- Published date:
- 16 January 2026
Pride in Place: Why property owners should lean into the UK’s new community agenda
- A version of this article first appeared on Green Street News.
The UK government’s Pride in Place Strategy marks a shift in how national policy empowers communities to shape their places. Rather than seeing place mainly as an economic asset, the strategy defines it as a living system of community, social capital and belonging.
For property owners, that shift carries both opportunity and risk. The opportunity lies in supporting (and being seen to support) a new community-centric model of growth. The risk in failing to do so could see the property sector perceived as detached from, or even hostile to, the communities it depends on.
From Levelling Up to local belonging
Pride in Place builds on the previous government’s Levelling Up agenda, its central premise being that strong communities are the foundation for economic renewal and not its by-product. Reading between the lines, there’s a tacit admission that local government can no longer provide what it did 20 years ago and therefore communities will have to “self-help” to a greater extent.
To achieve this, the government will deploy up to a reasonably hefty £5bn to support 75 priority areas and nearly 170 hyper-local neighbourhoods across the UK. The money will target projects that visibly improve quality of life: regenerating high streets, supporting community ownership of key assets and investing in parks, public spaces, and cultural venues.
This is clearly a good thing for places that will benefit. The interesting political nuance is that for a cash-strapped government to have found that amount of money speaks to the influence that advocates of more community-driven investment have in policymaking circles. Given how close the issue of ‘neighbourhood’ is to the voting public, it’s unlikely that a future government of a different colour would take a radically different philosophical approach on this point.
The direction of travel in policy and public sentiment therefore seems clear: investment that enhances social cohesion and local pride will increasingly be rewarded – through access to funding, planning flexibility, and long-term political support.
We know from experience that policy discussion often fails to differentiate between responsible and engaged property owners and those who give the sector a bad name.
Property and community
By empowering communities to a greater extent, the idea is that they will become more influential at a local level. There is an opportunity for property owners and developers to benefit from having stronger local partners to work with and there is scope for future property investment to more closely match “raw” local needs, unfiltered through the (well-meaning but often institutionally and resource-constrained) local authority.
Where this happens, it could start to shift residents’ perceptions about the value of property development and refurbishment activity as community partners are inevitably better placed to champion the benefits of development than a local authority.
While working directly with communities can be challenging and at times uncomfortable for property owners, it both underpins the sector’s “licence to operate” and goes with the grain of the greater focus that many property owners have placed on their social impact over the past five years.
Pride in Place also recognises the long-term approach that property owners can bring to the table and commits to introducing Business Improvement Districts (BIDs) across the country – something that the BPF has long advocated for.
The risks of inaction
However, the strategy also poses a clear reputational and political challenge. If the property industry is perceived as indifferent or obstructive to community empowerment, it risks becoming a lightning rod for local frustration.
The language of Pride in Place: “seizing control over high streets,” “reclaiming streets” speaks to a sense of local frustration that could easily turn against absentee or unresponsive owners, or indeed, against property owners as a whole.
We know from experience that policy discussion often fails to differentiate between responsible and engaged property owners and those who give the sector a bad name.
Policy levers such as compulsory rental auctions for long-vacant units, enhanced powers for local authorities to buy or repurpose derelict property, and potential fiscal incentives tied to community outcomes all demonstrate a more interventionist stance. The ban on upward only rent reviews also falls in this category – and is name-checked in the strategy. Property owners who ignore these signals may find themselves on the defensive, facing both regulatory pressure and reputational damage.
Capital and community
Pride in Place ultimately invites a new contract between property owners and the communities that host their assets. It recognises that physical regeneration and social regeneration are two sides of the same coin and that neither can succeed without the other.
For property owners, this means thinking beyond yield and asset appreciation. It means understanding that long-term value depends on local trust, on places people are proud to live and work in. Regeneration is about more than bricks and mortar; it is about belonging, stewardship and shared purpose.
If the property sector can lean into that ethos, it can help shape a more resilient, inclusive market and position itself as an indispensable partner in the government’s vision for national renewal. If it doesn’t, others will fill that space and the industry may find itself not the custodian of place, but its scapegoat.
Share article