Participation, procedural fairness and policy acceptability: A quasi-experimental field study of workplace travel planning

Parking restrictions are among the most effective tools available to organisations and local authorities seeking to manage transport demand and reduce commuting emissions — yet their implementation routinely fails when commuters question their legitimacy, and the conditions under which such measures gain acceptance during the development stage remain poorly understood. This study examines whether involving commuters in the development of restrictive travel measures increases their acceptance, applying policy acceptance and deliberative democracy literatures to an organisational transport context for the first time. Using a quasi-experimental field design embedded in a real travel plan development process at a UK university generating over 20,000 daily trips (N = 486), we compare standard consultation via a travel survey with enhanced involvement via deliberative workshops. Mediation analysis shows that workshop participation increased perceived procedural fairness, which in turn increased policy acceptance, replicating and extending Liu et al.'s (2020) participation–fairness–acceptance pathway to an organisational setting. A significant negative direct effect indicates that deliberation simultaneously raised critical scrutiny, producing inconsistent mediation. Trust in the organisation emerged as a precondition of participation: deliberative engagement increased acceptance among those who already trusted the institution. Contrary to practitioner concerns, self-selection into workshops was driven by role rather than scepticism or anticipated personal costs. For local authorities and organisations developing restrictive travel policies, these findings suggest that deliberative involvement can build the legitimacy necessary for effective implementation where institutional trust has already been established, and where the process is designed to be genuinely fair and inclusive.