rates of matriculation certificates and/or academic degrees among haredi women in the periphery compared to the center (41.4% vs 33.6% in one breakdown).
The Shoresh Institution for Socioeconomic Research, headed by Prof. Dan Ben-David, describes itself as an independent, nonpartisan policy research center that provides evidence-based analysis of Israel’s core socioeconomic challenges to policymakers and the public.
Ben-David found that housing and dispersal decisions are “not merely technical,” saying that the periphery’s geographic distance and mobility constraints can “have a tangible impact on family structure and fertility” with long-term demographic implications.