What is the purpose? Practitioners' perspectives of the Safe System approach to road safety in Australia

Green, Michael; Muir, Carlyn; Oxley, Jennifer · 2024 · Crossref

DOI: 10.1016/j.iatssr.2024.01.004

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates how road safety practitioners in Victoria, Australia, perceive the purpose of the Safe System approach and identifies the barriers and facilitators to its implementation. While Safe System is internationally recognized as a best-practice framework for reducing road traffic injuries, existing literature highlights difficulties in translating the concept into practice due to ambiguous policy directives and varied interpretations. The authors argue that practitioners are critical to this translation process, yet their perspectives on the approach’s purpose and the challenges they face have been under-researched. The study aims to clarify how practitioners understand Safe System and to examine the factors influencing its application. The research employed a cross-sectional online survey administered between November 2021 and April 2022. Of 691 completions, 469 responses from eligible road safety practitioners were analyzed. The instrument measured awareness, knowledge, perceptions of purpose, application history, and demographic factors, including role, seniority, and employment sector. Statistical analyses, including Chi-square tests, were used to examine relationships between practitioner characteristics and their interpretation of Safe System’s purpose and its practical application. Results indicate that 74.2% of respondents were aware of Safe System. Among those aware, the majority viewed the approach as multidimensional, seeing it as both a visionary goal and a practical tool. Specifically, 76.7% identified its purpose as reducing serious injuries and deaths, while 68.6% saw it as providing a broad vision for road safety. Approximately 62.8% of practitioners reported applying Safe System to their most recent project or program. Application rates varied by role and seniority; engineers were more likely to apply the approach than non-engineers, and managers were more likely to apply it than operational staff. Conversely, individuals working in policy roles were less likely to report recent application. Practitioners who had applied Safe System previously were significantly more likely to intend to use it in the future. Barriers to implementation were identified as being influenced by practitioner demographics, organizational role, and sector. The study concludes that while practitioners broadly support Safe System and recognize its dual nature as both a vision and a practical guide, effective application is hindered by various impediments. The findings suggest that interpretation of the approach’s purpose is linked to professional role and seniority, with managers and engineers showing higher engagement. The authors emphasize that reducing barriers to implementation is essential for the successful translation of Safe System policy into practice. This research addresses a gap in the literature by providing empirical evidence on practitioner perspectives, highlighting the need for clearer conceptual guidance and targeted support to facilitate consistent application across the road safety workforce.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-26; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• traffic safety culture