As the housing market begins to stabilise after a traumatic period of decline, a new report - Who Should Build Our Homes? - challenges any presumption that housebuilding should just continue from where it left off.
Earlier this year, Richard Simmons, CABE chief executive argued in No More Toxic Assets that more of the same is simply not good enough.
CABE has launched a debate about who should build our homes. Six housing experts have contributed their own strong views through a collection of essays. They put the case for new models - for much less reliance on build-to-sell; and for renting to become the norm once again. They also argue for self-build and community commissioned housing to enter the mainstream instead of being marginalised at the periphery.
Christine Whitehead, professor of housing economics at the London School of Economics (LSE), points out that housing supply never came near to meeting demand. She argues for a planning framework which incentivises the right sort of development at the local level.
Peter Studdert, planning director for Cambridge's growth areas, calls for local authorities to be set free from central government restraints so they can play a more active role in funding and delivering new homes.
Liz Peace, chief executive of the British Property Federation, wants to see a move away from the build-to-sell model and a positive attitude to renting from investors and consumers.
Stephen Hill, director of C20 futureplanners, champions the self-build movement and its potential to create high quality places.
Pooran Desai, co-founder of the BioRegional Development Group, argues that climate change should be tackled at the neighbourhood scale.
Dickon Robinson argues for a more diverse tenure mix, and that developers need to be incentivised to build larger homes.
For more information and to contribute views on the ideas in the six essays visit the CABE website here.