From symbolic compliance to systemic changes: Rethinking accessibility for passengers with reduced mobility in global aviation

Despite extensive regulation, the experience of air travel for passengers with disabilities continues to reveal inequities that formal compliance has failed to resolve. This paper examines why accessibility frameworks—though robust on paper—often produce only symbolic rather than substantive change. Drawing on institutional theory, it interprets accessibility shortfalls as manifestations of symbolic compliance, in which organisations pursue legitimacy through documentation and ritual rather than verified outcomes.A qualitative comparative analysis was conducted across five jurisdictions—India, the United Kingdom, Finland, the United States, and London Luton Airport—using regulatory documents, audit reports, and public records. The findings identify five recurring mechanisms that sustain symbolic compliance: definitional rigidity, process orientation, weak enforcement, tokenistic consultation, and institutional subordination. Together, these create a self-reinforcing cycle where compliance is easier to display than to deliver.To move beyond this equilibrium, the study proposes a six-pillar framework that links accessibility to outcome-based verification, integration with safety and quality systems, participatory governance, calibrated enforcement, technological transparency, and Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) accountability. The framework redefines compliance as functional legitimacy—performance verified by results rather than procedures.For aviation regulators and industry leaders, the analysis reframes accessibility from a moral obligation to a measure of institutional maturity. Achieving equitable mobility is no longer an act of accommodation but an essential test of aviation’s ethical, operational, and reputational credibility.