Government attempt to streamline system raises questions about fairness for landowners
The Chartered Institute of Housing (CIH) Scotland has said it would support the removal of “hope value” proposed in the government’s compulsory purchase order consultation.

Through the consultation, which closed on 19 December, the government is seeking to refine how compulsory purchase orders (CPO) are used to deliver new homes and infrastructure by replacing the “very complicated system” with a single comprehensive Compulsory Purchase Act.
One consideration included in the consultation paper is the exclusion of hope value when buying land, referring to the potential value of a site that could be realised through future development.
CIH Scotland said the exclusion of hope value for the development of social housing, healthcare and schools, in line with the system in England, would help address the “unrealistic expectations” of value based on potential future use that can block the delivery of social and affordable housing within benchmark levels.
However, the membership body warned that if this option is taken forward, the government “must set clear parameters for the use of exclusions to avoid adding complexity and delays back into the system it is seeking to streamline.”
The consultation paper also noted that although hope value exclusions would enable public bodies to acquire land more cheaply, the approach “could result in those subject to compulsory purchase receiving less for their property than it would be worth if sold voluntarily i.e. compensation would be below market value.”
It added that this would raise some “fundamental questions about fairness” and highlighted the need to “ensure landowners whose land is acquired through compulsory purchase receive equivalent compensation to landowners who sell their land on the open market.”
The Scottish government described CPOs as an “underutilised tool”, with its register of CPO cases from 2012 to 2025 showing only 57 cases raised by 11 local authorities under the category of “housing”.
No comments yet