We should build on the green belt

Updated 2025

Please note, this Topic Guide should be the starting point of your research. You are encouraged to conduct your own independent research to supplement your argument.

The Royal Town Planning Institute describes green belts as ‘areas around certain towns, cities and large built-up areas where the aim is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping the land permanently undeveloped. ‘ [ref: RTPI] But in recent years, there has been an ongoing debate about the merits of the green belt in the UK, with supporters and critics clashing over its relevance and necessity in the twenty-first century.

For years, housebuilding has run well below targets and demand has increased. One think tank suggests that the UK has now got a shortfall of over four million homes. [Ref: Centre for Cities] As a result, house prices are now so high that it is almost impossible for most first-time buyers to get on the ‘housing ladder’ in many parts of the country. According to official figures, in England in 2023, the average house price was £298,000, while average annual disposable household income was £35,000. In other words, average prices were equivalent to 8.6 times average income. (The disposable household income ratios were 5.8 in Wales, 5.6 in Scotland and 5.0 in Northern Ireland.) In the most in-demand areas, in London and south-east England, the price-to-income ratio is even higher – perhaps 12 to 15. [Ref: ONS]

Responding to this housing crisis, the Labour government elected in July 2024 has announced ambitious plans to increase supply by cutting back on planning rules and forcing local authorities to accept housebuilding targets. One particular focus has been on plans to build on ‘grey belt’ land – land in the green belt that is of ‘poor quality’. [Ref: BBC News]

This section provides a summary of the key issues in the debate, set in the context of recent discussions and the competing positions that have been adopted.

First formally proposed as a Metropolitan Green Belt surrounding London in 1935, the subsequent Town and Country Planning Act of 1947 broadened the remit, to allow local authorities around the country to formally designate their own areas of green belt land [Ref: Wikipedia]. At its core, green-belt policy was conceived to control urban sprawl by ensuring that towns and cities had a ring of countryside where agriculture, forestry and wildlife could flourish, and which city dwellers could easily access. [Ref: Wikipedia] Moreover, in terms of town planning, the green belt was seen as a way to ‘preserve the unique characters of historic towns, safeguard the countryside from development, and encourage the regeneration and reuse of urban land’. [Ref: Independent]

However, the idea of a green belt goes back to the Victorian era, when social reformer Ebenezer Howard suggested the idea of a ‘garden city’, which would provide the benefits of living in the city, but have countryside nearby to offer tranquility and fresh air for families [Ref: Guardian]. But recently, the nature of the green belt has come under increasing pressure from critics who argue that it stifles our ability to build vital infrastructure, such as housing. With this backdrop, the debate hinges on what should be done to build the homes and infrastructure that commentators on both sides admit we need, and what we want our cities, towns and countryside to look like in the future.

The case for building

Critics suggest that there are two main reasons why we should build on the green belt. Firstly, they challenge the picture advocates paint of the green belt comprising stunning, rolling countryside and abundant wildlife. Instead, property company CBRE reports that ‘land designated as ‘green belt’ may often have little inherent ecological value and isn’t chosen based on its natural beauty’. [Ref: CBRE] Further criticism focuses on the green belt’s expansion since it was first established: [I]n the 1930s, the green belt covered an eighth of its current size…[London’s green belt is now] three times the size of the city itself’ [Ref: City AM]. Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner criticises the prioritising of environmental concerns above people, arguing that ‘we can’t have a situation where a newt is more protected than people who desperately need housing’ [Ref: Guardian].

Secondly, critics point to the fact that we are simply not building enough homes in the UK to cope with demand, making homes increasingly unaffordable, especially in the South East [Ref: Telegraph]. The green belt has been blamed for increasing land prices within cities by placing an artificial limit on land availability. The Economist cites an estimate that without the green belt’s market-distorting impact, ‘prices in the south-east would today be about one quarter lower’ [Ref: The Economist]. The Centre for Cities advocates building on the green belt, estimating that even at low density, this could release space for up to 3.4million new homes to be built while affording a chance to upgrade infrastructure in existing peri-urban areas [Ref: Centre for Cities].

Writing for spiked, Mike Jones additionally argues that green-belt land is needed for development as brownfield sites present several problems: they do not offer enough space for the housing we need, that they can be prohibitively expensive to decontaminate, and often are not in locations where people work or want to live [Ref: spiked].

Advocates also note how little of the UK is actually built on, rejecting the idea that there are pockets of countryside which must be protected – urbanised zones make up only 9.9% of England, with 4.2% classed as built-up areas, whereas green belts comprise over 12.4% [Ref: London First]. As such, it is estimated that by building on just 5.2% of existing green-belt land around cities, 1.4million new homes could be built [Ref: Huffington Post]. With London’s green belt three times the size of the city itself, such a move could have a huge impact on the supply of homes for ordinary families [Ref: Huffington Post].

The Economist notes: ‘The public also does not grasp that the belt causes damage to the countryside elsewhere. Where builders lack brownfield space in cities, they jump the belt to put up commuter settlements farther afield. Of 180 local authorities with belts, 140,000 new homes, 45% of the total, have gone up in the past three years on the “outside” of their restricted areas.’ [Ref: The Economist]

For some, a more ambitious, radical and utopian approach to city planning is required; the ability to expand into the green belt is key to this vision. James Heartfield asserts: ‘The city has to be able to breathe. Instead of squeezing more flats into every space that becomes available…London needs more green space in its centre, and wider streets.’ He envisions a future where ‘if the green belt was built on, and the city was allowed to grow into the suburbs, all of us could lead grander, freer lives’ [Ref: spiked]. Others point to the success of the original garden cities of Welwyn and Letchworth, along with new towns such as Milton Keynes [Ref: Wikipedia], as a template for how new towns can be built successfully in the countryside [Ref: Guardian].

Why we need the green belt

With proposals put forward to build as many as 360,000 new homes in 14 new garden villages on green belt across the country [Ref: Guardian], including potentially up to 50,000 new homes around Manchester [Ref: Guardian], the green belt issue has been brought into sharp relief for supporters. For some, such as Simon Jenkins, the green belt is ‘one of the great creations of postwar British planning – the concept of a national park within reach of every city-dweller’ [Ref: Guardian].

Bill Bryson marvels at the tranquility that the countryside surrounding cities offers, and challenges critics’ accusations that the green belt ‘isn’t actually all that special, that much of the land is scrubby and degraded’ [Ref: The Times], arguing instead that ‘green belts in England contain 30,000 kilometres of footpaths and other rights of way, 220,000 hectares of woodland, 250,000 hectares of top quality farmland, and 89,000 hectares of Sites of Special Interest’. [Ref: The Times]. The Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) goes further, arguing for the restoration of substandard green belt land so that it is ‘useful and attractive’ [Ref: CPRE].

In terms of building, some argue we should prioritise urban regeneration, fearing that permitting development of the green belt will disincentivise urban-regeneration opportunities and encourage price speculation on green-belt land [Ref: CPRE]. Some propose granting local councils the power to compulsorily purchase tired, old and unused high streets and retail parks, and turn them into housing [Ref: The Times]. The CPRE, alternatively, claims the problem is not land supply but the market’s ability to build new homes. The group argues that brownfield land offers space for 1.2million homes and that planning permission for 500,000 homes has been granted, but these homes are not being built [Ref: CPRE].

Another key concern with building on the green belt is urban sprawl [Ref: Encyclopaedia Britannica] and worsened social isolation. Defenders of the green belt claim that the global trend of expanding cities into the countryside will have huge environmental effects in the long term [Ref: Guardian]. Geoffrey Lean in the Guardian asserts that ‘it produces car-dependent homes: on average, green-belt dwellers annually emit as much extra CO2 by driving as they would from 10 transatlantic flights’. [Ref: Guardian] Douglas Murphy warns that: ‘To live in sprawl means driving to work, driving to get dinner, driving to meet your friends. It means congestion…and isolation due to the lack of the perks of a compact city life.’ [Ref: Guardian]

By limiting urban sprawl, the CPRE argues, the green belt positively impacts people’s quality of life: ‘[I]n 1940, the greater urban areas of London and Los Angeles were similar. Since then, without any Green Belt protection, Los Angeles has sprawled to the extent that it now covers an area that would stretch from Cambridge to Brighton if it was overlaid on the UK.’ [Ref: CPRE]

A radical alternative, suggests Simon Jenkins, is that we increase the housing density within our cities, rather than building on surrounding green belt land. He argues that compared to cities such as Madrid, Athens, New York or Berlin, London is leafy and low rise, and notes: ‘Inner Paris has a population density of 20,000 people per square kilometre, four times London’s.’ [Ref: Evening Standard]

In the House of Lords

This section of the topic guide has been produced with the support of the House of Lords communications team in conjunction with Debating Matters at the House of Lords. All students may find the material useful.

The Green Belt has been a subject of debate in the House of Lords in recent years, often within discussions on housebuilding, community development, local infrastructure and more. The House of Lords Library has produced briefings on the subject, which are available at Green Belt – House of Lords Library and have been produced to help members of the UK’s second chamber with debates.

Please see the House of Lords section below for examples of when the Green Belt has been discussed in the chamber over the last five years, as well as a selection of committee reports.

To build or not to build?

It is clear that the discussion surrounding whether or not to build on the green belt is subject to some strong views on either side of the debate, but is one that is being taken seriously, both in parliament and in the public sphere. So, should we build on the green belt?

It is crucial for debaters to have read the articles in this section, which provide essential information and arguments for and against the debate motion. Students will be expected to have additional evidence and examples derived from independent research, but they can expect to be criticised if they lack a basic familiarity with the issues raised in the essential reading.

FOR

Is there a case for building on London’s Green Belt?
Jen Siebrits  & Scott Cabot CBRE 18 April 2024

We need to get building on the Green Belt
Mike Jones Spiked 12 August 2023

Redefining what green belt means could solve the housing crisis in London
Joshua Bond City AM 6 September 2023

AGAINST

Warning: countryside at risk. Ministers are pulling a fast one over the threat to pristine green-belt land
Geoffrey Lean The Guardian 10 September 2024

Building on Green Belt will not solve London’s housing crisis
Alice Roberts The campaign to protect rural England 17 June 2023

Green-belt campaigners set out alternative housebuilding vision
Greg Pitcher Architects’ Journal 12 December 2024

Somerset stunning village ‘betrayed’ as Americans are coming to take over
Tristan Cork Somerset Live 18 January 2025

US firm set to build Somerset HQ despite concerns
John Wimperis BBC News 17 January 2025

Sadiq Khan announces review of London Green Belt as he restates ‘brownfield first’ stance
Charles Wright On London 16 January 2025

Housing must take priority over nature, says Starmer in green belt reform plan
PA Media The Guardian 12 December 2024

Green belt housing plan to be decided by government
Joe Gerrard BBC 8 November 2024

The (not so) green belt — and why we should build on it
Robert Colvile The Times 7 September 2024

Fury at Labour plan to ‘build on fields’ by watering down Green Belt rules and stopping locals objecting to onshore wind farms – after Chancellor Rachel Reeves uses first big speech to vow overhaul of ‘timid’ planning system
James Tapsfield Mail Online 8 July 2024

Nimby Watch: Milton Keynes’ non-existent green belt
John Elledge Cap X 2 April 2024

Myth busting: green belt land value proposals
Avril Roberts The Country Land and Business Association 15 August 2024

‘Golden rules’ for the green belt: what is the Government proposing and will it work?
Maurice Lange Centre for Cities 29 August 2024

Holes in the Green Belt: Golf courses set for housing development
Urbanist Architecture 20 January 2025

Building on the green belt will not solve the housing crisis
Kunle Barker Architects’ Journal 12 June 2023

The debate: We need new homes, where should they go?
Mark Easton BBC 19 September 2024

Britain’s green belt is choking the economy
The Economist 17 August 2023

Lords Hansard – Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill
Legislation – second reading 17 January 2023

Lords Hansard – Building Homes
Debate on building homes 17 December 2024

Lords Hansard – Homes: Existing Communities
Debate on homes: existing communities 12 December 2024

Committee Report – Meeting Housing Demand
Built Environment Committee report 10 January 2022

Committee report – Restoring 30 per cent of our land and sea by 2030

Environment and Climate Change Committee report 26 July 2023