The Controversy of UK Agricultural Land Conversions to Housing

What are regarded as the controversies around converting land from agriculture to housing?

The value of UK Green Belt and agricultural lands is undisputed. But the environmental costs of modern farming and housing needs are area of the conversation as well.

Anybody considering making an alternate investment in strategic land will know that Britain unquestionably needs more homes to support an increasing population. According to the Office for National Statistics, more than 4.4 million homes must certanly be built by 2016, largely in a reaction to two factors: A decennial growth rate of 7 percent, as measured in Census 2011, and lagging new home construction that doesn't match this population increase, largely attributed to the stringent lending standards of banks following 2008 economic crisis chc agritech.

One or more group claims the answer is to construct on Green Belt land. The Policy Exchange, a centre-right think tank, said in late 2012 that the supply of land near cities that is kept unbuilt is a drag on the housing market. They argue that swaths of English countryside that typically surround towns must certanly be exposed for development. The fourteen Green Belts in England cover about 13 percent of the country, enveloping about 60 percent of Britain's population (about 30 million people).

The Policy Exchange faces plenty of headwind in its positions. Because the "garden city movement" of early 20th century, your time and effort to combat urban sprawl led by such groups while the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE) and the London County Council sought to steadfastly keep up open spaces specialized in recreation, forests and agriculture as a social good. Nevertheless the Town and Country Planning Association has proposed since 2002 the adoption of more flexible policies toward Green Belt lands, suggesting that rather than a growth-stifling "belt," that "wedges" and "strategic gaps" might allow an all natural expansion of urban areas.

Famously, the head of Natural England, whose charge is entirely to ensure protection and improvement of flora and fauna, said in 2007 "we truly need a 21st century means to fix England's housing needs which puts in position a network of green wedges, gaps and corridors, linking the environment and people."

Agricultural land outside Green Belts

Of course, land far from the major cities is green as well, much of it used for agricultural, forestry and recreational purposes. A lot more than 80 percent of the landmass in England and Wales, 12 million hectares, are employed for farming and forestry. Local planning authorities can more easily rezone the lands outside Green Belts when market factors, including the demand for housing development, call for it. Since 2000, about 1500 hectares of agricultural land has been converted to housing development every year.

Of course, similar sentiments understandably still exist relative to the bucolic perceptions of farming in the U.K. But environmentalists take exception to how modern agricultural methods, which include excessive application of fertilisers, can burden nature with its by-products:

• Toxic build-up. 100 million tonnes of sewage sludge, compost and livestock manures applied annually to agricultural lands is leading to a build-up of potentially toxic elements such as for instance zinc and copper, and more than half of sensitive wildlife habitat experiences harmful acid and nitrogen pollution, based on a paper published by Environment Agency UK.

• Lack of soil. About 2.2 million tonnes of topsoil is lost each year because of intensive cultivation, a few of that is instigated by compaction from heavy machinery and livestock, which precludes plant growth and contributes to runoff in rain. (source: Environment Agency UK). To be fair, some runoff is noted as well from building sites before landscaping is completed.

• Water quality compromised. About 70 percent of sediments present in water come from agriculture, and those sediments can carry metals, pathogens, pesticides and phosphates.

Such problems because of modern agriculture plague the planet, as similar pollution levels are reported throughout Europe, Asia, North America and Australia. Africa, Brazil and Argentina, the newer frontiers for agriculture, are expanding arable croplands to meet up global food demands but also exhibit a host of environmental sins.

The food-housing tug

There is no denying that the housing needs in the UK should be met - and soon. A complete generation of families are postponing children or surviving in cramped quarters, awaiting homes they can afford or at the least rent to support their members.

But Brits need to eat as much as sleep. So how to balance the usage of land for every?

A number of approaches are now being tested. One is always to encourage development of so-called brownfield lands, which include properties that will require remediation from previous industrial uses. These lands tend to be within towns or immediately adjacent for them, some with excellent access to existing urban infrastructure while others are cost-prohibitive for a number of reasons (no existing infrastructure, undesirable locations for housing or extensive environmental remediation required).

SustainableBuild.co.uk is a net publisher that considers the total amount between development and environmental sustainability from a very pragmatic standpoint. Your website offers several points how land conversions to development can have a poor effect, which include: converted greenfields are very unlikely to be converted back again to nature; there's inevitable lack of habitat for animals and plants; a lack of employment for agricultural workers; and a lack of Green Belt land that delivers geographical definitions and separations of cities, towns, villages and hamlets (I.e., American-style urban sprawl).