This article discusses the experiences of Serbian citizens who came back to their country of origin just before or at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic and the introduction of the state of emergency. We analysed their motives to return and their experiences during self-isolation. We also highlighted the problems they encountered at the beginning of the pandemic and the impact they had expected the pandemic would have on their social and economic status. The paper covers their plans for mobility after the end of pandemic, as well as potential motives for staying in Serbia. The aim is to show that even though a large number of citizens came back to Serbia when the crisis broke out and could not have predicted what would happen to their social and economic status in their destination countries, they still did not intend to stay in Serbia after the end of the pandemic. The whole social system in Serbia would need to be changed for them to decide to stay. Discussion of the results is based on data collected at the beginning of pandemic by researchers from the Institute of Sociological Research, one of whom was the author of this paper. Due to the health risks related to the coronavirus, we used a quantitative method: a questionnaire distributed online via the Google platform. As such, the respondents were mostly young and educated people who took part in the research because they used the internet on a daily basis and were able to fill in the survey easily. For this reason, the results presented in this article cannot be generalised to represent the whole population, but only the respondents of this research. The findings are placed within a contextual framework in which the world?s population is extremely mobile. We recognised a similarly high level of mobility among Serbian citizens, too. The COVID-19 pandemic has affected many different aspects of life, and so a large share of respondents decided to come back to their home country. This was a normal coping strategy, especially for those migrants who did not have officially recognised status in their destination country. Returnees faced many problems when they returned to their home country; they had to self-isolate and did not know what would happen with their jobs once the pandemic was over. They also didn?t know if they would receive an income or what would happen with the social system, either in their home country or in their country of emigration. Analysis of the data revealed that despite their expectations of an economic crisis following the drastic measures introduced to suppress the spread of the coronavirus, a large share of respondents believed that the crisis wouldn?t have an impact on their material and social status in their destination country. Because of that, we noted that most respondents wished to go back to their destination country after the crisis was over. However, it?s suggested that if we want them to stay in Serbia, then the state should introduce measures that include both economic and social reforms.

МИР ЈА НА БО БИЋ mbo bic@f.bg.ac.rs МИ ЛИ ЦА ВЕ СКО ВИЋ АН ЂЕЛ КО ВИЋ mzan djel@f.bg.ac.rs Уни вер зи тет у Бе о гра ду Фи ло зоф ски фа кул тет Оде ље ње со ци о ло ги је Чи ка Љу би на 18-20, Бе о град, Ср би јаСА ЖЕ ТАК: Ср би ја при па да кор пу су од ви ше од по ло ви не зе ма ља све та ко је има ју ве о ма ни ске ни вое ра ђа ња. Пре ма по да ци ма по пи са из 2011, ни јед на ге не ра ци ја же на у Ср би ји (без Ко со ва и Ме то хи је), ро ђе них жи во та и оп ште оску ди це у дру штву по лу пе ри фе ри је. Та кве нор ме и ре продук тив не прак се, ни су, ка ко са вре ме на ли те та ту ра по ка зу је, у функ ци ји по ви ше ног ра ђа ња, већ на про тив, од ла га ња и од у ста ја ња од ра ђа ња, по себно, ви шег ре да. За то се као по ли тич ки од го вор пред ла же ак тив ни је укључи ва ње му шка ра ца у ро ди тељ ство, уво ђе њем кво те за оче ве у тра ја њу од две сед ми це, пла ће ног од су ства. Ова ме ра тре ба ло би да бу де пра ће на ши ром, дру штве ном про мо ци јом очин ства, по себ но у по слов ној сфе ри, код по сло да ва ца и дру гих за по сле них му шка ра ца.КЉУЧ НЕ РЕ ЧИ: же не/мај ке, му шкар ци/оче ви, стра те ги ја, ис тра жива ње, по ли ти ке, Ср би ја

This paper discusses intergenerational solidarity in care from the perspective of women, focusing on mothers as the main providers. It has been carried out in the context of very low fertility, negative population change, and advanced ageing in Serbia, amid conditions of strong familism. Two types of care were analysed: care of children and of elderly parents. Qualitative research was carried out in two towns and their outskirts: Belgrade and Kraljevo. The main method was a case study based on interviews and observation. The first aim was to shed light on the informal support mothers/parents receive around children: who helps them, what help they receive, and why they receive help. The results supported the authors? initial expectations that mothers/parents rely heavily on grandparents, primarily grandmothers. The help grand-parents provide is reported to be daily, extensive, and exhaustive. Mothers, how-ever, deem that it contributes to happy and healthy ageing. Although caring for elderly people is still not widespread among respondents, they nevertheless presented their views on the issue. Again, in line with initial assumptions, care of elderly people was shown to be an indispensable part of family life. The empirical results reflect that the main explanation stems from strong solidarity based on kinship, which thus moulds both attitudes and behaviour. Elderly parents will be taken care of by their children, and this is considered natural, self-understandable, and an expression of vast gratitude. Putting elderly people into institutional care (nursing homes) is a rare choice that is only made when they cannot live on their own and take care of themselves, or if there are many elderly kin who need support.

No abstract

Diaspora phenomena, it?s characteristics and functions, were changing in a resent decade along with momentum of globalization notably. This requires new research approaches. Unlike a previous period when migrants visited their homelands rarely or never, they came more often today. They contact with friends and family nearly every day. Because of that, relationships besides members of diaspora and their Motherland is changed. Communications besides migrants and nonmigrants in the homeland make transnational networks which enable that migrants investing their resources without need for return and has a big potential for a Motherland?s prosperity. Intensivity of migrations in a every part of the world have impact to expanding migrants social networks (social capital become bigger) and acquiring a new knowledge (their human capital became bigger). That is reason for interest of policy makers became greather for human and social capital although it was only for monetary remittance earlier. New knowledge and technology application together with consultation with experts all around the world are available for the Motherland because diasporas social capital. They could be very important resource for its economically, cultural and social prosperity. However, it?s important to know that interaction with a people with a different culture has impact to change and experience of personal identity by migrants. That requires modification of earlier understanding identity members of diaspora. Theirs identity had a core in a national identity earlier, but today it has a form of hybridity. In a meso level, respecting by Motherland perspective, that?s mean that national identity doesn?t main motive for diaspora investing anymore and that?s important to make a new stimulating migration policy. Therefore, the goal of this paper is to point diaspora phenomena changing - change resources and influence to the Motherland. As a first, the emphasis is on transnational networks which change communication mode and relationship members of diaspora and Motherland, but they have impact to growth of social capital of migrants which could be invested in homeland potentially. These networks enable easier to acquire a knowledge and it?s transfer. That is why human capital become more readily available for the Motherland. But, hybrid diaspora identity must be motive for change state diaspora policy which was based in an emotional component of national identity. They must change in way of making a more favorable structural conditions for diaspora investment which is a preconditions to attracting human and social capital of diaspora that could have a big impact to the Motherland?s progress.