How European Union Policies Feel. Insights from a crowdsourcing study

This working paper presents the results of a crowdsourcing exercise conducted within the MORES project to explore how moral emotions shape citizens’ perceptions of European Union policies. Drawing on 1,363 responses collected between May and August 2025, the study examines emotional reactions, perceived appropriateness of EU action, policy familiarity, and identity across five salient policy domains: the war between Russia and Ukraine, migration and asylum, climate policy (Green Deal), food safety, and economic policy coordination. Using descriptive statistics and exploratory bivariate analysis, the paper identifies distinct emotional and attitudinal configurations across policy areas. The findings show that EU support for Ukraine stands out as a unifying case, combining high familiarity, strong perceived legitimacy, and positive emotions such as pride and compassion closely aligned with European identity. By contrast, migration and asylum policy emerges as the most divisive domain, characterised by high familiarity but very low perceived appropriateness and strong negative emotions, indicating an area where attitudes are resistant to changing and largely driven by affective predispositions. Climate, fiscal, and food policies occupy intermediate positions, marked by ambivalence, conditional support, and varying emotional foundations. The analysis highlights that familiarity does not automatically translate into legitimacy and that emotional structures differ significantly across policy domains. These results suggest the importance of integrating emotional awareness into EU policymaking and communication strategies. While the crowdsourcing sample is not representative of the EU population, the findings offer analytical insights into how emotionally and civically engaged citizens evaluate EU action, pointing to the need for differentiated approaches to strengthening trust, legitimacy, and democratic resilience.