PB February-March 2026
February-March 2026 45
By Michael Smith
Lessons for Ireland from
China’s housing machine
Initiate state development companies
I
reland’s housing debate is strangely
insular. We compare ourselves
obsessively with the UK, Vienna and
the Nordics, while ignoring the most
provocative counterpoint on the planet:
China. Not because Ireland should copy
China’s political system — far from it — but
because China demonstrates something
Ireland refuses to face. If the State wants large
volumes of housing, the State must build. If it
wants aordable land, it must control it.
China’s record is extreme, but instructive.
The State — through large construction
conglomerates and publicly-linked developers
— can deliver new homes at extraordinary
scale because it owns the land, controls
the finance, and uses a standardised,
industrialised building system. Ireland does
none of these things. Instead, it subsidises
private landlords, negotiates politely with
landowners, and relies on a CPO system that
is too slow,
What China gets right: scale,
co-ordination and state
capacity
China’s housing system is defined by
state capacity, not ideology. State-owned
developers dominate delivery because they
have reliable access to land, stable financing,
and clear political mandates. When a Chinese
city decides to build a large public rental
programme or redevelop a district, it instructs
a state construction enterprise and the project
proceeds.
The strength of the model lies in its
industrial organisation. Chinese state builders
use prefabrication, standardised components
and large, permanent workforces. They
build repetitively and at scale. And while
quality varies, new apartments in cities
like Guangzhou and Shenzhen routinely
include integrated amenities — landscaped
courtyards, childcare facilities, underground
parking, on-site management — that Western
developments often lack.
None of this requires authoritarianism. It
requires a state willing to plan, own land, build
directly, and get over its neoliberal hangups.
What Ireland gets right:
security and standards — for a
Minority
Ireland’s social housing, when it exists, is
excellent. Local authority and AHB-built
homes are secure, genuinely aordable, and
delivered to high energy standards. Tenants
enjoy strong rights that most countries —
including China — do not approach.
But the strengths apply only to a minority,
because Ireland simply does not build enough.
The State completed just 32,700 homes in
2023, and only 7,433 of these were social
homes built by councils and AHBs. Ireland’s
social housing share has collapsed to 9% of
homes, down from nearly 20% in the 1960s,
and far below countries we claim to admire.
Meanwhile, the State spends over €1 billion
per year on HAP, RAS and leasing — payments
to private landlords that produce no public
housing assets. HAP now houses over 60,000
households, making it, eectively, the largest
landlord in Ireland. This is not a system
designed to produce public housing; it is a
system designed to avoid it.
Ireland’s core problem: a
dysfunctional land and CPO
regime
Ireland’s inability to build is not fundamentally
about skills, labour or materials. It is about
land.
Ireland’s CPO system is one of the slowest
in Europe. A single CPO can take 2–4 years.
Councils initiate only a handful of housing-
related CPOs each year. The system is legally
fragile and politically timorous.
Ireland compensates landowners at full
open market value..
The results of inertia are visible everywhere.
The 2022 Census recorded 166,000 vacant
dwellings, and the Derelict Sites Register lists
over 8,000 properties — a fraction of the true
total. Yet the State remains unwilling or unable
to take control of these sites.
What Ireland could borrow from China
without surrendering Democracy
Ireland should not copy China’s politics. But
it can adapt the productive parts of China’s
system — many of which also exist in the
Netherlands, Denmark and Germany.
1. A national public construction company
A state builder, operating with standardised
designs and modern prefabrication, could
reliably deliver 10,000–20,000 homes per
year
2. Modern CPO reform
Compensation based on existing use value
(plus a premium), paired with 6–12 month
statutory timelines and a specialised
tribunal to replace High Court appeals.
3. Automatic triggers
A site vacant for five years? CPO. A derelict
building on the register for two years? CPO.
A developer fails to start after planning
permission? CPO.
4. Strategic public land banking
Municipal and national land banks with
20–30 year horizons, as used in the Dutch
and German systems.
5. Integrated urban design
Every public development should include
green space, childcare, community space
and public transport alignment — areas
where Chinese cities excel.
None of this compromises democracy. It
strengthens it by giving the State the capacity
to serve public need.
Conclusion
Ireland’s housing crisis is not inevitable. It is the
product of choices — to protect landowners, to
appease developers, to avoid confrontation,
and to outsource responsibility to the private
market. China’s system is a reminder that
states can build at scale when they choose to.
Ireland could do the same. It simply
doesn’t.
Them and us
ENVIRONMENT
Village_FebMarch26.indb 45Village_FebMarch26.indb 45 03/02/2026 08:2403/02/2026 08:24
