Is Planning Really Necessary?

Abstract

The misuse of British land, revealed by the pre-war Land Utilisation Survey, was a major consideration that led to the institution of planning machinery in 1947 to create a more rational land-use pattern. The Second Land Utilisation Survey now provides feedback information on how well this aim has been implemented. Contrary to expectation, the findings are not very encouraging. The planned separation of town and country, in order to integrate townscape and conserve the farmland resource, does not seem to have been achieved. There has been a rapid and accelerating farmland loss and in addition to this, there is also much land fragmented and subjected to urban pressures by new sprawling development. Far from attaining its objective of eliminating the 'rurban fringe' of incompatible use mixtures, planning often seems to have actively encouraged its proliferation. On the urban front, the land-use maps reveal that the failure to provide an adequate housing stock appears to be mainly due to the widespread premature demolition of housing. This is explored by examining before-andafter uses of 1000 square kilometres in south-east England. The largest new use proves to be waste land while roads and tended open space have each consumed 15 to 16 times as much new land as residential uses. The picture of continuing land misuse is surprisingly similar to that of the 1930s. Planning seems to be permitting the same abuses as non-planning, and we must seriously address ourselves to the question: 'Can we afford the vast expense of a planning establishment when free enterprise will do the same job free?'