Should we be developing buildings for people or computers?

One of the unavoidable aspects of being a researcher is that every topic you research starts to feel like the most important issue. Spend a few months speaking to planning committee councillors about housing delivery and you'll find yourself viewing a range of different topics through the lens of the housing crisis. Shift your attention to data centres and you'll quickly find equally passionate arguments about digital infrastructure, artificial intelligence and the UK's economic growth.

Over the last year, our team has been moving between these two topics. On one side, we've been running our annual National Planning Barometer, speaking to planning committee councillors across England about housing delivery. On the other, we've been exploring public and councillor attitudes towards data centres in Does Not Compute: What the UK Public Really Thinks About Data Centres.

Recently I read a Financial Times article asking the question: should we be developing buildings for people or computers? Looking at our two studies side by side, it's easy to see why that question is becoming more relevant.

This year's National Planning Barometer’s findings paint a picture of a housing system under considerable pressure. Despite some signs that perceptions of the housing crisis may be stabilising, councillors continue to describe shortages of genuinely affordable homes, stretched local infrastructure and difficulties meeting housing demand. 

Then, we found ourselves researching another form of infrastructure attracting growing public attention: data centres. Like housing, data centres are increasingly being presented as essential. The UK Government has designated them Critical National Infrastructure and they are becoming an increasingly big part of modern life, underpinning everything from online banking and public services to social media and artificial intelligence. 

Yet public knowledge of data centres is very low: 89% of the public say they know little or nothing about data centres. What's interesting is that people have not yet settled on a single view. Most recognise the need for the UK to have sufficient capacity to store and process data as demand grows. However, the public also hold valid concerns about power and water usage, and ultimately, whether AI growth is a legitimate reason to build more data centres.

Whether the debate is housing or data centres, it seems that support for national objectives often becomes more complicated when questions of local impact and competing priorities are present.

In our research, we find that housing debates are about supporting infrastructure, affordability and skills shortages as much as they are about homes themselves. Similarly, data centre debates quickly become conversations about energy, water, artificial intelligence, economic growth and competing land use.

What our research suggests is that the UK is entering a period where these trade-offs become increasingly visible, especially as both new homes and data centres depend on many of the same finite sources. The question is how we strike the right balance; build confidence and trust in the public and decision makers alike to ensure we can meet genuine housing need without compromising on our capability to support an increasingly digital economy.