Global lessons in new town building and what the UK can learn

When the House of Lords Built Environment Committee released its initial assessment of the UK’s New Towns programme, it reignited a debate that has run for decades - can large-scale, planned settlements really solve the housing crisis and create thriving places for future generations? To answer that question, we decided to look at what’s happening in the rest of the world, writes John Ridgeway.

Across Europe and Asia, countries have built new towns at different times and under different conditions. Some flourished and became models of modern living, while others struggled to attract residents, poor connectivity and rigid design.

The Netherlands: Almere and the Power of Governance

Few case studies are more widely talked about as Almere, a Dutch new town built on land reclaimed from the sea in the 1970s. From the start, Almere benefitted from a clarity of purpose. Governance was concentrated in municipal hands, land was publicly owned and phased for release and long-term stewardship was baked into the model.

What truly made Almere stand out, however, was its transport strategy. Rather than treating infrastructure as an afterthought, Dutch planners ensured rail and road connections to Amsterdam were central to its development. This gave residents confidence in their daily lives and gave investors’ confidence in the project’s long-term value.

Almere’s leaders also recognised that demand and demographics shift over time. Housing mixes were adjusted across the decades to reflect evolving family structures, income levels and cultural expectations. The result is not a static town, but a living, flexible community.

For the UK, Almere demonstrates the value of long-term public land control and staged delivery, but also the necessity of governance structures that can adapt and endure across political cycles.

France: The Promise and Pitfalls of State-Led New Towns

Post-war France experimented with a bold model of “villes nouvelles” such as Cergy-Pontoise and Marne-la-Vallée. Backed by development corporations and extensive state funding, these projects aimed to relieve pressure on Paris while promoting modern living.

The French model showed that when the state takes responsibility for upfront infrastructure - from rail lines to utilities - it can unlock private and institutional investment. Coordination across transport, housing and economic planning was one of its strongest features.

Yet centralisation also carried risks. In some cases, overbearing state control limited early community engagement and slowed the process of residents developing local ownership. Some towns gained reputations for being administrative projects rather than authentic communities.

The lesson for Britain is twofold. First, central government support can de-risk early phases and create conditions for private finance. Second, even the best-designed infrastructure plans can falter if residents feel excluded from shaping their environment. Engagement must not be treated as cosmetic, but as a cornerstone of legitimacy.

Germany: HafenCity and the Role of Design Quality

Hamburg’s HafenCity is technically an urban extension rather than a greenfield new town, but its lessons are highly relevant. Beginning in the early 2000s, HafenCity transformed a former port area into one of Europe’s largest inner-city development zones.

What set HafenCity apart was its commitment to high-quality design and sustainability standards. A dedicated development company managed land sales, set architectural guidelines and enforced sustainability targets across energy, materials and public space. Commercial, residential and cultural functions were carefully integrated, creating a balanced and vibrant district.

The German experience illustrates that strong public-sector project management, combined with ambitious, but credible standards, can attract private capital and raise the quality of delivery. For UK new towns, the HafenCity model highlights the opportunity to embed design excellence and long-term stewardship into the DNA of development, rather than leaving them to chance.

South Korea: Songdo and the Dangers of Overreach

If Almere is a lesson in pragmatic delivery, Songdo International Business District in South Korea is a reminder of the risks of overreach. Launched in the early 2000s as a high-tech smart city on reclaimed land, Songdo promised cutting-edge digital infrastructure, sustainability and global investment appeal.

Yet the reality has been more mixed. While Songdo boasts impressive buildings and technology systems, it has struggled with occupancy rates and vibrancy. The emphasis on technology and foreign business functions came at the expense of building an everyday sense of community.

Songdo’s story is not one of outright failure - it has created jobs and attracted investment - but it demonstrates that technology cannot substitute for organic neighbourhood life. Housing, schools, small businesses and cultural amenities are as important as smart grids and district cooling.

The UK’s New Towns programme will be tempted to showcase innovation. Songdo’s lesson is that innovation must serve human needs first. Without this focus, projects risk becoming sterile showcases rather than living towns.

China: Speed, Scale and the Challenge of Demand

China has delivered dozens of new towns and satellite cities in recent decades, some in partnership with international agencies. Projects like Tianjin Eco-City illustrate the country’s ability to assemble land, mobilise finance and build infrastructure at astonishing speed.

However, this very speed has sometimes created misalignment with demand. Several new settlements became notorious “ghost cities” when housing and commercial stock outpaced actual population growth. Top-down planning without sufficient market testing led to vacant neighbourhoods and wasted investment.

The key takeaway is that financial and technical capacity are not enough. Without careful phasing, product-market alignment and a focus on affordability, even the most impressive physical delivery can falter. The UK must avoid equating speed with success. Sustainable growth depends on matching supply to real demand.

Singapore: Incremental Success Through Integrated Planning

Singapore offers perhaps the most consistent record of successful new town building. Its Housing and Development Board (HDB) has overseen the creation of towns like Punggol and ongoing extensions to existing estates.

The formula is clear - transport-first planning, long-term stewardship and a commitment to incremental delivery rather than one-off megaprojects. By phasing development and engaging residents throughout, Singapore builds neighbourhoods that evolve rather than freeze.

Crucially, housing policy is integrated with economic and social policy. Towns are not just places to live, but centres of employment, education and recreation. Public agencies retain control of land and planning, ensuring long-term alignment of public interest with delivery outcomes.

For the UK, Singapore demonstrates the value of aligning housing with wider policy goals, and of thinking about new towns as complete ecosystems rather than housing estates on greenfield sites.

Lessons for the UK: Global Experience, Local Application

Taken together, these case studies point to a set of enduring principles. Governance structures matter - whether municipal, national or hybrid, successful new towns had clear lines of accountability and long-term stewardship. Infrastructure-first delivery is not optional - it is the backbone of successful places. Flexible masterplans that allow housing mixes to evolve with market demand consistently outperform rigid, single-use schemes. And above all, community engagement must be genuine, early and sustained.

The international record also shows what to avoid. Over-centralisation without local ownership breeds alienation. Over-reliance on technology or prestige projects risks sterile environments. And speed without demand alignment can create empty shells rather than thriving communities.

Implications for the Construction Industry

For construction companies, these lessons are more than abstract policy. They shape the pipelines, risks and opportunities that define the sector’s future. If the UK adopts infrastructure-first models, the sector must gear up for large-scale transport and utilities delivery at the front end of programmes. If governance is consolidated into empowered development corporations, contractors and consultants will need to adapt to new procurement and oversight regimes.

The emphasis on long-term stewardship and quality standards also has implications for skills and supply chains. Modern methods of construction, digital project management and sustainable materials are no longer optional extras, but likely requirements. International evidence suggests that the firms who invest early in these capabilities are best positioned to capture opportunity when new town programmes move from vision to delivery.

The history of new towns is full of both inspiration and cautionary tales. The Netherlands shows the value of public land and governance clarity. France proves the importance of infrastructure funding and coordination, but also warns against neglecting community voices. Germany underlines the power of quality and stewardship. South Korea and China caution against technology-first or speed-first approaches without market and social alignment. And Singapore sets the standard for incremental, integrated, transport-led delivery.

The UK does not need to copy any single model. But it does need to absorb the principles that make these international examples succeed. Governance, infrastructure, finance, flexibility and community - these are the foundations of durable places.

If the UK’s New Towns programme is to move from paper to reality, the construction industry will play a central role. That role will not just be to pour concrete and raise structures, but to deliver with an eye to long-term stewardship, sustainability and community value. International experience shows it can be done. The question now is whether Britain has the vision and consistency to match ambition with delivery.