AN ASSESSMENT OF MODERN STRATEGIES ON HOUSING DELIVERY IN

SOKOTO STATE, NIGERIA

BY

IBRAHIM AHMED BABANGIDA

REG NO: U15AT1069

A PROJECT SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE,

FACULTY OF ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT

OF THE AWARD OF BACHELOR OF SCIENCE DEGREE IN

ARCHITECTURE, AHMADU BELLO UNIVERSITY, ZARIA.

OCTOBER 2019

i
 DECLARATION
I declare that the work in this project report titled “AN ASSESSMENT OF MODERN
STRATEGIES ON HOUSING DELIVERY IN SOKOTO STATE” has been performed
by me in the Department of Architecture, Faculty of Environmental Design, Ahmadu Bello
University, Zaria-Nigeria. The information derived from the literature has been duly
acknowledged in the text and a list of references provided. No part of this project report was
previously presented for another degree or diploma at this or any other Institution.

____________________________ _____________________________
Ibrahim, Ahmed Babangida Date

ii
 CERTIFICATION
This project report entitled “AN ASSESSMENT OF MODERN STRATEGIES ON
HOUSING DELIVERY IN SOKOTO STATE” by Ibrahim, Ahmed Babangida meets
the regulations governing the award of the degree Bachelor of Science in Architecture of the
Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria and is approved for its contribution to knowledge and
literary presentation.

____________________________ _____________________________
Arc. Daniel Evanero Date
(Project Supervisor)

__________________________ _____________________________
Dr. A. S. Salisu Date
(Head of Department)

iii
 DEDICATION
This project is dedicated to the loving memory of my brother Ibrahim Musa. A friend and
mentor, from whom the desire and motivation to study architecture came from. You left
fingerprints in my life you will never be forgotten and I pray you find peace where you are,
I love you.

iv
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
My sincere gratitude goes to the giver of life, the creator of the universe, he we do not see

but believe that he exists, Almighty God for his protection, and his infinite mercy upon my

life, and for the successful completion of this research project.

To the love of my life Mrs. Jummai Ibrahim for her support, love, guidance, encouragement

and endless prayers I will never forget your sacrifices for me, all the things you let go even

though they meant a lot to you. I could never ask for a better mother, I lack words to express

how grateful and indebted I am to you, and I pray God bless you in this life and the hereafter

I love you so much and am forever grateful.

And to my siblings for their contribution, patience and love throughout my study, I could

never ask for a better family, I say thank you very much and I love you too.

I will not fail to give deserved credits to Arc. Daniel Evanero for his immense contributions

to this research work.

To my friends I love you all

To my entire course mate I say thank you for making this journey a memorable one.

v
 ABSTRACT
The Implication of social economic forces on the use of modern strategy on the delivery of
housing are wide and far reaching. The deficit in housing has put many citizens in an
uncomfortable situation of either paying so much for accommodation or not having a decent
accommodation at all. However, the constraint in using modern strategy on housing delivery
are still experienced in the Nigerian society which can be regarded as a social and economic
problem in the country. On the other hand, government policy, lack of proper planning and
involvement of professionals in the use of modern strategies such as production of housing
at lower cost, land reform and building codes, acceleration of innovative design during
construction, prevention of displacement by revitalizing neighbourhood etc. can change and
bring about sustainable housing delivery in the country. As illustrated under the section of
discussion government policy, planning etc. are the factors hindering the use of modern
strategy in the housing. However, the Nigerian government may attract foreign and private
investors such as NGOs, World Bank and creative financing to fund the use of modern
strategies on housing delivery to reduce cost of capital and make it easier for all categories
towards the use of innovative system of housing delivery.

vi
 TABLE OF CONTENT
DECLARATION ................................................................................................................... ii
CERTIFICATION ................................................................................................................ iii
DEDICATION .......................................................................................................................iv
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...................................................................................................... v
ABSTRACT...........................................................................................................................vi
TABLE OF CONTENT ....................................................................................................... vii
LIST OF FIGURES ...............................................................................................................ix
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 1
1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY ........................................................................... 1
1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT ......................................................................................... 3
1.3 AIM AND OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY................................................................ 4
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ......................................................................................... 4
1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY ............................................................................ 4
1.6 SCOPE OF THE STUDY ........................................................................................... 4
CHAPTER TWO .................................................................................................................... 6
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................................. 6
2.1 INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................... 6
2.2 THE NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN NIGERIA ...................................... 7
2.3 PAST STRATEGIES ON HOUSING DELIVERY IN NIGERIA............................... 9
2.4 STRATEGIES, POLICIES AND PROGRAMMES ON HOUSING DELIVERY .... 10
2.5 MODERN STRATEGIES .......................................................................................... 15
2.6 LIST OF SOME OF THE STRATEGIES THAT CAN BE ADOPTED .............. 15
2.6.1 Produce More Housing at Lower Cost ................................................................. 15
2.6.2 Reform Local Land Use Laws and Building Codes ....................................... 16
2.6.3 Accelerate Innovation in Design and Construction ........................................ 16
2.6.4 Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing and Protect against Displacement
2.6.5 Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing ................................................... 16
2.6.6 Prevent Displacement from Revitalizing Neighbourhoods ............................ 16

vii
 2.6.7 Expand Assistance for People at the Bottom of the Income Ladder .............. 17
2.6.8 Provide Direct Income Supports ..................................................................... 17
2.6.9 Develop New Forms of Housing Ownership .................................................. 17
CHAPTER THREE .............................................................................................................. 19
3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................................... 19
3.1 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................... 19
3.2 STUDY AREA............................................................................................................ 19
3.3 RESEARCH DESIGN ................................................................................................ 20
3.4 POPULATION OF THE STUDY .............................................................................. 20
3.5 POPULATION SIZE AND TECHNIQUE ................................................................. 20
3.6 DATA COLLECTION METHOD ............................................................................. 21
3.7 DATA ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................... 21
CHAPTER FOUR................................................................................................................. 22
4.0 DATA ANALYSIS, PRESENTAION AND DISCUSSION ......................................... 22
4.1PRESENTATION ........................................................................................................ 22
BIODATA OF THE RESPONDENTS ......................................................................... 22
4.2 DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................. 36
CHAPTER FIVE .................................................................................................................. 37
5.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION.............................................................. 37
5.1 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................... 37
5.1 RECOMMENDATION .............................................................................................. 38
REFERENCES .................................................................................................................. 39

viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure: 4.1 Gender ................................................................................................................ 22
Figure: 4.2 Age ..................................................................................................................... 23
Figure: 4.3 Education............................................................................................................ 24
Figure: 4.4 Level ................................................................................................................... 25
Figure:4.5 Nigerians are generally in support of government's provision of modern
strategies for housing ............................................................................................................ 26
Figure: 4.6 Government has provided adequate modern housing strategies for its citizens 27
Figure: 4.7 Source: Does the land act use support modern strategies for housing delivery . 28
Figure: 4.8 Lack of infrastructure is a problem of modern strategies for housing delivery 29
Figure: 4.9 Lack of infrastructure is a problem of modern strategies for housing delivery 30
Figure: 4.10 Government policy a setback for modern strategies for housing delivery....... 31
Figure: 4.11 Do mortgage institutions play vital role in modern housing delivery .............. 32
Figure: 4.12 Does rural-urban migration affect modern strategies for housing delivery ..... 33
Figure: 4.13 Does planning/policy affect modern housing strategies .................................. 34
Figure: 4.14 Private investors support modern strategies than government ......................... 35

ix
 CHAPTER ONE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY

Apart from being one of the items that absorb a large portion of household expenses, housing

plays a special role in the social, political and economic discourse of most societies

(Brickstone, 2019).

Housing shortage is one of the most serious developmental challenges presently confronting

Nigeria. Stakeholders and industry operatives in building technology are unanimous in their

opinion that the process of housing delivery in Nigeria needs a change of strategy. In this

study, the researcher is examining modern ways that could be explored to meet the nation’s

housing deficit, which stands around 17million units (Akeju, 2012).

Although Nigeria with the total population of 195.8 million people (Temi Oni-Jimoh &

Gerges, 2018) has been identified as the largest market in Africa for everything, including

real estate, growing demand for decent shelter has continued to meet leaner supply of housing

units. Over the years, between 2000 and 2004 the Federal Government established the

Federal Ministry of Housing and Urban Development. During this period, the federal

government only concerned itself with the provision of basic infrastructures leaving the

provision of affordable housing delivery to the private sector, In 2004, the Federal

Government declared its willingness to adequately fund researches that have to do with the

use of local materials in the housing sector with a target of 40,000 housing units of at least

1000 houses per state before the year 2007 (Jinadu, 2007), (Abdullahi, 2010) with the

assistance of the Nigeria Building and Road Research Institute, successive governments in

1
Nigeria as discussed in the literature review had thought of policies in a bid to achieve its

mass housing objective but due to lack of reasonable commitment to it, achieving the goal

has remained elusive (Federal Government of Nigeria, 2013).

Experts who gave analytical insight into the problem of housing delivery in Nigeria called

for a declaration of a state of emergency in the housing sector, saying innovative thinking

and modern strategies could bring about better outcomes that will enhance housing delivery

process in the country. It is a known fact that financing of housing projects remained one of

the biggest problems in the sector that is against housing delivery. (Akeju, 2012)believes the

major issue in housing delivery is funding, getting appropriate funding. There is money

flowing everywhere but the right type money needed for long-term project like housing is

not available. Something that can really work for affordable housing can be like what the

Federal Mortgage Bank offers which cannot go around.

Modern strategy such as Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing and Protect against

Displacement, Prevent Displacement from Revitalizing Neighbourhoods, Expand Assistance

for People at the Bottom of the Income Ladder in housing delivery in Nigeria will reiterates

the government’s priority to tackle overcrowding and the ambitious target to reduce severe

overcrowding in rented housing. Alongside making funding available for larger homes, with

at least higher number of bedrooms, and a long-term commitment to deliver the family sized

affordable homes should be identified in a strategic plan for housing delivery.

There are many strategies needed to facilitate massive housing delivery in Nigeria some are;

modern and technologically inspired large scale housing schemes and sites with thousands

of housing units which could play a significant role in the delivery of the large number of

2
houses Nigerians need. The experience of the last 20 years suggests that the level of demand

for new homes over the next decade will not be met by little incremental developments.

In Nigeria today, there is a shortage of housing for low-income earners and constantly

growing housing demands (due to increase in population) that are not met (Temi Oni-Jimoh

& Gerges, 2018). Unfortunately, banks are reluctant to provide mortgage facilities to low-

income earners. To solve the housing/mortgage challenges faced by the Nigeria populace,

the Nigerian Mortgage Refinance Company (NMRC) was established to promote home

ownership and increase the availability and affordability of mortgage loans to Nigerians.

Despite the incorporation of NMRC in 2013, not much has changed. The apathy of banks

towards mortgage transactions still lingers, understandably, because of the risk of default.

1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT

The problem of housing delivery is of great concern in many countries. This problem is

especially prominent in Nigeria. The challenge has been magnified because of a countless

number of issues, not least, a high population growth rate, shortage of necessary skills and

disintegrated supply chain. There is need for Nigerian government and stakeholders in the

building industry to rise to housing needs of Nigerians in quality and quantity. Some

researchers have advocated other modern methods of construction like dry construction as

strategy to mass housing delivery. However, the researcher is examining how modern

strategies such as Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing and Protect against

Displacement, Prevent Displacement from Revitalizing Neighbourhoods, Expand Assistance

for People at the Bottom of the Income Ladder can be used to ensure that the housing needs

in Nigeria are met.

3
 1.3 AIM ANDOBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
The aim of this research is to understand the concept of modern strategies in housing delivery

by the workers of the Sokoto state ministry of housing and environment.

The objectives are;

(a) To examine the modern strategies that can be used for effective housing delivery.

(b) To determine the effect of modern strategies on housing delivery in Sokoto state,

Nigeria.

1.4 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The research question is;

What are the factors hindering the use of modern strategies in housing delivery in Sokoto

state Nigeria?

1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The following are the significance of this study:

Outcome of this study will educate stakeholders in the building industry, government and

policy makers on the modern strategies that can be used to solve the problems of housing

deficit in Sokoto state, Nigeria.

1.6 SCOPE OF THE STUDY

This study on assessment of modern strategies on housing delivery in Sokoto state, Nigeria

will cover all the effort and approaches of past and present government of Nigeria in Sokoto

state in tackling the problem of housing deficit in Nigeria. With special reference to the

4
ministry of housing and environment in Sokoto state, it will also cover the new approaches

and strategies that can be used for mass housing development in the state.

5
 CHAPTER TWO

2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 INTRODUCTION
Housing is, defined as buildings or other shelters in which people live, a place to live, a

dwelling and to Nations, a critical component in social and economic fabric. Housing

represents one of the most basic human needs. The deficit in housing could put many citizens

in a precarious situation of either paying so much for an accommodation or not having a

decent accommodation at all. (Idaeho, 2019). It is a priority for the attainment of living

standard and it is important to both rural and urban areas. These attributes make demand for

housing to know no bound as population growth and urbanization are increasing very rapidly

and the gap between housing need and supply becomes widens. Cultural factors such as

preferences and values or social status, taste and financial resources influence physical

characteristics of a house. The gap between supply and demand for housing is an issue for

the government to address in order to provide housing, which is a basic need for man.

(Oluwaseyi Ajayi, 2016)

Despite the significance of housing, adequate supply has remained a mirage to all carder of

the society in Nigeria.

The situation is very particular to most developing countries where population growth is at

an exponential rate, rapid urbanization becoming a norm, and discrepancy in housing need

and supply is high. Various authorities have proffered strategies for improving housing

delivery in Nigeria. (C.A. Ayedun, 2017) Suggested the cooperative housing model while,

(Makinde, 2014) suggests land use restructuring, grants and tax reduction.

6
 2.2 THE NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN NIGERIA
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 as cited in

(Ezeigwe, 2015)

In Nigeria, neither the government nor the private sector provides sufficient

Housing units especially for the masses that need and demand it.

A recent study of housing situation in Nigeria put formal housing production at

approximately 100,000 units per year and this is highly inadequate because at least 1,000,000

units are needed yearly to bridge the 17 to 20 million housing deficit by governments target

date of 2023 and approximately US$363 billion to curtail. (Centre for Affordable Housing

Finace in Africa, 2018)

Housing, also referred to as shelter, is one of the three fundamental human rights, and it forms

an essential part of human settlement with great impact on the health, welfare, productivity

and quality of life of man (Nubi & Afe, 2012).

A well-planned housing system will also promote environmental sustainability because the

provision of adequate housing will go hand in hand with the provision of improved indoor

air quality, potable water, good sanitary, sewage and waste management, improved and

sustainable transportation network and consequent reduction in environmental pollution.

This achievement would, overall, be a driver for the nation towards development in a

sustainable way; indicating that housing has significant effects on all the three domains of

sustainable development.

7
To a nation such as Nigeria, housing is a very important and critical component in its social

and economic framework (Amao, 2013) because it accommodates the smallest unit of its

society, referred to as the family. Hence, housing is an indicator of a family’s standard of

living or societal class (Nubi O., 2008).

The present Gross Domestic Product (GDP) equals US$405.10 billion presently nonetheless;

the Per Capita Income is very low at US$2457.80 as lastly recorded in 2016 (Trading

Economics. Nigeria-Eonomic Indicators).

Which, indicates clearly the fact that there is an unequal distribution of wealth as people’s

income is not commensurate with the economic growth? The current cost of renting a

standard 3-bedroom apartment is US$5000 per annum (Centre for Affordable Housing

Finace in Africa, 2018). This has left the population struggling with poverty, inequality and

indecent form of housing that is not sustainable. The fast rate in population growth and

urbanization infer an exponential rate of housing deficit, with 61.7% of the urban population

being slum dwellers (Centre for Affordable Housing Finace in Africa, 2018)

Consequently, the need for an urgent solution of adequate and affordable housing supply to

the population is imperative, if the problem of shortage of housing it to be solved. Further

review of literature reveals that there had been several attempts made by both the Public and

Private Sectors of the country to address the fast-increasing housing demands, which have

recorded very minimal success (Waziri & Roosli, 2013). There have been, and currently are,

government strategies and efforts in form of housing policies and programmes to address the

problems/challenges. Nonetheless, these have also attained very little success.

8
 2.3 PAST STRATEGIES ON HOUSING DELIVERY IN NIGERIA
Between 1975 and 1980 there were plans to deliver 202,000 housing units to the public but

only 28,500 units, representing 14.1% was achieved. Under the National Housing Fund

(NHF) programme initiated in1994, to produce 121,000 housing units nationwide that less

than 5% was accomplished. In spite of a series of government policies towards housing

delivery, there exists a gap between housing supply and demand (Amao, 2013).

Either the Government or Private sector provides housing in Nigeria. Substantial contribution

is expected from other public and private sectors. The production of housing in Nigeria is

primarily the function of the private market, private developers produce majority of urban

housing. Due to housing demand created by rural- urban migration, there is increase in urban

population growth, the fixed supply of urban land, and inflation of rental and housing

ownership cost this type of movement has a negative impact on the quality of housing and

cost of infrastructure (Amrevurayire & Ojeh, 2016)

Apart from being one of the items that absorb a large portion of household expenses, housing

plays a special role in social, political and economic discourse (Brickstone, 2019).The issue

of affordable housing is a thing of concern for both the government and its citizens. To

eradicate these problems public and private developers make efforts using different means to

cover the split between housing demand and supply. Problem of implementation,

inconsistency of government policies and programs, lack of efficient credit delivery to the

housing sector are some of the problems of housing delivery in the country (Ademiluyi,

2010).

With the numerous policies and ways available for reducing the enormous housing

inadequacies it is possible to solve the problem if housing was used for only shelter.

9
However, in addition to serving as a shelter, housing is also a produced commodity, consumer

goods, assurance for families, means used for reproducing social relations and an investment

tool protecting the value of money against inflation.

2.4 STRATEGIES, POLICIES AND PROGRAMMES ON HOUSING DELIVERY

Prior to the colonial era, Nigeria had several cities of different sizes and importance.

Examples of such cities are Lagos, Ibadan and Ilorin, in the south western region, Kano and

Zaria, in the northern part, and Onitsha and Aba, in the eastern area, as well as Port Harcourt

and Calabar in the south. They are all with their distinctive socio-cultural identities even as

they are locations occupied by the three major ethnic groups in Nigeria, plus the southern

sub-ethnic group, respectively. The rate of movements of the people from rural areas to the

cities during this era was low, as majority concentrated on agricultural occupation. In the

post-Independence era, starting from 1960, people in Nigeria kept migrating at an increasing

rate from the rural areas to the urban centres in pursuit of better living conditions. Like every

other nation of the world, the migration has been causing rapid and extensive growth in the

urban centres. The urban population in Nigeria has grown from 6.9 million, 15.4% of the

total population of 45 million in 1960 to 99.9 million, which is 48.9% of the total population

of 195.8 million today (Temi Oni-Jimoh & Gerges, 2018)

Before the colonial period in Nigeria (1928–1960), most communities engaged in a

communal system of housing delivery. This is a situation whereby peer groups turn out

collectively to assist any member to build his/her house on appointed days and the builder

provides sumptuous meals for all-in return (Nicholas EO, 2015). This was alternated between

all members, thereby enabling housing delivery.

10
The evolution of housing policies dates as far back as 1928 by the government of Lagos

Colony during the Bubonic Plague that lasted till 1929 (Kabir B, 2006) when the Lagos State

Development Board(LEDB) was established. This era is tagged the Colonial Period between

1928 and 1960. It was for addressing the problem of housing at a national scale (Omange

GY, 2000) and was aimed at the provision of quarters for expatriates and some selected

indigenous civil servants such as the Armed Forces, Police, Marine and Railway workers in

Lagos and other regional headquarters like Enugu, Ibadan and Kaduna. This approach to

African Urban Housing by the Colonial masters aimed at redeveloping ‘decaying core areas’,

renewal of slums or squatter settlements and the construction of rental public housing estates.

The Nigeria Building Society (NBS), which is like a mortgage institute with the intention of

giving both workers in public and private sectors opportunities to have their own houses, was

founded after the World War II.

Nigeria was divided into three regions within this era and all the regions established housing

corporations in 1964 respectively with a vision of developing housing estates. These are

meant to provide mortgage for people, so they can build their own houses and pay back over

a long duration of time.

However, only the capital cities of these regions were impacted by this programme.

The Federal Government made a direct effort on the housing sector by establishing the

National Council on Housing in 1971. The NBS was renamed by the Federal Government to

Federal Mortgage Bank of Nigeria (FMBN) in 1973. This was when it took over its

ownership through the indigenous Act with the aim to expand mortgage lending services to

all segments of the population. It started with a capital base of 20 million Naira and this was

increased in 1979 to one 150 million Naira. FMBN functions as a secondary mortgage market

and hence, primary mortgage market was made opened to the private sector giving rise to
11
another problem of how to fund the Primary Mortgage Institutions (PMI). Consequently,

every Nigerian earning up to 3000 Naira per month were mandated to contribute 2.5% of

monthly salary to the National housing Fund (NHF), (Federal Government of Nigeria, 2013)

with the benefit of borrowing money from the fund through the PMIs after 6 months for

housing. This also was not productive as majority of the workers could neither access the

fund to get loans nor recover their saved money.

This approach to African Urban Housing by the Colonial Masters aimed at redeveloping

‘decaying core areas’, renewal of slums or squatter settlements and the construction of rental

public housing estates. The Nigeria Building Society(NBS), which is like a mortgage institute

with the intention of giving both workers in public and private sectors opportunities to have

their own houses, was founded after the World War II.

The Federal Housing Authority was inaugurated in 1973 through the promulgation of Decree

No. 40 of 1973 and begins formal operation in 1976. Its main objectives were, to make

proposals to the Federal Government on Housing and ancillary infrastructural services and

to implement those approved by the government. During this period, the first low cost

housing estate, Festac Town was developed in preparation for the first all-African Festival

of Arts and Culture (FESTAC) slated for 1977. Another government housing scheme was

the Ipaja Town followed by the AmuwoOdofin Phase 1 estate and more low-cost housing

estates in 11 state capitals. This era marked the first major Federal Government effort in

providing affordable housing to the citizens on long term mortgage repayment arrangement.

The FMBN had plans to deliver 202,000 housing units but because it was solely dependent

on government, it could not pass the test of time; out of the 202,000 houses planned to be

provided, only 28,500 units were realized which amount to just 14.1% (Kabir B, 2006) The

National Housing Programme was later instituted to provide 350 medium and high-income
12
housing units by the FHA during the 1981–1985 post-colonial era. This is in addition to the

national low-income housing programme known as Shagari Low Cost Housing in each of

the then 19 states of the federation (Nigeria, 2004). In addition, the NHP targeted 200,000

units of which just 47,500 (23.75%) units were constructed (Jinadu, 2007). Afterwards, a

period known as “A Period of Consolidation” between 1986 and 1993 was ushered in.

Emphasis was shifted from founding more new housing schemes to the completion of the

many suspended and abandoned housing projects that resulted from the past unsuccessful

housing schemes (Federal Government of Nigeria, 2013) The military government

established a different housing policy tagged “Housing for all by the year 2000”. This was

meant to provide decent and affordable housing for all before the end of the year 2000. It

estimated 700,000 housing units per year with 60% built in urban areas by providing housing

loans to individuals and corporate bodies through the FMBN and other mortgage institutions

which collect, manage and administer contributions to the National Housing Fund (NHF).

This era marked a huge success in the provision of housing for the population. Although the

housing provided cannot be termed affordable as the housing cost more than 30% of their

income.

As development increases in the urban centres, the rate of urbanization also increases;

meaning more people moving in from the rural areas in search of better lives. Subsequently,

there is more deficit in housing as the available housing supply could not meet its demands.

In 1991, the National Housing Policy was promulgated to propose possible solutions to

housing problems. A pool of funds was established for this purpose called the NHF in 1992.

The NHF was based on realistic standards affordable to the owners to encourage every

household to own its own house; through the provision of more credit and fund. Thus, giving

priority to housing programmes intended for the low-income group [36]. The number of
13
housing units to be delivered by NHF in 1994 was 121,000 but only 5% were achieved

(Amao, 2013). This implies that the NHF was ineffective as it could not meet its target and

the success rate was too low. Meanwhile the movement of people from the rural to the urban

cities kept increasing, thereby aggravating the problems that come with urbanization.

Between 2000 and 2004 the Federal Government established the Federal Ministry of Housing

and Urban Development. During this period, the federal government only concerned itself

with the provision of basic infrastructures leaving the provision of affordable housing

delivery to the private sector (Kabir B, 2006) ,which seems to be the main solution to shortage

of housing in the country (Jinadu, 2007) as most of the government efforts have failed. In

2004, the Federal Government declared its willingness to adequately fund researches that

have to do with the use of local materials in the housing sector with a target of 40,000 housing

units of at least 1000 houses per state before the year 2007 (Jinadu, 2007), (Abdullahi, 2010)

with the assistance of the Nigeria Building and Road Research Institute, NBRRI. Another

version of the National Housing Policy, NHP 2012 was adopted with an improvement on the

NHP 1999. The main purpose of the NHP 2012 is to ensure not just the provision of housing

units but also ushers in the need for affordability in housing by the year 2020 (Nigeria,

20016). The generally acceptable definition of Affordable Housing is ‘housing which cost

no more than 30% of the income at each income level’ (Makinde O. O., 2014). It is the

capability of households to meet their housing needs and at the same time maintaining the

capability of meeting other basic costs of living. Aribigbola 2011 citing MacLennan and

Williams 1990, defined housing affordability as the ability to assure some “given or different

standards of housing at a price or rent which does not impose an unreasonable burden on

household incomes, assessed by the ratio of a chosen definition of household costs to a

selected measure of household income in a given period” (Sanusi, 2003) and usually defined
14
by the income of the population served (Okonjo-Iweala, 2014). Approximately 50%ormore

of household income spent on housing is described as “severe burdens” (Makinde O. O.,

2014). Another good thing that comes with housing provision is the infrastructural

development. Such as good transport communication network, potable water, planned waste

management systems, job opportunities especially within the construction and property

sector. With all these in place, good health, reduced pollution and environmental degradation

will also be achieved.

2.5 MODERN STRATEGIES

Modern strategies refer to the measures that can be used in the in the proper and sustainable

delivery of housing that would curb the problems of housing shortage. If everyone could

afford quality housing, and every neighbourhood offered a diversity of housing options,

people up and down the income ladder could enjoy housing security and build wealth through

homeownership. Achieving this vision requires more than incremental tinkering with today’s

market institutions and public policies, it calls for bold action at all levels of government and

in the private and non-profits sectors(The Urban Institute, 2019)

2.6 LIST OF SOME OF THE STRATEGIES THAT CAN BE ADOPTED

2.6.1 Produce More Housing at Lower Cost

Innovations in building technologies and more flexible local regulations would enable the

market to deliver more housing faster and more cheaply. These solutions focus on what type

of housing is built and how and where it can be built. Reforms to state and local land use

regulations and building codes would allow more housing to be built where it is needed most

15
2.6.2 Reform Local Land Use Laws and Building Codes
Restrictive local land use regulations constrain housing supply and drive up housing costs.

These constraints stunt local, regional, and national economic growth and widen income and

wealth

2.6.3 Accelerate Innovation in Design and Construction

Unconventional housing designs (e.g., accessory dwelling units and micro units) and

innovative construction technologies can potentially increase the range of housing options

while reducing costs and sprawl.

2.6.4 Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing and Protect against Displacement

In many communities, housing market pressures drive up rents and home prices, making

housing unaffordable and pushing long-time residents out of their communities. Sometimes

these pressures result from targeted investments aimed at improving the quality of distressed

neighbourhoods. They can also result from gentrification, rapid growth in local jobs and

population, or rising income inequality.

2.6.5 Preserve Unsubsidized Affordable Housing

Only about one in five eligible households receives federal housing assistance (Kingsley

2017). Therefore, the stock of privately owned properties charging low to moderate rents

plays a critical role in meeting housing needs

2.6.6 Prevent Displacement from Revitalizing Neighbourhoods

In many cities across the country, economic growth, neighbourhood revitalization, shifting

neighbourhood preferences, and intensifying housing market pressures threaten to displace

long-time residents from their communities. A strong case can be made for policies that give

16
these residents (both renters and homeowners) meaningful voice and power in decisions

about the future of their neighbourhoods and allow low-income people and people of colour

to share in the benefits of revitalization

2.6.7 Expand Assistance for People at the Bottom of the Income Ladder
Despite a range of federal, state, and local housing subsidy programs, most households

eligible for housing assistance do not receive it. If solutions were effectively implemented,

the number of households in need of assistance could be dramatically reduced. However,

some households would still lack sufficient income to afford housing in the private market.

2.6.8 Provide Direct Income Supports

One strategy for tackling this challenge would be to boost household incomes by providing

a universal basic income or substantially expanded earned income tax credit. In theory, this

approach would ensure that all households have enough income to make housing affordable

without explicitly earmarking any income for housing.

2.6.9 Develop New Forms of Housing Ownership

Alternative forms of owning land and housing can create or preserve more affordable and

stable housing. Shared equity programs, particularly those that preserve long-term

affordability, create homeownership opportunities for low- and moderate-income people.

Below are some of the building knowledge needed by policymakers during housing delivery

(a) Using simple materials and construction technique.

(b) Understand opposition to housing development and the effectiveness of strategies

for achieving consensus.

17
(c) Make land affordable

(d) Alternative use technology in construction.

(e) Forecast the full costs and benefits of alternative models for expanding housing

assistance to low-income housing advocates and policymakers can assess the return

on investment from expanded federal housing assistance.

(f) Increase of private investment in housing.

(g) Improving quality/standard of all existing houses including energy efficiency.

(h) Giving occupant voice in the decision that affects them.

(i) Ensuring services reflect the need of those who use them not those who deliver them.

18
 CHAPTER THREE

3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 INTRODUCTION
This chapter states the method used in the research, as well as the population of the study,

and sampling techniques used in determining the sample size for the research. How data was

collected and analysed is also discussed in this chapter.

The main objectives of this research were achieved through quantitative method, as

inferential statistics were used to measure the level of accuracy and validate responses from

the respondents in accordance to the objectives of the research

3.2 STUDY AREA

Sokoto, usually referred to as Sokoto State to distinguish it from the city of Sokoto, is in the

extreme northwest of Nigeria, near to the confluence of the Sokoto River and the Rima River.

As of 2005, it has an estimated population of more than 4.2 million. Sokoto City is the

modern-day capital of Sokoto State (and its predecessor, the North-western State).

With coordinates: 13°05′N 05°15′E and has a total area of 25,973 km2 (10,028 sq. mi)

The name Sokoto (which is the modern/anglicized version of the local name, Sakkwato) is

of Arabic origin, representing suk, "market". It is also known as Sakkwato, BirninShaihu da

Bello or "Sokoto, Capital of Shaihu and Bello").

Being the seat of the former Sokoto Caliphate, the city is predominantly Muslim and an

important seat of Islamic learning in Nigeria. The Sultan who heads the caliphate is

effectively the spiritual leader of Nigerian Muslims.

19
 3.3 RESEARCH DESIGN
The research design used for this study was the descriptive research design. Since data,

characteristics were described using frequencies and percentages, and no manipulations of

data or variables were necessary, the researcher chose this research design. The researcher

discarded other alternatives such as the causal and explanatory research designs, because

accurate findings and data analysis may not be achieved.

3.4 POPULATION OF THE STUDY

The population for this study are employees of Sokoto State Ministry of Housing and

Environment. The population figure for the study was 150, comprising of staff of Sokoto

State Ministry of Housing and Environment from various departments such as operations,

finance, administration, land and survey etc.

3.5 POPULATION SIZE AND TECHNIQUE

Since the population for the study was not large, and data could not be collected from all the

respondents, the researcher adopted the census sampling technique and the formula to
𝑁
determine sample size which is 𝑛 = 1+𝑁(𝑒)2 (Yamane, 1967) to successfully complete the

study. Therefore 42 respondents were used for this study.

𝑁
𝑛=
1 + 𝑁(𝑒)2

Where n= sample size

N= population size

e= error margin 0.012

20
 3.6 DATA COLLECTION METHOD
Data for this study was collected from the respondents using questionnaires. Questionnaires

were shared to all 47 respondents of the organization, through responses to questions and the

questionnaire served as the main source of primary data for this study.

3.7 DATA ANALYSIS

Data from the organised questionnaires will be translated into numeric codes by the

researcher, and data capture will be done by statistical analysis using the excel, SPSS (version

21). The analysis, presentation and discussions of the findings from the questionnaires will

be presented in the following chapter. A total of 47 questionnaires were administered.

21
 CHAPTER FOUR

4.0 DATA ANALYSIS, PRESENTAION AND DISCUSSION

This chapter is the presentation, analysis and interpretation of the data gathered during this

study. The data are based on the number of copies of the questionnaire completed and

returned by the respondents. The results are presented in bar charts, frequencies and

percentages.

4.1PRESENTATION

BIODATA OF THE RESPONDENTS

GENDER

female
14%

male
86%

male female

Figure: 4.1 Gender of the respondents

Source: Authors field survey, October 2019.

From the figure 4.1 above 36 respondents which is (86%) of the total population are male

while 6 (14%) are female. This shows a predominance of male workers at the ministry of

housing and environment in sokoto state.

22
 AGE
25

20
FREQUEENCY

15

10

0
missing 21-30 31-40 41-50 51-above

Figure: 4.2 Age of respondents

Source: Authors field survey, October 2019.

The above chart shows the age grade of the respondents used for this study. From the chart

20 respondents which is 47% of the entire population are within the range of 41-50, 13

respondents which is 31% of the population are within the range of 31-40, 6 respondents

which is 14% of the population are within the range of 51-above, 2 respondents which is 2%

of the population are within range of 21-30 and 2% of the population which is 1respondents

did not fill the age column.

23
 EDUCATION
35
30
25
FREQUENCY

20
15
10
5
0
wasce/ssce OND/HND/BSc msc/PHD
EDUCATION

Figure: 4.3 Educational qualification of respondents

Source: Authors field survey, October 2019.

The above chart shows the educational qualification of the respondents used for this study.

From the above, 32 respondents which is 76% of the population have either

OND/HND/BSC qualification while 9 respondents which is 21% of the population have

either MSC/PHD qualification and 1respondent which is 2% of the population have

WASCE/SSCE qualification.

24
 LEVEL
30

25

20
FREQUENCY

15

10

0
junior staff senior staff
LEVEL

Figure: 4.4 Work classification of respondents

Source: Authors field survey, October 2019.

The above chart shows the level grade of the respondents used for this study. From the

above, 27 respondents which is 64% of the population are junior staff while 15 respondents

which is 36% of the population are senior staff.

25
 Nigerians are generally in support of
government's provision of modern
strategies for housing
16
14
12
FREQUENCY

10
8
6
4
2
0
strongly agree agree neutral disagree strongly disagree

Figure: 4.5 General views of respondents to government's provision of modern strategies

for housing
Source: Authors field survey, October 2019.

The above chart shows that 15 respondents which is 35.7% strongly agree that Nigerians

are generally in support of government's provision of modern strategies for housing while

35.7% which15 respondents agree, 16.7% which7 respondents are neutral, 3 respondents

which is makes 7.1% disagree and 2 respondents which is 4.8% strongly disagree with

question.

26
 Government has provided adequate
modern housing strategies for its
citizens
14
12
10
FREQUENCY

8
6
4
2
0
strongly agree agree neutral disagree strongly disagree

Figure: 4.6 Showing the data for provision of adequate modern housing strategies for its
citizens
Source: Authors field survey, October 2019.

The above chart shows that 13 respondents which is 31.0% agree that government has

provided adequate modern housing strategies for its citizens while 26.2% which is 11

disagree, 7 respondents which is 16.7% is neutral, 6respondents which is 14.3% strongly

disagree and 5 respondents which is 11.9% strongly agree.

27
 Does the land act use support modern
strategies for housing delivery
14
12
10
FREQUENCY

8
6
4
2
0
missing strongly agree agree neutral disagree strongly
disagree

Figure: 4.7 Showing whether the land act use support modern strategies for housing
delivery
Source: Authors field survey, October 2019.

The above chart shows that 13 respondents which is 31.0% is are neutral about the question

while 10 respondents which is 23.8% disagree, 8 respondents which is 19.0% agree, 8

respondents which is 19.0% strongly agree, 2 respondents which is 4.8% strongly disagree

and 1 respondent which is 2.4% didn’t answer the question.

28
 Lack of infrastructure is a problem of
modern strategies for housing delivery
12

10

8
FREQUENCY

0
missing strongly agree agree neutral disagree strongly
disagree

Figure: 4.8 Showing if Lack of infrastructure is a problem of modern strategies for housing
delivery
Source: Authors field survey, October 2019.

The above chart shows that 11 respondents which is 26.2% strongly agree that lack of

infrastructure is a problem of modern strategies for housing delivery, 11respondents which

is 26.2% agree, 11 respondents which is 26.2% is neutral, 7 respondents which is 16.7%

disagree, 1 respondent which is 2.4% strongly disagree another respondent which is 2.4%

did not answer the question.

29
 High cost of building material a major
problem of housing delivery
14
12
10
FREQUENCY

8
6
4
2
0
missing strongly agree agree neutral disagree strongly
disagree

Figure: 4.9 Showing whether High cost of building material a major problem of housing
delivery
Source: Authors field survey, October 2019.

The above chart shows that 13 respondents which is 31.0% of the population are neutral

about High cost of building material a major problem of housing delivery, 11 respondents

which is 26.2% strongly agree, 10 respondents which is 23.8% agree, 6 respondents which

is 14.3% disagree, 1 respondents which is 2.4% strongly disagree and another which is

2.4% did not answer the question.

30
 Government policy a setback for
modern strategies for housing delivery
14
12
10
FREQUENCY

8
6
4
2
0
missing strongly agree agree neutral disagree strongly
disagree

Figure: 4.10 Showing views on how Government policy affects modern strategies for
housing delivery
Source: Authors field survey, October 2019.

The above chart shows that 13 respondents which is 31.0% of the population strongly agree

that Government policy a setback for modern strategies for housing delivery, 13

respondents which is 31.0% agree, 7 respondents which is 16.7% disagree, 5 respondents

which is 11.9% was neutral, 3 respondents which is 7.1% strongly disagree and 1

respondent which is 2.4% did not answer the question.

31
 Do mortgage institutions play vital
role in modern housing delivery
12

10

8
FREQUENCY

0
missing strongly agree agree neutral disagree strongly
disagree

Figure: 4.11showing how mortgage institutions affects modern housing delivery

Source: Authors field survey, October 2019.

The above chart shows that 11 respondents which is 26.2% of the population disagree that

mortgage institutions play vital role in modern housing delivery while 10 respondents

which is 23.8% are neutral, 9 respondents which is 21.4% agree, 6 respondents which is

14.3% strongly agree, 4 respondents which is 9.5% strongly disagree and 2 respondents did

not answer the question.

32
 Does rural-urban migration affect
modern strategies for housing delivery
18
16
14
12
FREQUENCY

10
8
6
4
2
0
strongly agree agree neutral disagree strongly disagree

Figure: 4.12 Showing whether rural-urban migration affect modern strategies for housing
delivery
Source: Authors field survey, October 2019.

The above chart shows that 16 respondents which is 38.1% of the population agree that

rural-urban migration affect modern strategies for housing delivery while 13respondents

which is 31.0% is neutral, 9 respondents which is 21.4% strongly agree while 3 respondents

which is 7.1% disagree, 1 which is 2.4% respondent strongly disagrees.

33
 Does planning/policy affect modern
housing strategies
18
16
14
12
FREQUENCY

10
8
6
4
2
0
strongly agree agree neutral disagree

Figure: 4.13 General view of respondents on how planning/policy affect modern housing
strategies
Source: Authors field survey, October 2019.

The above chart shows that 17 respondents which is 40.5% agree that planning/policy

affect modern housing strategies while 16 respondents which is 38.1% strongly agree, 5

respondents which is 11.9% is neutral and 4 respondents which is 9.5% disagree.

34
 Private investors support modern
strategies than government
18
16
14
12
FREQUENCY

10
8
6
4
2
0
strongly agree agree neutral disagree strongly disagree

Figure: 4.14 Showing whether Private investors support modern strategies than government
Source: Authors field survey, October 2019.

The above chart shows that 16 respondents which is 38.1% of the population strongly agree

that private investors support modern strategies than government, 11 respondents which is

26.3% agree, 6 respondents which is 14.3% disagree, 5 respondents which is 11.9% is

neutral and 4respondents which is 9.5% strongly disagree.

35
Table 4.1: Summary of Results
S/N QUESTIONS Strongly Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly
Agree Disagree
1 Nigerians are generally in support of government's provision of 35.7% 35.7% 16.7% 7.1% 4.8%
modern strategies for housing
2 Government has provided adequate modern housing strategies 11.9% 31.0% 16.7% 26.2% 14.3%
for its citizens
3 Does the land act use support modern strategies for housing 19.0% 19.0% 31.0% 23.8% 4.8%
delivery
4 Lack of infrastructure is a problem of modern strategies for 26.2% 26.2% 26.2% 16.7% 2.4%
housing delivery
5 High cost of building material a major problem of housing 26.2% 23.8% 31.0% 14.3% 2.4%
delivery
6 Government policy a setback for modern strategies for housing 31.0% 31.1% 11.9% 16.7% 7.1%
delivery
7 Do mortgage institutions play vital role in modern housing 14.3% 21.4% 23.8% 26.2% 9.5%
delivery
8 Does rural-urban migration affect modern strategies for housing 21.4% 38.1% 31.0% 7.1% 2.4%
delivery
9 Does planning/policy affect modern housing strategies 38.1% 40.5% 11.9% 9.5% -
10 Private investors support modern strategies than government 38.1% 26.3% 11.9% 14.3% 9.5%

Source: Authors field survey, October 2019.

35
 4.2 DISCUSSION
The results reveal that most of the respondents are male within the age range of 41-50 years,

and 76.2% of the workers have their educational qualification between OND/HND/BSC

degree and 24.1% have MSC/PHD degree while 2.4% have just school leaving certificate.

Majority of the workers are junior staff which 64.3% while the senior staff have 35.7%.

During the study the researcher the that Nigerians are generally in support of government

providing modern strategies for housing for its citizens 15 respondents with which is 35.7%

of the population agree. High cost of building material a major problem of housing delivery

of building material is not a setback for the government in the use of modern strategies by

the government with 13 respondents which is 31.0% of the population are neutral about it.

16 respondents which is 38.1% of the population strongly agree that private investors support

modern strategies than governmentwhile 17 respondents which is 40.5% agree that

planning/policy affect modern housing strategies which means government play a vital role

the ensuring of housing delivery therefore government needs to start making policy/plan that

are sustainable. 13 respondents which is 31.0% is are neutral about the whether the land act

use support modern strategies for housing delivery while while 10 respondents which is

23.8% disagree.11 respondents which is 26.2% strongly agree that lackof infrastructure is a

problem of modern strategies for housing delivery, 11respondents which is 26.2% agree, 11

respondents which is 26.2% is neutral. 13 respondents which is 31.0% of the population

strongly agree that Government policy a setback for modern strategies for housing delivery,

13 respondents which is 31.0% agree. 16 respondents which is 38.1% of the population agree

that rural-urban migration affect modern strategies for housing delivery while 13

respondents which is 31.0% is neutral.

36
 CHAPTER FIVE

5.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1 CONCLUSION

This chapter is the conclusion, findings and recommendation of the researcher during the

study.

The research question of the study which is:

Factors hindering the use of modern strategies on housing delivery in Sokoto state Nigeria.

The findings of the study are as follows:

a) Nigerians are in support of modern strategies for housing delivery.

b) Government has provided adequate modern strategies, but lack of implementation is

the major setback.

c) Lack of infrastructure is a problem for the use of modern strategies on housing

delivery.

d) Government policy on housing has been a major setback for the use of modern

strategies.

e) Rural-urban migration is a problem for the use of modern strategies on housing

delivery due to increase in population.

37
 5.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

Housing as an important element in social and economic fabric plays an important role in

the society. The gap between supply and demand for housing is an issue for the Nigerian

government and policy makers to address and to provide housing which is a basic need for

the citizens. Most of the past housing delivery strategies adopted by both the federal and

state government has not really curbed the problems of housing shortage, the use of modern

ways in housing delivery is key in achieving housing efficiency and adequacy. The following

are some recommendations;

a) The government should therefore improve on its housing policies.

b) Create an under-laying base for proper organization of the housing delivery system

for the use of some the modern strategies as mentioned in the literature review.

c) Adopt different and sustainable means for housing delivery.

d) Involve building professionals in the decision making of housing plans and best

method of delivery rather than government officials who have no design, building

and construction knowledge.

e) Proper attention should be given to building type as to achieve the buildings

function.

f) Old buildings should be renovated and allocated to deserving users.

38
 REFERENCES
Abdullahi, B. (2010). Nigeria’s housing policy and public-private partnership (PPP)
strategy:. Urban Dynamics and Housing Change 22nd International Housing
Research Conference;, (pp. 4-7). Istanbul.

Ademiluyi, I. (2010). Public Housing Delivery in Nigeria: A Historical Perspective of

Policies and Problem. Sustainable Development in Africa, 158.

Adeshina, T., & Idaeho, R. (2019). Analysis of Nigeria's Policy on Housing.

Ajayi, O., Akinsiku, O., & Osunsanmi, O. (2016). Strategies For Housing Affordability in
Nigeria. Construction Project Managemennt and Innvation.

Akeju, A. A. (2012). Challenges to providing affordable housing in Nigeria. Proceedings

of 2nd Emerging Urban Africa International Conference on Housing Finance in
Nigeria, (pp. 17-19 ). Abuja.

Amao, F. L. (2013). International Journal of African and Asian Studies, 1, 82-83.

Amrevurayire, E. O., & Ojeh, V. N. (2016). Consequence of Rural-Urban Migration on the

source region of Delta State. European Journal of Geogrphy Volume 7, 42.

Ayedun, C., Oloyede, S., Ikpefan, O., Akinjare, A., & Oloke, C. (2017). Cooperative
Societiess, Housing Provision and Poverty Alleviation in Nigria. Covenant Journal
in the Built Environment, 81.

Brickstone. (2019). Key Development Considerations-Affordable Housing. Private Sector

Pariticipation in Affordable Housing, 3. Retrieved from proshareng.

Centre for Affordable Housing Finace in Africa. (2018). Housing Finane in Nigeria.
Lagos: C.A.H.F.

Dover, Delaware, USA. (n.d.). Retrieved September 3, 2019, from Dover, Delaware Web
site: http://www.worldometers.info

Ezeigwe, P. C. (2015). Evaluation of the Causes of Housing Problems in Nigeria. Journal

of Economcs and Sustainaible Development, 93.

Federal Government of Nigeria. (2013). Overview of the Nigeria Mortgage Refinance

Company. Federal Ministry of Finance.

Jinadu, A. (2007). Understanding the Basics of Housing. Jos: Jos, Plateau State Nigeria:
Jos University Press LTD.

39
Kabir B, B. S. (2006). A Review of Housing Delivery Efforts in Nigeria. Zaria-Nigeria.
Zaria: Department of Building, Faculty of Environmental Design, Ahmadu Bello
University.

Makinde, O. O. (2014). Housing delivery sysem, need and demand.

Nicholas EO, P. D. (2015). A review of governmental intervention on sustainable housing.

International Journal of Social Science Studies, 40-48.

Nigeria, F. G. (2004). National Housing Policy for Nigeria. Federal Ministry ofWorks and
Housing.

Nubi, G., & Afe, Y. (2012). Redefining Affordable Housing through Sustainable Practices.
Nigeria. Lagos: Faculty of Environmental Sciences, Department of Estate
Management, University of Lagos.

Nubi, O. (2008). Affordable housing delivery in Nigeria. The South African Foundation
International Conference and Exhibition, (pp. 1-18). Cape Town.

Okonjo-Iweala, N. (2014). Unleashing the housing sector in Nigeria and in Africa. 6th
Global Housing Finance Conference. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Omange GY, U. M. (2000). Government Involvement in Housing. Effective Housing in

21st Nigeria: . Akure: Federal University of Technology Akure.

Sanusi, J. (2003). Mortgage financing in Nigeria: Issues and challenges. Nigerian

Institution of Estate Surveyors and Valuers.

Temi Oni-Jimoh, C. L., & Gerges, A. O. (2018). Urbanization and Meeting the Need for
Affordable. Private Sector Driven Housing Delivery , 3.

The Urban Institute. (2019). Next50. New York: The Urban Institute.

Trading Economics. Nigeria-Eonomic Indicators. (n.d.). Trading Economics. Nigeria-

Eonomic Indicators. Retrieved September 12, 2019, from Trading Economics.
Nigeria-Eonomic Indicators: https://tradingeconomics.com/nigeria/gdp

Waziri, G., & Roosli, R. (2013). Housing policies and programmes in Nigeria. A review of
the concept and implementation Business Management Dynamics, 60-68.

Yamane, T. (1967). Statistics an Introductory Analysis. (2, Ed.) New York: Harper and
Row .

40