Who Owns England?

1. Land ownership in England remains highly concentrated and secretive

Land ownership remains our oldest, darkest, best-kept secret.

Concentrated ownership. In England, less than 1% of the population owns over 50% of the land. This extreme concentration has its roots in the Norman Conquest of 1066, when William the Conqueror distributed land to a small group of barons. Despite centuries of social and economic change, this fundamental inequality persists.

Lack of transparency. Unlike many other countries, England lacks a comprehensive, publicly accessible land registry. The Land Registry remains incomplete, with about 17% of land unregistered. Even for registered land, detailed ownership information is often hidden behind complex corporate structures or offshore entities. This opacity makes it difficult for the public, researchers, and policymakers to fully understand patterns of land ownership and their implications.

Key barriers to transparency:

• Incomplete Land Registry
• Use of offshore companies and trusts
• Resistance from wealthy landowners
• Lack of political will for reform

2. The Crown and Church still own vast tracts of land, rooted in historical privilege

The Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster remain the monarchy's personal fiefdom ever since.

Crown lands. The monarchy, through various institutions like the Crown Estate, Duchy of Lancaster, and Duchy of Cornwall, owns over 450,000 acres in England. While some of this land generates revenue for the public purse, other holdings provide private income for the royal family. The continued existence of these vast estates reflects the persistence of feudal structures in modern England.

Church holdings. Despite significant losses over the past century, the Church of England still owns around 175,000 acres. This includes valuable urban properties as well as rural lands. The Church's landholdings, like those of the Crown, are rooted in historical privilege and raise questions about the fairness of continued institutional landownership on such a scale.

Major Crown landholdings:

• Crown Estate: 264,233 acres
• Duchy of Cornwall: 130,639 acres
• Duchy of Lancaster: 41,610 acres
• Sandringham Estate: 20,000 acres

3. Aristocratic families continue to dominate landownership despite societal changes

Make sure they have an ancestor who was a very close friend of William the Conqueror.

Resilient elites. Despite predictions of their demise, aristocratic families still own vast swathes of England. Many of the largest estates have been in the same families for centuries, protected by inheritance laws like male primogeniture. While some aristocrats have adapted to modern times by opening their estates to tourism or conservation, others continue traditional practices like grouse shooting that shape large areas of upland England.

Entrenched inequality. The persistence of aristocratic landownership perpetuates broader social and economic inequalities. Large estates benefit from agricultural subsidies and tax breaks, while limiting access to land for new entrants in farming. The concentration of land in few hands also contributes to the housing crisis by restricting the supply of developable land.

Examples of major aristocratic landowners:

• Duke of Westminster: 129,300 acres
• Duke of Northumberland: 100,000+ acres
• Duke of Devonshire: 73,000 acres
• Earl of Cadogan: 93 acres in central London

4. New money and offshore companies are reshaping the landscape of land ownership

London is the money-laundering capital of the world.

Global wealth flows. Since the 1970s, waves of new money have entered the English property market. This includes Middle Eastern oil wealth, Russian oligarchs, and global business tycoons. Many have purchased prime real estate in London as well as rural estates, often through offshore companies to maintain secrecy and minimize tax liabilities.

Implications for communities. The influx of global capital into English land and property markets has profound effects on local communities. In London, it contributes to soaring house prices and the phenomenon of "ghost homes" left empty by absentee owners. In rural areas, new owners may change traditional land management practices or restrict public access.

Key trends in new ownership:

• Use of offshore companies to purchase property
• Concentration in prime London real estate
• Acquisition of traditional estates by global elites
• Investment in land as a financial asset rather than for productive use

5. Public sector land is being rapidly sold off, often at the expense of public interest

It's time to stop flogging off land – our land – and instead start asking us how we'd like to best use it.

Privatization push. Since the 1980s, successive governments have sold off large amounts of public land in the name of efficiency and deficit reduction. This includes former military bases, NHS properties, and local authority holdings. While generating short-term revenue, these sales often fail to consider long-term public needs or potential alternative uses.

Lost opportunities. The sell-off of public land represents a missed opportunity to address pressing social needs like affordable housing or green space. Once privatized, land is difficult to reclaim for public use. The sale of county farms, which provided entry points for new farmers, is a particular concern for rural communities and food security.

Examples of public land sales:

• Ministry of Defence: Plans to sell 32,500 acres by 2040
• NHS: 718 sites deemed surplus to requirements as of 2017
• Local authorities: Forced to sell assets to cope with budget cuts
• Forestry Commission: Attempted privatization in 2010 (later reversed)

6. Corporate land ownership poses challenges for transparency and accountability

Peel schemes rarely come to light until they are effectively a fait accompli and the conglomerate is confident they will go ahead, irrespective of public opinion.

Complex structures. Many large corporate landowners use intricate networks of subsidiaries and holding companies, making it difficult to trace ultimate ownership. This opacity can hinder local planning processes and community engagement. Companies like Peel Holdings have acquired vast landholdings across England with little public scrutiny.

Environmental concerns. Corporate landownership can lead to short-term profit-seeking at the expense of long-term environmental stewardship. Examples include the creation of grouse moors for elite sport, intensive farming practices, and neglect of contaminated former industrial sites. The lack of transparency around corporate ownership makes it challenging to hold companies accountable for environmental damage.

Issues with corporate land ownership:

• Use of complex corporate structures to obscure ownership
• Difficulty in tracing ultimate beneficial owners
• Potential for tax avoidance through offshore arrangements
• Challenges in enforcing environmental regulations
• Reduced local accountability in land use decisions

7. Conservation organizations play a crucial role in land stewardship and public access

The National Trust is now an entrenched part of that landscape: after all, it owns 614,000 acres of it – 2 per cent of England and Wales, with the bulk of that in England.

Land preservation. Organizations like the National Trust, RSPB, and Wildlife Trusts collectively own nearly a million acres in England. These groups play a vital role in preserving natural habitats, historic landscapes, and public access to the countryside. Their landholdings often provide a buffer against development pressures and intensive agriculture.

Evolving priorities. While conservation groups have made significant contributions, they also face challenges in balancing competing priorities. The National Trust, for example, has been criticized for focusing too much on stately homes at the expense of natural landscapes. There are ongoing debates about rewilding versus traditional land management practices on conservation lands.

Major conservation landowners:

• National Trust: 474,641 acres
• RSPB: 127,032 acres
• Wildlife Trusts: 34,241 acres (Woodland Trust)

8. The housing crisis is fundamentally a land crisis, driven by concentrated ownership

At its heart, the housing crisis is a land crisis.

Land value inflation. The soaring cost of housing in England is primarily driven by increases in land values, not construction costs. Since 1995, the value of land has increased fivefold. This inflation is exacerbated by the concentration of developable land in the hands of a small number of landowners and developers.

Policy failures. Current policies often fail to address the underlying land issue. Measures like Help to Buy have inflated demand without increasing supply, while planning reforms have not tackled the fundamental problem of land availability. The practice of "land banking" by developers, who hold onto sites without building to benefit from rising values, further constrains housing supply.

Key aspects of the land/housing crisis:

• Land values, not construction costs, drive house price increases
• Concentration of developable land in few hands
• Speculative land banking by developers
• Insufficient mechanisms to capture land value increases for public benefit
• Lack of affordable housing on publicly owned land sold for development

9. Agricultural policies and subsidies reinforce existing patterns of land inequality

Seventeen of Britain's dukes together received £8 million in farm subsidies in 2015.

Subsidy concentration. The current system of agricultural subsidies disproportionately benefits large landowners. Payments are typically based on land area rather than public benefits provided, meaning the largest farms receive the most money. This reinforces existing inequalities and makes it harder for new entrants to access farmland.

Environmental concerns. The subsidy system has also incentivized environmentally damaging practices, such as the removal of hedgerows to maximize subsidized acreage. While there are moves to reform subsidies towards "public money for public goods," the overall structure continues to favor large landowners.

Issues with current agricultural policies:

• Area-based payments benefit largest landowners most
• Minimum size thresholds exclude many small farmers
• Insufficient support for new entrants to farming
• Weak environmental conditions on subsidy payments
• Continued support for unsustainable practices (e.g., grouse moors)

10. Community ownership and land reform offer potential solutions to concentration

Half a million acres of land are currently estimated to be in community ownership in Scotland; we should aim for a million acres of England to be owned by community groups by 2030.

Scottish example. Scotland has made significant progress in land reform, including measures to increase transparency, community right-to-buy provisions, and support for community land trusts. These reforms have led to a significant increase in community-owned land, particularly in rural areas.

English possibilities. While England lacks a comprehensive land reform agenda, there are growing calls for change. Potential measures include completing and opening up the Land Registry, strengthening community right-to-buy powers, reforming inheritance tax on landed estates, and introducing a land value tax. Community ownership models, such as community land trusts for affordable housing, offer promising avenues for more equitable land distribution.

Potential land reform measures for England:

• Full transparency in land ownership records
• Community right-to-buy similar to Scotland
• Reform of tax incentives that favor large landowners
• Support for community land trusts and other collective ownership models
• Land value taxation to capture unearned increases in land values
• Strengthened powers for local authorities to acquire land for public benefit

</instructions>