A Spatial Analysis of the Components of Change of the Housing Stock in England: Will Alternative Means of Adding Dwellings Make a Difference?

Whether on greenfield or brownfield sites, new buildings need land. The locations of additional dwellings in England, whether provided through a standard planning process or a light-touch approach, have recently been criticised for not impacting affordability and for being in the wrong places. More sustainable means of raising the stock of abodes in England, including repurposing dilapidated or underused property, land, or infrastructure; reducing the demolition rate; and reducing the time an existing dwelling is left idle, do not consume additional land for building. Although the National Planning Policy Framework for additional dwellings places a duty on each district planning authority to find more land for housing, alternatives to new builds are included in the count. This paper examines the spatial concentrations of the components that can add to the habitable stock of real estate. It examines their take-up over recent years. This is important for land-use planning and the preservation of green spaces in the face of increasing housing pressures. Using a simple, innovative approach to assessing collocation, the paper considers whether there are similarities in spatial concentrations. The approach is used to infer whether builders converting existing property add units in areas where new builds are in more modest supply. Although alternative means of adding to the housing stock may be more sustainable, and more likely to be found in areas of greater need, the numbers are too low to be anything other than a supplement to new builds.