The purpose of the investigation is not so much to try and bridge the low autistic employment rate through architectural interventions alone but rather to try and develop strategies which aim to create more autism-inclusive workspaces in the hope that this can play some role in addressing the employment issue.
One thing to consider is that you are soliciting the opinions of an international audience. Not merely those from the UK.
Frankly I see that as a consideration relative to each and every individual employer. With the reality being that few private-sector employers are seriously going to be concerned with fiscal impacts of accommodating people who amount to a
less-than two percent minority who have yet to be hired. Worse perhaps if such expenses must be justified on a quarterly basis to corporate boards of directors and ultimately their shareholders.
No differently than workers compensation underwriters who dictate ergonomic requirements for employees
determined on an individual basis as opposed to demanding fixed and possibly permanent architectural considerations. Ones which wouldn't likely "fly"
on this side of the pond short of them being legally inclusive within the American Disabilities Act (which it isn't).
In essence, what you are proposing likely has exponentially more hurdles to deal with on our side of the pond than yours. I see it as a nice; even compassionate proposition. However one that isn't particularly realistic in an economic environment where businesses are so often indifferent to the long-term welfare of employees, regardless of neurological considerations.