If you found yourself having to leave your home in the middle of the night without knowing if, and when, you would return, what would you take with you? Common sense is about food, clothing, power banks and electronic devices. But for many of us, it is emotional attachment that wins in the end: childhood games, photos and family treasures are at the top of the list, before what is necessary for survival. This is what emerges from the “After the End” project, a survey that assessed the population’s preparedness in the event of sudden crises and natural disasters, in the wake of the indications of the European Commission, which since last year has recommended that all citizens of the Union have a “go bag” ready with which to survive for at least 72 hours in the event of wars or natural disasters. The conclusions reveal two unexpected truths: the first is that the vast majority of the population did not listen to the Commission and is absolutely unprepared in case of emergencies; the second, that many give more importance to the sentimental value of objects, and the emotional stability they can arouse, than they give to their usefulness.
The discrepancy between recommendations and reality
Government guidelines, including the UK’s Prepare initiative and the European PreparEU programme, recommend that citizens keep sufficient supplies of food, water and medicines at home for at least 72 hours. Added to these basic necessities are identity documents, cash, batteries, portable chargers and hand-crank radios.
To verify the effectiveness of the awareness campaigns launched by the European authorities, the After the End project carried out a survey among a thousand citizens of the United Kingdom, arriving at a merciless conclusion: only four participants out of a thousand declared having a complete emergency kit compliant with official indications. A figure that is confirmed by the 2025 UK Public Survey of Risk Perception, Resilience and Preparedness, in which only 13 percent of the over ten thousand interviewees considered themselves adequately prepared to face a catastrophic event.
The value of affective objects during a crisis
The research has highlighted a profound divergence between the rational planning of the authorities and the real psychological reactions of citizens. When participants were asked what items they would put in their evacuation bag beyond medical or food supplies, many pointed to items with personal and sentimental meaning.
Among the most frequent responses were childhood soft toys, family photographs and personal memories. According to the authors of the study, the need to save an emotional symbol is not an irrational behavior, but responds to the psychological need to protect one’s emotional well-being in the face of the trauma of displacement and the loss of the daily routine.
Rethink emergency response strategies
The results of the survey could have concrete consequences on European risk planning and communication strategies. In fact, they suggest the need to integrate emergency protocols with greater attention to psychological aspects. Focusing exclusively on physical survival risks ignoring the tools that allow individuals to overcome the emotional stress generated by a disaster.
The authors of the survey (whose results are awaiting publication in a scientific journal) highlight how the long-term resilience of citizenship also depends on the preservation of individual identity. Integrating the emotional aspect into prevention campaigns could therefore improve public compliance with preparedness standards and ensure a more effective response during evacuation phases.