Planning for Rural Housing in the Republic of Ireland: From National Spatial Strategies to Development Plans

Abstract

This paper examines the role of spatial planning as a policy framework for managing rural housing within an integrated territorial development strategy. The paper focuses on the Republic of Ireland, which provides a useful case for analysing spatial planning and rural housing relationships, due to the State's recent shift towards spatial planning (formalized with the publication of the Irish National Spatial Strategy), as well as the level of housing construction that has been observed in an increasingly post-productivist countryside (triggered by counterurbanization flows, increased affluence and demands for second holiday homes, etc.). The paper reviews all policy instruments that have been used to manage rural housing at various scales (from national strategies to local level development plans). It is argued that while spatial planning adopts an integrative vocabulary, as policy moves down the spatial scale hierarchy, multi-dimensional spatial goals are implemented through traditional, narrow land-use regulation. This often leads to rural housing being addressed in isolation from its wider social and economic context, disconnecting housing from wider rural community issues and ultimately failing to deliver a coordinated and coherent spatial policy for managing rural settlements.

‘If You Build It, They Will Come’: Governing property-led rural regeneration in Ireland

“…Indeed, governments have actively constrained new housing development, against an increasing demand for rural housing Sturzaker, 2010). In Ireland, however, policy attitudes to rural housing have been comparatively permissive during an extraordinary housing boom period (Gkartzios and Scott, 2009), which indicates that practice norms in Ireland are atypical in north Western Europe. For example, Gallent et al's (2003) comparative study of rural housing in Europe locates Ireland, along with much of southern Europe, in the 'atomistic cultures, laissez-faire' regimes.…”

Property-Led Urban, Town and Rural Regeneration in Ireland: Positive and Perverse Outcomes in Different Spatial and Socio-Economic Contexts

“…They are useful for animating development in clear instances of market failure, such as brownfield urban sites which commonly require assembly from several owners or declining districts of otherwise successful cities but in these cases, the incentives should be closely monitored and withdrawn if this market failure dissipates (Jones, 1996). The Rural Renewal Scheme indicates that, in the context of a liberal land use planning regime such as Ireland's (Gkartzios and Scott, 2009), low housing output in greenfield, rural sites is less likely to be related to market failure and more likely the result of lack of housing demand. In this context, incentives for housing development are likely to result in housing oversupply and attendant vacancy problems.…”

Governmentalities of mobility: The role of housing in the governance of Australian rural mobilities

“…While this area of rural studies was described several years ago to be marginal at best and neglected at worst (Milbourne, 2006), the last few years have seen a number of important critical contributions to our understandings of rural housing. More recently, analyses have concentrated on issues such as accessibility and the changing role of social housing (Milbourne, 1998;Barcus, 2002;Gallent et al, 2003b;Hoggart and Henderson, 2005;Marcouiller et al, 2011); processes and challenges of planning rural housing, problems of social exclusion and new forms of consuming rural housing (Gallent et al, 2003a(Gallent et al, , 2005Satsangi and Dunmore, 2003;Hall and Müller, 2004;Gallent, 2007Gallent, , 2013Gkartzios and Scott, 2009;Satsangi et al, 2010;Sturzaker, 2010;Gallent and Robinson, 2011;Marcouiller et al, 2011;Rye, 2011;Gallent and Robinson, 2012); the role of rural housing and its relationship to poverty and homelessness (Cloke et al, 2000a, b;2001a, 2001b, 2003Milbourne, 2004;Robinson, 2004;Argent and Rolley, 2006); and the unique features of and cultural influences on rural housing markets (Cho et al, 2005;Scott and Murray, 2009;Vepsalainen and Pitkanen, 2010;Beer and Tually, 2012). However, despite the rapid expansion of a critical literature on rural housing, two areas remain underdeveloped: a) the governmental role of rural housing and b) how we understand the role of mobility in relation to rural housing governmentalities.…”