January is often a time of reflection, considering the year that is past whilst looking ahead to the next twelve months (and beyond). Perhaps it is the quinquennium nature of the year that has slipped into history – 2025 – that particularly prompts a time of contemplation: a quarter of a century on from the turn of the millennium.

The first regional development strategy (RDS) for Northern Ireland (NI), known as Shaping our Future published in 2001, projected forward to 2025 and how the spatial organisation of the region might be configured depending on continuing alignment of government priorities and commitment from a wide range of delivery agents. Context is key: the RDS emerged at a time of renewed hope across NI, and beyond, that the decades-long political conflict was finally over; indeed, the RDS featured within the text of the 1998 Belfast / Good Friday Agreement (termed a regional strategic framework).

European thinking, including the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP), significantly influenced the policies and measures contained in the RDS, mirroring the direction of travel adopted at Westminster by the New Labour government (that included English regional planning), the Irish government through the National Spatial Strategy, the Scottish National Planning Framework and the Wales Spatial Plan. In other words, there was a broad commonality of purpose and strategic policy instruments across these islands.

There is not the scope here for a full evaluation of the RDS, but it is interesting to ponder how well that first iteration of the RDS faired in comparison to the experienced reality of NI in 2025. In terms of population, the strategy anticipated 1.835 million; the reality is almost 100,000 higher [1]. Up to 250,000 additional dwellings were provided for in the RDS; during the (almost) 21-year period from January 2005 to September 2025, construction of 165,885 new dwellings commenced [2]. Transport infrastructure projects remain stalled [3]. That said, there was no shortage of ambition in the RDS with the inclusion of rapid transit, enhanced connectivity, preference for development at interchange locations akin to the much-feted Dutch approach, and a visionary understanding of what is now expressed as ‘active travel’ and associated health benefits.

A lot has happened in the intervening 24 years, and this is by no means an exhaustive list: global financial crisis and associated impact on household formation [4]; coronavirus pandemic; collapse (and reinstatement) of NI’s political institutions; Brexit; and the transfer of planning powers in NI from central to local government. Conceived as a “planning framework for tackling the deficiencies in our infrastructure and helping the overall development of our economy and society“, the RDS undoubtedly set the tone for a new era of planning in NI, a shift away from survey-analysis-plan to plan-monitor-manage. A revised RDS – Building a Better Future – was published in 2012 for the period to 2035, set a target (subsequently exceeded) of 60% new housing to be built on brownfield lands, then one of the most ambitious in the UK.

This is a demonstration of policy evolution in practice: the goals and policies of RDS 2035, including transboundary cooperation, would likely not have been possible without RDS 2025.

With rapid advances in technology, the climate emergency, and monumental changes since the pandemic to our daily living patterns, there is an opportunity to update the RDS to more clearly articulate contemporary spatial planning ideas and principles. For example, sustainability and environmental considerations featured prominently in the RDS 2025 but ‘retrofit’ does not appear until RDS 2035. Yet policy measures contained within RDS 2025 can clearly be interpreted through a ‘retrofit’ lens “… reallocate road space where appropriate to give priority to pedestrians, cyclists, and public transport … to facilitate the renaissance of urban areas.” One of the most significant aspects of RDS 2025 was the consideration given to strategy implementation: a collaborative effort would be required, underpinned by “open and inclusive dialogue”, “effective partnership”, and “co-operation with our neighbours in the island of Ireland and with GB”. Perhaps this is all very ‘motherhood and apple pie’ – who would argue against these? – at the same time, this chimes with the very raison d’etre of planning as a coordinative activity and which mitigates the risk of a leadership deficit.

Urban retrofit, as process and as technology, does not and cannot operate in a silo. Similar to the RDS, collaboration between stakeholders is vital for achieving successful outcomes. Planning – both the ‘system’ and planners – are key to enabling this. Afterall, planning is “nothing if not a coordinative function” (Cullingworth and Nadin, 2002). The notion of an ‘ecosystem’ today is applied beyond the environmental as a valid description of the inter-reliance between various ‘parts’. Recent confirmation from the Westminster government that the Duty to Co-operate will be removed from the existing plan-making system has piqued interest, particularly with the commitment to a “new tier of strategic planning”. Maybe this is a ‘Back to the Future‘ moment – (another link to NI, as the DeLorean car was made in Belfast) – we will only know for sure when we reflect back at some later point, though hopefully it won’t be 25 years in the making.

[1] NISRA (2025) https://www.nisra.gov.uk/news/population-northern-ireland-continues-grow 

[2] Department of Finance NI (2025) https://www.finance-ni.gov.uk/publications/new-dwelling-statistics-detailed-reports 

[3] A proposed rail link to Belfast International Airport is one example of deferred decision-making: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8dpjzmp7v7o 

[4] Department of Communities NI (2017)  https://www.communities-ni.gov.uk/sites/default/files/publications/communities/dfc-housing-market-symposium-report-2017.pdf