Two weeks ago, I defended those who argue that it's time to build on the green belt. I agree fundamentally with one council chief executive who told me that the discomfort felt by communities facing development in their area is "nothing compared to the aggregate pain that people feel in this country because there is insufficient housing for them and their families".

It came as no particular surprise, however, when my article provoked fierce debate. One commentator disagreed with it, arguing that new development would simply lead to "urban sprawl": "Urban sprawl increases inequality, crime and pollution, it destroys both the city and the country and leaves behind a gloopy mess of highways, sheds, Barratt homes and business parks."

Others reminded us also that there is another option. If development in rural or protected areas is unpalatable, then we need to build upwards instead.

Unlike many European countries, and in particular contrast to countries with large populations such as Japan, we have a problem with aspiration. The image of the British dream home as a detached house with a garden persists, despite all the problems that we know our housing shortage is storing up for us.

In Japan, a series of factors have created a culture in which high-rise living is the norm. First, the geography makes it difficult to build: 72% of Japan's land is mountainous, meaning its population of almost 128 million must squeeze into what is left. Second, the working day for professionals is very long. It is usual to work until 11pm or midnight on an average working day. Commuting is impossible, so the majority of professionals live with their families in the city in which they work.

Owning a private home with a garden is not a meaningful aspiration in Japan; it is an opportunity only available to the super-wealthy. Middle-class families aspire to a comfortable apartment in a well-equipped city where there is stable employment for the head of the household (which in Japan, is almost universally a man).

Here in the UK, apartments or flats – especially in high-rise developments – have never been a tenure of aspiration. They are either synonymous with poverty, as many council or housing association properties remain in the high-rise brutalist housing estates of the late 1960s and 1970s, or they are a luxury that remains out of reach to anyone who can be meaningfully labelled as middle class. Apartments near the top of the Shard, with breathtaking views across London, are selling for £50m. Less than a mile away in south London, former council flats in tower developments are selling for little more than £100,000.

It is also in London that things are starting to change. The Greater London Authority and the boroughs have accepted that meeting demand within the constraints of the capital's planning system will mean building at higher densities. But still, too often, this change is being moulded by the demands of foreign investors rather than our own home buyers,

As Peter Murray, founder of the New London Architecture Centre, writes: "Although height is not an essential ingredient of higher densities, it can provide a greater sense of space than lower developments, and is popular with overseas buyers, who are the major target market for housing developers right now."

While I won't be arguing for 18-hour working days or gender inequality, there are some lessons we need to learn from the Japanese social example.

The UK housing market can no longer provide the kind of homes we want, in the places we want them, at an affordable price unless something gives. If want to protect the green belt, then middle-class aspirations must shift.

We need to build; if not out, then up.

• Want to have your say on the subject? Contact housingnetwork@theguardian.com

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. Join the housing network for more news, analysis and comment direct to you