Traffic Safety Culture within the Safe System 

Why We Conduct Research?

At The Culture Factor Group, we believe in unlocking culture with data. Our research advances the understanding of how culture shapes decisions, organisations, and societies. By analysing large-scale data, we refine existing models, challenge assumptions, and provide insights that drive better leadership, HR policies, and global strategies.

To commission a research project contact us.

Every year, approximately 20,000 people die on European roads and at least 100,000 are severely injured, numbers widely regarded as unacceptably high. Despite decades of progress through improved infrastructure, vehicle technology, and enforcement, fatality trends are stagnating or reversing in several countries. Road safety experts increasingly argue that lasting improvement requires something deeper: a shift in the shared beliefs, values, and social norms of all stakeholders involved in the transport system.

This study is directly relevant to transport policymakers, road safety authorities, fleet and mobility managers, HR professionals in logistics and professional driving sectors, and academic researchers working at the intersection of culture, behaviour, and safety. It is timely because the Safe System approach, now the global standard for road safety management, requires a robust, shared understanding of traffic safety culture to translate formal policy into real behavioural change. Without a common definition, measurement remains fragmented and interventions lose focus.

Purpose of the Research

Despite growing use of the term "traffic safety culture" in both research and policy, the concept has lacked a single, agreed definition. It has been measured and applied inconsistently across contexts, limiting its utility as a tool for intervention and assessment.

This study sets out to fill that gap by:

• Reviewing existing definitions of both organisational safety culture (relevant to professional drivers and fleet contexts) and traffic safety culture (relevant to private road users in society)
• Identifying the conceptual elements, such as values, norms, beliefs, and behavioural patterns, that appear consistently across definitions
• Developing a unified, theoretically grounded definition applicable to all actors within the transport system, from individual road users to organisations, authorities, and other stakeholders

The research builds on and bridges two established but previously separate fields: the mature literature on organisational safety culture (rooted in high-risk industries such as nuclear, aviation, and rail) and the more nascent field of traffic safety culture in broader societal contexts.

Source: Nævestad, T.-O., Wennberg, H., Kaiser, S., Yannis, G., Laiou, A., Nicolaou, D., Blom, J., Milch, V., Hesjevoll, I. S., Van den Berghe, W., Meesmann, U., & De Roeck, M. (2026, May 18–21). Advancing traffic safety culture: Developing a conceptualisation of cultural maturity among traffic safety stakeholders. Transport Research Arena 2026, Budapest, Hungary.

Findings

Literature Review
The systematic review, drawing on 48 included studies for traffic safety culture and 229 for organisational safety culture, found that most definitions across both fields share a common conceptual core. Regardless of sector or context, safety culture is consistently described in terms of shared values, beliefs, attitudes, norms, and patterns of behaviour. The review also confirmed that organisational safety culture is a significantly more mature field with well-established measurement frameworks, whereas traffic safety culture research remains conceptually fragmented.

Delphi Studies
Two rounds of Delphi surveys were conducted with international experts, one panel focusing on traffic safety culture in society (n=20 repeat respondents), one on organisational safety culture for professional drivers (n=21 repeat respondents). Across both panels, norms, values, beliefs, attitudes, and patterns of behaviour received the highest importance ratings (all mean scores above 8.0 on a 10-point scale) with strong consensus. For organisational safety culture, management commitment and leadership scored highest (mean 9.2), followed by employee involvement, communication, and safety systems and procedures (all above 9.0). Agreement was high and largely stable between rounds.

Focus Group Discussions
Two focus groups (n=12 experts; one online, one in Athens) refined the definitions and raised important practical considerations: the need for definitions sensitive to social context; the importance of distinguishing the appropriate unit of analysis (nation, community, peer group, organisation); the value of a single unified definition covering all transport system actors; and the risk of conceptual circularity when behaviour is listed as both a component and an outcome of culture.

The Proposed Definition
Based on the triangulated findings, the study proposes the following unified definition:

Traffic safety culture encompasses shared values, beliefs, attitudes, norms, and patterns of behaviours that shape how traffic safety is understood and enacted within a meaningfully defined group of actors in the transport system. This meaningfully defined group of actors can refer to road users, organisations, authorities, or other actors within the transport system.

Implications

For Policymakers and Road Safety Authorities:
The definition provides a conceptual foundation for translating Safe System principles into cultural interventions. It highlights that formal policies and infrastructure alone are insufficient, lasting change requires addressing the informal cultural values, norms, and beliefs that shape actual road user behaviour.

For Businesses and Fleet Operators:
Organisations with professional drivers can apply the organisational safety culture dimensions identified, particularly management commitment, employee involvement, safety communication, and a learning culture, to benchmark and improve their safety culture.

For Researchers:
The study provides the first triangulated, expert-validated unified definition of traffic safety culture, establishing a common framework for measurement and cross-context comparison. It opens pathways for developing survey instruments and comparative studies across regions and population groups.

For Educators and Public Communications Professionals:
The focus group findings highlight the need for practitioner-facing definitions that are accessible and actionable. Future work should translate the core definition into language suited to different audiences, including school programmes, public campaigns, and professional training.

Methodology

• Step 1 - Systematic Literature Reviews: Two parallel reviews using Web of Science and Scopus, following a simplified PRISMA approach. The traffic safety culture search yielded 48 included studies; the organisational safety culture search yielded 229 studies (restricted to 2010–2025, covering road, rail, air, sea, and nuclear sectors).
• Step 2 - Delphi Studies: Two online Delphi surveys conducted in two rounds (September–November 2025) via the Walr platform. The traffic safety culture panel comprised 20 repeat respondents across 14 countries; the organisational safety culture panel comprised 21 repeat respondents from 12 countries.
• Step 3 - Focus Group Discussions: Two focus groups (total n=12) held in November 2025, one online, one in Athens, with international experts in traffic safety and safety culture, following a semi-structured format.

Research Limitations & Implications

• With 20–21 repeat respondents per panel, samples are at the lower boundary recommended for Delphi subgroups; results should be interpreted with appropriate caution regarding statistical robustness.
• Round 1 response rates were 41% (traffic safety culture) and 19% (organisational safety culture), reflecting the relatively small global pool of specialists in these fields.
• Only two Delphi rounds were conducted due to time constraints within the EU TRUST project; supplementary focus groups and literature reviews partially compensate for this.
• Consensus was assessed on the basis of overall agreement and cross-round stability rather than a formal quantitative criterion, introducing some interpretive subjectivity.
• Both the literature reviewed and the expert panels are predominantly European and North American, limiting immediate generalisability to other cultural, institutional, and infrastructural contexts.
• Several experts reported difficulty distinguishing between closely related elements (beliefs, values, attitudes), reflecting genuine conceptual overlap in the field.

What is peer reviewed?

This research has undergone a rigorous peer-review process, ensuring that its methodology, findings, and conclusions meet the highest academic standards. Peer review involves independent evaluation by experts in the field, ensuring objectivity, reliability, and scientific integrity.

• Title: Traffic Safety Culture within the Safe System: Developing a Common Definition of Traffic Safety Culture
• Authors: Tor-Olav Nævestad, Uta Meesmann, Henriette Wallén Warner, Susanne Kaiser, Ingeborg Hesjevoll, Vibeke Milch, Mathias DeRoeck, Michael Schachner, Dimitrios Nikolaou, Gunilla Björklund, Alexandra Laiou, Sonja Forward, Hanna Wennberg, Eva Aigner-Breuss, Anita Eichhorn
• Journal: Frontiers in Sustainable Cities: Urban Transportation Systems and Mobility
• Publisher: Frontiers Media
• Status: Under Review (received 28 February 2026; revised 10 April 2026)
• Funding: EU-funded project TRUST: "Traffic safety culture: a systematic transition towards shared responsibility for safe and sustainable mobility in the EU" (Grant agreement ID: 101197992)
• The authors declare no commercial or financial conflicts of interest. Generative AI (ChatGPT, OpenAI) was used to assist with language editing and structural refinement; all outputs were critically reviewed by the authors.