Professional Documents
Culture Documents
1.1
Housing (adequate shelter) is known universal as one of the basic necessities of life
and a pre-requisite to survival of man (Onibokun, 1983; United Nations, 1992; Salau,
1990; Nubi, 2003). A house is a place in which it provides shelter, refuge, comfort,
protection, and dignity. The housing industry can be a stimulus to national economy
(Onibokun, 1983). A house also provides the physical framework in which human,
social, economic, and cultural resources are realized, enriched, and integrated. In the
traditional African setting, in particular, housing is, in fact, one of the greatly
cherished material properties. This is because of the other functions that a house
performs in the traditional society includes the protection of family cohesion and
values, taking care of the aged through the extended family system, and the protection
of the ancestral values, among others. Thus, the significance of providing adequate
housing in any country cannot be overemphasized.
However, in spite of the fundamental role of housing in the life of every individual
and the nation, and in spite of the United Nations realization of the need to globally
attain adequate shelter for all, the housing crisis remains one of the global problems
and a grave and rising challenge facing both urban and rural residents, particularly in
most developing countries. It is generally estimated that the world needs to house an
additional 68 million to 80 million people (Awake, 2005). According to the United
Nations Population Fund (Wikipedia, 2003), world population passed 6.1 billion in
2001 and it is expected to reach between 7.9 and 10.9 billion by 2050. Over 90% of
1
the growth during the next two decades is forecast to occur in the developing
countries.
Those estimates represent a formidable housing challenge. The situation even
becomes more serious and worrisome when one realizes the fact that despite a number
of political, social, and religious initiatives taken in the past in some of these
developing countries, a large proportion of their population still lives in sub-standard
and poor housing and in deplorable and unsanitary residential environments. This is
particularly so in Nigeria, where housing provision by government commenced before
political independence in 1960 and where, despite various government interventions
and huge investments in housing provision, the housing problem in the country still
remains intractable as many rural and urban populations in Nigeria do not have access
to decent, safe and affordable housing. This, according to Onibokun (1990), is as a
result of the government to provide housing to the general population.
The level of production of housing in a developing country like Nigeria is only 2
dwelling units per thousand people, compared to the required rate of about 8-10
dwelling units per 1,000 population as recommended by the United Nations
(Anthonio, 2002). It is against this backdrop that this study attempts an overview of
government housing delivery strategies in Nigeria over the years with a view to
identify corrective measures that are needed to better the shelter and living conditions
of the generality of Nigerians.
1.2
Statement of problem
2
Housing delivery is a highly controversial and politicised issue that is of great concern
to administrators, scholars and the public in Nigeria. In the last few decades, the influx
of people into urban areas, the natural population increase and inadequate responses
by the government have contributed to the worsening housing situation in this country,
to the extent that economic development and the welfare of the citizens are adversely
affected (Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1991; Akinmoladun and Oluwoye, 2007;
Ademiluyi and Raji, 2008).
These problems have become more critical in the cities, where huge housing supply
deficits, dilapidated housing conditions, high cost of housing as well as proliferation
of slums and squatter.
residential real estate, especially for the low-income segment. The housing backlog is
estimated at 14 million units (Roland Igbinoba Real Foundation for Housing and
Urban Development, 2009) and it will require N49 trillion ($326 billion) to bridge the
housing deficit of 14 million units based on an estimated average cost of N3.5 million
($23,333) per housing unit (Roland Igbinoba Real Foundation for Housing and Urban
Development, 2009).
The problem of housing delivery strategy can be known if the following research
questions are asked;
1. What are the housing delivery strategies which have been delivered by
LSDPC?
2. What are the challenges of these housing strategies used by LSDPC?
3. What is the level of success of these housing delivery strategies used by
LSDPC?
3
4. What are the measures that are needed by LSDPC to improve housing supply
in Lagos state?
1.3
The aim of this study is to evaluate the housing strategies deployed by LSDPC with a
view to identify measures that are needed to improve housing supply.
To achieve the above stated aim, the following objectives are pursued:
1. To determine the housing delivery strategies deployed by LSDPC
2. To identify the challenges of these housing delivery strategies.
3. To determine the level of success of these housing delivery strategies.
4. To determine measures that are needed to improve housing delivery.
1.5
Significance of study
1.6
Definition of terms
CHAPTER TWO
2.0
2.1
Literature Review
Introduction
The aim of this chapter is to review the literature on the concept of housing and
significance of housing. The review of literature also captured past government
interventions in housing delivery in Nigeria.
2.2
facilities, equipment and devices needed for the physical health and
social well-being of the family and the individual
As quoted by Christina (1997), an ad-hoc group of experts on social programming of
housing in urban areas concluded that in fulfilment of social needs, Housing serves
as the area where the individual becomes capable of experiencing community and
privacy, social well-being and shelter and protection against hostile physical forces
and disturbances and also serves as the area, an abundant supply of social relationship
and services are accessible, education, recreation, sports, social welfare and health
protection services, shopping and transportation.
Housing fosters physical, social, and economic as well as psychological satisfaction
for the dwellers. It provides leisure and reflects status, Domfeh (1992). Apart from
being a basic human right, adequate housing plays a major role in the economic
development and growth of the nation. The provision of housing is so inextricably
linked with national economic development that in spite of its high cost on available
investment resources.
Housing enhances and increases the productivity of workers. Provision of adequate
workers houses, conveniently sited near their places of work, together with
remuneration and incentive payments, should improve workers concentration on the
job and thus enhance and improve productivity. Housing fulfils a social need and
satisfies the criteria for remunerative urban investment as a focus of economic
activity, as a symbol of achievement and social acceptance, and as an element of urban
growth and income distribution.
8
However, the achievement of the goal for the provision of adequate housing in Nigeria
has been difficult, requiring a clearly stated national policy as well as the continued
innovative and co-operative efforts of all institutions involved in the provision of
housing such as financial, industrial and constructional sectors as well as traditional
institutions in land tenure. A good housing scheme and its attendant social facilities
and good sanitary conditions will contribute towards the eradication of health hazards.
It will also facilitate family integration and unity, which will bring peace to contribute
effectively towards productivity at the work place. On the other hand, the lack of it
induces stress, which produces disturbing psychological and physiological reactions
that reduces the individuals ability to cope with the day-to-day stresses of life.
2.3
Many renowned scholars of urban science (Castells, Burgess, Hall, Turner, AbuLughod, Mabogunje and so on) as well as distinguished regional and international
organization (United Nations Habitat, World Society of Ekistics, the World Bank etc.)
concerned with urbanization and housing at worldwide levels, have long expressed
enormous anxieties over the disturbing nature and dimensions of the housing
problems in the nations of the developing world. Highly recognized among the most
crucial corollaries of unplanned and dependant urbanization is the urban housing crisis
pervading the primary and large regional secondary cities of the fast and medium
developing categories of the third world nations (Lagos, Rio de Janeiro, Sao Paolo,
Mexico City, Cairo, New Delhi, Karachi etc.). This crisis situation in its integrated
form has surpassed the terrains of the social sphere, reproducing itself in the
9
economic, political and environmental processes of these nations of the third world,
Nigeria not an exemption.
The problem of housing has been generally accepted as being diverse and complex.
Within the spectrum of this problem, one can identify both quantitative and qualitative
deficiencies. Agboola (1998) identified the major housing problems in Nigeria as that
of instability of human needs for housing. This problem is world-wide and it is of a
recurring nature. In fact it is doubtful if any nation of the world can satisfactorily meet
its housing requirements.
In Nigeria, most people live in poor quality housing and in unhygienic environments.
This problem of inadequate housing has been compounded by the rapid rates of
urbanization and economic growth. Housing difficulties is more serious for the low
income groups where problems have been complicated by rapid growth, inflated real
estate values, speculative activity, and influx of poor immigrants and lack of planning.
One can also cite the increasingly significant shifts in the form and design of housing
from the rooming form to flat and single family house forms as a factor responsible
for acute shortage of housing for the low income groups. L.M. Olayiwola et al. The
problem of inadequate housing is experienced in both urban and rural areas in Nigeria.
For example NISER in a study of rural housing in the nine Southern States of Nigeria
found that, the projected demand of housing units on an average of six persons per
dwelling unit for the nine states are 5.2 million in 1990, 7.0m in 2,000, 9.5m in 2,010
and 12.7m in the year 2,020. Other manifests of the housing problem are: high rent in
the housing market, inadequate mortgage finance and inaccessibility to mortgage
loans. These problems have resulted in overcrowding, poor and inadequate social
10
2.4
The United Nations estimates that Nigerias population in 2005 stands at 141 million,
and predicted that it would reach 289 million by 2050 (Encarta, 2007). The United
States Census Bureau projects that population of Nigeria will reach 264 million by
2050. Nigeria will then be the 8th most populous country in the world (Encarta, 2007).
Rapid growth in population creates demand pressure towards shelter and efficient
supply and distribution of basic utilities and services for the city dwellers, In most of
our urban centres the problem of housing is not only restricted to quantity but to the
poor quality of available housing units which is manifested in overcrowding in
houses. Nigeria is perhaps the fastest urbanizing country in the African continent. One
of the most important challenges facing the country is the provision of affordable
housing. As more and more Nigerians make towns and cities their homes, the resulting
social, economic, environmental and political challenges need to be urgently
addressed (Raji, 2008).
A recent study of housing situation in Nigeria put existing housing stock at 23 unit of
houses per 1000 inhabitant. Housing deficit is put at 15 million houses (Mabogunje
2007) while N12 trillion will be required to finance the deficit. This is about 4 times
the annual national budget of Nigeria (FHA, 2007). Home prices and rents, on the
other hand, have grown ahead of general inflation. Making matters worse, the
11
composition of homes for sale and rent on the market has been inexorably shifting
towards very expensive home (Nubi, 2008).
The National Rolling Plan of 1990 92 estimated housing deficit at 4.8 million. The
1991 housing policy estimated that 700,000 housing units are to be built each year if
housing deficit is to be cancelled. The documents indicated that not less than 60% of
the new houses are to be built in urban centres. In 2006, the Ministry of Housing and
Urban Development declared that the country needs about 10 million housing units
before all Nigerians can be sheltered.
Between 1975 and 1980, there were plans of deliver 202,000 housing units to the
public but only 28,500 units, representing 14.1% was achieved. Also, out of 200,000
housing units planned to be delivered between 1981 and 1985, only 47,200 (23.6%)
was constructed. Under the National Housing Fund (NHF) programme initiated in
1994, to produce 121,000 housing units, it was believed that less than 5% was
achieved. In spite of a series of government policies towards housing delivery, one
thing that is clear is that; there exist a gap between housing supply and demand
(Olomolaiye, 1999; Agbola, 1998; Adegeye and Ditto, 1985).
Historically, Housing unit is treated as product hence the need for quality if it is to pair
well and perform desirably in the market, but quality in construction industry suffers
significant difficulty as it passes through extreme pressure driven by cost
minimization rather than value maximization. Research has shown that 75% of urban
housing is situated in slum conditions (UNDN,1988), and indeed the quality of the
12
housing is poor and clearly an affront to human dignity (Olotuah, 1997; Agbola and
Olatubara, 2003).
2.5
14
In Nigeria, the major steps taken, so far, in the direction of solving the housing crisis
in the country includes:
The Establishment, in 1928, of the Lagos Executive Development
Lagos benefited from the programme. But the NBS could not stand the test of
time because it was dependent on government for funding. Its establishment
was mainly to provide housing loans to both Civil Servants and the Nigerian
public.
1952- 1972
Nigeria in 1952 - 1960 was carved up into three regions namely: Eastern
Region, Western Region and Northern Region. The regions established
respective housing corporations in 1964. With a function of developing estates
and at the same time providing mortgage for the people to build houses and pay
16
back over many years. Like the Nigerian Building Society, the housing
corporations had impacts only in the capital cities of the respective regions i.e
Enugu, Ibadan, and Kaduna. One of such is Bodija Estate in Ibadan developed
by the defunct Western Regional government (NHP, 1991). In 1971 National
Council on Housing was established which marked the first significant and
direct attempt by the Federal Government intervention in the area of Housing.
17
Learning from past failure, FHAs housing delivery is made to be end-user driven
through cooperatives, Housing Associations, Key workers Scheme, and House
improvement (Nubi, 2008). As a source of strength, the agency (Federal Housing
Authority), has well over 53,000 housing units in about 77 estates and a land asset
holding of over 10,000 hectres nationwide to its credit, the FHA has spent over N30
billion on housing development and ancillary infrastructure. It also has an asset base
of approximately N5 billion (ThisDayonline, 2009). The agency is placed in a pivotal
position to contribute so much to provision of residential accommodations to a large
section of the population. Its activities can also boost manufacturing and distribution
of building materials such as cement, iron rods, roofing sheets, ceiling sheets, timber
products, nails, paints, etc. through new housing development or housing renewal.
the then 19 states of the federation. The 1981 - 1982 National Housing Programme
was designed to provide 350 medium/high income housing units in each of the then 19
states in the country, to complement the Shagari administration's Low -Income
Housing Programme which was handled by the then Federal Ministry of Housing and
Environment (NHP, 2006). 1986 1993 tagged "A period of consolidation". Then, the
Nigerian urban landscape was littered with many suspended/abandoned housing
projects, resulting from the past failed programmes, Shagari's Low-income schemes
and FHA's schemes. Emphasis during the period was therefore shifted from new
programmes to completion of viable suspended schemes (This Day Online, 2009).
The formation of the National Site and Services Scheme (NSSS) in 1986:
Site and Services scheme is an approach which has been adopted by many
developing countries including Nigeria to provide housing for the poor and
under-privileged in the society. The rapid urbanization and the high rate of
population growth prevalent in the country created the need for an approach
that will promote and enhance rapid housing provision to solve the housing
problem in Nigeria. Due to its design and level of services, public housing was
unavailable to the poor and under-privileged in the society, most of which are
scattered around the periphery of the city in unsafe and unserved land plots.
Aside the above, sites and services scheme are designed to solve the problem of
acute shortage of housing in developing countries including Nigeria,
particularly to the poor who cannot afford the rising cost of constructing houses
and of the high standards established by the government. In site and services
19
scheme, the government or its agency provides infrastructural serviced plots for
individuals who are then encouraged to erect their own type of buildings. In the
approach, the scheme land is furnished with access roads, drainage, water,
sewage, electricity and a variety of other individual as well as community
services. The underlying principle of sites and services project is that
authorities would provide the land and infrastructural facilities, while the
individual and his family who are allocated the serviced plot proceed to build
their house in accordance with approved plans but of own choice (National
Housing Policy, 1981). Thus, in view of the housing problems in Nigeria, like
other developing countries of the world, housing provision for urban poor has
therefore moved more than never before towards self-help schemes,
particularly of the sites and services type as a strategy of mass housing. The
scheme generally entails public financial commitment for land acquisition,
planning, design and installation of basic infrastructure such as paved roads,
water and electricity before the sites are allocated on leasehold basis to the
public for housing development (Izeogu, 1987)
The setting up of the State Housing Corporation (SHC) to provide housing
to the general population at affordable prices.
The creation of the Federal Mortgage Bank of Nigeria (FMBN): Nigerian
Building Society was converted to Federal Mortgage Bank in 1977, with a
capital base of Twenty million Naira (N20m) and increased to One hundred and
fifty Million Naira (N150m) in 1979. The impact of Federal Mortgage Bank
then was insignificant as only few loans were given principally to few middle
20
and high income groups in the country (NHP, 1991). As pressure due to
increase in housing deficit continue to rise, an inclusive Housing policy was
started in 1980, targeting low income group whose annual income did not
exceed five thousand Naira (N5,000). The Federal Mortgage Bank (FMBN) as
a vehicle for Housing delivery in Nigeria, was combining the functions of
primary and secondary mortgage institutions. The Federal government
separates the two functions by creating the Federal Mortgage Finance of
Nigeria (which is now phased out). The FMBN was therefore left to operate
exclusively as a secondary mortgage market and open the primary mortgage
market to the private sector. Many leveraged that opportunity to go into
mortgage banking. But their impact on the built environment has been short of
expectation. With the FMBN operating as the secondary mortgage market, the
next problem was where to source the money to lend to the Primary Mortgage
Institutions (PMIs). In 1992, the Federal government enact a policy which
made it mandatory for every Nigerian earning up to N3,000 monthly to
contribute 2.5 per cent of his monthly salary to a National Housing Fund
(NHF) (Thisdayonline, 2009). This fund was to be managed by the FMBN,
from which it could lend to the PMIs. The contributors to the fund were also
entitled to borrow money from the fund, through the PMIs, after six months, to
develop houses. The Federal Mortgage Bank of Nigeria, a scion of the Nigerian
Building Society, the FMBN has undergone several transformations since it
came into being in the 1970s. It is today Nigeria's secondary mortgage
institution, charged on the one hand with managing the NHF; and on the other
21
hand, with lending money to housing developers through the PMIs. The bank
has taken a number of measures in the recent times to ensure that estate
developers can build to target prices.
With the NHF policy, and subsequent decree, in place, the NHF had about N12 billion,
out of which only about N3.4 billion has been disbursed. Contrary to expectations,
however, this strategy did not solve the problem of scarcity of housing in the country.
The national development planners had then targeted the year 2000 as the year by
which Nigeria would achieve the objective of having provided shelter to all citizens.
Akinlusi (2007) strongly advocate for mortgage facilities as vehicles for mass housing
delivery in Nigeria
The setting up of the National Housing Policy (NHP) in 1991: The
Nigerian National Housing Policy was formulated in 1991 with the goal of
ensuring adequate access to decent and affordable housing by all Nigerians.
The housing situation in Nigeria since its formulation has shown quite
glaringly that the implementation of the policy and the operational strategies
adopted for it have been deficient. The policy was revised in 2004 to take care
of the problems encountered in the implementation. A Presidential Technical
Committee on Housing and Urban Development was set up by government to
address the new housing reforms. It recommended amongst other things the
restructuring of the Federal Mortgage Bank of Nigeria (FMBN) and the
creation of Real Estate Developers Association of Nigeria (REDAN), and
Building Materials Producers Association of Nigeria (BUMPAN). The new
22
housing reforms created financial mechanisms and institutions that will make
available to the private sector (developers) funds for the production of mass
houses, and allow purchasers (mortgagors) to have easy access to borrowed
money through the Primary Mortgage Institutions (Ebie, 2004). It also
acknowledged, finance as constituting the centre piece, among other major
pillars, of housing delivery (Abiodun, 1999). The poor performance of Federal
Mortgage Bank of Nigeria (FMBN), which gave loan to 8,874 out of over
1,000,000 applications between 1977 and 1990 was very worrisome. It was
very obvious that the FMBN should undergo serious re-engineering to be able
to cope with the enormous task of housing finance. This re-engineering resulted
into a framework of two tier financial structure (see fig. 2.1)
Arilesere 1998, summarised the major strategies and guidelines of the National
Housing Policy (NHP, 1991) on Housing finance as follows:
1. Mobilisation of savings into Mortgage Institution
2. Provision of incentives for the capital market to invest in property development
3. Provision of policy controls over the allocation of resources between the
housing sector and other sectors of the economy.
4. Facilitation of flow of domestic and international resources into the priority
housing areas, such as low income housing.
23
Apart from the above, the policy spelt out other functions of the FMBN These are:
1 1. To develop a secondary mortgage market for housing finance to improve the
Liquidity of the system
2. To act as guarantor for loan stock floated by the primary mortgage
Institutions
3. To manage the National Housing Fund (NHF)
National Housing Programme (NHP 1994 1995):
1994-5 National Housing Programme was designed to provide 121,000 housing units
nationwide, for all income groups. The cardinal objectives of the programme included
the following: to increase the housing stock in the country; provide easy access to
home ownership; translate the national housing policy objectives into reality; and
enhance resource mobilization. Others were: to establish permanent housing delivery
system which will be self-sustaining and enduring, without reliance on the
government treasury, after an initial take-off grant; strengthen institutions within the
24
system to render their operations more responsive to demand; and encourage greater
private sector participation in housing development. The programme, nevertheless,
failed due to reasons of inadequate funding, white elephant scale, inadequate planning
and conception, flaws in execution, attenuated public confidence, problems of access
to the NHF, under-pricing and costing, inflation etc. In view of this,theFHA and the
Federal Ministry of Works and Housing were jointly appointed the executing agency
of the NHP at its inception (Thisdayonline, 2009).
The setting up of a Housing Policy Council (HPC) to monitor improvement
in the housing sector and also to set up the machinery for the review of the
1978 Land Use Decree (LUD) in order to make more land available for the
citizens of the country
The review of the mandate given to the Federal Housing Authority (FHA)
to include provisions of the National Social housing as part of the strategy
towards meeting the Millennium Development Goal. The authority also plans
to assist the provision of two million housing units within the next four years.
Others are the formulation of the National Housing Policy (NHP) in 1984,
the establishment of the Infrastructural Development Fund (IDF) in 1985,
and the Urban Development Bank (UDB) in 1992 (Federal Republic of
Nigeria, 1997).
Furthermore, on the legal and regulatory framework for enhancing housing delivery,
eight (8) housing related laws have been proposed to the National Assembly. They are:
1. The Federal Mortgage Bank of Nigeria Act 1977 (replacement)
25
In addition to the above, virtually all the introduced National Development Plans
(NDPs) from 1962-1985 and the National Rolling Plans (NRPs) from 1990 to date
explicitly recognize the importance of providing adequate housing in the country as a
tool for stimulating the national economy (Gbolagade, 2005).
The First National Development Plan (1962-1968) accorded low priority to housing
with focus on accommodating government staff in the regional capitals and Lagos. A
low proportion/percentage achievement was recorded.
In the Second National Development Plan (1970-1974) the target was to construct
60,000 housing units (15,000 units in Lagos and 400 units in each of the remaining
capitals). There was marginal improvement at the end of that period.
Governments
Increased construction of housing quarters for government officials, expansion
of credit facilities to enhance private housing construction, and
Increased investment in domestic production of cement. A sum of N2.5 billion
was allocated to the housing sector with a target production of 202,000 units
(50,000 units for Lagos and 8,000 units for each of the, then, 19 states). At the
end of the period, a success of 13.3% was recorded.
During the plan period, the Federal Ministry of Housing, Urban Development, and
Environment was created while the Federal Government bought over the shares held
by the Commonwealth Development Corporation in the Nigeria Building Society and
converted it to the Federal Mortgage Bank of Nigeria (FMBN) with an enlarged
capital base from N21 million to N150 million to provide loans to individuals, state
housing corporations, and private estate development firms.
During the Fourth National Development Plan (1984-1985) period, three schemes
were embarked upon: the direct housing construction, under which 2,000 housing
units were to be built in each state annually, while the FHA was to construct about
143,000 low cost housing units across the country. Site and Services Schemes were
also to be provided.
At the end of the plan period, a success of 20% was recorded.
During the 1990-1992 rolling plan periods, efforts were intensified on the sites and
services scheme. About 2,892 serviced plots were provided in Anambra, Lagos, Imo,
Kano, Kwara, Ondo, and Rivers states, while the second phase commenced in other
states. On prototype housing schemes, 72 housing units were constructed and
27
allocated in 1990, while the construction of 218 units commenced in Lagos and Abuja.
During the plan period, the National Housing Fund Decree No. 3 of 1992 was
promulgated and Primary Mortgage Institutions (PMIs) were licensed. The Housing
Policy Council was also set up to monitor development in the housing sector. The
1993-1995 rolling plan period witnessed allocation of about 10,474 plots of the three
residential categories to the public. The impact of FHA was also felt in Lagos and
Abuja.
During the 1994-1996 rolling plan, the national housing program was launched with
the target of constructing 121,000 housing units of various models all over the country
by the end of 1996. However, by the first quarter of 1997, fewer than 2,000 housing
units had been completed. The federal and the state governments were expected to
spend N2.0 billion on housing provisions during the 1996-1998 National Rolling Plan
(NRP). Over N3.00 billion was expected to be spent by the two levels of governments
during the 1999-2001 National Rolling Plan (Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1998;
Federal Republic of Nigeria, 2000). As part of the efforts to increase houses for the
masses in the country, the Federal Government in 2004 pledged to adequately fund
research pertaining to the manufacture and the use of local materials in the sector, with
the aim of providing 40,000 houses with at least 1,000 per state before year 2007.
However, as observed by Ademiluyi & Raji (2008), little had been done to meet this
target barely two months into the year 2007.
Despite these interventions and efforts by the governments, actual achievements in
terms of providing adequate housing in the country remain essentially minimal for a
number of reasons. These include:
28
29
2.6
In 2003, the federal government also established the Federal Ministry of Housing and
Urban Development, and Proposed a Housing Reform, in view of the fact that there
were not many affordable houses in Nigeria. There was an illusion that houses were
available. But most of them were high-priced. Mabogunje (2004) opined that a
number of other legislation needs to be amended substantially to bring their provisions
in line with the new housing regime. The touchstone in such reviews is to reduce redtape and ensure that various legislations are compatible with demands of a free and
robust market economy. The period 2003 2004 witness a Housing policy that
30
recognized the private sector on the driving seat of housing delivery in the country, the
key features of this policy include the placement of the private sector in a pivotal
position, for the delivery of affordable houses, on a sustainable basis; assignment to
government of the responsibility for the development of primary infrastructure for
new estate development; and review and amendment of the Land Use Act to ensure
better access to land and speedier registration and assignment of title to developers.
Others are the development of a secondary mortgage market, involving the FMBN
and the establishment of a new mortgage regime, under the NHF, to facilitate more
favourable mortgage terms; and a five-year tax holiday for developers (Thisdayonline,
2009).
2.7
31
Although the board was the sole executive authority for planning and development
both in central Lagos and its environs, the maintenance of its constructed roads, drains
and open spaces was the responsibility of the Lagos City Council. The vetting of
building plans was also shared with the city council, an awkward arrangement that
often resulted in the delay of approval of building plans. The attendance frustration to
private developers often times led to contravention of planning regulations by
developers.
However, subsequent control of the city necessitated the involvement of the Ikeja Area
Planning Authority, (IAPA) in the control of development and provision of housing
outside the city. The (IAPA) on the one hand had full powers to vet building plans and
control private development in its area of jurisdiction, but such plans had to be
forwarded to the relevant council for health approval. With the creation of Lagos state
in 1967, the need to stem the lack of proper coordination between the existing
planning authorities and the local authorities involved, and the unnecessary dissipation
of energy without meaningful results, necessitated the formation of a central body to
be charged with all the duties of the different bodies. Consequently in 1972, the Lagos
Executive Development Board (LEDB), Ikeja Area Planning Authority (IAPA), Epe
Town Planning Authority (ETPA), metamorphosed into what is known as the LSDPC.
The LSDPC Edict no 1 of 1972 bestows legality on this metamorphosis. The functions
of the new body, LSDPC among others were:
1. To acquire, develop, hold, manage, sell, lease or let any property moveable or
immovable within the state
32
2. To provide and maintain roads, footways, bridges, drains and sewers on its
estates until a local authority takes over.
3. To establish a home ownership saving scheme in respect of any housing estate
or building owned, consulted and managed by the cooperation
Subject to the provision of the Edict, to carry on all activities which are necessary,
advantageous or convenient for the purposes of carrying out its function under the
said Edict.
Upon its creation in 1972, LSDPC which inherited the liabilities and assets of its
three predecessors was completely divested of all their development control power.
This was transferred to the Lagos State Ministry of Works and Planning (LSMWP)
which became responsible for planning and development control throughout the
state. But after much persuasion, the power to control development on its estates
was transferred back to LSDPC in 1978. Under the present arrangement however,
the LSDPC has again been divested of power to allocate powers to provide and
manage residential, commercial and industrial houses throughout the state.
2.7.2
In Lagos state, the provision of housing has been the responsibility of both the
public and private developers but this study explores only the public developer
which is mainly the Lagos State Development and Property Cooperation. Over
recent years LSDPC have used various housing delivery strategies to improve
housing supply, these housing delivery strategies have faced some challenges and
33
have enjoyed some rate of success. This study explores the housing delivery
strategies deployed by LSDPC and the challenges of these housing delivery
strategies.
The housing delivery strategies deployed by LSDPC includes;
1. Site and service scheme: this strategy is one which is being adopted by
various governments in most developed countries to solve housing problem. In
site and service scheme, the agencies (which is LSDPC in this case) provides
infrastructural serviced plots for individuals who are then encouraged to erect
their own type of buildings. In this strategy, the scheme land is furnished with
access roads, drainage, water, sewage, electricity and variety of other individual
as well as community services.
2. Hybrid: this strategy consists of the direct government construction for the
underprivileged, the middle and the upper-middle class where agencies like
Lagos State Development and Property Cooperation (LSDPC) will build and
sell for profit and the profit will be used by government to fund social housing
for the vulnerable members of the society. This housing delivery strategy was
used for the construction of the newly built Elegushi Housing Estate, located
within the corridor of Lekki-ajah, Eti-Osa Local Government Area.
3. Joint Venture: this strategy is one in which the government agency (which is
LSDPC in this case) combine resources with private developers to construct
and provide comfortable, hygienic and good houses which are sold to the
34
public. The profit which is made from the project is shared among the parties;
this strategy is also very commonly used by other government agencies.
4. Turnkey: this strategy is one in which the government agency (LSDPC) add
resources with some private developers to provide good housing schemes
which are sold to interested individuals or bodies and the profit realised from
them is used by the government to fund social housing for vulnerable members
of the society.
5. Private Public Partnership: this strategy is just like the joint venture strategy
as it consists of the combination of resources (such as financial, human,
technical and intangibles) of government agency (LSDPC) with private
developers for the construction and provision of housing for the public. It has
also been defined as a collaborative effort among public, private and third
sector organisation based on mutual trusts, a division of labour and a
comparative advantage in the sharing of responsibilities, risk and benefits.
6. Design and sell: one of the most used housing delivery strategy that have been
commonly used in almost all the developed countries in the world is the design
and sell strategy. This strategy is one in which the government agency provides
the design of various types of houses with the presence of the necessary social
facilities and amenities such as water, electricity, sewage, drainage etc which
are designed in a line with the Building Regulation law which they sell to
interested developers ( Individuals and Cooperate bodies).
The housing delivery strategies that have been earlier discussed in this study have had
some setbacks which has made them not too successful, the challenges these delivery
strategies have faced over the past years in their use are listed below;
1. Finance
2. Infrastructure
3. Land Accessibility
4. Affordability
5. Building materials
6. Economic problems
7. Labour
2.8
Conclusion
From the literature review above, it is apparent that housing delivery is a function of
both private and public developers. In Lagos State, LSDPC is the main organisation
responsible for housing delivery. This organisation has used overtime several housing
delivery strategies including Site and Services Schemes etc
36
CHAPTER THREE
3.0
Research Methodology
3.1 Introduction
The core concept underlying all research is its method. The
methodology controls the study, dictates the acquisition of the data,
and their arrangement in a logical manner. This method of research
sets up a means of refining the raw data, contrives an approach so
that the meanings that lie below the surface of those data become
manifest, and finally issues a conclusion or series of conclusions that
lead to an expansion of knowledge.
This chapter discusses method used in this study. This study is a survey research to
find-out the housing delivery strategies that have been deployed by LSDPC overtime
in Lagos State.
Questionnaire
A covering letter and one questionnaire would be designed for the purpose of
this research. The covering letter would be attached to the questionnaire. The
main purpose of the covering letter is to briefly introduce the researcher and the
objectives of this study, and to encourage people to complete the questionnaire
with enthusiasm. The questionnaire is designed brief to be but not to the
detriment of the reliability of the study. The questionnaire covers all necessary
issues relevant to the study. These are the determination the housing delivery
strategies deployed by LSDPC, the challenges of these housing delivery
strategies, determine the level of success of these housing delivery strategies in
the study area and to determine measures that are needed to improve housing
supply in the study areas. The questionnaire is both open and closed ended.
41
42
CHAPTER FOUR
4.0
4.1 Introduction
The objective of this Chapter is to present, interpret and discuss the result of the
analysis of the staff questionnaire survey and oral interviews conducted with selected
staff of the Lagos State Development Property Corporation (LSDPC). The Chapter is
divided into two main segments. Section One presents and discusses the results of data
derived from the survey which examined the respondents profiles. This result was
presented with charts and frequency tables. The second section is the presentation and
discussion of the result of the analysis of the questionnaire survey of housing delivery
strategies LSDPC utilise, challenges the organisation are encountering and the
remedial measures towards increasing housing supply in Lagos State. The result was
presented with charts, frequency tables and mean score ranking. The Chapter ends
with a summary of findings from the study of the public housing agency.
4.2 Response Rate
In total fifty-five (55) questionnaires were administered to staff members of LSDPC,
fifty-three questionnaires (53) responses were received by the cut-off date, out of
which 47 were found usable. This represented an effective 88.6% response rate. The
43
discarded responses were from respondents who failed to meet the required quality
and consistency checks used in the screening processes.
RESPONSE RATE
RECEIVED
UNRECEIVED
44
Gender
Male
Female
45
Marital Status
Architecture
Accounting/Finance
Administration
Estate Management
Building Technology
Civil Engineering
Land Surveying
Quantity Surveying
Marketing
Law
Information Technology
Mechanical Engineering
Public Relations
Research and
Documentation
46
Age
31-45 years
46-50 years
51-60 years
18-30 years
47
Educational Qualification
HND
BSC
ND
MSC
OTHERS
48
population of the survey which focused only on staff members identified to be directly
involved in the design and execution of the organizations housing projects.
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Axis Title
Column1
Axis Title
49
Designation
50
Working Experience
Although, a good number of the staff members sampled had less than ten years
working experience, it is evident from the result that the ratio of those with over ten
years of experience to those with less than ten years experience was 45.56%: 54.44%.
51
This suggests that the organizations have experienced personnel in housing delivery.
The large proportion of relatively young population among the staff members also
suggests that there are younger than elderly people in LSDPC. This is well expected
for continuity and survival of these organizations. The implication of this result is that
the capacity of the organizations to deliver housing is not jeopardized by a large
proportion of ageing workers. Based on the above result, the organizations can be
considered to have reasonable human capacity to undertake their public housing
projects.
4.4 Housing Strategies Utilised by LSDPC
The respondents were asked to state the housing delivery strategies in use by their
organization. The study found that the housing delivery strategies employed by
LSDPC are the Hybrid strategy, Joint Venture, Private Public Partnership, Site-andServices Schemes, Turnkey, Design and Sell.
4.4.1 Extent of the Usage of Housing Delivery Strategies
The respondents were asked to state the extent of usage of the identified housing
delivery strategies utilize by their organization, as shown in Figure 4.8 below, the
main housing delivery strategy in use was the design and sell with a mean score of
4.57, and ranked first. Ranked second was joint ventures with a mean score of 2.8; and
in third position was hybrid model.
52
4.57
2.67
1.89
2.8
1.65
1.99
fourth with a mean of 3.87. In fifth position was land accessibility. It has a mean of
3.81. Infrastructural challenge ranked sixth with a mean of 3.11.
Challenges
Challenges2
Afordability
3.87
Labour
2.89
Economic Problems
4.03
Building Material
4.09
Infrastructure
3.11
Finance
4.34
Land Accessibility
3.81
components like doors, door knobs, windows, etc. The non-availability of long-term
funding for housing development also compels builders of residential accommodation
to recover their capital within the shortest possible time. It is in this area that the
development of non-mortgage housing finance products, such as housing
microfinance, could be very usefully explored.
4.6 Level of Success of the Housing Delivery Strategies
The respondents were asked of the level of success of LSDPC in terms of the utilised
housing delivery strategies. The result is presented in Figure 4.10 below. From the
Figure, the most successful strategy is the design and sell, ranked first with 4.59 mean
score rating. Joint venture is ranked second, with a mean score rating 3.52; while in
third position in terms of being successful was the hybrid strategy. The least
successful housing delivery model was the site and service scheme.
LEVEL OF SUCCESS
Turnkey
3.14
2.87
4.59
3.15
Joint Venture
3.52
Hybrid
3.44
CHAPTER FIVE
56
5.0
5.1
Introduction
This last Chapter of the thesis aggregates the key findings and issues in this research
and their implications. The Chapter begins with an overview of the research. Next is
the summary of key findings as well as synthesis of key issues arising from the study.
The implications of study findings are also presented and discussed. The areas of
further research on the subject matter are highlighted before concluding remarks are
made.
5.2 Overview of the Study
Much has been written on public housing in Nigeria in particular and Developing
Countries in general. However, very little is known and documented on the objectives
and outcome of public housing as social intervention programmes in Lagos State.
Specifically, much is not known on the outcome of different public housing delivery
strategies and the extent to which past and present housing schemes have achieved
and/or are achieving the intended goals and objectives in Lagos State. As a result, it
has become increasingly difficult indentifying the most viable public housing
provision strategies and options in addressing housing need of the different socioeconomic groups as well as impact of public housing schemes on the quality of life of
beneficiaries. In addition, there is scarcity of empirical data on the challenges and
level of success of housing delivery strategies utilized by LSDPC. These are no doubt
important for housing policy formulation, programme design and implementation, and
particularly in identifying optimum efficiency and economics in the judicious
allocation and use of resources in addressing housing challenges confronting most
57
residents in the study area. It is against this background and the need for proper
understanding of the outcome of various housing delivery strategies utilize by
LSDPC.
An in-depth evaluation of housing delivery strategies utilise by LSDPC was carried
out. The research activities and findings are reported in this study. As indicated earlier
on, this study sought to evaluate housing delivery strategies utilise by LSDPC. In
pursuant to this goal, Chapter One of this thesis outlined the following objectives of
this study to include: (1) To determine the housing delivery strategies used by
LSDPC; (2) To identify the various challenges besieging LSDPC in housing delivery;
(3) To determine the level of success of these housing delivery strategies; and (4) To
determine measures that are LSDPC needed to improve housing delivery.
With the above aim and objectives in mind, Chapter Two established the context of the
study by providing basic information on the nature and structure of public housing
policy and provisions in Lagos State. It is evident from that Chapter that current effort
in public housing provisions in Lagos State was initiated out of governments desire to
continuously seek pathways to addressing burgeoning housing challenge in the State.
Having carried out literature review, it was apt to elucidate upon the methods used in
the research design, data collection, presentation, processing, analysis and
interpretations of results. From Chapter Three it can be seen that both qualitative and
survey research methods were used in this study, and that the units of data collection
and analysis were LSDPC. This Chapter also identified the questionnaire as the key
survey technique and interview guide and observation schedule as the two qualitative
techniques used in the study. It was also indicated that both descriptive and inferential
58
statistical as well as non statistical tools were used in the analysis of data collected
from the field work and literature search. The results, interpretation of the results and
findings as well as their implications were presented in Chapters Four in line with the
aim and objectives of the study. The following sections present a summary of key
findings, synthesis of key issues arising from the study and their implications, areas of
further research and final conclusions respectively.
5.4 Conclusion
59
An evaluation of the housing delivery strategies has been explored in this study
including the challenges suffered by these delivery strategies, its success rate and the
measures which are needed to be taken by LSDPC to increase housing supply. From
the study, we can conclude that the most successful delivery strategy is the Design and
Sell strategy while the most persistent challenge to the delivery strategies is Finance.
5.5 Recommendations
We recommend that with all the findings that this study has explored, the only way
through which supply of quality, safe and decent housing can be increased by the
government (LSDPC) if they part-take in the construction of cheap and affordable
houses. And also housing can be increased if the following measures are put in place,
the measures include;
1. Provision of finance for the housing projects by the government
2. Accessibility of land for housing projects to LSDPC
3. Provision of quality and cheap building materials for the construction of
4.
5.
6.
7.
housing projects
Construction of affordable housing for the public
Availability of skilled and unskilled labour
Availability of infrastructure
The use of slum upgrade to get access to more land space for housing projects
60