Adaptive nature of coordinated road traffic injury prevention responses in some OECD countries

•Examines the context, triggers for coordinated responses, and preference for or choice of coordinating strategies.•Unveils the existence of resource limitation and inter-dependence across actors.•Does not endorse the formalization of coordinated responses or a legal mandate to coordinate responses.•Reveals two coordinating strategies favored by experts in road traffic injury prevention – i.e. self-organizing community groups and the funding of community groups to forge partnerships.•Suggests the examination of the impact of legal mandates on coordination.

This study examines the context of coordinated responses, triggers for coordinated responses, and preference for or choice of coordinating strategies in road traffic injury prevention at a local level in some OECD countries. This aim is achieved through a mixed-methodology. In this respect, 22 semi-structured interviews were conducted with road traffic injury prevention experts from five OECD countries. In addition, 31 professional road traffic injury prevention stakeholders from seven OECD nations completed a self-administered, online survey. It found that there was resource limitation and inter-dependence across actors within the context of road traffic injury prevention at a local level. Furthermore, this study unveiled the realization of resource-dependency as a trigger for coordinated responses at a local level. Moreover, the present examination has revealed two coordinating strategies favored by experts in road traffic injury prevention – i.e. self-organizing community groups, which are deemed to have a platform to deliver programs within communities, and the funding of community groups to forge partnerships. However, the present study did not appear to endorse other strategies such as the formalization of coordinated responses or a legal mandate to coordinate responses.In essence, this study appears to suggest a need to manage coordinated responses from an adaptive perspective with interactions across road traffic injury prevention programs being forged on a mutual understanding of inter-dependency arising out of resource scarcity. In fact, the role of legislation and top-down national models in local level management of coordinated responses is likely to be one of identifying opportunities to interact with self-organized community groups and fund partnership-based road traffic injury prevention events.