Just 0.56% of people engage with local plan consultations, RTPI analysis finds
New analysis from the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) finds responses to local plan consultations represent 0.56% of a local authority’s population, with the Institute warning that low public participation could undermine trust in planning reform.
The finding suggests that most people are not taking part in formal conversations about the future of their local area, despite local plans shaping the location of homes, high streets, schools, parks, roads and railway stations.
The analysis is published alongside a new white paper, Communications in Planning, from the RTPI and its member magazine The Planner. The report argues that planning authorities need to communicate clearly, engage early and reach beyond the people who already participate in planning consultations.
Previous RTPI research with YouGov found that 33% of the British public did not know how to get involved in the planning process, while 39% felt their participation would not make a difference. The same polling found that only 7% of the public had engaged with the planning system.
However, earlier research supported by the RTPI and delivered by Demos, The MIMBY Majority, found that 63% of the UK population would accept development under certain conditions.
The white paper warns that the challenge is becoming more urgent. Changes to the National Planning Policy Framework will mean every English local authority will be required to have a local plan in place within 30 months.
Without better engagement, the RTPI said, decisions risk feeling more remote, more opaque and more vulnerable to mistrust, misinformation and public opposition later in the process.
Simon Creer, Director of Communications and Engagement at the RTPI, said: “Planning, no matter where it is done, relies on proper communications and consultation. The public expect their voices to be heard. But there is an emerging feeling that planning is something that is done to people, not with them.
“There is a real risk that changes to the National Planning Policy Framework, as well as the additional layer of spatial development strategies, will add to this. The communities being consulted will be larger, the decisions more opaque and further away. Many people may not even be aware of which combined authority they are in, let alone be motivated enough to engage with planning at that level.
“Taken all together, we can see a system that will require more engagement, more communication and clearer explanation of what the system does and does not do. If we are to bring the more positively inclined communities along with us and make this system work, then there is a large job of work to be done.”
Simon Wicks, editor of The Planner, said: “The Communications in Planning report aims to get the ball rolling on a discussion about the importance of good communication in planning and its potential to relieve some of the antagonism around planning in the UK.
“We know that planners often feel intimidated by the public reaction to their work. We know the system as written doesn't really facilitate good quality, meaningful communication between planners and the public. The result is a lack of information flowing in either direction and an erosion of trust.
“We want to talk about this and share with planners some of the ways in which they can communicate more effectively with the people affected by planning proposals and decisions.”
Rachel Brisley, Head of Planning and Place, Public Affairs, Ipsos, said: “When people have the evidence and time to reflect, urgency rises and choices become fairer and more strategic. From our experience, the most general concerns are protecting vulnerable communities, investing in resilience, and putting resources where they count. And with transparency, trust grows - making tough trade‑offs easier to navigate. For planners, deliberation can lead to clearer priorities, a stronger local mandate, and decisions that stand up better under national‑local pressure.”
Jennie Savage, Strategic Urban Designer and Co-Design Specialist, Studio Jennie Savage, said: “What if a Local Plan started with listening, took a ‘whole system’ approach to mapping place and had a local circular economy focus?
“What would change if local knowledge genuinely shaped the direction of travel and connected development to place-based initiatives? What would happen if communities were part of the solution and difficult decisions were made together?
“A local plan that aligns with local aspiration starts with listening to people’s stories and understanding how communities feel, scaling local knowledge to connect major, long-term, strategic development to the fine details- the things that genuinely enrich people's lives.”
Robin Hutchinson, Director of The Community Brain CIC, said: “I’m not sure we should be overly surprised by the low figures of engagement currently experienced through formal and traditional routes. The language used and approaches taken can be a turn off even when if it does come to people’s attention. Conversations need to be brokered earlier and in different ways so they are not directly linked to the need for specific responses.
“Create events and moments that allow people to talk openly about their area, their thoughts, concerns and hopes. Make space for them to tell their stories. You will find more insight and information from someone in this atmosphere than ever through a ‘consultation’. We are always delighted by how open and ambitious people can be about where they live.”
The report is published in the July/August issue of The Planner.
Methodology
RTPI researchers carried out desk research to identify the number of written responses received during local plan consultations by local planning authorities across the UK.
In England, researchers used engagement figures reported in Regulation 22 consultation statements, or interim Regulation 18 and Regulation 19 consultation reports where these were the most recent available sources. In Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, researchers used the closest equivalent local plan consultation reports.
To allow comparison between authorities, the analysis focused on written responses to local plan consultations. Where figures were available across more than one consultation stage, researchers calculated the mean number of written responses received across those stages. This figure was then expressed as a proportion of the relevant local authority population, using the 2024 mid-year population estimates.
The research used the most recent available local plan consultation data for each authority. As a result, the dataset includes a mixture of current, emerging and withdrawn local plans.
Engagement figures were publicly and accessibly available for 73.9% of planning authorities. For the remaining 26.1%, researchers were unable to identify a usable figure. Reasons included consultation reports not being published, broken links on council websites, plans still being prepared following boundary changes, and unclear or inconsistent wording within consultation reports.
The figures should therefore be understood as an estimate of written response rates to local plan consultations, rather than a measure of all forms of public engagement or the number of unique individuals who participated.
