The Exercise of Power to Limit the Development of New Housing in the English Countryside

Abstract

The author argues that power is being exercised by rural elites to prevent much-needed new housing being built in the English countryside. Evidence is presented from five case-study local authorities in rural England, via analysis of interview data and policy documents produced at the regional and local plan-making level. Technocratic explanations for the ongoing failure of the planning system to deliver more housing in line with the well-established need/demand for such are rejected. Drawing on the three dimensions of power presented by Lukes, the author explores how the exercise of power effectively subverts planning processes and leads overwhelmingly to decisions being made which favour the exclusionary preferences of certain groups.

Local history as productive nostalgia? Change, continuity and sense of place in rural England

“…Politicised notions of heritage also apply at the local level and, since 'community' groups like local history societies tend to be socially biased in terms of being dominated by middle-class residents (Sturzaker, 2010;Tewdwr-Jones, 1998;Yarwood, 2002), these groups can hold disproportionate power within the community and are inescapably embroiled in local politics. In an exploration of writings in a county history society's journal, The Devon Historian, Jackson (2008, p.370) points out that local historians have developed 'a greater statutory profile in the planning consultation process' and that planning officers within the society's membership 'have encouraged the forging of the bridge between the practice of preservation and research in local history'.…”

Homo Economicus in a Big Society: Understanding Middle-class Activism and NIMBYism towards New Housing Developments

“…These are individuals who demonstrate NIMBY tendencies -as shown by a number of high-profile cases where Cabinet Ministers have opposed new housing development in their own constituency while at the same time advocating its necessity at a national level. There is a stereotypical view that this attitude to development is predominantly held by more affluent households, that we might term "middle-class" in the UK, and who are newer residents to suburban or semi-rural areas (Sturzaker, 2010). From this perspective, opposition is entirely selfish and self-serving, often the result of opponents wishing to maintain the value of their own property, or recreate an imagined rural idyll (Sturzaker, 2010;Sturzaker and Shucksmith, 2012).…”

“…Organisations that are strong voices within the planning system, such as the Campaign for the Protection of Rural England, have supported policies such as greenbelt around urban areas and opposition to rural development, increasingly using a discourse of sustainability, to actively resist any development in urban-rural fringe and rural areas (Sturzaker, 2010, Sturzaker andShucksmith, 2012). For the UK Conservative party this has been a particular challenge as they need to balance their desire to allow the market to deliver new development where it is needed, while responding to an electorate that largely lives in suburban and semi-rural commuting villages and who are strongly opposed to new development.…”

“…The regulatory power of the planning system remains largely in place despite a prolonged period (since 1979) when governments of all main parties have embraced a market-led approach to economic policy, supporting market processes rather than regulating or challenge them, including to some extent within development planning (Allmendinger and Haughton, 2012). However, there has long been a recognition that the English planning system has failed to deliver new housing development due to the expression of collective opposition through the electoral process, and in processes of planning for new housing themselves (Hall, 1973, Sturzaker, 2010. The period around 2004 saw the 'sudden rediscovery' of housing supply as a major policy issue in England after thirty years' slumber (Bramley 2007), crystallized in the Barker Review (2004) and the then UK Government's quite strong policy response to this (Barker, 2006).…”

When Urban Planning Doctrine Meets Low Density Countryside

“…House building in rural areas has been seen to result in car-dependent residents with environmentally damaging greenhouse gas emissions, so undermining the concept of sustainable development (Curry and Owen 2009;Gkartzios and Scott, 2010;Sturzaker and Shucksmith, 2011). Given these restrictions to rural housing, rural space has increasingly become a luxury which is affordable only to a prosperous elite, and unobtainable to a majority of ordinary people (Sturzaker, 2010;Sturzaker and Shucksmith, 2011). This paper investigates rural planning, housing rules and practices in Finland, where house building in rural areas has traditionally been loosely regulated (Ministry of the Environment, 2012).…”