A review finds that team cohesion, fair treatment, clear communication and reliable support help sustain volunteering in high-risk services.
Researchers reviewed evidence on motivation and dropout among volunteers in fire services, emergency medical services, search and rescue, and civil protection. The review covered 8,162 volunteers across 23 countries and examined both personal experiences and organizational conditions.
Across the studies, team cohesion, identification and mutual trust were the most consistent factors supporting retention. Clear roles, realistic preparation, good training, constructive feedback, meaningful input and local discretion also supported motivation, while overload, work–family conflict, burnout, secondary trauma, poor leadership and perceived unfairness undermined it.
What keeps volunteers involved
The review identified a strong and consistent role for relatedness—the feeling of belonging and mutual trust—in sustaining emergency volunteers. Team cohesion, identification with the group and trust between members were linked with continued involvement across the settings studied.
Volunteers’ sense of competence was supported by clear responsibilities, realistic preparation, high-quality training and constructive feedback. Their sense of autonomy was supported by having a meaningful voice in decisions and some discretion at the local level.
Demotivation and withdrawal were associated with chronic overload, conflict between volunteering and family life, burnout, secondary trauma, high alert demands, poor leadership and communication, and a perceived lack of fairness or recognition. The review describes retention mainly as an outcome of how organizations are designed and managed, rather than simply as a result of individual resilience.
Why organizational support matters
Emergency services depend heavily on volunteers, but high-risk organizations can struggle with demotivation and dropout. The findings suggest that organizations may be able to support retention through practical choices: building trust within teams, preparing people realistically, communicating clearly, recognizing their contributions, treating them fairly and managing risks in ways volunteers can trust.
The review frames these measures as ways to better align volunteers’ expectations with their actual experience and to create safer, more reliable systems as societies face growing risks.
Evidence and caveats
This was a preregistered, protocol-driven systematic review conducted under PRISMA guidelines. Researchers searched seven international databases, screened 3,684 records and included 87 empirical studies from 23 countries. They assessed study quality using established checklists for quantitative and qualitative research.
The evidence combines findings from different study designs, countries and emergency services, so it identifies recurring factors rather than one universal effect size. The abstract does not report a pooled estimate or establish that any single organizational change directly causes volunteers to stay. The results also depend on the quality and scope of the underlying studies.
// Source
Safety Science · 2026 · DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2026.107425
Authors: Niklas Tschäschke, Meinald T. Thielsch
Institutions: University of Wuppertal
