The online survey on the floods in Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Croatia (20 May 2014; a convenience sample of 324 participants) shows that the dominant emotion toward the disaster was sadness, accompanied by pronounced fear, especially when it comes to Serbia. Upon hearing the news about the floods in Serbia, participants most often felt sad (47.53%) and frightened (32.41%), while anger and outrage were much rarer (8.33% and 5.25%). A similar pattern, with even stronger sadness, appears for BiH: sadness (66.05%) and fear (15.74%). For Croatia, sadness is also most common (57.72%), but indifference is more visible (13.89%) than in the case of Serbia (3.40%).
Despite the emotional shock, the survey records a high level of civic mobilisation. The most common forms of participation in alleviating the consequences of the floods were monetary donations (27.11%), followed by donating clothes and footwear (18.52%) and hygiene supplies (16.42%). Direct involvement in riskier activities was less frequent: flood prevention (5.12%) and rescuing victims (1.81%), suggesting that solidarity is primarily channelled through “mass and accessible” forms of assistance. A very small share report doing nothing (2.71%), while some say they did not participate but plan to do so later (3.01%). Open-ended responses further illustrate the spectrum of help—from volunteering, providing accommodation for evacuees, sending SMS donations, to spreading information via social networks.
Motivations for helping are strongly value-driven: open responses are dominated by humanity, solidarity, compassion, a sense of duty, and moral obligation, as well as a pragmatic awareness that “if you wait for the state, it will be too late.” An important doubt also emerges that may affect recovery: some participants explicitly raise the question of whether aid will end up being used for political marketing, indicating that trust and transparency become key conditions for sustained support.
When it comes to recovery, willingness to help remains high, but again relies mostly on donations: monetary contributions (29.89%) and giving goods (24.82%) are the most common. Still, a significant share are also ready for direct engagement: working on reconstruction without any compensation (12.86%) and providing professional services free of charge (11.78%). Smaller percentages support engagement with partial compensation (10.69% for labour; 5.25% for professional services), suggesting that among some respondents there is also a “I can, but under minimal conditions” logic.
The participant profile reflects a typical online sample: 56.17% women and 43.83% men, median age 29, mean 32.5. By status, the largest groups are students (21.30%) and currently unemployed respondents (14.51%), alongside employed participants and highly qualified professions. Regionally, the largest share of participants are from Belgrade (centre 22.84%) and Vojvodina (around 31% in total), with participation from other parts of Serbia and a smaller number from the region/diaspora.
Methodological note: this was an online survey, so the findings reflect the views and experiences of participants who chose to respond and cannot automatically be generalised to the entire population. Still, the data clearly point to a combination of collective empathy and a high willingness to help, along with a message that organisation, transparency in spending, and trust will be decisive for long-term recovery.