In July 2024, the government announced its plans to deliver “the next generation of new towns”. But this will require far more than just housebuilding. In a new report, Rosa Marks explores what lessons the government can learn from Britain’s post-war New Towns programme to ensure the successful delivery and long-term safeguarding of social infrastructure in new towns.
As part of their plans to tackle the housing crisis, the government is seeking to deliver a number of new towns of at least 10,000 homes each that are “well-connected, well-designed, sustainable and attractive places to live”. While housebuilding will inevitably be the priority, the government has also acknowledged that these new towns will require “all the infrastructure, amenities and services necessary to sustain thriving communities”. Alongside more traditional infrastructure, such as transport and water, social infrastructure – the physical spaces in which regular interactions are facilitated between and within communities – will be critical to the success of these new settlements.
The government has identified Britain’s post-war New Towns programme as a source of inspiration for their town-building plans. This programme was initiated by Clement Attlee’s Labour Government in 1946 in response to poor housing conditions and overcrowding in major cities. This resulted in the designation of 32 towns in the UK over the course of 30 years, which are now home to over two and a half million people. The delivery and governance of the new towns largely followed the recommendations of the New Towns Committee, the body established in 1945 “to consider the general questions of development, organisation and administration that will arise in the promotion of New Towns”.[1] The Committee’s proposals were enshrined in the New Towns Act (1946), which created the machinery for the construction of the new towns, including the New Town Development Corporations (NTDCs), the public agencies responsible for the delivery of the new towns.
There is mixed evidence regarding the success of the new towns. While some point to the deteriorating infrastructure and inadequate community facilities, others argue that these new towns are “good places to work and to live”.[2] So, what can the current government learn from the successes and difficulties of the post-war New Town programme about the delivery and maintenance of social infrastructure in new settlements? In our latest Townscapes report, Social infrastructure and the development of new towns – learning from history, we identify three key messages for the current government based on our research into the post-war era.
First, we highlight the importance of providing a range of social infrastructure from the early stages of development. In the post-war new towns, the delivery of community facilities was often slow, though residents were quick to adapt and make use of alternative spaces. Homes and other privately-owned spaces were used to host the numerous associations and clubs that were established from the earliest years of the towns’ occupation. Today, however, social infrastructure and the necessary transport infrastructure to accompany it are often provided late, if at all, in new developments. One example of this is Northstowe, a development of 10,000 homes in Cambridgeshire, which still lacked a café, pub, shops, and healthcare services six years after the first residents moved in. There and elsewhere, this has resulted in frustration among established residents and newcomers alike and will only serve to increase opposition to further development.
Second, we explore the critical role of cross-sector collaboration, particularly between the public and private sectors, in the delivery of social infrastructure. As our previous research showed, although social infrastructure is typically understood to be the exclusive responsibility of the public sector and civil society, the private sector plays a key role in the provision of social infrastructure. This was recognised to an extent by the post-war NTDCs, who sought to attract businesses to the new towns, such as through rent-free periods. Some of the most successful privately-owned social infrastructure, most notably pubs, was the result of close cooperation between stakeholders. Other spaces, such as shops and restaurants, were slower to emerge, though in the long-term, many towns developed flourishing retail, recreation, and leisure facilities.
Third, we consider the long-term management of social infrastructure. This is something that has too often been an afterthought in existing urban areas and new settlements. Many of the post-war new towns have poorly maintained and inadequate social infrastructure, in part because of the quick-fire sale of assets in the 1980s, which included many community facilities. The maintenance of social infrastructure is an even more important issue today as cash-strapped local authorities are increasingly unwilling to take on new assets. However, in recent years, some new settlements have been pioneering alternative approaches to the management of assets that involve meaningful community participation and stewardship. This not only provides a solution to the long-term safeguarding of assets but also fosters a sense of belonging among residents, something which has often proved challenging with planned communities.
As these lessons show, projects of such ambition, innovation, and scale like the post-war New Towns programme inevitably involve some teething problems. However, in the long-term, these new towns have been widely regarded as successful. That said, steps can be taken to minimise the challenges involved in delivering and maintaining social infrastructure in new towns. Drawing on the successes and difficulties of Britain’s post-war new towns, we identify a number of recommendations for central and local government to ensure the delivery and long-term management of a range of social infrastructure in the next generation of new towns. These include sufficient, long-term, and upfront investment in (social) infrastructure, cooperation with the private sector, meaningful and ongoing engagement with residents, and the prioritisation of community stewardship when considering the long-term management of community assets.
On ITV’s This Morning on 31 July 2024, Deputy Prime Minister and Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, Angela Rayner, identified the importance of infrastructure, and more specifically social infrastructure, to the success of the next generation of new towns. She stated that “infrastructure is critical. And that’s why our rules will make sure that we get that infrastructure as well, because I’ve heard what people have said on that: ‘We need these homes but Ange we need the infrastructure in place as well. You can’t just land us with 900 new homes without a new GP or a new school.’”
But delivering social infrastructure – and safeguarding it in the long term – is easier said than done. The new Labour Government will be wise to heed the lessons of the past as they launch their plans for Britain’s 21st century new towns.
Read report: Social infrastructure and the development of new towns – learning from history
[1] Terms of Government Announcement. (1945) HLG 84/1 Constitution, terms of reference, etc.. New Town Committee (Reith Committee): Minutes, Papers and Reports. The National Archives, London, UK.
[2] Hall, P. (2014) Cities of Tomorrow: An Intellectual History of Urban Planning and Design Since 1880. Newark: John Wiley & Sons, 2014.
Image credit: John Allen Photography for the Sherford Consortium
The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the Bennett Institute for Public Policy.
