The Affordable Rural Housing Commission have highlighted a significant shortfall in affordable housing provision in rural areas.

In launching the study the Chair, Elinor Goodman, commented that, "Villages and country towns must be allowed to evolve in the way that they did in the past – they can't just be preserved in aspic. Most can probably absorb some houses, as long as they are in scale and character and maintain the identity of individual communities."

The Report criticises how the concept of 'sustainability' has been applied to rural areas. It has been standard practice to judge villages as 'sustainable' or 'unsustainable' depending on what facilities they have, and housing is allocated accordingly, rather than considering how facilities might be improved with additional housing.

The report echoes the sentiments of many who live and work in the countryside, stating that, "The emphasis has been on conserving the landscape at the expense of the social and economic needs of the communities which live in them."
The Commission makes a number of recommendations, including exploring the controversial use of cross-subsidy, that is permitting market housing in order to deliver affordable housing, which has historically been resisted. The report also highlights how new draft national guidance on PPS3 should be interpreted and outlines how the Affordable Rural Housing Commission has secured new provisions for housing in rural areas, including a provision that seeks to make sufficient land available either within or adjoining market towns and villages for affordable and market housing to sustain rural communities.

Although the Report concentrates on the delivery of affordable housing, it does highlight how previous policies, based on permitting only 100% affordable schemes, have failed and recommends a more intelligent approach to housing in rural areas than has been the case for the last few years. Whether this Report, and changes to PPS3, result in a change to the general policy of restraint remains to be seen.