||UK Government policy currently places a strong emphasis on the reuse of brownfield land as part of its sustainable development and regeneration agendas, including the Sustainable Communities Plan. The Barker Review has also been important in the continuing debate for highlighting not only the chronic undersupply of new dwellings, but also in arguing that improvements in both the housebuilding industry and the planning system could deliver an increased supply of low cost, new homes. This has implications for the use and reuse of both brownfield and greenfield sites. Policy makers have therefore realised that fundamental change is needed, albeit within the context of (so far) relatively 'light touch' policies, working in conjunction with the market. The current development landscape therefore is a complex one, with a range of policy measures being debated, but with inherent uncertainty, tensions and conflicts still present. The question arises therefore, how are developers approaching brownfield and contaminated land issues today? Previous research has focused on the barriers surrounding brownfield reuse, but there has been little research that has focused on how the housebuilding industry interacts with other players or stakeholders, in terms of market dynamics at a national and regional level. This paper is based around the Stage 1 survey results (carried out in mid-2004) of commercial and residential developers of a two and half year EPSRC-funded project, based at The College of Estate Management in Reading. The paper briefly provides an overview to the brownfield issue in an international context, in terms of conceptual models of brownfield, and critically reviews the key literature relating to the housebuilding industry and brownfield land in the UK, highlighting recent UK government policy in relation to brownfield land. Commercial developers have a long history of developing on brownfield sites, but key results from the survey suggest that housebuilding on recycled land is no longer the preserve of specialists, and is now widespread throughout the industry. Attitudes towards developing on contaminated sites appear to have changed as developers have gained more experience of building on brownfield land. As a result, developers are personified by distinct 'cultures' and varying attitudes towards brownfield/contaminated land issues, in terms of risk perception, and remediation technology adoption. As the survey suggests, although brownfield redevelopment is becoming 'mainstream', the redevelopment of contaminated sites for residential use could, however, be threatened by the impact of the EU Landfill Directive. Its implementation was likely to dissuade over two-fifths of housebuilders in the survey (particularly the smaller operators) from undertaking development on land requiring remedial treatment. These findings and others covered in the paper have important ramifications for brownfield regeneration. This may also have consequences for increasing housing supply in the key growth areas targeted in the Government's Sustainable Communities Plan.