Reducing meat consumption is crucial for addressing environmental and health challenges; however, implementing effective policies requires public support. This study investigates psychological and political determinants of public acceptance of four proposed meat reduction policies in Finland—two price-based and two availability-based measures—developed from expert recommendations. Using a representative sample of Finnish adults (N = 1999), we applied structural equation modeling to examine how perceived policy fairness, effectiveness, and intrusiveness mediate the influence of environmental risk perception and political trust on policy acceptance. Acceptance rates ranged from 25 % for the prohibition of discount sales to 35 % for taxing the most environmentally harmful meat products. Of the proximal predictors, perceived fairness had the strongest association with acceptance across all policies. Perceived effectiveness and intrusiveness had smaller associations. Environmental risk perception showed a large indirect effect on acceptance. Political trust had a moderate indirect effect on acceptance, primarily through perceived fairness. These findings suggest that future communication strategies might benefit most from emphasizing policy fairness. Interventions targeting distal predictors may aim to raise environmental risk awareness, although this strategy must be pursued carefully to avoid fear-based disengagement. This cross-sectional work opens exciting avenues for future research using experimental or longitudinal designs.