We began this book by posing a series of questions about the supply of housing in Britain's countrysides, its quality, its location, its connection with the state of rural economies and rural society, and whether patterns of supply deliver social equity as well as sustainability. We asked also about some of the key pressures on housing resources, emanating from patterns of retirement, second home purchasing and from general migration to and from different rural areas. And finally, we alluded to more fundamental questions that bind all other concerns together: how representations of the countryside find expression in attitudes towards development and in planning's treatment of different rural areas: essentially, what are society's expectations of rural land: who can use it and for what purpose? The opening chapter began a process of defining what exactly we mean by the ‘rural housing question’: is it a simple question to which there is a simple answer, or is it a set of interlinked questions that each need addressing separately? It would be much too easy at this stage to conclude that attitudes towards Britain's countrysides must change, that government must take a firmer lead in ‘winning hearts and minds’ and delivering solutions to rural challenges that put community needs on a equal footing with the undisputed importance of maintaining environmental and landscape quality. Whilst this is true, it does not really move the debate forward. Advancing a convincing answer to the rural housing question seems as far off now as it did in the time of Savage (1919). Almost a hundred years have passed since he documented the inadequacies of rural housing provision in the first decades of the 20th century. Whilst the ‘barbaric’ conditions he witnessed have undoubtedly improved, significant sections of rural society today are either inadequately housed, homeless or displaced up the urban hierarchy.

The planning system and local planning practice are not helpless in the face of such issues, but make rational choices that often appear quite heartless. Strict limits are placed on the amount of housing directed to villages and emphasis is put on the concentration of development in larger centres. This makes a lot of sense: services are easier to provide, councils are able to facilitate development by private enterprise and new jobs can be co-located with new homes.