Housing Market and Low-Cost and Efficient Materials and Technologies Final Report June2023 Compressed

Final Report
A Study on the Rwandan Housing Market and

Low-Cost and Efficient Materials and Technologies
Ministry of Infrastructure
Rwanda Housing Authority
Development Bank of Rwanda
For and on behalf of the Government of Rwanda
30
-
06
-
23
Study on the Housing Market and Low-Cost and Efficient Materials
Research Objective
The objective of the Study on the Housing Market and Low-Cost Efficient Housing
Materials and Construction is twofold:
1. to analyse the demand and supply bottlenecks, particularly as they relate to finance
(offtake and construction)
2. to evaluate how innovations in materials and technologies can lower the cost of
new construction or facilitate the improvement of older structures.
Given that the study is expected to support the Government of Rwanda’s ongoing
efforts to “engage with the private sector for a fast and effective delivery of affordable
housing,” the research shall be done in close consultation with the policymakers,
developers, builders, technicians, landlords and financial instaitutions that make up
Rwanda’s housing ecosystem.
The results of this study shall complement sister initiatives across a host of other
agencies and institutions, in particular the Ministry of Infrastructure (MININFRA) and the
Rwanda Housing Authority (RHA). With the support of the World Bank, MININFRA and
RHA have launched parallel studies to set benchmarks, review policies, and establish
new protocols for a wide range of housing-related issues from informal settlement
upgrading to estate management/ maintenance and the subsidization of infrastructure
for affordable housing developments. While the individual initiatives are designed to fill
gaps in the sector, the overall goal of the World Bank funding is to build a robust housing
framework capable of structuring investments in a nascent market. So, although the
present study is focused on the weak finance, planning and construction links of the
housing value chain, the team’s approach will involve testing new solutions within a
series of prototypical real estate development scenarios to be discussed, debated, and
disseminated among a diverse stakeholder group
2
Study on the Housing Market and Low-Cost and Efficient Materials
Table of Contents
PART I : Housing Market Study
I. INTRODUCTION 6
II. HOUSING DEMAND 8
III. SEGMENTATION AND HOUSING JOURNEYS IN EACH SEGMENT 24
IV. HOUSING SUPPLY: A HIGH-LEVEL OVERVIEW 48
V. HOUSING FINANCE 56
VI. RECOMMENDATIONS 69
APPENDIX A: OVERVIEW OF URBAN HOUSEHOLDS IN KEY DISTRICTS 74
APPENDIX B: HOUSING FINANCE CASE STUDIES 89
PART II : Low-cost and Efficient Building Materials

and Technologies
I. INTRODUCTION 5
II. RWANDA’S HOUSING ECOSYSTEM : A SECTOR DIAGNOSTIC 11
III. HOUSING COST STUDY AT DIFFERENT SCALES 43
IV. SCENARIOS 113
V. CONCLUSIONS 173
APPENDIX A: REAL ESTATE PERFORMA 192
APPENDIX B: IMPACT SIMULATION TOOL 200
APPENDIX C: STRUCTURAL PLANS G+3 204
210
APPENDIX D: STRUCTURAL PLANS G+10
HOUSING MARKET STUDY REPORT
Prepared by
A Thirty-Five Thousand Holdings company
Together with CAHF, Kigwa Consulting and Fatou Dieye

CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 6
2. HOUSING DEMAND ........................................................................................................................ 8
3. SEGMENTATION AND HOUSING JOURNEYS IN EACH SEGMENT .................................................. 24
4. HOUSING SUPPLY: A HIGH-LEVEL OVERVIEW .............................................................................. 48
5. HOUSING FINANCE ...................................................................................................................... 56
6. RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................... 69
APPENDIX A: OVERVIEW OF URBAN HOUSEHOLDS IN KEY DISTRICTS ................................................. 74
APPENDIX B: HOUSING FINANCE CASE STUDIES .................................................................................. 85
5
1. INTRODUCTION
This housing market study characterises affordable housing (rental and ownership) demand in main
urban1 centres. This report updates and expands on the demand-side analysis presented in the Phase
1 Baselines Report of November 2022. It also provides a further refinement of the segmentation
model and proposes a revised definition of the affordable market with a focus on urban areas. In line
with the TOR, it also includes a brief overview of supply together with key blockages that impact on
the housing value chain. It also includes findings of primary research on household-led development.
With regard to the analysis of demand-side or household data, Chapter 2 of this report includes an
updated analysis of RSSB data for the segment of the market that has formal income. While the Phase
1 Baselines report relied only on August 2022 data from the RSSB (the only data that was available at
the time), the analysis in this report has been enriched with historical data that allows for a more
nuanced understanding of labour market trends that in turn shape a view on which households have
the required income stability to enable access to credit. The historical data also underpins projections
of the income distribution of formal income earners in Rwanda included in this report.
In addition, the project team has analysed available Census 2022 data. This includes a set of static
tables published by the NISR as well as a 10% sample at a cell level. While this data has enabled rich
analysis and critical insight into current demand-side conditions, there are some limitations. A rural /
urban indicator was not provided in the 10% sample. In order to identify urban areas, the analysis has
relied on main urban boundaries as per the National Land Use and Development Master Plan
(NLUDMP). These boundaries do not align with the cell level data provided in the 10% census sample.
The team therefore demarcated a cell as urban if its midpoint is located within the NLUDMP main
urban boundary. We note there is a noticeable discrepancy between the number of households
categorised as urban by the Census (964 000 households) and the number of households that live in
cells matched back to the NLUDMP (747 000 households). Thus, we refer to ‘high density (proxy) urban
settlements’ rather than urban areas when reporting on detailed analysis of the census.
In addition, the 10% sample was drawn at an individual, not household level. In order to conduct a
household-level analysis using this sample, we rely on individuals flagged as the household head. We
note it is not possible to link individuals to households to determine, for instance, the relationship of
individuals to the household head or to identify households that contain a recent migrant.
A further inherent limitation of census data is that it does not contain income. Thus, the analysis of
individuals and households who are not represented in the RSSB data relied on survey data, principally
the EICV5 survey conducted by the NISR in 2015/16. That survey was used to derive an estimated
income distribution inflated to June 2022.2
A further survey dataset that underpins the analysis is the Labour Force Survey (LFS) conducted by the
NISR. This survey provides insight on sector of employment (formal versus informal) at a household
level.
Aside from conducting an extensive analysis on administrative data and nationally representative
survey data, the team has conducted primary research in various segments of the market to provide
additional nuance on housing journeys, preferences and affordability. Findings of this research are
1
A rural and urban split is provided by the NISR in survey data sets. No distinction is provided in other
administrative data sets used in this report.
2
The income estimates derived from the EICV5 data are based on expenditure, as this is more widely reported
6
presented together with the demand-side findings in an income-based segmentation focused on
housing affordability.
This document also incorporates a section on end-user finance, identifying potential interventions
that could increase access and take up of housing finance products. These interventions may be
undertaken by lenders, the housing finance sector and the state.
With regard to supply, the vast majority of households in urban centres of Rwanda currently rely on
household-led delivery, much of it incremental and uncaptured in formal development application
processes. The nature of this supply can be determined by exploring the housing conditions and tenure
of households across the various segments of the market.
Chapter 5 of this report identifies key blockages within housing delivery value chains. While there is
some scope to reduce the cost of formal housing delivery and to increase its scale, it is likely that the
dominant mode of delivery for the majority of households will continue to be household-led and
incremental, even when factoring in wage and employment growth. The chapter therefore focuses on
findings of research on household-led development conducted with property owners in areas zoned
for higher densities.
Both the supply-side and demand-side data highlight the very significant challenges regarding access
to services, including sanitation, piped water and transport that impact directly on the housing market.
In addition, with regard to household-led development, the findings emphasise the importance of
ensuring administrative visibility to enable local authorities to understand and support housing and
neighbourhood development. This in turn requires the development of pragmatic building codes with
which households and small scale developers can comply, and strong management by local
authorities, potentially aided by new technology-driven tools.
These and other key points and suggested interventions are summarised for each segment of the
market in the final chapter of this report. That chapter also includes some cross-cutting
recommendations for the sector as a whole.
7
2. HOUSING DEMAND
According to the Census 2022 Main Indicators Report, there are 3.31 million households in Rwanda.
Just over 960 000 of which reside in urban areas. They are the focus of this report 3. Urban dwellers in
Rwanda now account for 28% of the population and 29% of households. Between 2012 and 2022 the
number of households living in urban areas increased by 547 500 households. The number of
households in Kigali doubled over the period and it remains the dominant ‘primary’ city by a long way.
That said, other urban areas are growing at least as fast as Kigali, with particularly rapid growth visible
in Bugesera and Rwamagana, new satellite cities flagged as growth points in the National Land Use
and Development Master Plan (NLUDMP).
Chart 1 Number of urban households4 between 2012 and 2022 (top 10 districts)
Source: Census 2012 10% sample and Census 2022 published tables
Data from the census provides some indication on household size and composition. Across the country
(in rural and urban areas), the dominant household type is a nuclear family (59% of households). In
higher density (proxy) urban settlements5, 44% of households are nuclear families, 19% of households
include extended family members and 18% of households comprise a single person6. Single person
households in high density (proxy) urban settlements are predominantly male (73% of single person
households).
3
As noted in the introductory comments above, a set of static tables published by the NISR as well as a 10%
sample of the 2022 Census data was made available for analysis. We rely on various other data sources including
surveys as well as administrative data. These data sets do not always align. For example, according to the 2021
Labour Force Survey, there are 3 026 443 households in Rwanda. LODA data indicates there are 2 931 433
households, slightly lower than the Census 2022 Main Indicator Report.
4
For 2012 urban households include those living in urban as well as semi-urban area types
5
As noted in the introductory comments, the classification of areas as rural versus urban is not clearcut as the
10% sample data for the 2022 Census provided by the NISR did not include a rural / urban marker. The project
team therefore created its own indicator based off the National Land Use and Development Master Plan. This
results in a significantly lower number of urban households than that reported by the Census (750 000 vs 964
000 for the Census). Given this discrepancy, these areas are termed high density (proxy) urban settlements
rather than urban areas.
6
In rural areas the corresponding percentages are 63%, 22% and 10%.
8
Housing need
Various indicators in the census can be used to identify households whose living conditions are poor
and who thus have a visible housing need. These indicators include the type of area (unplanned areas7
versus planned areas), materials used to construct the dwelling, over-crowding within the dwelling
and access to services such as water and sanitation.
Roughly a third of households in higher density (proxy) urban settlements live in unplanned areas.
While a direct comparison with Census 2012 data is not possible in these areas because both
categories and demarcations have changed, there is a decline in the number and, most notably, the
percentage of households living in unplanned areas across the country as a whole. In 2012, around
340 000 households nationally (urban and rural) were categorised as living in ‘Spontaneous/ Squatter
housing’ (14% of all households). This decreased to 290 000 households in 2022 or 9% of all
households. We note that this change has not happened uniformly across the country. For example,
the number of households living in unplanned areas increased in Kigali by about 8 000 households and
Muhanga by roughly 6 500 households over the ten-year period. In contrast the number of households
living in an unplanned area in Rusizi and Huye decreased by more than 8 700 households in each
district.
Chart 2 Habit types in Census 2012 compared to Census 2022 for all households (urban and
rural) in Rwanda
Source: Census 2012 10% sample and Census 2022 10% sample
Just under 40% of households in higher density (proxy) urban settlements live in dwellings that are
constructed, at least in part, from non-durable materials. A detailed breakdown of the roof and wall
materials for households living in high density (proxy) urban settlements is shown in Chart 3 below
together with materials used for the floor. While flooring may not technically be a component of
dwelling construction, it is critical from a health perspective. Households that live in dwellings with
sub-standard flooring are therefore included in the determination of those that have a visible housing
need. Based on Census data, 40% of households who live in squatter settlements live in dwellings that
7
Unplanned areas include spontaneous/ squatter housing and unplanned housing
9
have non-durable or semi-durable walls, or roofing or floors. The corresponding percentage for
households living in planned settlements is 34%.
A further dimension of housing need relates to in-dwelling densities. According to census data, 10%
of households live in over-crowded conditions, with more than three people per sleeping room.
Chart 3 Dwelling indicators for households who live in high density (proxy) urban settlements
Source: Census 2022, 10% sample
Access to adequate services is also limited. While the majority of households in higher density (proxy)
urban settlements have access to electricity8, fewer than half have piped water on the plot (41%) or
in the dwelling (3%)9. Flush toilets are uncommon (only 13% of households have a flush toilet)
although over 95% of households in higher density (proxy) urban settlements have access to so-called
8
Eighty five per cent of households are connected to the REG grid lines or other lines
9
This is for general use with 41% having piped water on the plot. A lower percentage report using piped water
for drinking: 35% of households use piped water in the compound for drinking, while 2% have internal piped
water. A further 8% of households access piped water from a neighbour
10
improved toilet facilities10. Over 40% of households share their toilet with another household; the
census does not gather data on how many households share the toilet. Census data highlights the
significant environmental challenge of sewage disposal with more than 40% of households disposing
of sewage in a non-environmentally friendly fashion11. As cities continue to densify, this challenge will
become more acute.
Chart 4 Selected Access to service indicators for households who live in high density (proxy)
urban settlements
To identify households in high density (proxy) urban settlements who live in dwellings with a need for
re-development, upgrading or retrofit, a basic segmentation is presented in Chart 5 below. The first
segment includes households who live in dwellings constructed of non or semi-durable materials12
and do not have access to services (see detailed definition below chart). More than 30% of households
10
As per the SDG definitions this includes flush toilets as well as pit latrines with a slab. See SDG indicator
metadata available at Metadata-11-01-01.pdf (un.org)
11
Non-environmentally friendly sewage disposal includes disposal Into the courtyard, Bush, In the street, Sump,
or Rivulet/ trench/ Channels
12
This includes if the walls, or roof or floor of the dwelling are categorised a non or semi-durable
11
in spontaneous/ squatter or unplanned areas fall into this segment as do 28% of households in
planned areas. Another significant segment is made up of households who live in durable dwellings,
but do not have access to adequate services including environmentally friendly waste and sewage
disposal (28% of households in unplanned areas and 25% of households in planned areas). Fewer than
40% of households in planned areas appear to need no, or limited, additional investment. These
households live in dwellings that are made of durable materials, have adequate access to services and
are not over-crowded.
Chart 5 Segmentation of households in high density (proxy) urban settlements based on

dwelling conditions and access to services

Non-durable or semi-durable is when the roof OR wall OR floor are made of non or semi durable materials (see Chart 4
above for classification)
Inadequate services are when the drinking water source, sanitation type, waste disposal OR sewage disposal are
inadequate:
Inadequate drinking water source: lake/stream/pond/stream/irrigation channel/surface water, protected/unprotected
spring/well, rain water, tanker truck, tube well/borehole
Inadequate sanitation: bush, pit latrine without slab used by one or several households
Inadequate waste disposal: burnt, river/stream/drain/gutter, thrown in households fields or bushes
Inadequate sewage disposal: courtyard, bush, sump, rivulet/trench/channels, in the street
Tenure
Roughly 53% of households in higher density (proxy) urban settlements equating to around 395 000
households rent their dwellings, overwhelmingly from other households. The prevalence of rental is
higher in Kigali at 67%. It is noteworthy that 72% of recent adult migrants13 rent their dwellings.
According to the census, 12% of households in high density (proxy) urban settlements who rent also
own another property. We have no data on where this property is located, nor is there data to assess
whether these renter households are at the same time investing in that other property, although this
appears to be a common practice.
13
Recent adults migrants have migrated across districts within the past five years and were between the ages
of 16 and 64 at the time they migrated. The analysis of migrants excludes those who migrated between districts
of Kigali
12
While the census does not contain data on actual rentals paid, assuming that households who rent
pay an average rental of RWF 23 000 per month14, the total income generated by landlords in high
density (proxy) urban settlements (who are overwhelmingly small-scale household landlords) is
roughly RWF 9 Billion per month. This is a significant amount that underscores the direct role that
rental housing plays not only in the supply of housing in Rwanda’s cities but critically, in income
generation. The growth in the number of households who rent their dwellings is marked; across the
country as a whole there were around 360 000 renter households in 2012 compared to 735 000 in
2022. Rental, and particularly affordable backyard rental accommodation provided by small scale
household landlords who live on larger plots in planned areas is likely to continue to grow as more
people urbanise and as cities limit the growth of squatter housing in unplanned settlements. As
densities rise, the provision of services, particularly sanitation and sewage disposal, becomes even
more critical.
Housing conditions for renters in higher density (proxy) urban settlements are noticeably different
from owners as per Chart 6 below. The proportion of renter households living in dwellings made from
non or semi-durable materials and without access to adequate services at 18% is lower than that of
owner households (40%). On the other end of the spectrum, 43% of renter households live in dwellings
made from durable materials, have adequate access to services and are not overcrowded compared
to just 28% of owner households
Chart 6 Segmentation of renter versus owner households in high density (proxy) urban
settlements based on dwelling conditions and access to services
14
Based on median rental paid by urban households in EICV 5, inflated to June 2022
13
Household incomes
A household income distribution has been estimated using expenditure data from the EICV 5 survey
inflated to June 2022 using the CPI. The total number of urban households has been increased to
match Census 2022.
Chart 7 Estimated net monthly income15 for urban households (964 000 urban households)
Source: EICV 5 (inflation-adjusted expenditures to June 2022), total number of urban households based on Census 2022
published tables
An estimated 30% of households have a net monthly household income of below RWF 100 000 and a
further 27% of household have a monthly income of between RWF 100 000 and RWF 200 000 per
month. On the other end of the income scale there are around 30 000 urban households with a
household income of more than RWF 1 million (3% of urban households). We note that inflation-
adjusted incomes may well over-state actual incomes, which may not have kept pace with recently
recorded high rates of inflation.
Individual incomes
To improve our understanding of affordability, we have analysed data on monthly pensionable

incomes from the Rwanda Social Security Board (RSSB) for the period July 2015 to June 2022. This data
provides an overview of the number of formally employed individuals16 in Rwanda and allows for a
detailed exploration of how salaries have changed over the past seven years.
According to RSSB data, the number of formally employed individuals has increased steadily, despite
a noticeable drop mid-2020 due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Over the seven-year period between July
2015 and June 2022 the number of individuals contributing to the RSSB increased by over 170 000, a
51% increase or a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 6.2%, as shown in chart 2 below.
15
Based on EICV household expenditure inflated to June 2022. The total number of urban households has been
inflated to match Census 2022
16
Pension contributions are mandatory for all salaried workers as well as active political representatives. In
addition those not mandated to contribute can voluntarily contribute to the scheme
14
Chart 8 Number of employees contributing to the RSSB pension fund per month (July 2015 –
June 2022)
Source: Data on pensionable incomes provided by RSSB
In May 2022, 45% of formally employed individuals were employed in the public or mixed sector and
55% were employed in the private sector. The segments most impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic
were younger private sector workers (aged below 35 years) with private sector workers aged between
35 and 54 also visibly impacted. There was a noticeable increase in young public sector workers during
that period. Many of these workers may have taken on temporary jobs associated with the
management of the Covid-19 pandemic. Employment appears to have stabilised in 2021 and grew in
the first half of 2022.
Chart 9 Number of employees contributing to the RSSB pension fund per month per sector and
age segment (July 2015 – June 2022)
Individuals enter and exit the formal labour market on an on-going basis. To better understand labour
market dynamics a six-month (half yearly) view is shown in Chart 9 below. Between the first half of
15
2016 (H1 2016) and the first half of 2022 (H1 2022), the number of unique individuals who contribute
to the RSSB at least once in the six-month period increased from roughly 411 000 to 594 000.17
Chart 10 Number of unique individuals who contributed to the RSSB per half year
In order to understand dynamics in the formal labour market, the RSSB data was used to segment
workers into a number of categories;
New joiners who stay – not seen in the past (i.e., seen for the first time in the period), but who are
visible in the data in the future
New joiners who leave – not seen in the past (i.e., see for the first time in the period), but who are
not seen again in the future. These employees appear to dip into the formal market and then leave
Permanent employees – seen previously and present in the full six months over the period, and
remain in employment going forward (albeit not necessarily every month)
Seasonal/ Occasional employees– seen previously and present in between one and five months in
the period (i.e., not present in all six months), and remain visible in the data in the future (albeit not
necessarily in every month)
Leavers – seen previously, but not seen in future months
Because the analysis requires data going forward, the time series stops in H2 2021, with data for H1
2022 segmented only into new employees and those who are previously seen.
17
We note this rising trend is not reflected in the Labour Force Survey which indicates that the number of
employees contributing to the RSSB fell noticeably in 2020 and remained lower in 2021 compared to 2019.
Likewise the LFS indicates that employment in the formal sector rose steadily between 2016 and 2019, but fell
significantly in 2021 (from roughly 525 000 in 2019 to 429 000 in 2021). This may reflect the impact of Covid on
employment as reflected in survey data, with some furloughed workers who remained on the payroll regarded
by the survey as unemployed. They non-active employees who have not worked (and who would respond as
such in the survey) would still appear in the administrative data.
16
Chart 11 Labour market dynamics (2016 H1 – 2022 H1, data labels in thousands)
The number of new joiners has increased, with a noticeable spike in the second half of 2020 (H2 2020)
in the number of first-time employed who are present in that period, but who are never seen again.
As noted, many of these workers may have taken on temporary jobs associated with the management
of the Covid-19 pandemic. The growth in the number of leavers is likely to be technical – reflecting a
shorter window in the available data as we approach the end of the sample period. It is possible that
some will re-join the formal labour market in the future. The growth in the number of permanent
employees is encouraging as is the number of new joiners in H1 2022.
Even within the formal sector, borrowers who do not have a stable track record of employment might
be unable to access credit. Of the 594 000 formal employees that are visible in RSSB data in H1 2022,
only 64% are visible in each of the preceding six months with the remaining 38% not present in one or
more months in that six-month window. It is unlikely these employees would be able to access housing
finance from a bank given the magnitude and tenure required for the construction or purchase of a
dwelling.
The net income distribution for formal employees who contributed to the RSSB in May 2022 is shown
below. More than 40% earned a net income of less than RWF 50 000. Two thirds of these low-wage
earners are less than 35 years old (39% are young private sector workers and 27% are young public
sector workers). Just 11 500 formally employed people had an income of over RWF 1 million in May
2022 or 2% of all individuals who contributed to the RSSB. Two thirds of these high-income earners
are in the private sector.
17
Chart 12 Monthly net income group for formally employed individuals who contributed to the
RSSB in May 2022 (522 400 individuals, data labels in thousands)
While the number of formal employees has been growing, there is limited evidence of rising wages.
Chart 12 below shows the change in the inflation-adjusted and nominal median wage over time. While
the nominal median wage has been growing, when inflation is taken into account there has been no
growth over the period. This phenomenon is consistent with the growth in new joiners who typically
earn lower wages.
Chart 13 Trend in median wage over time (nominal and inflation adjusted)
While nominal median incomes have grown slowly, there has been a noticeable increase in the
number of employees with a net income of more than RWF 500 000 per month in nominal terms which
doubled from 16 000 individuals in May 2016 to 31 000 in May 2022.
18
Chart 14 Trend in monthly net income group for formally employed people who contributed to
the RSSB in May of each year (nominal incomes, data labels in thousands of individuals)
Historical data from the RSSB on pensionable incomes has been used to forecast the number of formal
employees and their net income to 203518. The forecasting is based on nominal incomes (i.e. incomes
that are not adjusted for inflation). The number of formally employed individuals per income group is
shown in Chart 14 below. The month of May has been shown in each year between 2016 and 2035.
Note that data labels indicate the number of formally employed individuals in thousands.
18
These projections use Prophet forecasting as well as ARIMA-based modelling to capture historical trends and
project incomes forward. Prophet is a forecasting tool developed by Facebook that uses a decomposable time
series model with three main components: trend, seasonality, and holidays. It can handle a wide range of time
series data, including those with missing values, changes in trend, and outliers. Additionally, Prophet can model
logistic trends for saturation, which can be useful for forecasting trends with a decreasing projection. Prophet
uses a Bayesian approach for parameter and uncertainty estimation. On the other hand, ARIMA (AutoRegressive
Integrated Moving Average) is a statistical model that uses past values of a time series to predict future values.
ARIMA models are based on three components: auto-regression (AR), differencing (I), and moving average (MA).
The results of both models were compared and the average was used to create the forecast.
19
Chart 15 Forecast of formally employed per monthly income group in nominal terms (data
labels in thousands of individuals)
Source: Historical data on pensionable incomes provided by RSSB
Based on the forecast, we expect the number of formally employed individuals who contribute to the
RSSB to increase from 522 000 in May 2022, to 637 000 in May 2025, and then to 756 000 in May
2030, and 865 000 in May 2035. This results in a compound annual growth rate of 4% between 2016
and 2035. The private sector is expected to grow faster between 2022 and 2035 compared to the
public and mixed sector, where growth is expected to start to taper with compound annual growth
rates of 4.9% and 2.6% respectively.
The number of individuals with a formal income of more than RWF 500 000 per month in nominal
terms is expected to more than double from just over 30 000 individuals in 2022 to 75 000 individuals
in 2035. Individuals with an income of more than RWF 500 000 will increase from 6% of individuals
who contributed to the RSSB in May 2022 to 9% of individuals who contribute in May 2035.
While the number of high-income individuals is expected to increase, so too will low-wage earners.
While the rate of growth for those earning less than RWF 200 000 per month is slower than higher
earning individuals, their numbers will continue to increase so that by May 2035 we expect over 680
000 formally employed individuals will have a monthly income of less than RWF 200 000 per month.
Six segments based on age (less than 35 years, 35 – 54 years and 55 years and more) as well as sector
(private and public including mixed sector) are shown in Chart 15 below. The fastest growth is
expected to come from private sector employees aged less than 35 with strong growth in the segment
aged between 35 and 54. The number of high-earning individuals in these two segments is also
expected to increase significantly.
20
Chart 16 Forecast of formally employed segments per monthly net income group in nominal
terms (data labels in thousands of individuals)
Source: Historical data on pensionable incomes provided by RSSB
According to the Labour Force Survey 2021, just 11% of urban households in Rwanda include at least
one formally employed person. This is likely understated as the LFS 2021 reports fewer formally
employed people compared to the RSSB (430 000 versus 486 000 individuals who contributed to the
RSSB in May 2021). Most households with a formally employed person contain just one formal wage
earner (73%), 24% have two formally employed people and 3% have three or more formally employed
household members.
Chart 17 Urban households with at least one formally employed person
Source: Labour Force Survey (LFS) 2021
21
Box: Geographic variation in demand conditions – a focus on Kigali
There is some geographic variation across the main urban centres with regards to housing need,
tenure and incomes. Households living in high density (proxy) urban settlements in Kigali are
noticeably better off than other urban centres. A current profile of the income distribution and
housing conditions for households living in these high density settlements in Kigali is provided in Chart
18 below with similar profiles for selected other districts provided in the appendix.19
The majority of households living in high density (proxy) settlements in Kigali rent their dwelling (67%),
however 12% of renters own a housing unit in their village or elsewhere. While most households live
in formal dwellings, access to flush toilets is limited (17% of households use a flush toilet) and just 3%
say their main source of drinking water is piped into their dwelling.
While households living in high density (proxy) urban settlements in Kigali have noticeably higher
incomes that other districts, just 22% would be able to afford a property of RWF 8 million financed
with a mortgage.
According to the NLA, there are just over 211 000 residential properties in Kigali. It is noteworthy that
roughly 10% of them have transacted in the past 12 months indicating a very active property market.
19
See Appendix A for profiles for satellite and secondary cities.
22
Chart 18 Housing market profile for urban households in Kigali20
20
Housing market profiles for other urban areas are included in APPENDIX A of this report.
23
3. SEGMENTATION AND HOUSING JOURNEYS IN EACH SEGMENT
Market segmentation is the process of dividing the market into smaller groups of individuals with
similar needs or characteristics. This allows for a more refined understanding of the market, the
identification of specific needs and gaps, and the mechanisms to close these gaps either through
market provision, government support or a combination of both.
The segmentation below is based on the analysis of administrative data and EICV5 data, augmented
with primary research conducted by Kigwa Consulting. A total of 958 intercept surveys were
conducted targeting those with an income of less than RWF 500 000 and included security guards,
informal workers, factory workers as well as teachers and nurses. In addition, three focus groups were
conducted with individuals who earn more than RWF 500 000.
In line with the segmentation used in the Baselines Report, the basis of segmentation is household
income. The segments are defined as follows:
Low income earners: Household income of less than RWF200 000 per month. Within this we include
a focus on households with very low incomes (less than RWF100 000 per month)
Middle income earners: Households who earn between RWF200 000 and RWF500 000 per month
Higher earners who earn more than RWF500 000
These household income-based segments align with household incomes of various livelihood groups
interviewed as part of the primary research. Low wage formal income earners including security
guards and factory workers as well as the informal workers interviewed (mobile money agents, moto
drivers and informal business owners) tend to have household incomes below RWF 200 000 per
month. Key workers including teachers and nurses interviewed tend to have household incomes of
between RWF 200 000 and RWF 500 000. Professionals included in the focus group discussions have
household incomes of over RWF 500 000 per month.
Within each of these segments, we distinguish between renters and owners. Given the low levels of
mortgage penetration in Rwanda, most owners are likely to have equity in their properties which
fundamentally impacts on their affordability should they wish to trade up. Owners may also choose
to provide rental accommodation and generate an income from their properties.
The segments are sized using an estimate of incomes (inflated to June 2022) from the EICV 5 survey.
Unlike the analysis based on a 10% sample of the census data which relies on a proxy derived from
the NLUDMP to identify urban households, the segmentation described in this section relies on the
urban indicator as per the EICV data set, with the total urban market factored up to match the
published report of 2022 Census (964 000 urban households).
24
Chart 19 Urban household income segments (964 000 households in urban areas)
Source: EICV 5 and Census 2022
All segments are expected to grow significantly by 2035 as the population grows and households
continue to urbanise. The latest Census 2022 finding of 964 000 urban households aligns well with
Vision 2050 projections.21 Going forward, Vision 2050 estimates that there will be three million urban
households by 2035. This implies a 9% per annum growth rate in the number of urban households. In
line with the projection of formal income (included in Chapter 2 above), we expect household incomes
to increase similarly22. While we expect growth in all segments, higher income segments will grow at
a faster rate; the number high income households (earning RWF 500 000 and more) is expected to
double in less than 10 years, while the number of middle-income households (earning RWF 200 000 –
RWF 500 000) is expected to double within 15 years.
An overlay of housing need by income segment is provided in the chart below for urban areas.
Unsurprisingly housing need23 is most visible in lower income segments and specifically owner
households in these segments. For households in the lowest income segment (household income
below RWF 100 000 per month), 41% of renter households and 66% of owner households live in
dwellings constructed of non- or semi-durable materials and do not have adequate access to
services24. The proportion of households in this segment that appear to be adequately housed is low.
This is most notable for owner households, just 3% of whom live in dwellings that have access to
adequate services and are constructed from durable materials25.
Households in the highest income segment (household income of over RWF 500 000 per month), are
significantly more likely to be adequately housed (i.e. they live in dwellings constructed from durable
21 According to Census 2022 there are 964 000 urban households, with Vision 2050 projecting approximately 990 000
22
We note that it is difficult to predict how urban informal incomes may change in the future given the limited data available.
However, we have assumed that informal incomes and the number of informally employed will increase in line with formal
incomes projections discussed in Chapter 2 as the informal sector absorbs urban migrants and, based on the primary research
conducted as part of this study, can offer higher earnings than low-skilled formal employment opportunities
23
Based on area type, structure of the dwelling and access to services as described above
24
Non or semi-durable materials include if the roof or floor or walls are made from non or semi-durable materials. These
include: Roof – Plastic/plywood/impermanent materials, Thatch / leaves/grass, Walls – Mud bricks, Tree trunks with mud,
Tree trunks with mud and cement, Floor – Beaten earth, Hardened dung. Inadequate services include if the toilet facility or
main source of water are inadequate: Inadequate toilet facility includes - Pit latrine without slab, no toilet facility whatsoever,
inadequate water sources include – Springs, surface water or lake, Borehole, Tanker truck, Rainwater or wells
25
This includes materials for the floors
25
materials and have access to services). Over 90% of renter households in the top income segment and
85% of owner households fall into this category.
Chart 20 Household segments categorised by housing need
Source: EICV 5
A detailed overview per segment is included below.
Very low earners (urban households with income of less than RWF100 000 per month)
This segment currently makes up 30% of urban households. The graphic below characterises this
segment based on available data26. The segment is almost evenly split between renters and owners,
with a slight bias towards renters. As the data illustrates, housing conditions are poor, noticeably more
so for owner households. Within the renter segment, the dominant household type is a single person
household (30%). At least some of these tenants may be willing to share accommodation (if they are
not sharing already).
27
We note this is lower than the 41% of the segment who own according to the survey data. Based on housing
conditions it appears that many of those who own their house, own in unplanned settlements
26
Chart 21 Segment overview: Urban, very low earners (RWF 1 – 100k per month)
Few households in this segment have a formal income, and within that a very low percentage appear
to have stable income. Both affordability and bankability are therefore very limited. That said, over
130 000 households who earn less than RWF 100 000 per month (41%) own a property according to
the EICV. While there is no clear indicator in the data, it is plausible that many live in unplanned
27
settlements. For these households, it is not clear what the likely pathway to improvement is, and what
role they would be expected to play in the funding and development of solutions.
It appears however, that a noticeable minority own land in formal, planned areas; according to NLA
data, 22% of very low formal wage earners who are visible in the RSSB own land27. This land could be
leveraged to fund the development of rental stock. According to the EICV just 12% of households who
own their dwelling in this segment (irrespective of whether they live in unplanned or planned
settlements) report that they earn rental income. While the prevalence of landlordism may be
understated in survey data28, it is likely that there is scope for growth. Access to construction support
and finance underpinned by future rental income streams could enable the development of well-built
affordable rental accommodation in this and other segments of the market impacting positively on
landlord incomes and land use.
Key metrics for the segment are summarised below.
27
We note this is lower than the 41% of the segment who own according to the survey data. Based on housing
conditions it appears that many of those who own their house, own in unplanned settlements
28
Respondent landlords may understate rental market participation if they fear that data might be shared with
taxation authorities
28
Chart 22 Key affordability metrics: Urban, very low earners
Within this segment, household members often work in entry-level, low growth jobs in industries such
as private security and retailing. To explore housing conditions, affordability and preferences in this
29
segment, the project team conducted 131 intercept interviews with security guards. Findings of this
research are summarised below.
BOX 1: SECURITY GUARDS IN URBAN AREAS29
Security guards interviewed for this project are predominantly male. Half earn less than RWF 40, 000
per month with many reporting stagnant incomes; over 40% report they have never received a raise
even after being employed for over a year. One quarter believe they are unlikely to receive an increase
in the next two years.
Almost 70% of the security guards we interviewed rent their dwellings, with median rentals at
RWF17 000 per month and the median rent to income ratio at 25%. Living conditions are poor. Just
over 40% of those who rent live in a room or dwelling in a backyard and overcrowding is common30.
With the exception of electricity, access to services including sanitation and piped water is limited;
two thirds of tenants use a pit latrine without a slab and three quarters share their toilet with other
households, often sharing with more than ten other people.
Mobility appears to be high with half the respondents living in their dwellings for less than a year.
While the survey did not explore reasons for moving, over 60% of respondents indicated that if rents
increased by 5%, they would look for a cheaper alternative. Despite their difficult current
circumstances, many believe they will be living somewhere better in five years, and almost half think
they will own.
The number of low-earning, formally employed individuals such as security guards is significant.
According to RSSB data, in May 2022, 66% of the formal employees, or 345 000 individuals, had a net
personal income of less than RWF 100 000 per month. Just under 60% of these individuals are young
(under 35 years old) and just over half are employed in the private sector (58%).
Historical data from the RSSB can be used to forecast the number of low-earning formally employed
individuals to 203531. Based on the forecast, this segment will increase from 345 000 individuals in
May 2022 to 530 000 individuals in May 2035. The majority of the growth is expected to come from
the private sector which is expected to absorb young and low-skilled workers into the formal
workforce.
29
A more comprehensive summary of the findings of the primary research is included in Appendix B of this
report
30
Dwellings are considered to be over-crowded where there are three or more people per sleeping room
31
project incomes forward. The forecasting is based on nominal incomes (i.e. incomes that are not adjusted for
inflation).
30
Forecasted number of employees in the formal sector with a net personal income of less than RWF
100 000
(Data labels in thousands)
Low earners (urban households with an income of RWF100 000 to RWF200 000 per month)
There are an estimated 260 000 urban households in Rwanda with a monthly household income of
between RWF 100 000 and RWF 200 000. Just under 60% of these households rent their homes.
Compared to owners, a noticeably higher proportion of renters are single person households. As with
the lowest income segment, housing conditions for owners are noticeably worse than renters.
31
Chart 23 Segment overview: Urban, Low earners
32
Households in this segment could use their income together with other equity (savings or the proceeds
of the sale of an existing property) to purchase a new dwelling, to improve or redevelop an existing
dwelling and / or to provide rental accommodation. Likewise, as with the previous segment a
noticeable proportion of owners in this segment say that they are earning rental income. With some
additional support, these households could see their incomes increase significantly if they optimise
land use. Key metrics relating to affordability are summarised below.
Chart 24 Key affordability and bankability metrics: Urban, Low earners
33
Many workers in this segment are likely to see wage growth. A cohort analysis of RSSB data from 2016
indicates that roughly 61% of those earning between RWF100 000 and RWF200 00032 in 2016 saw an
increase in inflation adjusted income between 2016 and 2022 of more than 3% per annum. In addition,
the segment absorbs many young, new entrants into the formal labour market. It is likely that as
Rwanda’s manufacturing sector grows, this segment will provide an opportunity for greater
participation in the formal labour market, as well as progressively higher paying, more productive jobs.
Nevertheless, there is clearly a significant affordability gap, relative to the cost of the cheapest units
currently available (RWF8 million). It is unlikely that this gap can be closed by the adoption of solutions
that leverage new technologies and materials.
BOX 2: FACTORY WORKERS IN URBAN AREAS
As with security guards, the factory workers we interviewed are predominantly male. Incomes are
noticeably higher in this segment, with over half earning above RWF 100 000 per month. In addition,
incomes appear to be on an upward trajectory with almost 80% who have been employed for more
than a year having received a raise. Across the sample, the vast majority expect their incomes to
increase over the next two years.
Three quarters of interviewees rent their dwellings. While rentals paid are noticeably higher than
those paid by security guards, living conditions remain sub-standard. Backyard rooms or dwellings are
common and a fifth live in over-crowded conditions. Many make use of unimproved sanitation
solutions, relying on pit latrines. Median rentals are RWF30 000, with rent to income ratios at 23%.
There appears to be some scope to absorb higher housing costs, with 60% of renters able afford an
increase of 5%.
They are positive about their future housing situations with 77% of factory workers believing that in
five years they would be living somewhere “better” and 60% thinking they will own.
According to the RSSB data, in May 2022 there were just under 90 000 individuals with a net personal
income between RWF 100 000 and RWF 200 000 per month. Almost 60% of these employees are in
the public or mixed sector and 42% are in the private sector.
Historical data from the RSSB can be used to forecast the number of formally employed individuals to
203533. Based on the forecast, this segment will increase from 88 000 individuals in May 2022 to 150
000 individuals in May 2035. The private sector is expected to grow faster than the public sector as
the manufacturing and construction sectors expand.
32
In 2022 RWFs. All wages have been inflated to 2022 using CPI
33
inflation).
34
Forecasted number of employees in the formal sector with a net income of between RWF 100 000
and RWF 200 000
As noted, a noticeable minority of households in this segment already owns a property in an urban
area, and could either improve their existing dwellings, or sell and buy up using a loan. However, this
is not feasible for owners in tenuous employment (including those in the informal sector) who are not
currently bankable, and it is obviously not a feasible option for 60% of the segment who do not own
and are likely to continue renting. Their ability to access good quality and well-serviced housing will
be constrained by the extent to which rental accommodation can be upgraded without resulting in
significant increases in rentals charged; as noted, many of those renting in this segment of the market
cannot afford even relatively low increases in rents charged.
BOX 3: THE INFORMAL SECTOR
According to the Labour Force Survey, there were over 2.7 million informal sector34 workers in Rwanda
in 2021, roughly half a million of whom were in urban areas. These workers include employers (with
regular employees), own account workers (without regular employees) as well as employees.
Informal employment is a significant contributor to urban household incomes in Rwanda. Based on
survey data, it appears that less than 15% of urban households have a formal income source35, with
the vast majority of households reliant on informal income streams only. The informal sector provides
employment opportunities for the recently urbanised. It is therefore imperative to consider solutions
that meet the housing needs of this segment of the market.
It is difficult to predict how the number of informal workers may change in the future as the incentives
for workers and employers to comply with requirements to join the formal sector may change
34
According to the NISR, “employment in the informal sector was defined as all persons 16 years of age and over
who were engaged in unregistered private business enterprises that did not keep written record of accounts.
Unregistration meant not registered with the Rwanda Revenue Authority or not paying PAYE/TPR.” The NISR
distinguishes between the informal sector and informal employment, which is determined by the conditions of
work rather than the nature of the enterprise. See Labour Force Survey 2016, NISR, August 2016
35
According ot the Labour Force Survey 2021, just 11% of urban households had at least one formally employed
individual. However, the LFS undercounts the number of formally employed individuals when compared to the
number of formally employed individuals contributing to the RSSB in the same period
35
significantly36. That said, if the sector is not subject to any major interventions over the next 20 years,
it is likely to grow in-line with the formal sector.
As part of this study, we interviewed 118 mobile money agents37, 144 moto drivers38 and 92 informal
merchants39 to understand their housing conditions and assess affordability.
Respondent incomes vary, with most respondents reporting a household income of more than RWF
100 000 per month (71%). The median monthly household income reported is RWF 120 000.
Respondent personal incomes varied significantly, with the median income at RWF90 000. Eleven per
cent earn more than RWF200 000. This income profile is higher than those in low-skilled formal
employment making the sector attractive.
There is no nationally representative data against which to assess these findings. However, give the
significant size of the segment, even if only 6% of those in the informal sector earn more than
RWF200 000, the absolute number of workers employed in the informal sector earning RWF200 000
would be greater than the corresponding number with formal incomes. Providing these individuals
who have some capacity to save and/or repay debt with appropriate financial mechanisms to finance
the purchase or construction of a house is clearly critical.
Over 60% of respondents rent their dwellings. The median rental is RWF 27 000 per month,
corresponding to a 27% rent to income ratio. As with other respondents, a room or dwelling in the
backyard was the most common dwelling type. Access to services is limited; almost 60% use a pit
latrine without a slab and 71% share their toilet with a non-household member. There is some, albeit
limited, capacity to pay additional rent within this group; half the respondents said they that if their
rent went up by 5% they would pay more.
Over 70% believe they will own a property in five years. According to other research conducted with
Moto drivers in 202040, “30% of moto drivers indicated that buying or building a home was the top
36
These include exemptions from or amendments to costly and time-consuming processes, tax exemptions and
subsidies for formalised businesses, as well as crack downs on informal businesses. With regard to the latter,
there are many examples across Africa, including in Uganda, Tanzania, Kenya, Nigeria and Zimbabwe among
others.
37
There were 50 000 MTN Momo and airtime agents in 2021 according to MTN Rwanda’s Integrated Annual
Report 2021. See https://www.mtn.co.rw/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/MTN-Rwanda-Integrated-Report-
Final.pdf
38
There were an estimated 35 000 Moto drivers in Rwanda in 2020. See: E-hailing platforms as distributors of
financial services in Rwanda. Case study: Yego, May 2020, by Mia Thom, Kate Rinehart-Smit, Fabrice
Gatwabuyege of Cenfri available at https://cenfri.org/wp-content/uploads/E-hailing-platforms-as-distributors-
of-financial-services-in-Rwanda-1.pdf
39
According to the 2021 Labour Force Survey there are roughly 150 000 individuals who own informal retailing
enterprises. These are own account workers or employers in the informal sector who work as shopkeepers or
food vendors. Specific ISCO names as per the survey data include Bartenders, Butchers, fishmongers and related
food preparers, Cooks, Fast food preparers, Food service counter attendants, Sales workers not elsewhere
classified, Shop keepers, Shop sales assistants, Shop supervisors, Street food salespersons and
Street vendors (excluding food). According to MTN, 60 000 of these merchants are registered as Momo
Merchants See https://mtn.co.rw/mobile-money-rwanda-ltd-kicks-off-2022-with-an-exciting-new-campaign-
biva-
momotima/#:~:text=About%20Mobile%20Money%20Rwanda%20Ltd&text=The%20company%20has%20over
%2030%2C000,MoMoPay%20merchants%20across%20the%20country
40
Source: E-hailing platforms as distributors of financial services in Rwanda. Case study: Yego, cited above.
36
financial goal they wanted to achieve in the next two years”, higher even than the purchase of a vehicle
(cited by 23%).
Roughly a third of the respondents own their dwellings. Informal workers that own their dwellings
either purchased (45%) or built (38%) them. However, the use of credit is limited with 80% using
savings. The dwellings that these respondents own are most commonly stand-alone single (77%) or
multi (19%) storey houses. Like informal sector workers who rent, owners also predominantly use pit
latrines, although a noticeably lower proportion share. Road infrastructure is poor, with many having
either no road access or very poor access.
While access to credit is currently constrained for this segment, this may shift as more informal
business owners digitise their businesses and expand their data footprints. Rwanda is committed to
accelerating the digitalisation of its economy in general, and of payments in particular. MomoPay,
MTN’s mobile money solution for merchants has seen rapid take up. Latest data published by MTN
indicates it has more than 60 000 registered merchants in Rwanda, and 3.7 million active mobile
money users41.
As more transactions are digitised, it becomes possible for financial services providers (FSPs) to
characterise opportunities and assess risks associated with small businesses, be they in the formal or
informal sectors. In addition, because businesses have bank or mobile money accounts, lenders can
deduct instalments or premiums cheaply and reliably. This reduces both credit and operational risk in
a segment of the market that is currently difficult to serve.
In order to facilitate lending to small businesses and to ensure that there is competition, it is critical
that a wide cross-section of FSPs can access both the data and payment collection mechanisms.
Ideally, access to data should be enabled through existing credit information sharing infrastructure
maintained by the National Bank of Rwanda (NBR) and registered credit reference bureaus. In
addition, emerging self-sovereign identity solutions can enable business owners to control their data
and share it securely with third parties including lenders and insurers. Likewise, FSPs need to access
business owners’ bank or mobile money accounts efficiently, irrespective of the account holding
institution. Recent implementation of initiatives to enable full interoperability across banks and
mobile money providers in Rwanda should go some way to enabling this.
Middle income households (urban households with income between RWF 200 000 and RWF 500 000
per month)
There are 290 000 households in this segment. This segment of the market contains many skilled, key
workers, including teachers and nurses, whose wages are likely to continue growing in inflation-
adjusted terms. Despite their relatively high wages in the Rwandan context, survey data as well as
primary research conducted as part of this study indicates that, as with those in lower income
segments, housing conditions are poor and access to services is limited.
More than 40% of this segment owns their dwelling. There appears to be only marginal differences
between living conditions for owners and renters, as illustrated below. It is noteworthy that a
significant proportion of households in this segment (both renters and owners) provide
accommodation for a live-in domestic worker.
41
As at the end of the 2021 fiscal year. See MTN Rwanda’s Integrated Annual Report 2021
37
Chart 25 Segment overview: Urban, Middle-income earners
38
There is capacity to leverage finance in this segment, with many formal wage earners owning
properties that could be further developed or sold to fund the purchase of another property. Despite
this, mortgage penetration is low. As per the affordability estimates in the graphic below, higher
earning households in this segment, even those who rent and have no equity, may well be able to
afford a newly built, entry level property. In addition, a significant portion of owners in this segment
say they earn income from rental. There is potential for these landlords to further develop their
properties and for additional households to provide rental accommodation.
39
Chart 26 Key affordability and bankability metrics: Urban, Middle-income earners
40
BOX 4: TEACHERS AND NURSES
The team interviewed 154 teachers and 143 nurses. Over half earn above RWF 165 000 per month. Of
those who have been employed for at least one year, 70% had received a pay increase, and many
expect to see further increases in the future. Their median monthly household income is RWF 250
000.
While ownership is more common compared to the other segments interviewed, most respondents
rent. While renters predominantly live in a dwellings on a self-standing plot (single or multi-storey), a
sizeable minority rent backyard dwellings. The median rent to income ratio is 23%. More than half of
teachers and nurses have capacity to pay additional rent and would not be forced to relocate if their
rents increased by 5%. Nevertheless, access to services remains poor. Less than a third have access to
a flush toilet, over 40% share their toilet with another household and only 9% say they have piped
water in their dwellings.
A considerable percentage (40%) of teachers and nurses own their dwellings with a majority having
bought (59%). A third built and only 7% say they inherited. Many relied on credit provided by banks
or MFIs and non-umurenge SACCOs. Use of savings is also common.
Owners have better access to services compared to those that rent. Only 9% share their toilet facility
with a non-household member. However, access to a flush toilet (31%) is still limited and pit latrines
remain common. Moreover, road infrastructure is inadequate; over 10% of the respondents said that
they have no road access and a further 22% rate road access poorly.
According to the RSSB data, in May 2022 there were just under 60 000 individuals with a net personal
income between RWF 200 000 and RWF 500 000 per month. Around half are employed in the private
sector and half employed in the public and mixed sectors.
203542. Based on the forecast, this segment will increase from 58 000 individuals in May 2022 to 106
000 individuals in May 2035.
Forecasted number of employees in the formal sector with a net income of between RWF 200 000
and RWF 500 000
42
inflation).
41
High income households (urban households with income above RWF 500 000 per month)
This segment of the market comprises an estimated 120 000 households. Over half of which own their
properties. Housing conditions for both owners and renters are noticeably better than lower earning
households although it is noteworthy that only half of owners in the segment have access to a flush
toilet.
Households in this segment are relatively large and the majority have a live-in domestic worker.
42
Chart 27 Segment overview: Urban, High-income earners
43
The majority of households in this segment are likely to be bankable (there is a formally employed
person in the household with a stable employment history) and affordability aligns with price points
of new, entry level stock that is in the pipeline. However, despite high levels of property ownership,
bankability and affordability, mortgage penetration remains low.
Chart 28 Key affordability and bankability metrics: Urban, High-income earners
44
To understand preferences and perceptions of this segment in more detail, two focus groups were
conducted in Kigali and Muhanga. Findings of focus group research are summarised in the box below.
BOX 6: HIGH INCOME, URBAN DWELLERS
According to the RSSB data, in May 2022 there were 31 000 individuals with a net personal income of
RWF 500 000 or more per month. Two thirds are employed in the private sector and 73% are aged 35
and above.
203543. Based on the forecast, this segment will more than double from 31 000 individuals in May
2022 to 75 000 individuals in May 2035, with almost all growth from the private sector.
Forecasted number of employees in the formal sector with a net income of RWF 500 000 or more
Two focus groups were conducted, one in Kigali and the other in Muhanga44, with individuals with
monthly personal incomes of between RWF 500 000 and RWF 700 000, and similar household income
ranges. Respondents’ occupations and employers ranged from public servants, administrators,
nurses, bank employees, as well as individuals working for Rwanda Energy Group and RwandaAir.
Almost all respondents were renting and most were aged 40 or less. Rentals ranged from RWF 80 000
– 200 000 a month with additional utilities expenses ranging from RWF7 000 – 20 000 a month.
Household compositions varied in the group; most are nuclear families (married with children), but
there were also married couples with no children, and single individuals.
The majority of individuals live in single-storey houses, most commonly with three bedrooms and a
separate living room, either on a self-contained plot or in a compound with other tenants (often with
fences separating dwelling units). In some cases, the kitchen and toilet were outside the dwelling unit.
Most participants have domestic workers or house help, who live in a separate outside room or inside
the same dwelling. Examples of the different housing typologies that emerged in the groups are
included below.
43
inflation).
44
Two additional focus groups have been conducted with respondents in the high-income segment, one in Kigali
and one in Musanze. However the transcripts were not available in time to be included in this report
45
The focus group findings highlighted six key themes:
1. Perceptions of higher density typologies were mostly positive with respondents linking living in an
apartment with improved access to public services and facilities. But private entrances are important,
as are other practical considerations (space to dry laundry, good ventilation)
“Privacy is crucial, I would trade a square meter on the rooms to get it” – Kigali FG
2. Quality of construction is important, but respondents don’t particularly mind if materials are
‘Made in Rwanda’ or imported
“As long as the houses are well built, I see no problem with using Made in Rwanda” – Kigali FG
3. Despite similar income levels, perceptions of what is ‘affordable’ differed in the group. Some
commented that ‘affordable’ houses are in the range of RWF 5 million, one respondent spoke about
their plans to build for RWF 10 – 20 million (including the cost of land), while others said anything less
than RWF 20 – 25 million would be good
4. Perceptions of mortgages were generally positive with some commenting that monthly mortgage
repayments may be lower than their current rentals. Key concerns with bank loans include high
interest rates and risk of default due to unstable jobs
5. Long-term housing visions commonly relate to building incrementally. Some have already started
on this journey – they have purchased plots and are waiting to accumulate the funds to start building
or to put down as a deposit for a bank loan.
“Saving for building is not easy. I will use a loan, not a big loan. I can build in instalments and move in
it before finishing it. In 5 years, I will be able to have it. I want a small, nice house, I don’t plan to have
many children, 3 bedrooms, kitchen, stock, living room, if possible, a toilet for each room but for the
moment the measures used do not allow for it as we do small houses. It will cost 10 to 20M, with the
land. I would buy the land first; it may increase but as I plan to build slowly, I can start with 6 million.”
– Muhanga FG
“I have already started, I own two plots, but I don’t want to use bank money. So, I plan to build a small
house and move in it and save the rental money I’m paying now to start build 8 years from now. If I
get 5M I will start, the issue with the bank money is that if the work stops it would be difficult to do.”
– Muhanga FG
46
6. Those who are considering buying a unit want a fully finished unit. Respondents would prefer to
pay more to access a fully finished unit particularly if they are going to finance the purchase of the
dwelling with a mortgage or other loan.
47
4. HOUSING SUPPLY: A HIGH-LEVEL OVERVIEW
There is no consolidated source of data on the number of housing starts or completions in Rwanda.
However, available data from various sources indicates formal delivery is very limited.
A broad market scan covering both affordable and higher priced units delivered by large as well as
small scale developers conducted in 202145 found that just 1 862 units had been completed over the
period 2013 to 2020, with a further 9 173 units in the pipeline. Likewise, an Aide Memoire for the
Housing Finance Project prepared by the World Bank indicates a pipeline of 6 677 affordable units46
in large developments.
An analysis of the Building Permit Management Information System (BPMIS) data which includes all
formal construction activity indicates that development applications for just under 8 500 units47 were
submitted in Kigali between January and September 2022, mostly in areas zoned for lower densities.
Over the period January 2013 to September 2022, development applications were submitted for
63 815 residential units, significantly below the required output.
A comparison of 2012 and 2022 census data indicates that the number of households living in habitat
types defined as ‘planned urban areas’ in Kigali increased by 181 000 over the ten-year period48. There
was a significant increase in the number of households in Kigali who live in a house occupied by one
household (from 168 000 households in 2012 to 300 000 households in 2022). This increase of over
100 000 units over the ten-year period appears to be higher than planning applications received by
the City.49
Rwanda’s National Land Use Development Master Plan (NLUDMP) proposes a move to high-density
living in its urban centres. The arguments in favour of densification include maximising the benefits
gained from infrastructure investment and environmental protection of Rwanda’s wetlands and hilly
terrain. This shift is not yet apparent. According to the census, the number of households who live in
storied buildings in planned areas increased from 1 320 households in 2012 to 3 970 households in
2022, 2 080 of which are occupied by a single household.
The ability of the housing market to deliver on this objective will require, amongst other things, the
reworking of existing supply chains to accommodate high-rise typologies and the re-parcelling of land
to accommodate the higher densities outlined in respective city Zoning Regulations. Several
challenges related to this have been identified, with the cost of delivering these units to Rwanda’s
predominantly low-income population being among the most acute. The current constraints, resulting
impact on affordability and opportunities across the entire housing delivery value chain are
summarised in Table 2 below.
45
Source: Scoping Rwanda’s Affordable Housing Sector and its Financing, Access to Finance Rwanda, 2021,
available at https://afr.rw/downloads/scoping-rwandas-affordable-housing-sector-and-its-financing/
46
The affordable units are below 80m2 and have a construction cost of less than RWF500 000 per m2
47
The data on number of units was not well populated, and might therefore be inaccurate. We cannot assess
whether it is too low or too high.
48
This is based on dwellings in area types classified by respondents as ‘Planned Urban Housing’ in the 2012
census and ‘Modern planned urban area’ in the 2022 census
49
At the same time the number who share a dwelling with other households increased from under 100 000
households in 2012 to 167 000 households in 2022.
48
Table 1. Rwanda Housing Value Chain: Context Constraints, Impact on Affordability and Opportunities for Sector Growth
Table 1: Rwanda Housing Value Chain: Context Constraints, Impact on Affordability and Opportunities for Sector Growth (continued)
50
Table 1: Rwanda Housing Value Chain: Context Constraints, Impact on Affordability and Opportunities for Sector Growth (continued)
NOTE: Appendix 2 includes 2 case studies concerning offtake guarantees in the provision of affordable housing. (Kajom Capital and Family Homes Fund)
Focus on the household-developer opportunity
Previous studies have identified five main developer types and the role they play in delivering
affordable, well-located housing units50. These are summarized in the table below and serve as the
basis for the development scenario analyses conducted by WS2.
Table 2: Five main developer types
Household-developers are broadly defined as individuals who currently own properties who have
some capacity to redevelop or densify their plots. The household-landlord developer model is of
particular interest given its ability to deliver at scale and the critical role it can play in shaping urban
development in the future. It is critical that this process is supported to ensure that the quality of
housing that is developed aligns with a minimum standard, that neighborhoods develop coherently
and that the key risks of higher densities (including congestion and lack of sanitation) are adequately
mitigated.
To gain a better understanding of this market, thirty-four interviews were conducted with
respondents living in Gasabo district, in areas zoned for high density in Kigali. Twenty one of the thirty-
four respondents were males, and the average age across all respondents was 44 years old.
50
See Scoping Rwanda’s Affordable Housing Sector and its Financing, Access to Finance Rwanda, 2021, available
at https://afr.rw/downloads/scoping-rwandas-affordable-housing-sector-and-its-financing/
52
All respondents reported owning their properties with title51 and the majority were the primary
decision makers for their properties (26 of the 34 respondents). The interviews captured basic
demographic and dwelling characteristics and explored owners’ awareness of the NLUDMP and the
Kigali City Master Plan and perceptions of densification and related topics such as zoning. Discussions
also explored their views on developing their land, and general housing visions.
Awareness of the NLUDMP and Kigali City Master Plan was high – 59% and 76% of respondents said
they had heard of the NLUDMP and Kigali City Master Plan respectively. However, there was some
confusion about what densification means.
Question: Can you explain what densification means?
Respondent: It means living on the street where houses are very close and many on small land
with no open space e.g. play ground or public gardens.
Respondent: To live in area which is surrounded by cheap houses.
Many respondents also expressed negative connotations with the word “densification” – 19 of the 34
respondents associated “densification” with either “slums”, “unplanned settlements”, lack of zoning
or planning approvals, or areas for “people with low income”.
Awareness and understanding of the zoning for their area was also low. Only 15 of the 34 respondents
correctly identified the zone they live in (zone R2 or R3).
Among those that knew what zoning is and what is means for them, there were mixed views. The less
optimistic views reflected concerns about having to leave the area, while positive views focused on
improved infrastructure, potential for an increase in property values and income generation
opportunities.
Question: What does zoning mean for you and your property?
Respondent: Anytime they can come and move us from here because we are not capable of
building those R2 houses, and we have no other place we are familiar than here so it’s a
disadvantage to us.
Respondent: It means we are going to get 53odernized houses. Most importantly the value of
our house shall rise amazingly.
These findings suggest there is a need to raise community awareness and provide further information
and education on the practical implications for property owners as well as the potential opportunities
this presents for them as property owners in the area.
That said, when probed about their thoughts on development in the area, most expressed an
understanding of the need for it, both in their area and the country more broadly.
In addition, the majority (26 of the 34 respondents) say they have already thought about adding more
dwellings to their property. However, consolidating parcels of land with a neighbour is not regarded
as feasible – only 8 of the 34 respondents say they would consider this. Concerns of future conflict,
delineation of property rights, lack of trust and different financial positions were the most common
challenges that are anticipated.
51
Respondents were asked: “Do you have title to this property?”
53
While the majority of respondents were interested in developing their properties, there are three
main concerns including financing, technical expertise and tenant affordability.
With regards to financing many respondents were unsure how they could finance development:
Respondent: As current residents we don’t have the means to comply with the masterplan
unless we receive funds to do so
Respondent: : I am happy, but I am worried how it will be done especially financially
Most respondents said that they would source advice form experts if they were to develop their
properties. This included advice on building design, materials required and the cost and advice from
sector executives. However, some respondents said they would not get any advice or just rely on their
family members– this likely would increase the risk of inadequate buildings. There is some evidence
that this is already happening:
Question: What do you think about how your neighbours have developed their properties?
Respondent: Some of them earn money but build is not good condition
While most respondents were confident that if they built rental accommodation they would be able
to find tenants, a number of respondents noted that tenant affordability is a concern
Questions: Do you think there will be people to rent from you?
Respondent: Very few because of poor means
Respondents’ views on how long it would take to complete a multistory development are realistic and
illustrates a familiarity with the model of long-term incremental build. Most believe it would take at
least five years, with some commenting that it would take as long as 20 to 30 years to finish the
project. Others say they “can’t even dream of it”. This also reflects an inherent understanding of their
own financing constraints.
54
Respondents’ views on selling their properties to a developer are particularly interesting. The majority
(28 out of 34 respondents) say they would consider this, an interesting view in light of the possibility
that land values may well appreciate significantly in the future.
Most respondents say they believe their properties are worth RWF 20 million or less. Nine
respondents believe their properties are worth between RWF 21 – 50 million, while a minority (five
respondents) say their properties are worth more than RWF 50 million.
There is clearly an opportunity to encourage existing property owners to utilise their land more
efficiently. A combination of support and financial incentives to develop land zoned for higher
densities could accelerate and direct this process. Support could include access to information, advice
and professional services that could ensure the delivery of better quality, well financed stock. In
addition, a well-structured land and property taxation system would discourage speculative land
holding and ensure that land is put to it best use. Suggested reforms to Rwanda’s property taxes have
been highlighted by other studies, although it is not clear whether implementation is underway.52
Critically, the lack of city-wide sanitation solutions impose a significant cost burden on household
developers, and create material risk for cities as they are often poorly installed and maintained.
Finding practical solutions in this domain should be a priority.
52
See “Policy Brief: How data can improve property tax implementation in Rwanda” Jonathan Bower, Kaspar
Kundert, Patrick McSharry & Paul Brimble, March 2022
55
5. HOUSING FINANCE
Data from the National Land Authority can provide an indication of registered property ownership and
mortgage usage. According to that data there are 1.59 million unique individuals in Rwanda who own
at least one land parcel although it is not clear whether there is a dwelling on the land. Of these
individuals 77% jointly own or are part of a group of owners53 and 23% are single owners. According
to the NLA, 27 000 unique individuals have an active mortgage. This data can be overlaid on RSSB data
to determine patterns of property ownership and mortgage usage among households with at least
one formally employed person. Unsurprisingly, property ownership is more common in higher earning
segments, as is mortgage usage. However, the relatively low penetration of mortgages, even in higher
earning, bankable segments of the market is noteworthy.
Chart 29 Property indicators for households with at least one formal income54
Source: RSSB data, NLA data, households identified using LODA data
Low levels of mortgage or other forms of housing finance penetration may be as a result of a number
of factors, on both the demand and supply sides.
Demand-side factors include:
• Limited affordability: incomes are low and other expenses are high limiting income available
to service the loan; at the same time, land, infrastructure and construction costs are high,
putting the price of housing beyond affordability limits of many potential borrowers;
• Poor credit record and/or high credit indebtedness: many borrowers might already be over-
extended in terms of credit, or have a poor repayment record, or no record at all, making them
ineligible for mortgage finance
• Failure to meet the requirements of the product: while potential borrowers may be able to
afford monthly instalments, they might not have savings or equity for the deposit, or might
not have access to the title of the property and be able to offer it as collateral. They may not
be able to provide verifiable evidence of their income (for example, if they are informally or
53
Note, some of these individuals may also own land singly.
54
Note that property indicators developed off the NLA data are for the country as a whole and do not distinguish
between rural and urban areas, as this layer is not included in the data.
56
self-employed), or may not earn income every month (for example, if their employment is
seasonal). Households relying on two incomes to afford loan repayments might find they are
able to provide the necessary proof for one income, but not for both.
• Reticence to take on secured credit and risk losing the asset in the event of default: some
households prefer to finance their housing more gradually, fearing that if they access a
mortgage they risk losing their property in the case of default.
• Market inefficiencies and limited supply such that buyers who can afford the housing available
are not in need of credit and buy with cash, crowding out those who might afford the same
housing albeit only with a mortgage.
• Unfamiliarity with mortgage finance
While all these constraints might apply, it is clear from the data that limited affordability is a key
constraint. Based on the household income distribution for urban households in Rwanda (see Chart 7
in Section 2 above), a limited number of urban households can afford so-called affordable housing
stock currently on the market, despite government assistance provided to developers. The chart
below shows the estimated number of urban households who could afford selected units based on a
mortgage with an 11% interest rate and an 18% interest rate. Note that many of the households that
are able to afford these units may not be willing to purchase the new stock on offer. The actual market
of households both willing to purchase and able to afford would therefore be smaller than that shown
in the chart below.
Chart 30 Number of urban households who could afford select units currently available on the
55
market
Source: Estimated household incomes based on EICV 5 data inflated to June 2022. Total number of urban households inflated
to match Census 2022
Note: Assumes that households can put down a 10% deposit and can contribute 30% of their household income to loan
repayments
55
Note that property indicators developed off the NLA data are for the country as a whole and do not distinguish
between rural and urban areas, as this layer is not included in the data.
57
Aside from factors that inhibit the demand for mortgage financed housing, various factors also
constrain the supply of mortgages or increase their cost. These include:
• High cost of capital which makes finance more expensive, putting it out of reach of the target
market
• Limited access to capital to suit the tenor and quantum of the loan: lack of long-term, large-
scale capital to fund the mortgage or housing microloan portfolio. This is an issue for both
types of loans, both of which are generally larger than traditional commercial or unsecured
loans.
• Inability to secure vacant possession of a property in default militates against a lender offering
mortgage products that depend on access to underlying security as a key risk management
tool
• Inability to recover outstanding balances on the sale of the property: for example, a weak
property market in which property values are declining, increases recovery risks and makes
lenders reticent to extend large loans
• Loan products that are poorly aligned with the housing delivery process with an emphasis on
lending for a developer-driven housing process rather than more prevalent incremental
housing practices. As a result, many incrementally driven housing processes are financed with
household savings and take much longer than they need to
• Lack of construction finance which encourages developers to offer attractive instalment sale
arrangements so that buyers provide the developer with construction progress payments
While data on mortgage lending shows low levels of usage (and may suggest limited access), there is
limited data on the use of unsecured loans for housing. Rwanda has a few housing microloan products
available. However, these are not tracked or reported on. There is some indication of unsecured
finance used for housing purposes in survey data. According to the FinScope 2020 survey, of the 320
000 urban households who say they built their dwellings, 19% say that they got most of their money
from a ‘loan from a bank’ with only a further 2% relying on a ‘loan from an MFI or non-umurenge
SACCO’. Nevertheless, it is in the lender’s interest to support their clients in their housing journeys,
as the housing loan becomes a useful cross-selling product which ultimately supports the household
balance sheet and demand for further financial services. In addition, borrowers who use housing
microloans are often repeat customers who seek credit to continue improving their homes over time.
For the government, access to finance that aligns with the housing development process (i.e.
mortgage loan as offtake finance, or housing microloans to support an incremental housing
development process) can favourably support the quality of the housing outcome, and reduce the
time taken to realise it.
Interventions designed to encourage an increase in housing finance therefore need to address the
breadth of constraints – both risks and costs – through the loan design, origination, servicing and
termination process of not only mortgages, but also of unsecured loans for housing. In the table
below, risks are set out as a function of uncertainty – they create costs by the impact they have on a
lenders’ expectations for return. Generally, risks are managed by the imposition of a higher interest
rate or requirements for insurance, both of which ultimately impact on the affordability of the loan
for the household. Administrative costs associated with the affordable market may also be relatively
high. But this is less about uncertainty and more about the impact of smaller loans and higher rejection
rates associated with a new borrower market. If it costs (for argument’s sake) $100 to originate a
loan, it is in the lender’s interest to apply that to a large loan rather than a small loan, so that the cost
to revenue ratio is kept low. Sometimes, lenders amortise these additional costs into the interest rate.
58
However, administrative costs might be better managed with improved efficiencies. Where this is not
possible, a capital subsidy could cover the cost of engaging with a specific target market.
The following table sets out a variety of potential interventions, as might be offered by (a) the lenders,
(b) the lending and affordable housing industry, or (c) the state, to realise a shift in the availability of
housing finance (both mortgage and unsecured) for lower income earners. The choice of one or more
of these ultimately rests on the problem that is being solved, and the interplay of lender, industry and
state in each playing its role in extending access to, and improving the efficiency and effectiveness of,
the affordable housing ecosystem.
59
Table 3: Potential risk and cost management supports to enable housing lending downmarket
Interventions for which a short case study is provided marked with an * asterix. Case studies have been included in Appendix B
Risk and cost Risk and cost Risk and cost

Key risks Key administrative issues management management management
opportunities: LENDER opportunities: INDUSTRY opportunities: STATE
OVERALL PRODUCT DESIGN
• Lack of an active • Limited capacity to • Niche market targeting: • Establishment of a • Local level, municipal
mortgage market manage long term loans diaspora market, student mortgage bankers housing support offices,
• Lack of a property market • Limited access to housing, employer association building inspections, etc.
• Poor construction quality appropriate (long-term, housing, etc. • Development of mortgage • Special subsidy niche
undermining security affordably priced) capital • Creation of housing- loan servicing platforms target markets: i.e. civil
• Poor liquidity creates • Limited mortgage relevant product suite: on an industry-basis servants, SEZ employees,
opportunity costs for experience among construction, offtake, • Negotiations with the youth, etc.
other lending borrowers landlord loans building industry around • Mortgage liquidity facility
Mortgage product • Capital adequacy • Identification of mortgage building quality – with special envelopes for
design requirements product as a “reward” mechanism / insurance to key challenges/
product for trusted clients realise quality opportunities: mortgages
• Implementation of sound construction for landlords, mortgages
loan management for low income target
processes underpinned by market, etc.
appropriate technology
• Underwriting conditions
regarding the quality of
the property
• Lack of security for larger • Limited capacity to • In-house development of • Development of non- • Local level, municipal
and longer-term housing underwrite housing- housing-specific expertise governmental housing housing support offices,
loans specific loans to assist in underwriting support agency building inspections, etc.
• Incremental housing • Limited access to or to provide construction • Development of • Wholesale finance facility
processes are not appropriate (medium- technical assistance consumer education to support the
supported by local by- term, affordably priced) • Partnership with housing materials to support development of housing
Unsecured product
laws and urban capital support agency to review quality incremental microloan products and
design development frameworks • Limited financial literacy plans and provide housing activity financed their ongoing financing*
among borrowers construction technical by housing microloans
assistance
60
LOAN ORIGINATION
• Borrowers are not familiar • New borrowers need • Additional administrative • Detailed pamphlets • Application cost subsidy
with mortgage loans and detailed explanations fees on top of the interest /marketing material for awarded to lenders for
the application process about loan terms and rate housing finance products each loan extended in the
• Information on the conditions • Premium on the interest desired target market
application form is • Limited data may rate • Marketing / awareness
Application process incorrect necessitate expensive • Detailed pamphlets for campaign regarding
• Information on the client interviews or other particular credit products housing financing options
application form is mechanisms to validate
unverifiable information provided by
applicants
• Lack of security: borrower • Valuation is complex and • Unsecured personal loan: • Industry-based warranty • Legislation to enable
does not have title to land dependent on data that shorter term, higher scheme for developers: pension-backed lending
/ property does not exist – can be interest rate, not lenders only finance (application of the
• Deeds registry / title deed highly flawed particular to housing properties built by withdrawal benefit as
registration is delayed or • Property inspections are • Housing-specific certified builders* security for loan)
Security untrusted costly and valuers are unsecured loan that is • Valuations training to • Subsidised property
In the case of a mortgage
• Value of security is trained to value a limited relationship-based, tied to accommodate lower value retrofit programme to
loan, this is title. In the range of properties construction process stock encourage home
incorrectly calculated
case of an unsecured (housing microfinance)
(that is, valuers may not • Title insurance improvements towards
loan, this is the
be familiar with low-cost • Secured loan, not by the • Ongoing property market mortgageability (finance-
confidence that the linked subsidy)*
housing or may misread property: alternative monitoring to maintain an
borrower is more likely to
the residential property security (vehicle, understanding of property • Improvements to the
repay because the loan is
market) livestock, etc.) allowable values deeds registry and
used for housing
• Property does not meet • Pension-backed loan conveyancing system so
purposes. that access to title is
lender’s standards for
mortgage-ability (no realisable
approved plans, no • Title insurance
sanitation, poor quality of
construction)
• Failure to recognise • Limited data regarding • Savings product tied to • Participation in Credit • FOGARIM-style guarantee
payment risks borrower ability to pay; housing loan (improves Reference Bureau scheme targeted at
• Failure to recognise a willingness to pay LTV and creates a (existing) people with informal
good client / loan necessitates institution payment track record) • Collateral Replacement incomes
Underwriting opportunity of other, expensive • Develop and institute Guarantee* • Augment Rwanda’s credit
• Borrower cannot afford mechanisms to assess mechanism to underwrite • Employer guarantees? information infrastructure
deposit risk for informal incomes • Develop industry to include newly digitised
• Small loans undermine • Special small-scale standards for income streams (in
the cost: return ratio – landlord / home based underwriting for informal particular MoMo data
61
need for scale to make enterprise loan product – incomes, and offer from merchants who use
underwriting structured as SME loan lenders training mobile money)
requirements affordable against future income • National savings
stream* programme for housing
• Identification of mortgage
product or housing
microloan as a “reward”
product for trusted clients
– lender only lends to
clients they know
• Loan is too expensive to • Inefficient operations • Risk based pricing • Standardised operational • Interest rate subsidy
administer given interest add to cost of product • Special pricing for repeat systems to support • Buy-down subsidy on the
margins loans improved efficiencies loan instalment
• High cost of capital • Special pricing for • Up-front capital subsidy
• High borrowing costs package loans (limited to reduce the loan size
result in limited take-up time, targeted purpose) required
• Improved operational • Mortgage refinance
Pricing efficiencies to reduce facility to reduce cost of
costs capital and increase the
number of participating
lenders
• Special fund for housing
microlenders, increased
access to and reduced
cost of capital*
• Leakage – funds used for • Administrative costs of • Disburse against BoQ or • Property market industry • Local housing support
purposes other than disbursing small amounts Construction Inspection reports offices to verify
housing Certificate • Industry forums, bringing construction phases
• Disburse only through together role players –
accredited dealers / finance, material
conveyancers suppliers, contractors and
• Use iBuild-type platform / developers, the state
Disbursement smart card for
disbursements*
62
SERVICING
• Low literacy levels • Use of direct messaging • Industry-wide borrower •
• Poor access to digital • Free online access to education
Statements services; expensive to statements
post statement • Borrower education
• Non-payment • Cash payments are • Direct debit off payroll for • Industry-based warranty • Mortgage indemnity fund
• Poor alignment of expensive & borrower salaried workers scheme for developers:
collections frequency with may be unbanked • Direct debit of mobile lenders only finance
client cash flows • Flexible payment money account for properties built by
• Early settlement arrangements are costly digitised merchants certified builders*
Collections to institute • Consumer education
• Daily / weekly / monthly /
seasonal instalments interventions to support
• Regular communication payments
with borrowers • Free online access to
credit score
• Failure to recover • Administrative cost of • Penalty for non-payment • Credit Reference Bureau • Absolute clarity of
follow up • Amnesty to incentivise communication that
Default
payment lender has the right to
management • Payment holidays manage default; no
political interference
ACCESSING SECURITY IN THE CASE OF MORTGAGE DEFAULT
• Inability to secure vacant • Cost of securing eviction • Tight default • Court system empowered
possession order management systems to engage in mortgage
Vacant possession • Time to secure an eviction cases
eviction order
• Destruction of security: • Establish loan servicing • Good, area-based
property used as security and property governance
is destroyed or damaged management companies • Ongoing property market
• Depreciation that specialise in monitoring
Loss given default • Negative amortisation managing loans in distress • Reduction in steps / time
• Illiquid market for and properties that have / cost of transfer
property results in limited been vacated by
value of security borrowers
Where interventions have been successfully tried in other contexts, an asterix (*) has been included in the table above. These case studies are included in
Appendix B of this report.
63
Potential options for the state
Across the breadth of issues facing lenders in delivering and extending housing finance downmarket,
there are a number of supportive interventions that the state can make. These, in turn, are likely to
encourage lenders to implement the measures within their control to also offer housing loans to lower
income people for lower cost housing. Rwanda already has a mortgage liquidity facility that it is
developing with the support of the World Bank. This is an important intervention addressing the cost
of capital as well as its access, while also having the potential longer-term impact of standardising
mortgage lending practice. Further interventions are set out below. Not all of these are advisable,
and some may well be better delivered by the private sector, whether that is the lender or the
industry.
Subsidies
Subsidy interventions may address the demand or the supply side, and may be applied to the housing
product or the financing mechanism. The choice of instrument depends on the outcome that the state
wishes to realise, subject of course, to the availability of sufficient funding. For example:
• Supply side subsidies, targeted at one or more of the underlying housing cost components can
reduce the cost of the product to buyers to align with their affordability. Supply side subsidies
could be in kind (the provision of land, or infrastructure at reduced or no cost), or as capital
contributions (a particular amount per development or unit). They can be targeted at an entire
population, scaled in relation to household income, or at housing delivered to particular segments,
for example civil servants, first time homebuyers, the youth, SEZ employees, and so on. They can
be targeted to reduce the cost and increase the supply of housing for ownership or for rental.
Because they are supply side, they are directed at suppliers in the housing delivery equation – at
builders, developers, or landlords.
• Demand side subsidies are structured to improve the affordability of buyers or tenants, by
enhancing the income they have available for housing. There are various options available,
including:
o A capital subsidy structured as a deposit for a housing loan. This could increase the capital
available for purchase of a house without increasing the loan amount.
o An interest rate subsidy involves the state taking responsibility for a portion of the interest
chargeable on a loan. This is generally understood to be a regressive subsidy – the higher the
loan, the higher the cost of the interest for which the state takes responsibility. This means
that higher income earners who can afford larger loans get more subsidy than lower income
earners with smaller loans.
o A buy-down subsidy: the state commits a capital amount to the borrower based on certain
criteria, which the bank applies monthly against the borrower’s loan, as a sort of co-payment.
This is a better mechanism for reducing monthly repayment obligations as the subsidy
quantum can be determined against the borrower’s income rather than loan size (i.e. lower
income borrowers with lower loans get a higher subsidy), and can be capped at a certain
amount, payable over a limited period of time, while impacting on the monthly instalment
being charged. Critically, the buy-down subsidy does not have to extend for the full duration
of the loan, but rather is focused on the early years in which the borrower’s affordability is
constrained.
o Demand side rental vouchers offered to specific segments of the market to enable them to
afford better quality rental housing. These subsidies may require landlords to meet specific
standards relating to building quality, access to services and / or location.
64
• Niche targeted subsidies are for a particular use: For example:
o The government could reimburse lenders for the costs of engaging with target market clients.
This would encourage lenders to overcome concerns that administrative costs are a barrier to
lending to the target market.
o An interesting demand side subsidy applied in Colombia involves a state contribution
specifically to households who retrofit or refurbish their housing to a particular standard. This
encourages households to maintain and improve existing housing stock so that qualitative
backlogs don’t grow.
• Tax breaks and incentives are a type of subsidy, in which the state forgoes tax collection of a
certain amount from a certain income group. The state may elect to reduce VAT for certain
categories of affordable housing (bearing in mind that this is also regressive, in that a larger benefit
is accrued to more expensive housing).
• A subsidy for a national savings programme for housing, in which people who save explicitly for
housing (this could be a partnership with existing commercial banks) get some financial incentive
(for example, matched contribution, or annual bonus) from the state.
It is worth noting that subsidisation is not the only potential intervention that a state might make. It
is certainly the most obvious, but often the most expensive. Where fiscal space is constrained
subsidies may have limited reach. They also come with serious risks relating to poor targeting, high
expectations and uncontained financial obligations. Other interventions such as those set out below,
may be more efficient.
Guarantees
The state may wish to offer guarantees to particular target markets so that they are better able to
access finance for housing purposes. A few models are available:
• Collateral replacement guarantee to enable 100% LTV: this is currently available in Rwanda and
allows the borrower to access a 100% loan from the lender, while the lender enjoys an LTV of 80%.
The guarantee is currently not subsidised by the state, but rather offered commercially.
• Title insurance exists in some jurisdictions to assist lenders to accept the title of a property as
security. This becomes important when the transaction process is slow and the mortgage needs
to be approved before the transfer of the property has been formalised in the deeds registry. It
can also be used to assist buyers / borrowers assert that their title is realisable as security when
the lender is unsure. Offered by the state, this would be an underwriting of its own institutions
overseeing regulations and foreclosure.
• Mortgage indemnity fund: This was an approach applied in South Africa in the mid-1990’s when
lenders were concerned about lending in particular areas because of what they defined as
“political risk”. The Mortgage Indemnity Fund (MIF) was established to evaluate the political risk
in areas and to provide an indemnity against non-payment as a result of political factors. The MIF
explicitly excluded guarantees for commercial risk.
• FOGARIM-style guarantee scheme targeted at people with informal incomes: this is a demand-
side guarantee offered by the Moroccan government to lenders who lend to households with
informal incomes. Depending on the particular target market, the guarantee covered between
70-80% of the loan value, on condition that the total loan value did not exceed a certain amount
and that the monthly installment payable by the borrower was limited to a certain amount.
65
Eligible borrowers had to be first time homeowners, and the conditions of their income and the
application of the guarantee were carefully specified. The FOGARIM guarantee has assisted
lenders in extending their loans to lower income clients. Given the profile of Rwandan
households’ employment, this might be a particularly useful intervention.
Liquidity
Rwanda has developed a mortgage liquidity facility to support lenders’ capital needs and encourage
standardisation in the mortgage industry. This is positive from the perspective of capital market
development and worth continuing. However, with a focus only on end-user finance and within that
only on retail mortgages that target relatively high income earners in the Rwandan context, the facility
faces the risk of being under-utilised. A key challenge is supply-side finance in particular markets, such
as construction finance for small scale developers and the providers of rental accommodation.
Broadening the liquidity facility’s mandate to include commercial mortgage finance for small scale
developers, and landlords, would provide important stimulus on the supply side and reach lower
income segments of the market that have very limited access to finance.
A further area of focus is the availability of capital for housing microlending, which generally has
greater capital demands (amounts and term) than traditional microlending. The development of a
special fund for housing microlenders could increase access to and reduce the cost of capital to enable
the flow of housing microloans, and might assist in stimulating this form of supply.
Credit information sharing and market information systems
As noted, a key constraint to lending for housing purposes, whether with a secured or unsecured
product, is the lack of information available to allow the lender to adequately assess risk. Rwanda has
an extensive credit information infrastructure that could be used to grow the credit profiles of low-
moderate income earners for housing purposes. Providing access to mobile payment data would be
a critical next step and could improve access to housing finance for those who are currently unable to
access finance.
A further support by the state could be the ongoing monitoring of the residential property market, by
segment, to improve lenders’ capacity to engage in lower-value markets. The regular collection,
analysis and dissemination of transactional data would allow market players to become more familiar
with the low-moderate income affordable housing market, thereby better able to design appropriate
products and price for their risk.
Policy and legislation
Ability to realise the value of the underlying security is a key challenge for lenders. Legislation to
enable pension-backed lending (application of the withdrawal benefit as security for loan) might
support access to housing finance as the underlying security is liquid and easily accessible.
Urban Management and Development Processes
Lending appetite, and the design and delivery of lending products, is fundamentally shaped by lender
perceptions of risk and the administrative costs associated with providing the products and services
to the target market. The state can intervene in this equation through its governance of the building
sector and local urban areas, and its overall administration of land and development processes.
Specifically, this might include:
66
• Active implementation of appropriate building codes and standards, ensuring the right capacity
to engage with the reality of affordable housing delivery processes
• Optimisation of development management and approvals processes, reducing the steps, time and
cost of approvals as well as ensuring alignment with mortgage criteria (or a dialogue with
mortgage lenders to ensure they will fund developments aligned with new standards).
These governance services might be provided at the local level through the establishment of
neighbourhood-based-satellite building approval offices, to review and approve building plans,
provide construction and occupancy permits, provide access to professional services and advice and
facilitate access to finance. This office would also monitor development in the area and deliver local
information to relevant officials for attention.
Given the above and the current performance of Rwanda’s affordable housing market, it is
recommended that BRD consider the following measures to support increased access to housing
finance:
1. Address lender risk and costs: a key barrier to lending down market are the risks and costs
associated with the target market. Two interventions would usefully address these constraints.
• Demand-side guarantee to enable mortgage lending to potential borrowers with informal
incomes (modelled on Morocco’s FOGARIM)
• Augment Rwanda’s credit information infrastructure to include newly digitised income
streams (in particular Mobile Money (MoMo) data from merchants who use mobile money)
2. Increase access to affordable housing finance: there will be very many people (the majority of
Rwandans) who will not be able to access mortgage finance. Their only finance option will be to
access unsecured loans for housing. Given the focus on supporting housing delivery for all
Rwandans, this is likely to increase the demand for housing microloans, which existing lenders will
unlikely be able to meet. To this end, two interventions are proposed:
• Provision of wholesale capital at subsidised rates to non-bank lenders offering housing
microloans. This offering can have the effect of growing the housing microlending sector
overall. These lenders would then develop housing support services or leverage local support
offices to enable a quality housing construction process.
• Wholesale capital at subsidised rates to lenders offering construction finance to small scale
builders and landlords. This is a sorely overlooked segment of Rwanda’s housing market.
3. Enable improvement in the quality of housing that is delivered through household-led

investment
• The analysis of household level data highlights the role that limited access to services plays in
creating Rwanda’s qualitative backlog. The provision of infrastructure, including roads, water
and sanitation which is typically a local government function, would go a long way in
improving the quality of housing that is delivered by households, and should therefore be
prioritised. In the absence of these services in many neighbourhoods, it is difficult to justify
the provision of subsidies for so-called affordable housing developments. In addition, a
mortgage-linked subsidy is regressive given that only households with sufficient incomes can
access mortgages. By channelling infrastructure support directly to landlords providing
67
housing, the quality and quantity of affordable housing on the market, particularly with
respect to rental, is likely to increase.
• Municipal level attention to the small scale construction approvals process and inspections
through the establishment of neighbourhood-based housing support offices. With this
intervention, local authorities can leverage latent housing construction activity as is found in
household level, small scale builders. It is important to provide them with support that
achieves the level of quality that is desired – and once this is achieved, this will become a
further market for lenders.
68
6. RECOMMENDATIONS
There are a number of critical issues that are highlighted in the data and analysis presented in this
report.
Mismatch between affordable housing interventions and need: As already noted in previous phases
of this project, there is a significant mismatch between the need in the market and the focus of current
affordable interventions which, in the main, target households earning above RWF500 000. The
lowest cost unit, a one-bedroomed, 40-square metre dwelling offered by See Far costs RWF 20 million.
At prevailing interest rates, this would be affordable to households earning over RWF 900 000, a tiny
minority of urban households. Even with a reduced interest rate of 11%, only households earning more
than RW600 000 could afford this. At the same time, the research highlights that this segment of the
market is relatively well-housed.
Recalibration of the income thresholds aligned with the affordable market definition: Coming out of
the research, we would argue that the definition of the affordable market should be recalibrated to
align with salaries paid to key workers, including teachers and nurses. These workers are skilled and
should be able to afford housing with minimal assistance. However, their current housing conditions
are visibly poor. In line with this, we suggest reducing the thresholds associated with the affordable
housing market to the thresholds originally included in the TOR for this project (RWF200 000 to
RWF700 000) or even reducing them to RWF200 000 to RWF500 000.
The rationale for increasing the thresholds is sensible; the mortgage refinance facility requires
mortgageable stock, and mortgage lenders are currently configured to provide finance for completed
units to those earning stable, visible incomes in the formal sector. However, the increase in the income
threshold of the affordable housing market to RWF1.2 million in line with the price-points associated
with the stock that larger developers can provide to meet the lending practises of banks means that
supply determines demand-side thresholds, instead of the other way around, and is akin to the cart
leading the horse. Of course, the Housing Finance Project does not only seek to improve housing
outcomes, it also seeks to establish the capital markets infrastructure required for Rwanda’s future.
But the two objectives may not be entirely aligned.
Loans to support household-led or small scale development, principally for rental: In order to ensure
greater alignment, it is critical that banks and other lenders support the key processes that actually
deliver affordable housing in Rwanda. These processes are often household led, or led by small scale
developers, and typically deliver rental accommodation. These developers require construction
finance that is currently unavailable. Existing retail lenders typically finance the purchase of a
completed unit on the back of wage-based income flows, while commercial divisions of banks finance
larger projects. Lenders should be encouraged to provide finance to this market through access to
lower cost funding through the housing finance facility.
Advice and professional services to support the development process: In addition, to ensure that
household-led investment delivers good quality housing, households need to be supported by
professional services and advice. In some models, lenders provide this, and will load the costs into the
loan. However, given the severe affordability constraints in the market, there may be an opportunity
for the municipality to offer these services, comparable to the provision of extension services in the
agricultural sector. Undoubtedly, the municipality would benefit from the direct interaction with
household led developers, not least in understanding on-the-ground constraints and creating a fact
base on which to draw as it considers how to re-craft building codes that are better aligned with
reality.
69
Provision of infrastructure, including sanitation, water and transport, is key: There is a material need
for better quality housing in segments of the market that earn below RWF500 000. This need relates
not only to the form and structure of the dwelling itself, but also to the services that are associated
with housing, including sanitation, piped water and transport. A focus on provision of these services
by local government would enable developers, including household developers, to focus on
construction of higher density dwellings in line with the master plan. In addition, in some cases there
may be opportunities to implement off-grid solutions that service compounds or small
neighbourhoods. Given that these off-grid solutions are often ‘green’, they may be able to attract
concessionary finance, reducing their costs.
Data is key and more of it would be very helpful: Rwanda’s emphasis on data offers it unusual
opportunities to monitor the market and align policy and interventions accordingly. While the team
has been able to access critical data sets, there are a number of key gaps, particularly with regard to
supply. As noted, there is no consolidated, accurate dataset on delivery. Ideally data should be
available on price points as well as the unit specification. In addition, the quality of BPMIS data
requires improvement. An analysis of BPMIS data found that the data is not standardised; there are
multiple free-text fields and over 600 active and inactive forms. According to the Rwanda Housing
Authority version two of the system is in development. This will include controls to ensure data is
entered in a standardised way and will also integrate directly with the Master Plan to improve data
accuracy. In addition, NLA data enriched with a description of the actual property could be used to
monitor resale activity. Finally, richer data on mortgage market activity should be available via the
Rwanda Development Board as well as the National Bank of Rwanda.
Aside from these broad observations, a number of issues are flagged for each segment.
Very low- and low-income earners: Key points
• This segment is large (~290 000 urban households who earn less than RWF 100 000 and a
further ~260 000 households who earn between RWF 100 000 and RWF 200 000), and likely
to grow as the country urbanises
• A sizeable number of households in this segment of the market indicate that they own their
dwellings. In fact, there are more owners in this segment (225 000 households who own) than
in middle income and high income segments (120 000 and 65 000 respectively).
• However, based on their levels of access to basic services, it appears that many owners live in
unplanned settlements where properties may be difficult to leverage; banks are unlikely to
provide loans secured against properties in these areas.
• In addition, borrower incomes are low and, in the main although not always, tenuous, which
would constrain their ability to access finance.
• However, many households in this segment have some, albeit limited, affordability. Many pay
rent and would arguably be willing to continue doing so, creating an income stream for
landlords, many of whom may also be in this segment.
• While there might be some scope for incomes to grow, particularly for those at the lower end
of the spectrum, this may be constrained by low skill levels and market forces.
• Many workers in this segment are employed in the informal sector. As economic activity in
that sector become more visible a greater proportion of households will become ‘bankable’
• For many households in this segment, access to services is very constrained. This is a real
concern, particularly as cities need to increase densities. Without access to sanitation,
environmentally sound sewage disposal mechanisms and clean water, the risk of disease
70
becomes material. In addition, if affordable transport is not available, there will be growing
demand for housing in better located areas pushing up land values and rentals in those areas.
• Renters in this segment are at risk of displacement if rents increase. This may be difficult to
avoid in some cases and it is imperative that any GoR led upgrading initiative address the
tendency of property-upgraded owners to raise rents.
• The segment is very aspirational, with most wanting to own their own homes. In reality, the
majority will rent unless their incomes rise.
Possible interventions in this segment
• There may be some scope for employers to provide accommodation for workers, particularly
where they are young and single. Employer-led or employer-linked housing could be feasible
in or near industrial sites. This need not require employers to own and manage the stock.
Rather employers may be able to play a role in managing offtake, subject to landlords meeting
a set of basic norms and standards regarding the specification of units provided. Employers
could also facilitate the payment of rentals either directly off payroll or through the inclusion
of a housing allowance for employees, lowering the risk for landlords
• In better-located unplanned settlements it may be possible to implement community-based
land readjustment projects, funded in part by the sale of units or land freed up through the
re-blocking process and denser typologies
• Given the significant need for sanitation, neighbourhood-based solutions may be more
efficient than solutions provided by individual property owners. Arguably, local government
would be better placed to ensure that a basic package of services is in place than individual
property owners or landlords. Government entities are likely to be able to access lower cost,
longer term finance to develop this infrastructure, particularly when repayments are matched
by service charges that are collectable from beneficiary households
• There is scope to test innovative financing mechanisms that leverage a track record of digital
payments to assess the credit worthiness of merchants, moto drivers and others in the
informal sector. While digital credit is not new, the provision of digital credit to finance large,
long-term investment is.
Middle income earners: Key points
• This segment comprises skilled and key workers who should be able to afford good quality
housing that provides access to key services including sanitation and transport. It includes
teachers and nurses who are employed by the state and by the non-profit sector
• A particular employer segment of interest is religious institutions. They are known to own
well-located land and at the same time employ many key workers.
• It is likely that wages in this segment will rise; workers are skilled, and productivity may
increase as the economy develops
• Property owners in this segment have affordability if existing equity is combined with finance.
They may be able to buy up (new or existing), or redevelop their properties to improve their
own living conditions and / or to provide rental accommodation
• Households who own land, many of whom are in this segment, may be able to develop their
properties, particularly if these properties are located in areas zoned for higher densities.
However, the data collected as part of this project indicates that many property owners lack
knowledge about the formal property development process and have a real need for guidance
and support should they decide to upgrade their properties. They require information on the
planning and development approval process, building materials and designs as well as on
71
sources and costs of finance. They also need access to built environment professionals
including architects, quantity surveyors, engineers and construction managers
• For those who rent, it may be possible for them to buy if developers can reduce prices
sufficiently. If unit prices could be reduced to RWF 10 million, over a third of households in
this segment who rent could afford to purchase a unit (roughly 58 000 households). A
reduction to RWF 8 million would mean that two thirds of renter households in the segment
would fall into the addressable market (~110 000 households) assuming they can access a 20-
year mortgage at an interest rate of 11%56. In addition, it may be possible for some households
in this segment to save up for a sufficiently sizeable deposit to enable affordability
• Cost optimisation by developers of affordable housing to reduce prices to below RWF 10

million for newly-built units. WS2 will assess whether this is feasible
• It may prove fruitful to engage with owners of well-located land but under-utilised land to
encourage housing development. Churches in particular may be open to exploring solutions
for their employees and constituents in this segment of the market
• In order to enable Incremental upgrading and densification in this and other segments,
household developers need access to support in the form of professional advice and services
(drafting, engineering, surveying and so on). To encourage investment, these services could
be offered free of charge to encourage households to densify
• In addition, households need access to well-designed financial products that match the cash
flows of the investment. Specific requirements for small-scale landlords include development
finance that is paid out in line with specific milestones. In addition, repayments should only
start once the units are tenanted and rental income is collected.
• In some cases, lenders could partner with property management companies who assist in
finding and managing tenants
• As with the low-income segment, sanitation solutions at a neighbourhood level may be
feasible in some contexts
• Local government capacity is required to manage a household-led densification drive. While
this is likely to require additional manpower, new technologies including imaging and AI can
be leveraged to reduce costs as part of Kigali’s smart city initiative
High income earners: Key points
• This is the smallest segment comprising just 46 000 households

• This segment includes professionals with stable incomes which are likely to continue growing
over time
• Dwelling conditions are noticeably better for this segment compared to the middle-income
segment. However, while most have access to a flush toilet, a sizeable minority do not; 29%
of renter households and 40% of owner households in the segment do not use a flush toilet
• This segment has the capacity to purchase developer-built units currently on the market
• Two thirds of the segment own their dwellings. These households may be located in areas
zoned for high densities creating an opportunity for owners to further develop their properties
with proper guidance and support
56
Assumes that renter households are able to put down a 10% deposit and contribute 30% of their household
income to loan repayments
72
• Just under one third rent their dwellings. Based on feedback from the focus group discussions,
some renters own land which they intend to develop incrementally, or could potentially
leverage to purchase a unit in the future
• There is some scope to reduce costs of new housing development leveraging better design,
local materials and better building technologies. These are outlined in more detail in WS2
• As with the middle-income segment above, to enable Incremental upgrading and densification
households need access technical expertise to ensure that development is done to standard
• Other researchers have highlighted the importance of developing a property tax base. This
should be explored, starting with higher earners who are most able to afford the additional
tax burden
73
APPENDIX A: OVERVIEW OF URBAN HOUSEHOLDS IN KEY DISTRICTS
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
APPENDIX B: HOUSING FINANCE CASE STUDIES
Case studies related to table 1 in Section 5 Housing Finance
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
OFFTAKE GUARANTEES
Millard Fuller Foundation and the Family Homes Fund (Nigeria)

The Millard Fuller Foundation (MFF) is a faith-driven organisation which promotes collaborative and innovative partnerships
with individuals & organizations to provide affordable housing on a sustainable basis
In 2018, MFF completed the first phase of the Grand Luvu Estate, located in Luvu-Madaki, in Nasarawa State close to the
Nigerian capital of Abuja. The 400 unit project includes 200 one-bedroom semi-detached units and 200 two-bedroom semi-
detached units. The 32m2 one-bedroom semi-detached units were identified as the cheapest houses in Africa in 2019 by
CAHF with units selling for USD 8,040.
Funding for the first phase of the project was provided by Reall UK who partnered with MFF in 2016. In 2018 the Family
Homes Fund (FHF) bulk-bought 400 completed units for resale. The FHF is a social housing initiative promoted by the Federal
Government of Nigeria as part of its Social Intervention Programme with initial shareholding by the Federal Ministry of
Finance and the Nigeria Sovereign Investment Authority. The company's mission is to address the housing deficit in Nigeria
and make homeownership a reality for low-income families. The bulk purchase of the units meant that MFF was able to
completely re-pay the original loan from 2016.
The FHF provides off-take financing for the units through their Help-to-Own product which targets first time home buyers
who do not own property, and who can provide a minimum deposit of 10 percent of the purchase price. The borrower then
gets a 50 percent mortgage from a mortgage lender at the regular rates, while FHF provides a 40 percent loan with no
repayment obligation for the first five years. In the sixth year, payment to FHF begins at a subsidised interest rate of 3
percent, which then grows over the term of the loan to 15 percent in the 20thyear.
94
PART II
STUDY ON HOUSING MARKET AND LOW-COST EFFICIENT

HOUSING MATERIALS AND TECHNOLOGIES
Development Bank of Rwanda (BRD)
71point4 Lambert Lénack

Yves Nsengiyumva Philibert de Viron
Kecia Rust, CAHF James Setzler
Fatou Dieye Vincent-Robert Ngirabacu
TABLE OF CONTENT
I. INTRODUCTION 5
1. Objectives : Low-Cost Efficient Housing Materials and

Technologies
2. Eight Aspirations 6
8
II. RWANDA’S HOUSING ECOSYSTEM : A SECTOR DIAGNOSTIC

11
1. Introduction : housing supply in Rwanda
2. Housing policies in Rwanda : supply side 12
3. Baseline : sector performance 13
3.1 Affordable housing project 17
3.2 Building permit information management system (BPMIS) 17
4. Construction materials in Rwanda 19
5. Rental housing 20
6. Housing supplier profiles in Rwanda 22
7. Financing sources for the housing industry in Rwanda 24
8. Mortgage loan access for urban households 28
9. Construction professionals in Rwanda 34
10. Housing property prices 38
10.1 Affordable and market rate housing 38
property prices breakdown
10.2 Affordable housing property prices 40
breakdown per supplier
III. HOUSING COST STUDY AT DIFFERENT SCALES 43
Introduction 44
1. Building construction scale 48

1.1 Materials and technologies assessment framework 48
1.2 Material Kits 54
1.3 Construction incrementality 58
1.4 Design principles 62
1.5 Building typologies 70
2. Urban development scale 104

2.1 Impact of infrastructure 104
2.2 Density/ urban regulation 106
3. Real estate development scale 108

3.1 Real estate proforma 108
3.2 Levers for cost optimisation 110
IV. SCENARIOS 113
1. Urban design scenarios 114

1.1. Introduction 114
1.2. Landowner self builder 120
1.3. Landowner private investment 124
1.4. Landowner joint venture 136
1.5. Micro scale developer 138
1.6. Small scale developer 142
1.7. Large scale developer 146
2. Subsidy and incentive impact scenarios 166
3. Industry growth strategy 170
V. CONCLUSIONS 173
1. Supply chain constraints and opportunities 174

per supplier : recommendations
2. Conclusion 182
VI. APPENDIX 191
1. Real estate performa 192

2. Impact Simulation Tool 200
3. Structural Plans G+3 204
4. Structural Plans G+10 210
I. INTRODUCTION
1.OBJECTIVES : LOW-COST EFFICIENT HOUSING

MATERIALS AND TECHNOLOGIES
2. EIGHT ASPIRATIONS
INTRODUCTION 5
6
I. INTRODUCTION
1. OBJECTIVES: LOW-COST EFFICIENT HOUSING

MATERIALS AND TECHNOLOGIES
BACKGROUND STUDY OBJECTIVES AND OUTPUTS
Between 1998 and 2018, Rwanda was one of the world’s As per the Terms of Reference, the two-part study “on
fastest urbanizing countries1, witnessing unparalleled the Rwandan Housing Market (Part I) and Low-Cost and
levels of low-income rural-urban migration to cities Efficient Building Materials and Technologies (Part II)” was
unable to provide the physical and social infrastructure designed to address challenges that exist on both the
necessary for households to thrive. Despite ongoing demand and supply sides of affordable housing. All told,
efforts by the government of Rwanda to address sector the principal aim of the study is to develop a series of
constraints, FinScope 2020 reports that nearly 70% of recommendations, both on the policy and technical sides,
Rwandan households are unserved by the formal housing to assist in expanding production and access to housing
market and supply their own homes using informal in Rwanda.
solutions. As long as key gaps in the housing delivery
chain undermine the participation of the private sector, The present report addresses the specific objectives of
there is little chance that developers will be able to bridge Part II, where the consultant team was asked to assess
the large and widening gap in the housing market. The the housing supply bottlenecks and identify the design,
2050 targets loom large, and until and unless the sector construction and financing opportunities that could
can address constraints related to high construction and facilitate scaling-up the delivery of quality, affordable
land costs and the limited capacity of the financial sector housing in Rwanda.
to scale-up housing finance, the economic and social
potentials of urbanization will remain unrealized. In order to anchor the strategies and recommendations
within the local context, Chapter 1 revisits the Housing
While weak supply chain and finance linkages undermine Sector Diagnostic completed during the Baselines phase,
delivery, housing affordability is also severely constrained. with the purpose of providing a comprehensive overview
Although Vision 2050 sets out ambitious targets with of the sector’s primary challenges and opportunities
respect to income growth, current income levels are low. with respect to construction materials, capacity, policy
In addition, many households who can afford housing and finance. The chapter concludes with a review and
demonstrate a marked preference for self-built, self- breakdown of current housing prices and construction
financed free-standing units often located on the urban costs by supplier, establishing a benchmark upon which
edge. Shifting these preferences and changing housing to test various design and development scenarios.
investment patterns are also key challenges. Where Chapter 2 interrogates the direct and indirect
costs associated with housing delivery at different scales
That Rwanda is starting off at a low base is not necessarily (from building to city), Chapter 3 presents a series of
a disadvantage. The lack of legacy processes and case studies designed to optimize project costs through
approaches creates a fertile ground for the deployment different subsidy and incentive instruments.
of new solutions that can potentially leapfrog often
inefficient, polluting and unsustainable solutions Given 1/ the urgent need to increase housing supply in
that dominate in other economies. Likewise, global Rwanda as per the 2050 targets, and 2/ the diversity of
experience from poorly conceived, albeit affordable, existing supply channels and their active participation in
housing interventions provide useful lessons for Rwanda Rwanda’s robust - albeit informal - rental housing market,
as it builds cities that enable households to thrive and final recommendations of the study are organized by
economies to grow over time. supplier type, with the goal of addressing their respective
bottlenecks in the value chain to increase both the quality
and quantity of affordable housing available on the
Rwandan market.
1
UN World Urbanization Prospects 2018, p. 52
7
I. INTRODUCTION
2. EIGHT ASPIRATIONS
Expectations of Rwanda’s rich urban future are many. SUSTAINABILITY

From Vision 2050 to the National Land Use Development As temperatures rise and severe weather events increase,
Master Plan, Rwanda’s future cities are expected to be Rwandan cities must learn to increase their resilience
inclusive engines of growth, ushering in social, economic, to the shocks and stresses of climate change that will
and environmental prosperity and health to all. Central affect the way our cities and households grow. In
to this vision is “universal access to affordable and decent addition to promoting environmentally responsible and
housing,” a goal that imagines a working housing market responsive technologies, priority shall be given to building
in which the needs of all Rwandans are met by an array solutions that lower the overall carbon footprint of
of products that are financed by local investors and a Rwanda’s construction industry and promote bioclimatic
working housing finance sector. dispositions.
The following pages outline 8 aspirations for Rwanda’s

burgeoning formal housing sector, each one addressing DIVERSITY
an objective and/or principle designed to improve the Despite being a small, land-locked country, Rwanda’s
quality of the country’s housing stock through critical geographic, social and economic profile is incredibly
material, environmental and social considerations. Viewed diverse from the scale of the province down to the
together, the Aspirations define the goals of Rwanda’s household. The National (NLUDMP) and City Master Plans
supply side, one that must anticipate the delivery of 5,5 translate this diversity into a range of different regulations
million dwelling units by 2050 for a dynamic and diverse and land controls that promote density, mixed use, and
middle-income population. transit-oriented development. Consequently, the present
study investigates and defines the parameters of real estate
development models adapted to a variety of situations
AFFORDABILITY to evaluate their impact on project development costs.
Since 2015, the Rwandan Government has set an This will include the study of mixed-use, mixed-income
affordability threshold. On the supply side, this threshold neighbourhoods, with the aim of providing equitable
is defined by the size of a residential development (more access to resources, amenities, and infrastructure.
than 100) and the cost of the selling price (no more than Furthermore, at the scale of the real estate project, mixity
FRW 500,000 per square meter). For the purposes of may introduce important cost reductions due to certain
this study, the team will expand the possible definition cross-financing mechanisms that spread benefits and
of affordability to address the entire housing life cycle costs across a range of products.
from construction through offtake and maintenance to
better identify the total envelope of costs that determine DESIGN
whether a household can afford to purchase, rent, and Design quality in the housing sector can create and attract
maintain a property. investment and sensitize buyers to the benefits of urban
housing. Consequently, interpreting local tastes and
MATERIALS & TECHNOLOGY preferences into built form suitable for urban areas remains
In 2017, the Ministry of Trade and Industry officially one of the architect’s key professional opportunities.
introduced the Made in Rwanda policy to support local It follows the architects, structural engineers and the
economic development, with a particular focus on the institutions in charge of enforcing regulations and
construction and industrial manufacturing sectors. approving buildings, should be familiar with design and
The study considers the cost-reduction opportunities technical approaches that do not compromise quality in
of these measures in addition to those related to the pursuit of low-cost.
entire chain of real estate development activities, from
material production, to transport, delivery and storage.
Conclusions from this investigation shall be used to
inform an appropriate sector scale-up strategy.
8
SKILL and mechanisms. This includes consideration of sites
The creation of off-farm employment for rural Rwandan and services schemes, flexible standards and designs, in
youth has remained among the priority actions for the addition to incremental building and finance solutions.
government and its development partners for decades. As
GoR’s urbanization portfolio takes a more prominent role, NEEDS
the opportunity to use urban development as a catalyst In addition to meeting the required planning and
for job creation and skills building should not be lost. construction specifications and standards, quality
When it comes to affordable housing, this means ensuring housing must be sensitive to the needs of the typical
the necessary technicians in both the public and private Rwandan household. In addition to cost, a family’s
sector are available to accompany the development need for adequate space for domestic, recreational,
process all along the value chain, from architects and and sometimes commercial, activities shall need to be
engineers, to site supervisors, surveyors, inspectors and taken into consideration in the design of the house. This
masons. reflection on the needs of a typical household shall also
be informed by a review of previous projects and the
ORGANISATION opinion of stakeholders across all income ranges and
The National Development Land Use Master Plan estimates geographic locations.
that a combined total of 5,5 million dwelling units (existing,
new and refurbished) will be needed by 2050. Given the
current limitation of the market to deliver at scale, real
estate development in Rwanda shall need to consider the
planning and optimization of multiple delivery channels
VISION 2050
MATERIALS &
AFFORDABILITY
TECHNOLOGIES
The Prime Minister Instructions Made in Rwanda policy
No 004/03 of 13/09/2015 (MINICOM) / Investment
determining the Conditions support to brick value chain
and Procedures for Obtaining (NIRDA)
Government Support for
Affordable Housing Projects
NEEDS SUSTAINABILITY
Rwanda Green Building Minimum
Compliance System (RHA) /
Nationally Determined Contributions
Framework for Projects (MoE)
ORGANISATION DIVERSITY
National Land Use Development Master Plan (Kigali and Secondary
Master Plan (GoR) Cities) / National Land Use
Development Master Plan (GoR)
SKILL DESIGN
Support to MSMEs and SMEs via different
programs available through MINICOM /
TVET and Rwanda Polytechnic program
enhancement (MINEDUC)
9
10
II. RWANDA’S HOUSING ECOSYSTEM: A SECTOR
DIAGNOSTIC
1. INTRODUCTION : HOUSING SUPPLY IN RWANDA
2. HOUSING POLICIES IN RWANDA : SUPPLY SIDE
3. BASELINE : SECTOR PERFORMANCE
4. CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS IN RWANDA
5. RENTAL HOUSING
6. HOUSING SUPPLIER PROFILES IN RWANDA
7. FINANCING SOURCES FOR THE HOUSING

INDUSTRY IN RWANDA
8. MORTGAGE LOAN ACCESS FOR URBAN

HOUSEHOLDS
9. CONSTRUCTION PROFESSIONALS IN RWANDA
10. HOUSING PROPERTY PRICES
11
1. INTRODUCTION : HOUSING SUPPLY IN RWANDA
During the Inception Phase, the consultant team At the same time, the research revealed opportunities
conducted a review of ten years of data from policy and for improved supply capacity and sector growth in 4
research/practice activities in the housing industry with principles areas:
the objective of addressing two of the sector’s biggest
challenges: affordability and supply. Site visits and • Building materials and technologies: With
interviews with developers, local authorities and suppliers government programs like Made in Rwanda and
carried out during the Baselines Phase of the project Manufacture and Build to Recover, opportunities exist
further informed the sector diagnostic from which eight for local producers to receive support in developing
(8) main supply-side bottlenecks emerged: existing and new building material supply chains. Not
only can these programs support innovation in a sector
• The real cost of housing construction: There desperately in need of new cost-efficient construction
exists a persistent mismatch between costs eligible for solutions (particularly sanitation), but it can also support
subsidies and real project implementation costs. small-scale suppliers in increasing their quality and yield.
• Delivery capacity: Only a handful of developers • Rental housing market: With more than 50% of
can deliver homes below 40 million FRW, and those that urban households earning between FRW 100,000 and
can do not have a scalable business model. 500,000 per month renting their homes, it is estimated
• Trust / Local Preferences: Based on previous that landlords earn more than FRW 9 billion per month in
experience, end-users are wary of the quality of so-called revenue. This is a significant amount that underscores the
affordable units. In addition, end-users prefer bungalows direct role that rental housing plays not only in the supply
over apartments. Apartments will have difficulty of housing in Rwandan cities but critically, in household
penetrating the market if the unit cost is the same or income generation.
higher than a bungalow. • Typologies: Landowners with parcels in high-
• Construction finance: High development costs density areas express interest in developing their
(land, materials, site services, taxation, etc.) put pressure properties but lack the technical expertise and financial
on developers’ margins, so although most local developers capacity to meet building codes and density regulations.
are convinced of the size of the affordable housing • Alternative development models and delivery
market, they are reluctant to invest in solutions enabling channels: With guidance from Rwanda Housing Authority,
them to deliver hundreds of homes at the requested price the City of Kigali and development partners, upgrading
point. has emerged as a potential housing delivery model for
• Scale: The current housing policy framework low-income communities that blends public and private
principally addresses medium- and large-scale developers finance. Given the diversity of actors on the supply-side
even though they are not the most active builders or currently responsible for housing construction (formal and
suppliers of affordable housing to the market. informal, for sale and rent), there is immense opportunity
• Densification: Most landowners are not prepared for the Government of Rwanda to pilot projects, support
to invest in multi-family, multi-storied building solutions and engage with non-traditional suppliers in building a
to bring their plots into compliance with regulations multi-functional housing program.
requiring higher-density development. Consequently,
landowner-developed housing stock, which houses more The following chapter is structured to identify mechanisms
than 75% of urban households (FinScope 2020), consists suitable for addressing these issues, with a view towards
primarily of low-rise, low-density housing. improving the sector’s ability to reduce costs, improve
• Construction materials and technologies: Few affordability and champion growth that is in line with the
building material producers on the market can deliver aspirations outlined in Chapter 1.
at scale, leading to implementation delays as builders
struggle to procure materials in sufficient quantities
leading to a heavy reliance on costly imported products.
• Skills gap: Despite a building boom in Rwandan
cities, worker investment remains low creating a labour
force that is largely unskilled and informally employed,
leading to deficiencies in construction quantity and
quality.
12
2. HOUSING POLICIES IN RWANDA : SUPPLY SIDE
The government of Rwanda has introduced strong policies households.” In other words, by integrating these types of
designed to optimize the use of land and encourage the approaches into technical guidelines, authorities can help
construction of housing. The most accessible among strengthen the affordable housing market against one its
these are the Master Plans for Kigali and the Secondary primary foes: overregulation.
Cities, which work to bring structure and coherence to
neighbourhoods undergoing rapid growth. By promoting A range of different planning and design research has been
inclusivity, densification, and the integration - rather than conducted by Universities and the City of Kigali around
the replacement - of informal areas into the plan, the these guidelines, in an effort to develop neighbourhood
document serves as an important tool for the promotion guidelines and sustainability principles to ensure that
of high-density low-rise typologies, employee housing the accent on participation and inclusivity is translated
and other forms of more diverse and democratically into tangible elements of the urban fabric that directly
accessible residential development. contribute to the quality and liveability of housing.
The National Building Code, which has undergone In many cases encountered, the interpretation by
extensive revision over the past decade, has the landowners of urban planning prescriptions in terms of
responsibility of guiding Rwanda’s construction industry density results in a parcel division of large plots for sale of
towards safer and better-quality buildings. However, dimensions 15 by 20 m, i.e. 300 square meters.
when thinking about the role of building regulations This land sold for the construction of individual houses
in facilitating the development of affordable housing, under the “landowner self-builder” channel consumes a
economists from IGC argue in favor of introducing lot of land and does not allow for urban harmony in the
flexibility into the code so that it reflects more of the long term, because individual owners develop their own
housing market’s current reality, especially as it relates project on the scale of his land without necessarily taking
to household involvement in the production of housing. into account consideringof integration into a coherent
More precisely, IGC recommends that the code to master plan with its neighbourhood.
amended to “recognise household level incrementalism This is of course not tenable on a large scale in the
and self-building as a valid and effective way of creating perspective of the expected densification of cities.
affordable housing and make it accessible to low-income
516840.000000 516880.000000 516920.000000 516960.000000 517000.000000 517040.000000
1011 1022
4781540.000000
4781540.000000
977 1012
976
1023
971
970
P41
975 !
.
P40
!
.
P39 956 955
!
.
4781510.000000
4781510.000000
P38
!
.
P61
969
300.719 sq m !
.
P37
!
.
300.582 sq m
P32 P64
!
.
!
. 300.037 sq m 315.891 sq m P63 957
974 P33 !
.
P71 !
. P65
!
. !
. P34 323.240 sq m !
.
P42
P46
!
. !
.
P69 !
.
P75
P35 P62 317.199 sq m
!
. !
. !
. 958
P74 317.352 sq m 301.174 sq m P47
! P43
. ! !
.
P36 .
527.697 sq m 273.627 sq m !
. P44 301.822 sq m P48
!
.
4781480.000000
4781480.000000
P70 !
.
!
. !
.
P68
310.599 sq m 301.821 sq m
P45 P49
P29 ! !
.
!
. P67
299.445 sq m
. 343.614 sq m
9 72 !
. P50 P55
304.396 sq m !
. !
.
P19 P72 P28
!
.
422.180 sq m
!
. !
. P66 P30 P51 301.999 sq m
973 !
. !
. !
.
P27
!
.
P31
P52 302.255 sq m P56
!
.
!
.
P20
300.200 sq m !
.
P53 !
. !
.
P26 !
P54 302.482 sq m P57
. !
!
. .
379.420 sq m
P21
300.200 sq m
!
. 302.778 sq m P58
!
.
P18
!
P22
300.200 sq m 300.349 sq m
4781450.000000
4781450.000000
! .
. 300.200 sq m !
.
P59
P7 P23 P60
!
. !
.
!
.
P17
300.200 sq m 298.084 sq m !
.
P24
P8 P73
!
!
. !
.
P16
432.003 sq m . !
.
P25
P15 !
.
373.050 sq m !
. P14
P9 !
.
P6 P10 !
.
!
. 323.925 sq m P11
!
.
!
.
P12 980 967
P5 !
. 966
4781420.000000
4781420.000000
. ! P4
! P13
. !
.
P1
!
. 496.185 sq m 981
P2
!
.
Legend
P3
! 968 1053
. !
. NUNGA_WAYPOINTS
P_ROAD
982
4781390.000000
4781390.000000
PLOTS3
463
516840.000000 516880.000000 516920.000000 516960.000000 517000.000000 517040.000000
Example of parcel division into plots Example of parcel division into plots
Rusororo CamScanner
Busanza
13
NATIONAL LAND USE DEVELOPMENT UNIT DISTRIBUTION AMONG SUPPLIERS

MASTER PLAN
The NLUDMP’s spatial framework outlines the type of units
The National Land Use and Development Master Plan needed for 2050 by organizing them into 5 categories,
(NLUDMP) is a “national spatial planning tool intended to ranging from Type A+, single-storied housing solutions, to
guide the well balanced, integrated and efficient use of land in Type D, apartment blocks of 10 – 22 floors each. Although
Rwanda during the implementation of Vision 2050.” By 2050, cost is not a factor in the distribution, the plan does make
the NLUDMP targets Rwanda to have a population of 22,1 note that certain typologies are likely to be less affordable
million (at a growth rate of 2 percent) distributed according and this is reflected in the NLUDMP distribution (ref. Table
to the carrying capacity of different types of settlements and XX1). With the overall objective of preserving land and
their specific function in the national economy. promoting smart densification, the proposed unit types are
to be distributed across Rwandan cities and towns according
To meet the housing needs of 22,1 million people in 2050, to projected population growth and anticipated demand. To
the NLUDMP projects that 5,5 million dwelling units will be better understand how Rwanda can achieve these housing
required, including an existing stock of 1 million. In order supply targets, the present study allocates the typologies
to deliver the remaining 4,5 million, the plan estimates an to the 6 different building suppliers based on EICV5 data
annual average construction of 150 000 dwelling units and Census 2022 data on housing quality, as well as a field
from 2020 until 2050, arguing in favour of the replacement assessment of market trends and industry capacity drawn
and upgrading of informal settlements and densification from stakeholder interviews.
of existing cities and rurban centres before embarking on
greenfield developments. To this end, the plan envisions In addition to the breakdown by type, the NLUDMP takes
the delivery of 2.7 million new and 1.8 million replacement Rwanda’s existing housing stock into account, both
dwellings over the 30 years. in terms of quantity and quality. So, although the plan
specifies that 5.5 million dwelling units will be required by
Between delays imposed by Covid and persistent sector- 2050, 1 million are deemed to be of satisfactory quality. Of
level constraints (e.g., limited access to finance, high cost the remaining 4.5 million, then, the NLUDMP argues that
and high import of building materials, etc.), the Rwandan only 60% of these (2.7 million) shall need to be new build if
housing industry has fallen far short of its goal. A study of 40% (1.8 million) can be achieved through the upgrade of
10 years of Building Permitting Information Management existing structures. Consequently, the estimated number
Systems (BPMIS) records reveals that in Kigali, the country’s of units to be delivered on a yearly basis is roughly 108,000
most active construction hub, fewer than 3,000 new dwelling and 72,000 new and upgraded dwelling units, respectively,
units were constructed per annum since 2013. At this rate, between 2025 and 2050. To devise a proper sector supply
Rwanda will not achieve its objective of guaranteeing its strategy capable of delivering those units to the market, it
citizens “universal access to affordable and decent housing.” is first important to see 1/ how new build and upgrade are
defined and 2/ what supplier can deliver which product to
It follows that the Government of Rwanda and its partners market, and 3/ in what quantity the supplier can deliver it.
at the World Bank have since introduced a host of high-
level policies designed to support both the demand and
supply sides. However, given the urgency of the situation,
a detailed supply side roadmap is required, one that lays
out a path for current and future producers to realize the
millions of dwelling units required by 2050. To achieve this
goal, the current study builds on the national spatial human
settlement framework outlined in the NLUDMP, marrying
existing suppliers with the typologies and settlement patterns
championed in the plan.
Dwelling units needed in Rwanda by 2050

broken down into typologies
14
DEFINITIONS According to this breakdown, then, the chart reveals that
more than 40% of all urban households in Rwanda do occupy
New Build consists of entirely new structures built to code homes that require some form of upgrade. At the same
and with respect of all land use guidelines and zoning time, the data attests to an important detail regarding this
regulations. New structures shall be approved and inspected vulnerable housing stock: it is located both in planned and
by the local authorities as specified in Part 5: Section 1 of the unplanned areas. This implies that a distinction should be
Rwanda Building Code. made when prioritizing upgrading activities, as the process
may generally be more expensive in higher density unplanned
Although upgrade, rehabilitation or retrofit is addressed in settlements where trunk infrastructure is not yet be available.
Part 13: Existing Structures of the Rwanda Building Code, the Given the technical and locational parameters involved in
definition about what a structure suitable for upgrade consists upgrading, the following definition is proposed:
of remains unclear. Previous studies have identified this gap
and proposed the following categorizations: overcrowding, Structures that quality for upgrading as a “retrofit” are mostly
low build quality, temporary homes, and homes in high- located in unplanned settlements. The quality of these
risk locations. Analysis of the EICV5 and Census 2012 and structures is low enough that mere “retrofitting” is impossible,
2022 data conducted for the Housing Market Study reveal necessitating a more substantial intervention that may involve
another dimension that is often overlooked: access to partial demolition or even rebuilding. For the purposes of
services, most particularly with respect to proper sanitation this study we define “retrofit” as the practice of bringing an
and waste disposal. Based on this, 5 segments of urban existing structure up to full compliance with code safety
housing quality were established, as shown in the below regulations, which may involve the demolition and rebuilding
chart. Using this breakdown, it is possible to define structures of the entire structure, reusing whatever materials are
needing upgrading as any structures made of non-durable or available from the original construction in the same location
semi-durable materials, structures with inadequate access as the original structure. Retrofitting may also be understood
to services or both. Overcrowding shall not yet enter the as the upgrading of sanitation systems (replacement of a
debate with respect to upgrading. Rather, if market actors pit latrine with a compost toilet, for instance), water supply
are enabled to deliver more and diverse units to the market, systems (rainwater collection and filtration, as one example),
households should hopefully have access to more suitable the addition of an external communal kitchen or other shared
accommodation. amenities.
Segmentation of households in high density (proxy) urban settlements based on dwelling conditions and access to services
(Source: Housing Market Study, 2023)
15
Taking project size, technical capacity and EICV5 data into account, it is possible to develop a scenario
distributing the 5,5 million units among the 6 categories of suppliers as shown in the below table.
Table XX2. Scenario for allocating NLUDMP prescribed housing need by supplier type
U N I T TY PO LO GI E S
A+ A B C D
5–9
1 f loor 1 – 2 f loors 3 – 4 f loors f loors 10 – 2 2 f l oors
L a n d o w n e r S e lf B u i l d ( 1 D U ) 650,000 350,000 - - -
L a n d o w n e r P r i v a t e I n v e st m e n t ( 1 - 5 D U ) 256,000 200,000 - - -
L a n d o w n e r J o i n t V e n tu r e ( 5 - 2 0 D U ) - 250,000 175,000 10,000 -
M i c r o - S c a l e D ev e l o p e r ( 5 - 2 0 D U ) 150,000 158,500 160,000 20,000 -
S m a l l - S c a l e D e v e l op e r ( 2 0 - 1 0 0 D U ) - 562,500 500,000 140,000 10,000
La rge -S c a l e D e v e l op e r (100+ D U ) - 280,000 150,000 190,000 235,000
T OT A L FOR 2 050 1, 6 56 , 000 2 , 17 5, 000 1, 000, 000 3 7 0, 000 2 45, 000
Scenario for allocating NLUDMP prescribed housing need by supplier type

Given that 1 million units already exist, and 1,8 million shall need to be upgraded, it is possible to do
another distribution among suppliers. Given the large number of upgraded units to be completed, and the
limited financial and technical capacity of the public sector to undertake the endeavor at this scale, it can
become a means of unlocking subsidies for large-scale developers. In other words, large-scale developers
who assist in the upgrading of certain neighborhoods (e.g, servicing neighborhoods adjacent to their
developments) may be able to unlock additional subsidies from the government on the condition that they
maintain the units at an affordable price. Upgrading by micro-development (or backyard landlords)
wouldthat
Given be an1 important pipeline
million units already forexist,
the formalization of the rental
and 1,8 million market
to their and could be
developments) supported
may by unlock additional
be able to
specialized
shall need tofinancial products
be upgraded, and
it is technical
possible to support designed subsidies
do another to increase both
from theyield and quality.
government on theThe
condition that they
impact subsidy
distribution amongcalculator presented
suppliers. Given thelaterlarge
in this reportofshall test
number this hypotheses
maintain further.
the units at an affordable price. Upgrading by
upgraded units to be completed, and the limited financial micro-development (or backyard landlords) would be
and technical capacity of the public sector to undertake the an important pipeline for the formalization of the rental
endeavor at this scale, it can become a means of unlocking market and could be supported by specialized financial
subsidies for large-scale developers. In other words, large- products and technical support designed to increase both
scale developers who assist in the upgrading of certain yield and quality. The impact subsidy calculator presented
neighborhoods (e.g, servicing neighborhoods adjacent later in this report shall test this hypotheses further.
D w e l l i n g U n i ts By S up p l i e r
R et rof it New
L a n d o w n e r S e lf B u i l d 750,000 250,000
L a n d o w n e r P r i v a t e I n v e st m e n t 300,000 156,000
L a n d o w n e r J o i n t V e n tu r e 135,000 300,000
M i c r o - S c a l e D ev e l o p e r 450,000 38,500
S m a l l - S c a l e D e v e l op e r 0 1,212,500
La rge -S c a l e D e v e l op e r 165,000 689,000
1,800,000 2,646,000
Dwelling Units By Supplier
16
3. BASELINE : SECTOR PERFORMANCE
In addition to its 10-year review of Rwanda’s housing sector, As of 2021, settlements (both rural and urban) have been
the team endeavoured to take a snapshot of housing supply constructed in all 30 of Rwanda’s Districts.
as it stands today as a means of understanding 1/ the pace, The successful delivery of more than 28,000 units in
capacity, and scale of ongoing housing supply activities 222 settlements over a 10-year period is the result of an
in Rwanda and 2/ how far the sector has progressed in efficient and closely monitored supply chain involving
meetings its ambitious policy targets. The first shall be done agencies and actors at all levels of government, from
with a review of affordable housing projects currently on the planning, design through construction.
market;, the second, via a review of the country’s Building
Permit Information Management System (BPMIS). Private Sector Delivery
PART 1: AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS Where the public sector has benefitted from the resources,
partnerships, and policy alignment to deliver housing
Despite the relatively small quantity of recognized at large-scale, the private sector has mostly focused on
affordable dwelling units on the market today, both the small-scale housing solutions, delivered by outside of
public and private sector have been actively engaged in formal finance and construction structures.
their provision as described below.
However, given the sheer size of the rental market (ref.
Public Sector Delivery Housing Market Study), it is clear that the private informal
sector is an efficient and active participant in the delivery
To date, the public sector has delivered a range of of affordable housing solutions. While these are not yet
different housing solutions at scale, targeting both the traceable, statistics revealed through the Housing Market
low (IDP Model Villages) and the middle-income brackets Study research indicate the number of rental solutions are
(Batsinda II) of the income pyramid. In the case of formidable.
projects above 100 DU, parallel investments in securing
the building material supply chain facilitated project
implementation. In the case of the IDPMVs, delivery
schedules were maintained due to existing material and
labour supply contracts with Ruliba Clays and the RDF/
Engineering Brigade, respectively. In the case of Batsinda
II, an implementation-stage agreement with AfriPrecast
facilitated the testing for the application of new building
solutions for housing. In other cases, the government has
facilitated private investment into production facilities
following a contract for the delivery of affordable housing
units (e.g., Remote Group). In yet another example, the
government’s vulgarization of new technologies has
succeeded in driving additional investment into the
production sector (e.g., the use of Rowlock Bond Bricks
for IDP Model Village projects triggered brickmakers to
deliver similar products).
In addition to making the link between the production of

materials and the production of housing, the government
of Rwanda has made other gestures to support the
implementation of housing projects. Most notable is their
nationwide land banking scheme, which proposes to
hold land and make it available in quantities and locations
sufficiently attractive to private developers. To date, the
Rwanda Housing Authority, the Development Bank of
Rwanda in addition to the Rwanda Social Security Board
have accumulated reserves of greenfield land aimed to
support the development of affordable housing projects,
Source: Scoping Rwanda’s Affordable Housing
including the IDP Model Villages. Sector and its Financing (2021)
17
Looking forward, however, as the sector aims at In the meantime, the present snapshot of affordable
formalization, the team reviewed the number of housing projects is intended to gauge the average
designated affordable housing projects currently on the duration of a so-called affordable real estate projects
market. The majority of these received some form of and determine the number of affordable dwelling units
support from the Government of Rwanda, begging the constructed per year. We can conclude that a number of
question about the ability of the government to support 500 formal affordable dwelling units are being builtd each
more, and more nuanced, affordable housing projects year, a. And the sizes of the project can vary from 15 to
led by the private sector. The question of rental further more than 1000 dwelling units.
complicates the issue, as it will require vastly different
supply chains in order to ensure the stock maintains its
quality and affordability in the long-term.
ONGOING AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS IN RWANDA

No of Units No Units
No Name Time Span Time Span
planned completed
1 Bumbogo Housing 289 18
2 Gahanga Housing 295 59
3 See Far Housing 452 52

Gahanga Riverside
4 200 86
Estate
Bwiza Riverside
5 2 000 252
Project
6 Busanza Project 1 260 1 260
7 Kinyinya & Rwankuba 1 000 300

2018
8 Kabuga Unknown 86 - 32
2022
9 Rugarama 2 000 -
Secondary City
10 68 68
Projects
11 Rusororo Hill Side 88 -
Masaka Housing
12 278 -
Remote Group
Masaka Housing
13 600 15
Urukumbuzi
14 Kagarama 960 48
15 Izuba City 221 64
TOTAL 9 797 2 254 23%
500 DU constructed/year
18
PART 2: BUILDING PERMIT INFORMATION KEY FINDINGS
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (BPMIS)
• Despite nearly 10 years of experience logging
As part of its analysis, the project team reviewed data and tracking permitting activity in the City of Kigali, the
contained within the Building Permit Management challenge of duplicate applications and incomplete
Information System (BPMIS), the national portal that fields persists. In the case of Secondary City Musanze
manages electronic applications for construction and and Satellite City Nyamata (via Bugesera District), both
related permits. First piloted in Kigali in 2013, the BPMIS datasets suffer from a mixture of poor formatting and
was rolled out nationwide by the Rwanda Housing high levels of non-response, which means that insight on
Authority in 2016, with the intent to track, measure and residential development patterns and trends outside of
map construction activity across the country. Analysing the Rwanda’s capital city remains limited.
the application data had two primary objectives: the first,
to understand the nature of new construction, and the • Chapter 8 of the National Land Use Development
second, to assess the private sector’s current appetite Master Plan proposes 5 distinct types of dwelling for 2050,
and capacity to realize the housing vision encapsulated ranging from single storey to 22 floors. The NLUDMP
in city-level Master Plans and the NLUDMP, both of which includes projections of the number of each dwelling
outline the country’s development objectives for 2050. type required to achieve the desired consolidation and
agglomerations outlined in the plan. By 2050, the plan
RESULTS OF DATA ANALYSIS indicates that Rwanda should boast 1,615,000 dwellings
units in some 62,000 storied buildings, 65% of which
A detailed review of 43,000 construction permit should be 5 to 9 floors. Information culled from 10 years
applications for the City of Kigali between 2013 and 2022 of BPMIS data indicates that the number of buildings in
revealed the following about residential construction in this category is still low, meaning that prioritizing further
Kigali: research into the design, construction, financing and
offtake of multi-family storied buildings suitable to the
• The number of permits applied for in all key Rwanda culture and building context is required.
residential zones has grown massively. Applications for
development in zones R1 and R1A have both increased by • The important data gaps that characterize the
more than 5 times since 2013. Applications to develop in BPMIS dataset mean that details related to the current
an R2 zone increased from just 83 in 2013 to 624 in 2022. state of housing development in Rwanda remains uneven
Similarly, R3 applications have increased from 116 to 766. across districts, cities and sectors. Additional data such
This increasing trend is a positive indication of the uptake as high-solution satellite imagery or, in the case of Kigali,
of formal processes when undertaking construction. LIDAR data, could assist in better visualizing construction
activity in Rwanda, particularly if this information could be
• Although the number of construction permits analysed over time. Although it is outside of the scope
has steadily increased over time, construction activity of this current assignment, plotting BPMIS construction
has primarily been focused on low-rise, low-density permitting data on aerial images taken intermittently
residential construction. The shift to high-rise, high- between 2013 and 2022 could shed light on the scale,
density construction is not yet visible in the data. Active shape and growth patterns of informal development and
promotion of multi-family housing solutions will be its relationship to key investment areas and/or to growing
required in order to shift consumer preferences and pockets of formal residential development.
prepare the private sector for delivery.
• As with the number of permits, the number • Missing information about project locality also
of new dwelling units has also increased significantly. makes it difficult to say if formal residential construction
However, it is still well beneath the required number of is on par with population growth across districts. With
new housing units required to support the growth of the time, as the quality of the BPMIS data improves, it would
Kigali City population. The master plan envisions that in be possible to put migratory patterns in relationship to
2050, an additional 859,000 housing units will be required, residential construction activity to better understand if
which translates to an average of 27,000 new units a year. and how and where formal and informal housing markets
According to the BPMIS data, in 2022 there were just are responding to demand.
under 8,500 dwelling units for proposed development.
19
4. CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS IN RWANDA

In 2018, the International Growth Center (IGC) published remains the dominant base construction material in both
a Review of industrial policy in Rwanda (November 2018), rural and urban environments. Consequently, emissions
which offers an overall assessment of manufacturing from the building materials and construction sector
and production. While the paper primarily advocates for in Rwanda remains low relative to more industrialized
Rwanda to integrate global value chains, the research nations. However, with urbanization and population
does provide insight into the positive economic, social, growth rates on the rise, the need for mass production
and environmental benefits of housing production. These and storied urban building solutions will surely increase
include: the total energy consumed and process-related CO2
emissions of the sector over the coming decades.
• A need to focus on a value chain approach that
includes the services around the production of goods (e.g., In 2019, buildings used 57% of the total energy and
concentrate on building a pipeline of technicians who fix accounted for 32% of the process-related CO2 emissions
and import machines and not only on the producers who in Africa. Over the next 30 years, these numbers are
will use them to make products). slated to increase drastically as Africa undergoes an
• When considering new building materials unprecedented rural to urban transformation. By 2050,
and construction technologies, one must consider the it is estimated that Africa’s cities and towns will house
short- and long-term infrastructure requirements for the nearly 1.5 billion people, 60% of the region’s projected
production to function at scale and consider how these population.
impact on the final price of the dwelling unit.
• Focus on supplier linkages and build natural As old cities grow and new cities emerge across the
connections between production and construction continent, the demand for building materials and storied
activities (ref. ADHI model). urban building solutions shall also increase. In Rwanda - a
• The manufacturing of building materials requires land-scarce economy with one of the highest urbanization
labour, who in turn require housing. Consequently, rates on the continent - the need for building materials
the production of materials can directly contribute to and construction solutions for dense urban areas is
create a pipeline from worker to housing that may have particularly acute.
important repercussions at the scale of the city. Given
the sheer volume and diversity of products needed for Despite relatively low emissions, Rwanda’s formal building
the construction of housing, the production of building material and construction sector is largely a mineral-
materials has the potential to usher in a new era of green extractive based industry, reliant on cement, lime, sand,
industrialization in Rwanda. aggregates, and clay. These base materials are processed
using high heat and burning of biomass, to form the
BACKGROUND backbone structure of Rwanda’s cities and towns,
consisting of buildings with concrete frames, cement-
With a projected demand of 150,000 new dwelling units based finish materials, fired clay bricks and concrete
per year through 2050 (as per the NLUDMP), the volume blocks. Not only is production of these materials costly,
of building materials required to supply the construction but they present important environmental hazards, many
industry is well beyond the current capacity of local of them linked directly with climate change.
production facilities. If 60% of new homes for one year
were to be made of Modern Bricks for example, the market Consequently, the Building Material Strategy drafted
would need to supply some 900,000,000 bricks per as a component of this study espouses the following
year (average house size 50m2). The current production principles:
capacity nationwide is less than 40,000,000 bricks per • Short-term: Improvement in production and
year, less than 5% of the total needed. Estimates done construction practices using existing materials to
for other supply chains result in the same conclusion: maximize efficiency and reduce waste
Rwanda does not currently have sufficient local materials • Short-term: Support small-scale developers
to meet the housing demand, let alone the demand for and private builders in substituting certain materials and
all other urban buildings and infrastructure projects. technologies with easy-to-use, environment friendly and
Consequently, any research on the intersection between cost-effective alternatives that do not require immediately
housing and the construction industry shall need to adopt new structural strategies
a wider lens, considering the policy environment and the • Medium-term: Introduce technologies that
technical and financial resources and manpower required gradually shift production away from polluting sources
to shift to industrial-scale production. as a means of reducing the environmental footprint and
reducing costs
Although data from the Integrated Household and Living • Long-term: Actively promote the use of new
Conditions Survey (EICV5) indicates that the quality of materials and technologies supported by investment in
residential construction is steadily improving, mud brick training, advocacy and logistical support.
20
DEFINITIONS composites), materials shall refer to a raw building
construction elements prior to their assembly into a
For the purposes of this study, the definition of alternative structural form. For example, clay shall be considered
building materials and construction technologies (ABMT) a material and a brick a unit of that material. Similarly,
will build upon the definition proposed by Kenya’s National concrete shall be considered a composite material
Construction Authority (NCA) which defines ABMTs as: consisting of other raw materials like aggregate, stone,
• Low-cost building materials and technologies sand, water and cement. Other common material families
attributed to lowering construction costs, particularly in are wood, stone, metal, etc.
housing. • Technologies: A technology shall refer to the
• Materials aimed at achieving goals of sustainable methods and technical processes used in a building’s
development towards affordable housing construction. For example, the RCC-reinforced brick
• Construction processes, building materials cavity wall is considered a technology made of materials
and tools that are safe, cost-effective, innovative and like clay, concrete and reinforcement bars. Innovative or
environmentally friendly, and which are acceptable to the alternative building technologies, such as 3D printing or
climatic conditions of an area fiber-cement boards, are those considered to maximize
efficiency, increase performance and/or reduce
In the case of Rwanda, this definition can be expanded environmental footprint.
to the present study, which argues that the mass-scale
production of ABMTs for the construction of affordable The full research on Building Materials and Construction,
housing are a pipeline for achieving the urbanization and which including a review of different material value
industrialization objectives outlined in Vision 2050. chains, Material Kits by income group and the Building
Materials and Technology Assessment Framework and
It is also worth noting the distinction between materials case studies of other African government construction
and technologies. For the purposes of this exercise, the material policy initiatives, is included in the Annex to this
following definitions shall apply: report. Applications of the research have informed the
• Materials: Whether natural or man-made (e.g. design of the typologies, and associated material kits,
reviewed in Chapter 3.
21
5. RENTAL HOUSING
To date, the low-income rental housing sector in Rwanda • Employer landlords- provide accommodation as
is dominated by private small-scale landowners looking a recruitment incentive.
to generate a passive income stream. Between 2012 • Not-for-profit landlords- can operate at scale
and 2022, the number of renter households nationwide and increasingly are favoured by government as public
doubled from 360,000 to 735,000. With population private partners. They make profit but are not distributed.
growth and urbanization rates expected to rise • Institutional landlords- operate at large scale and
exponentially, the demand for affordable rental housing are favoured by investors such as pension institutions.
will only increase, presenting a unique opportunity for • Public sector landlords- Government and
landowners (individuals and/or companies) in desirable municipal government owned. A slowly declining sector
locations to benefit from the demand for rental housing. in most developed countries as they are not generally well
And so, despite the challenges related to finance and run and starved of funds.
regulatory barriers, the potential rewards for those who
can navigate these obstacles are significant. RENTAL HOUSING TYPES
• Formal Private Rental: This market comprises
Results from the housing market study reveal severe formal accommodation stock, generally task-built
challenges with respect to the quality of rental housing primarily in inner- and near-city higher density areas and
(e.g., poor access to services and overcrowding), medium density secondary nodes. The types of rental
particularly for renters at the low-end of the income units included in this sector are free standing houses, flats,
pyramid. So as Rwanda’s rental housing market continues townhouses, and cluster houses. It is generally developed
to grow, there is a pressing need to formalize the by Private Corporate Landlords, Small Private Landlords
sector and ensure that it operates in a safe, secure, and and Individual (Enterprise) Landlords.
sustainable manner. With an estimated monthly revenue • Social Rental Housing: This includes all social
of more than 9 billion Rwandan francs per month, the housing stock managed by accredited Social Housing
stakes are high, and the potential benefits of formalization Institutions in charge of providing rental or co-operative
are significant. Formalization can lead to increased housing options for low- to middle-income households.
investment, improved access to finance, better quality • Public Rental Housing: This includes all housing
housing, and enhanced economic growth. Thus, Rwanda stock under the control of Public Rental Institutions.
has a valuable opportunity to create a thriving, formalized • Hostel / Single Accommodation: This comprises
housing market that benefits both the country’s citizens hostels, single rooms with communal facilities and
and its economy. one-bedroom accommodation, including student
accommodation. It is generally developed by Private
In the same vein as the team’s recommendation that the Corporate Landlords, Small Private Landlords and
Government of Rwanda consider policy and economic Individual (Enterprise) Landlords.
incentives for all six categories of housing suppliers, a • Household Rental: This includes all rental stock
thriving rental housing market needs a range of landlord created on private households’ land. This occurs in existing
profiles to ensure a variety of rental offerings are available residential areas and includes formally constructed rooms
on the local market (e.g., rental, rent-to-own, social / flatlets both formal and informal.
rental, etc.). Research into different rental markets in
Given the distribution of renters across the income
Sub-Saharan Africa and abroad reveal the main types of
pyramid, it is clear that a strategy that includes a mix of
landlords and rental housing products that can exist in a
landlords and a mix of housing types will best address
housing market.
the needs and purchasing power of an increasingly
diverse Rwandan population. A multi-pronged strategy
LANDLORD TYPES
is also the best way to address the persistent quality
• Small scale landlords- most prevalent in Africa
concerns that currently plague lower-income rental
and typically reflect a not-well organised housing market.
offerings (ref. Housing Market Study). Consequently, as
the Government of Rwanda moves forward with building
a national rental housing program, it is recommended to
work both across and within segments to deliver a range
of solutions that best achieve the country’s aspirations in
terms of diversity, quality, and affordability. Furthermore,
given 1/ the long-term investment opportunity that
rental housing represents, and 2/ the need for strong
ongoing management and maintenance structures, it
would behove the government to begin its rental housing
journey with a detailed assessment of potential partners
22
with 1/ patient investment capital (e.g., pension funds) and through the sale, or if the property values decline over
2/ property management experience. The stakeholder time.
mapping should include the 6 existing housing supplier • Legal and regulatory risks: Tenant purchase
types to identify support mechanisms that could deliver schemes can be subject to a range of legal and regulatory
quick wins while it invests into a larger housing stock challenges, such as disputes over ownership rights or
(e.g., demand side rental vouchers given to tenants for violations of local housing regulations. Suppliers must
properties where landlords have suitably upgraded their navigate these risks carefully to avoid costly legal battles
rental accommodations). or fines.
• Tenant management challenges: Tenant
Rent-to-own / Tenant Purchase Schemes (TPS) purchase schemes require suppliers to effectively manage
the transition from rental to ownership, which can be a
Although it is outside the scope of the current assignment, complex and time-consuming process. Suppliers must
recommendations on rental housing programs cannot ensure that tenants are able to obtain financing, complete
escape the debate around tenant purchase schemes necessary repairs, or renovations, and successfully
(TPS), otherwise known as rent-to-own. In a country navigate the legal and administrative steps involved in
like Rwanda, where the majority of households aspire to purchasing a home.
own a home, TPS often appears in policy and planning • Social impact concerns: Tenant purchase
documents as a vehicle for supporting low-income schemes can have broader social impact concerns,
households to become homeowners. However, while such as the displacement of low-income renters or the
tenant purchase schemes can be beneficial for some gentrification of affordable housing markets. Suppliers
tenants, there are also potential challenges to consider, must consider these concerns carefully when developing
namely: their strategies for tenant purchase schemes.
• High costs: Tenant purchase schemes may Despite these challenges, tenant purchase schemes
require a substantial down payment and ongoing remain a popular policy option for governments and
mortgage payments, which can make it difficult for housing advocates around the world. Many proponents
low-income families to afford. In some cases, the costs argue that such schemes can help to promote social
associated with purchasing the property may be higher mobility and empower low-income families, while also
than the costs of renting, which can put financial strain on providing a boost to the local housing market. However,
the tenant. it is important to carefully evaluate the costs and benefits
• Maintenance and repair costs: In a tenant of such programs, and to ensure that they are designed in
purchase scheme, the tenant is responsible for a way that meets the needs of all stakeholders involved.
maintaining and repairing the property. This can be costly CONCLUSION
and time-consuming, particularly if the property requires
major repairs or upgrades. Rental housing can be a lucrative investment opportunity
• Risk of foreclosure: If the tenant is unable to for individuals or organizations looking to generate passive
keep up with mortgage payments, they may risk losing income. By purchasing rental properties and leasing them
their home through foreclosure. This can be a devastating out to tenants, landlords can generate regular cash flow
experience, particularly if the tenant has invested a and build equity over time. Rental housing also offers the
significant amount of time and money into the property. potential for long-term appreciation, as property values
• Limited flexibility: Once a tenant purchases a tend to increase over time in most markets. Additionally,
property through a tenant purchase scheme, they may rental housing investments can offer tax advantages, such
be tied to that property for an extended period of time. as deductions for mortgage interest and depreciation.
This can limit their flexibility to move to a new location While there are risks associated with any investment,
or change their living situation if their circumstances rental housing is seen as a viable option for companies
change. and/or investors seeking to diversify their portfolios and
build wealth through real estate. No less important is the
On the side of the supplier or investors, other concerns role rental housing plays in the lives of more than 50%
may come into play, such as: of Rwandan households, who count income from rent as
one of their primary sources of monthly income. For this
• Financial risks: Tenant purchase schemes reason, designing a rental housing program in Rwanda
require suppliers to give up their rental income streams that shifts responsibility, ownership, and profits solely to
in exchange for a one-time lump-sum payment from the government and outside investors, comes with the
tenants. This can create financial risks for suppliers if they risk of depriving tens of thousands of households of a vital
are not able to recoup their investment in the property income stream.
23
6. HOUSING SUPPLIER PROFILES IN RWANDA
Data from literature and interviews with construction industry reason, the supplier groups naturally organize themselves
professionals reveals the existence of six distinct builder into 1/ those who can rely on municipal infrastructure versus
profiles, each one embracing a unique business model that those who must service their land prior to construction,
delivers a particular type of housing product to the market, and 2/ those who own land versus those who must acquire
be it in the formal or informal sector. Where the demand and amalgamate land for development. Other defining
side segmentation (ref. Housing Marking Study) revealed characteristics are related to scale of the business activity
land and infrastructure to be pivotal factors with respect to (from 1 dwelling unit to over 100) and the cost and structure
affordability, the same two components serve as structuring of their financial arrangements. A short description of these
factors in the business model of the various suppliers. For this actors is included below.
LANDOWNER LANDOWNER LANDOWNER

SELF BUILDER PRIVATE INVESTMENT JOINT VENTURE
< 500 M2 < 500 M2 500 M2 - 0.5 HA

1 - 5 DU 1 - 5 DU 5 - 20 DU
Registered landowner who constructs Individuals acquiring one or more plots Neighbouring landowners coming
1 home which the household occupies. for the retrofit of existing units or the together to construct housing blocks
FinScope 2020 reveals that 84% of construction of new dwelling units (or any other type of multi-family unit)
Rwandan households fall into this to be put up for sale or rent. These on conjoined plots. Landowner joint
category. Although this type of supplier are typically single-family or semi- ventures can serve as a vehicle to bring
is overwhelmingly active in rural areas, detached homes and may not always small plots into compliance with local
landowner self-builders still account be located on contiguous plots. They regulations and building guidelines,
for 75% of urban households. While the rely on existing water and electricity ushering in low-rise higher density
level of access to services (e.g., water networks and adopt low-tech solutions, typologies into urban areas. With a
and sanitation) varies greatly by income like improved pit latrines, to dispose mix of owner-occupied and rental
segment, wastewater management of liquid waste. Landowner individual units, landowner joint ventures could
consists primarily of single-household investment builders typically deliver play an important role in formalizing
on-site solutions like pit latrines. between 1 – 5 homes per investment Rwanda’s informal rental market if land
Of the owner-occupiers who build cycle. The business is circular, meaning transaction and technical support were
their own homes in urban areas, 65% that offtake of 1 or 2 units typically offered. In informal neighbourhoods,
report financing plot acquisition and finances the next. Like the landowner these joint ventures present an
construction through savings. 19% self-builder, the landowner individual important opportunity for introducing
report acquiring a loan from a bank investor operates outside of traditional formal amenities (e.g., water and road
and fewer than 5% report having housing finance and construction access) to previously unserviced areas.
borrowed money from friends, family structures, relying on own capital and These types of partnerships enjoy
or a SACCOs. In short, the prolific own labor to deliver the housing. widespread policy support and have
landowner self-builder operates for the been the subject of demonstration
most part outside of both the mortgage projects funded by the Government of
market and the formal construction Rwanda with development partners like
industry. the Swiss Agency for Development and
Cooperation or the Agence Française
de Développement.
24
MICRO-SCALE SMALL-SCALE LARGE-SCALE
DEVELOPER DEVELOPER DEVELOPER
$ $$ $$$
500 M2 - 0.5 HA 0.5 HA - 5 HA 5 HA - 40 HA

5 - 20 DU 20 - 300 DU 300 - 2000 DU
Individual landowner that develops Individual or a small company that A company or organization that
anywhere from 5 to 20 dwelling units develop formal residential properties develops large residential communities
on one plot. In the informal sector, on a small scale. With anywhere from (100 dwelling units or more)
micro-developers are often referred to 20 to 100 dwelling units per project, that typically include mixed-use
as backyard landlords, responsible for small-scale developers may specialize programming. Large-scale developers
introducing a large stock of affordable in a particular typology (e.g., detached, often have access to more significant
rental housing to the market through semi-detached) or technology to limit financial resources and specialized
the construction of small rudimentary potential sourcing challenges. In the teams during certain phases of the
structures behind a main house. These absence of central sewerage systems project. To benefit from economies
structures are largely improvised, in Rwanda, small-scale developers are of scale, large-scale developers may
using substandard materials that often required to introduce formal sanitation develop specializations, going so far
display health and safety challenges. systems in their projects to ensure that as to invest in production facilities,
Infrastructure is ad hoc, often in the wastewater is properly collected and proprietary technologies and/or in
form of shared ablutions in a common treated onsite. Currently, small-scale the recruitment of a skilled workforce
courtyard. Since the property is developers operate on a very small to securitize (or de-risk) their supply
shared with the landowner, the capital scale in Rwanda, and their activities are chains. Large-scale developers may be
investment required for development concentrated in Kigali and the Satellite eligible for partial government subsidies
is limited to the new structures. In cities. and support in land acquisition in the
the formal sector, micro-developers event they can deliver affordable units
typically deliver single family homes at scale. To date, large-scale developers
for sale in popular detached, semi- have mainly concentrated their efforts
detached, or duplex housing typologies in Kigali, where the technical support
on previously acquired land. With and demand for affordable housing
fewer than 20 dwelling units, micro- remains highest.
developers are not required to introduce
a costly wastewater treatment plant,
hence the ability to rely on low-tech
sanitation solutions. Neither the
informal nor formal micro-developers
rely on formalized construction finance
for developing their projects. With
profit margins above 20% in most
cases, neither do they qualify for
affordable housing subsidies. Rather,
with ownership of the land settled in
most cases, the micro-developer, uses
own funds or small unsecured loans to
finance construction.
25
Research commissioned by Access to Finance Rwanda in Above we give a more in-depth analysis of Rwandan housing
2021 identified six housing submarkets in Rwanda, each suppliers with the objective of interrogating their business
one supplied by a different type of builder, from the prolific models to 1/ detect opportunities to improve affordability,
backyard landlord to the large-scale developer. A high-level quality, and yield via technology, capacity building and/or
review of their respective value chains revealed a variety of finance, and 2/ identify potential areas for policy, regulatory,
challenges, most particularly around regulations, construction, and/or financial support. The supplier profiles shall serve
and construction finance. Within the framework of the as the basis for the scenario building exercises and Subsidy
current study – where the team has been asked to analyse Impact Calculator presented in respective chapters.
and evaluate cost structures to identify the components
that impact affordability – a deeper analysis of the builders
currently active in Rwanda’s housing market is warranted.
26
Methodology for analysing supplier profiles: profitability.
1. Match supplier product(s) with the housing and settlement 4. Provide a detailed breakdown of supplier costs into the
types as prescribed in the National Land Use Development following five (5) categories:
Master Plan (NLUDMP, pp. 50 - 52). a. Financial costs (including taxes)
2. Using data from EICV5, Census 2012 and Census 2022, b. Land costs
estimate the number of dwelling units introduced to the c. Development costs
urban market by each supplier type. d. Infrastructure costs
3. Assess supplier performance for each link in the value e. Building costs
chain (land, infrastructure, regulations, design, construction, 5. Propose mixed-supply scenarios for 2025, 2030 and 2035
offtake, and maintenance) with particular emphasis on the designed to meet the objectives of the NLUDMP.
roles of technology, skills and/or finance on productivity and
27
7. FINANCING SOURCES FOR THE HOUSING INDUSTRY

IN RWANDA
Rwanda’s vision for 2050 imagines a working housing market 4. Lower-quality construction as suppliers are
in which the housing needs of all Rwandans are met by an forced to cut corners or use lower-quality materials
array of products that are financed by local investors and to save costs. Not only does this create problems with
a working housing finance sector. And yet, although the maintenance and safety of dwelling units, but it also
country’s financial sector is robust and includes banks, MFIs reduces the overall value of the housing stock. And so,
and pension funds, the lack of a comprehensive finance despite data evidencing improvements in the quality
strategy that addresses both the demand and the supply side of materials used for housing, developments like
has hampered the growth of a truly healthy housing market Urukumbuzi Estates attest to the pervasiveness of this
in Rwanda. The following chapter will review the finance- issue, even with respect to so-called formal construction.
related challenges, strategies and opportunities that exist on Sadly, low-quality materials are not the main source of
the supply side, to identify mechanisms to unlock value chain substandard housing: with Census 2022 reporting that
bottlenecks that threatens to trap the next generation of inadequate access to services (e.g., improper sewerage
Rwandans in substandard or unaffordable housing solutions. disposal) remains a challenge across all Rwandan cities
and towns.
BACKGROUND 5. Increased risk of project failure, as developers
are unable to secure the financing needed to complete
At industry level, the challenges associated with a lack of projects or may be forced to take on more debt than
construction finance include: they can realistically service. This can lead to bankruptcy,
foreclosure, and other negative consequences for
1. Lenders charge higher interest rates, making developers and investors alike.
it more expensive for developers to borrow the funds
needed to build new housing units. This can both 1/ In addition to lower quality construction, increased risk of
reduce the number of developers willing to take on new project failure and reduced or delayed capacity, finance
projects, further reducing the supply of new housing and limitations on the supply side have reduced the private
2/ increase the cost of the housing units as developers sector’s ability to innovate new approaches to housing. At
simply transfer financing costs to the end-user. the same time, limited construction finance has created
2. Reduction in the supply of new affordable housing market distortions, as formal suppliers focus on higher-
units, which exacerbate existing housing shortages and end properties or luxury development to guarantee
drive-up housing costs. Data from the Housing Market sufficient returns on their investment.
Study reveal that fewer than XX number of households
can afford the cheapest built affordable house.
3. Delayed Development of new housing projects,
which can lead to missed opportunities for economic
growth and job creation. This is especially problematic
in Rwanda where public funds to support housing are
limited and so a delayed return is a missed investment
in supporting population growth and local economic
development.
• National Investment Policy (2017)

• The Rwanda Financial Sector Strategy (2018-2024)
• Law N° 05-2015 Governing The Organization Of Pension Schemes
• Law Governing The Organization Of Banking 2017
• Law Establishing The Organisation Of Micro Finance Activities 2008
• Regulation Governing Mortgage Refinance Companies-2020
• Regulation No. 14 of August 2013 on REITs, Regulation No. 20 of July 2016 and Guidelines
Table 4.1. Finance Instruments for the Rwandan Housing Sector
28
PUBLIC-SECTOR INITIATIVES • Provide a mix of typologies from 1 to 3BHK, not
exceeding 80 square meters
Fortunately, the Rwandan Government has not remained • Provide a minimum of 40 affordable DU per
mute in the face of these challenges. In December 2020, hectare
GoR approved the ‘Manufacture and Build to Recover • Adopt any affordable construction technology
Program’ to accelerate private sector investment in approved by the Rwanda Housing Authority and Rwanda
construction and manufacturing. The program includes Standards Board.
incentives such as tax exemptions on construction The Manufacture and Build to Recover Program (MBRP)
materials and tax credits to boost the production of falls under MINICOM’s “Made in Rwanda” policy and as
construction materials (see table below). Eligibility criteria such is part of a broader economic transformation agenda
for the construction incentives (including affordable that the government of Rwanda has been implementing
housing construction) is however limited to projects that over the past two decades. While there is no specific end-
have a minimum investment of US $ 10 million and US $1 date for the program, the government has set a goal of
million for setting up a manufacturing industry. While the achieving self-reliance in key sectors by 2035. The RHFP
incentives would benefit large-scale developers (supplier infrastructure subsidy, on the other hand, is a limited
category no. 6), there is need for mechanisms that source of financing (USD 30 million) that shall need to
specifically target the micro-scale (no. 4) and landowner be disbursed by 2024. More importantly, however, is that
joint-venture (no. 3) category of suppliers. Given their the two funding sources share one important limitation:
outsized contribution to Rwanda’s rental housing market, with a USD 1 million minimum construction value set for
incentives specifically designed for the latter would the MBRP and a 100 dwelling unit minimum established
assuredly trigger large gains in the affordable housing for the RHFP program, only the largest housing suppliers,
sector. the so-called large-scale developers (category no. 6)
may qualify. Consequently, the most productive supply
chains for affordable housing solutions on the market
The government has offered other incentives to support today, are currently excluded from government support.
housing suppliers. Most notable is the infrastructure Understanding the cost-benefit of this policy position
subsidy allocated under the Rwanda Housing Finance is critical: from a finance perspective, does an exclusive
Project (RHFP), which proposes to cover the cost of investment into large-scale supply chains yield the most
infrastructure for developments that meet the following return (counted in affordable units delivered to market)
criteria: for GoR’s investment? The Impact Subsidy Calculator
presented in Chapter 03 shall seek to test this and other
• Deliver code-compliant affordable houses with a hypotheses related to current policy positions.
maximum selling price of FRW 40 million or FRW 500,000
per square meter
• Develop a project with more than 100 dwelling
units
Manufacture and Build to • VAT exemption on imported construction materials not available in the East African
Recover Program (2020) Community (EAC)
• VAT exemption for construction materials sourced domestically
• General construction incentives apply to a minimum investment of USD 10 million
• Greenfield investments eligible for incentives where total construction value is USD 1
million or greater
• Brownfield investments eligible for incentives where total construction value is USD 1
million or 20 percent of total investment
29
PRIVATE-SECTOR INITIATIVES
A 2018 report from the International Labour Organization

(ILO) analysing Rwanda’s construction sector revealed that
the lack of financial services has constrained growth and
operations on the side of suppliers. At the micro-scale,
contractors indicated that they could rarely access financial
products to be able to upgrade their equipment or participate
in competitive biddingss. For large-scale developments,
gethe financial guarantees required to win the bid exceed 10%
of the entire contract value. Furthermore, the requirements
from banks for financial guarantees are prohibitive and can
exceed 12% of the entire contract value. In short, Rwandan
construction professionals face numerous hurdles when
aiming to deliver housing to market through formal channels
at both the large and small scale.
Research conducted over the course of the study included

exchanges with banks regarding financial products available
for Rwandan housing suppliers be they small- or large-scale
operators. The information is summarized in the Construction
Finance Matrix below, which details the financial resources
available through government subsidies, local financial
institutions, or other informal streams to each one of the 6
categories of suppliers. Not only does the matrix attest to an
unbalanced focus of government funds on a limited number
of actors, it speaks to the strength of private funding channels
in the construction, sale and rental of housing in Rwanda.
Not unlike the aforementioned situation with contractors

whose financial limitations increase the cost of doing
business, onerous application and eligibility criteria, short
repayment periods and high interest rates challenge all
housing suppliers, regarding of the size of their operations.
Most notable:
• Landowner self-builders have a high burden of

proof to get access to funds
• Thirty percent collateral for access to short-term
construction finance is not viable for medium- and large-
scale projects that require large capital investments
• Limited grace periods after start of construction
(zero grace period in the case of land purchase) allows for no
construction delays, a high risk in a sector where procurement
processes and limited resources (e.g., materials) regularly
delay project implementation schedules
30
C o n s t r u c t i o n F i n a nc e U s ed b y H o u s i n g S u p p l i e r s i n R w a n d a
G o v e r n m e n t S u b s id i e s L o c a l F i n a nc i a l I ns t it u t i o ns Ot her
• SACCO: FRW 1-5 mio to members for home
renovation and/or extension projects with
200% collateral and IR of 21 – 23% fixed per
annum, term is 1 to 3 years • Rental income
La n d ow n e r • SACCO: BDF-supported loan • Savings
S e l f Bu i l d e r • BK House Construction Loan for self-builders • Loan from friends/family
None
1 Dwelling required proof of formal employment, banking • Inheritance
Unit account and formal land/property documents • Remittances
• NCBA Real Estate Finance Loan for land • Banque Lambert
acquisition or construction up to 70% of the
project amount (repayment period up to 60
months)
• SACCO: FRW 1-5 mio to members for home
renovation and/or extension projects with
200% collateral and IR of 21 – 23% fixed per
annum, 1-3 year term
• Atlantic New Morocco: FRW 40 million, IR of
14%, 10 to 15-year term
• Rental income
La n d ow n e r • BK House Construction Loan for self-builders
• Savings
Pri v a t e required proof of formal employment, banking
• Loan from friends/family
Inves t ment None account and formal land/property documents
• Inheritance
1 – 5 Dwelling • NCBA Real Estate Finance Loan for land
Unit • Remittances
acquisition or construction up to 70% of the
project amount (repayment period up to 60 • Banque Lambert
months)
• Equity : Loan for land and/or home
construction, IR of 18.25%, with payback
period of 25 years (max loan amount
dependent on client’s ability to repay)
• World Bank RUDP Phase II is
financing basic road
infrastructure in 4 unplanned
• Atlantic New Morocco: FRW 40 million, IR of settlements in Kigali
14%, 10 to 15-year term • UN-Habitat is currently
• NCBA Real Estate Finance Loan for land supporting the City of Kigali in
acquisition or construction up to 70% of the searching for impact investors
project amount (repayment period up to 60 to help finance unplanned
La n d ow n e r settlement upgrading in
months)
J o i n t V e n tu r e Rwandan cities using a PPP
None • BK House Construction Loan for self-builders
5 – 20 model
required proof of formal employment, banking
Dwelling Units
account and formal land/property documents • Access to Finance Rwanda
• Equity : Loan for land and/or home and the Swiss Agency for
construction, IR of 18.25%, with payback Development and
period of 25 years (max loan amount Cooperation are currently
dependent on client’s ability to repay) exploring SPV structures to
support upgrading of informal
settlements (70% private
investment and 30% GoR)
M i c ro-S c a l e
Develop er
None
5 – 20
Dwelling Units • NCBA Real Estate Finance Loan for land
S ma l l -S c a l e acquisition or construction up to 70% of the
Develop er project amount (repayment period up to 60
None • Re-finance of foreign
20 – 100 months)
Dwelling Units property assets, transfer of
• KCB : Real Estate Development Mortgages
money to a local Rwandan
Under the RHFP: Basic available upon reviewed of fully approved
company from which the
infrastructures which (permit, EIA) project documents for land
developer can borrow a
includes (materials and acquisition for development of sale or rental
shareholder loan with lower
technology for roads, properties up to 70% of project costs, IR of
IR and longer repayment
La rge -S c a l e water treatment and 17.5%, commitment fees 2.5%
periods than a typical
Develop er supply, electricity, energy • Equity : Loan for land and/or home
construction loan
100+ and street lighting, construction, IR of 18.25%, with payback
Dwelling Units communication. period of 25 years (max loan amount
accessibility to public dependent on client’s ability to repay)
transport and public
transport services, and
social amenities)
31
RECOMMENDATIONS
New Financial Products technical assistance package to ensure that storied building
solutions respect codes and standards. These loans could
Given the high cost of finance and limited subsidy offerings be granted specifically to consortia who can present land as
from the government, the research investigated possible ways collateral. Once construction is completed, the mortgage
in which to reallocate subsidies to increase yield and improve could turn into an end-user mortgage product in the case of
overall affordability. A few of these ideas are listed below. a sale property.
The remaining are summarized in the final recommendations
chart according to value chain link and housing supplier type.
• With so few households able to afford mortgage GoR Budget reallocation
finance in Rwanda (less than 15,000), the RHFP could
consider shifting funds from demand-side financial support The housing-related activities to be supported by the
to providing capital to builders for construction, which is a Government of Rwanda in 2023 by the Urbanization
much more significant market. and Rural Settlements sector fall into the social housing
• Financial institutions on the other hand, could category, including the construction of IDP model villages
develop a mortgage product or a micro-loan for landowner and shelter for genocide survivors. All told, MININFRA
self-builders and landlord private investment (categories 1 reports an annual budget of 25 billion FRW for these types
and 2) who are delivering low-income rental housing. of activities. Additional expenditures on roads, extension of
• Banks could also develop a micro-mortgage water supply networks and terracing in rural areas completes
product specifically for public sector workers who build for the investment envelope. Given GoR’s competing priorities,
themselves and for renters. the research explored other avenues of funding within pre-
• Introduce a mortgage loan product specifically approved investments. One funding channel distinguished
for densification. This could support the landowner joint itself as more likely than the rest: the climate finance facility
venture (category 3) in consolidating land with neighbours under the Ministry of Environment.
and densifying construction. The product could come with a
Climate Finance / Green Finance
32
As part of its commitments under the Paris Agreement, Rwanda criteria that responds to GoR policy and aspirations related
released its updated National Determined Contributions to the environment. A shortlist of these crossover projects
(NDC) to the Climate United Nations Framework Convention is currently being prepared under the UN-URBAN LEDS II
on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 2020. The following program.
year, the Ministry of Environment released the NDC
Implementation Framework (2021 – 2025), a database that
identifies the prioritized NDC actions by mapping existing AVAILABILITY OF DATA ON HOUSING FINANCE
work underway and prioritizing projects for implementation,
in respect to national planning and budgeting processes. Among the expected outputs of this study is a series of
In total, there are 557 projects or activities mapped to the recommendations on how data can support the growth and
NDC and categorized by status of implementation (planned, structuring of Rwanda’s housing sector. Housing finance is no
ongoing, concluded in 2020, indicative, without support). exception. As per the Centre for Affordable Housing Finance
in Africa’s 2022 Yearbook, Rwanda’s data environment is
To date, 278 of the total 557 projects are mapped in the already quite rich. To date, housing finance data is collected
Implementation Framework as ongoing or planned, with a by multiple institutions including the National Institute of
consolidated budget of USD 5.9 billion from across multiple Statistics of Rwanda, the National Bank of Rwanda, the
sectors. The Urbanization and Rural Settlement sector Rwanda Land Management and Land Use Authority, the
constitutes 4,4% (USD 259 million) of the total budget. Given Rwanda Housing Authority, and the Development Bank of
the intersectionality between housing sector and emissions, it Rwanda. Together, these agencies collect and disseminate
may be worth considering fast-tracking and/or coordinating information on lending and housing finance trends. Linkages
with projects from the NDC implementation framework between databases, such as the one that exists between the
related to green infrastructure and environment-friendly eMRD database and RLMA’s Land Administration Information
building material production. If a special facility were to be System and the National Identification Agency system,
created, developers could apply for funding via the NDC to expedites lending procedures by streamlining and expediting
implement projects that would directly support the delivery the identitfy proofing of applicants applying for loans.
of housing. Not only would this increase the pool of funds Similarly, the Iwanjye portal can offer additional opportunities
available, it would add another category to the eligibility for extracting analytics from the finance sector.
Fig. XX Distribution of mitigation and adaptation measures

related to NDC Framework Contributions by Sector
33
8. MORTGAGE LOAN ACCESS FOR URBAN HOUSEHOLDS
The work of our team has the triple objective of

1. Identifying current market segments in Rwanda
2. Optimising construction cost through material,
technologies and typologies
3. Propose viable scenarios for future urban projects
blending affordable housing and market rate housing
To do so, we translate household incomes outlined by

workstream 1 into a typological mix that allows to achieve
a real estate balance. The challenge of this exercise is
double sided: on the one hand, we aim to put on the
market cost effective dwelling units to widen the range of
potential buyers; on the other hand, a reasonable amount
of market rate housing is needed in order to partially
cross-finance affordable housing without an excessive
amount of subsidies.
Based on the data gathered and analysed by WS1 on the

household income distribution we can see that more
than half of the urban households are situated in the
lower income level of the income pyramid with a monthly
household income less than 200k RWF.
Based on the assumption of a mortgage of 20 years

at a 11% interest rate and a 30% net household income
contribution we can see that the maximum loan
affordability for a standard 2 Bedroom apartment of
43 sqm is 21.5 million RWF. This requires a minimum
household income of 665 800 RWF.
If we overlay this information on the income pyramid, we

can see that the existing situation would thus allow only
45 000 households to afford a 2-bedroom apartment
which corresponds to 5% of all urban households and lays
in the income range between 1 million and 700 000 RWF
monthly household income.
In order to provide a broader access of housing to the

Rwandan population one strategy could be to lower the
property value due to optimised construction costs. And
also given that only a minority of those households have
formal incomes, we identify the question of finance as a
key issue.
34
HOUSEHOLD INCOME PYRAMID: NUMBER OF URBAN HOUSEHOLD
(964 000 URBAN HOUSEHOLDS)
RWF 1.2M+ 20 5 61
e l i g ibl e c r ite r i a fo r affo r d abl e h o us i ng
RWF 1M-1.2M 10 815

NET MONTHLY INCOME GROUPE (RWF)
RWF 700K-1M 27 15 7
RWF 500K-700K 61 619
RWF 300K-500K 139 690
RWF 200K-300K 15 1 95 7
RWF 100K-200K 25 8 7 5 1
RWF 50K-100K 199 094
RWF 1K-50K 94 644
(Income distribution based on EICV expenditure data inflated to june 2022 and applied to total number of urban
households reported in census 2022)

RWF 21.5 Million unit

RWF 1.2M+ 20 5 61
2 Bedroom, 43 Sqm
RWF 1M-1.2M 10 815

Minimum household income
required:
rwf 665,800*
RWF 700K-1M 27 15 7
45 000 households can afford
RWF 500K-700K 61 619 6 467
RWF 300K-500K 139 690
RWF 200K-300K 15 1 95 7
RWF 100K-200K 25 8 7 5 1
RWF 50K-100K 199 094
RWF 1K-50K 94 644
Can afford Cannot afford
Income distribution based on EICV expenditure data inflated to June 2022 and applied to total number of urban
households reported in Census 2022
Note*: Based on a mortgage of 20 years, 11% interest rate and LTV of 90%. Assumed that household can contribute
30% of net household income to loan
35
9. CONSTRUCTION PROFESSIONALS IN RWANDA
Rwanda’s construction ecosystem is comprised of a range SKILLED WORKERS

of actors – from brickmakers to builders and brokers –
participating in both formal and informal housing value As of May 2021, the Rwanda Institute of Architects (RIA)
chains. As the housing sector prepares for scale-up, a reports fewer than 150 registered architects, whereas
primary constraint is the capacity of its workforce, both in the Institute of Engineers (IRE) reports upwards of 900
terms of numbers and skill. licensed professionals. While the disparity in numbers
reflects the short history of formal architecture education
Although the Establishment Census lists the construction in Rwanda (the first cohort graduated in 2013), it is also
industry as the most formalised among all business sectors a reflection of a construction industry plagued by high
in Rwanda (with respect to company registration), data levels of informality. With 5,000 unregistered engineers
from the Labour Force Survey indicates that the industry’s and 42% of technicians working as architects operating
workforce is largely informal with a limited number of without a license, the formal construction sector faces a
professionals capable of assuring the planning, design, crisis on multiple fronts.
construction supervision and maintenance/ management
responsibilities necessary for the delivery of tens of The first is related to capacity. To deliver as per the NLUDMP
thousands of new dwelling units every year. (i.e., 150,000 DU per year) the current lot of architects
would have to supervise approximately 1,000 DU per
year each, nearly 20 times the average among architects
UNSKILLED WORKERS in France. This is not only impossible, but inadvisable for
reasons of capacity, safety, and professional ethics.
Overall, a low-skilled construction sector can lead
to significant risks and challenges for both workers The second hurdle concerns quality. The sector will be
and businesses. It is important for governments and hard pressed to formalize and regain the trust of clients
companies to invest in training and education to ensure a wary of low-cost housing, if the technicians are not
skilled and safe construction workforce. adequately trained to deliver quality work during the
entire building process, from design all the way through
construction and maintenance.
36
Until and unless the sector “professionalizes” itself (the To meet the challenge of the high and growing affordable
IRE has already called for all unlicensed professionals housing demand, permanent monitoring of the capacity of
to register), the reputational and safety risks currently Rwandan Housing Sector is needed. A regular analysis of
associated with the industry will persist and client trust the registrations of construction professionals combined
and delivery capacity will continue to come under with the estimate of the number of masons, brickmakers,
question. Furthermore, without some level of structure engineers, inspectors and others required to support a
and formalization, the profession will be unable to seize well-functioning and high-performing housing sector
the opportunities presented by rapid urban growth will monitor the gap between the need for skilled labour
nationwide. Consequently, a rethinking of theoretical and and the professional capacity available on the market,
practical training is warranted to prepare the sector for enabling professional organizations, policy makers, and
2050. technical schools to adjust enrollment forecasts and
technical programs.
The prevailing condition of a profound lack of architects
and engineers required to take on appropriate design and Through such monitoring, Rwandan Government
supervision of construction sites compared to the high institutions would have a useful tool to guide investment
number of dwelling units needed in the coming decades, policies in capacity building. Indeed, this tool would
is also the case for many other technical actors involved enable entities like RDB, BRD, RHA and MININFRA to
in the development and realisation of real estate projects. communicate the volume of employment opportunities
to the private sector, while also enabling training institutes
This is especially true in the case of incremental housing and professional associations to formally prepare for the
construction, a process that requires a high-level of capacity building and formalization of the workforce.
planning and technical capacity to deliver safely. For
the Rwandan housing strategy to leverage the individual
capacities of households seeking to resolve their housing
circumstances independently, it will be important that
they have access to technical support.
37
10.1 AFFORDABLE AND MARKET RATE HOUSING
PROPERTY PRICES BREAKDOWN
Composed of much more than simply the cost of materials materials for affordable housing. The other half is due
and labor; the selling price of any real estate property is to costs linked to infrastructure (landscape, roads and
made up of numerous expense items which are added utilities), that are included in construction costs for
the developer / constructor profit margin. To optimise market rate housing, while they are covered by subsidies
the conditions that would bring down the selling price for affordable housing.
of housing, in this study we analyse each component
separately, and identity the appropriate levers of action to
be taken to reduce the global selling price. These price LAND, FINANCIAL & DEVELOPMENT COSTS
elements can be grouped into five broad families2 :
Land, financial and development costs are the additional
• Financial costs and Taxes costs that complete the property price.
• Land costs VAT and the cost of loans for housing suppliers are an
• Development costs important percentage of the financial and development
• Infrastructure costs costs.
• Construction costs
The cost of land is a minor component of the selling price
As suggested in the Terms of Reference, reducing but as the real estate market develops it might become a
construction cost is a key way to achieve housing selling more important matter. As large-scale affordable housing
price affordability. In first stage, the study set up a baseline projects are typically developed in less central areas of the
of existing average construction costs by analysing several city, the land purchase costs are roughly 30% lower than
Bills of Quantities (BoQs) from projects undergoing or for market rate housing.
already executed in Rwanda.
Subsequently, reference prices were established for the Property prices considered here are analysed from
other categories of the housing selling price, through a recently built projects, those average estimates are based
collaboration with local quantity surveyors and interviews on price values from 2021.
conducted with various developers and contractors to
challenge these average costs and to ensure that they 2
Different elements making up each of these categories are detailed in the so called
correspond to the actual housing production market. “Real estate Proforma” tool that is developed in later chapiter of this study.
We used square meter costs to analyse existing selling

prices, to align with standard understanding of final users
and to faciliate comparisons across different typology
scales. This cost analysis includes all components of the
selling price: construction (materials and labor), land,
financial,and development costs.
CONSTRUCTION COSTS
Construction costs for affordable housing range in

average from 250 000 RWF per square meter to 400 000
RWF for market rate housing.
Half of this gap is due to a general reduction of costs
of structure and finishes, thanks to the use of cheaper
38
1 000K RWF / SQM
150K RWF/SQM 15% VAT (18% of all costs)
500k LOAN (17% interest rate, 5 years loan term,

RWF/SQM
157K RWF/SQM 16% on 1/2 of financial investment)
50%
DEVELOPMENT
COSTS
63K RWF/SQM 6% PROFIT (10% Financial Investment excl. VAT)
45K RWF/SQM 4% CUSTOM DUTIES (27.5% of material imports)
60K RWF/SQM 6% LAND (40 000 RWF average price for 80 DU/ha & average
surface of 80 sqm per DU)
25K RWF/SQM 3% DESIGN & SUPERVISION (5% of construction cost excl. VAT)
195K RWF/SQM 20% STRUCTURE (Fondation, Superstructure, Facade, Roof)

49 % of construction costs
400k
RWF/sqm
50%
CONSTRUCTION
COSTS
155K RWF/SQM 15% FINISHES (Exterior joinery, walling, flooring, coating)
50K RWF/SQM 5% MEP (Mechanical, electrical, plumbing engineering)

100k INFRASTRUCTURE (Roads and utilities, landscape,

RWF/Sqm
10% 80 000 RWF/sqm of unbuilt surface for 80 DU/ha)
MARKET RATE HOUSING
500K RWF/SQM
50K RWF/SQM 10% VAT (18% of Construction Costs, Design & Supervision)
FINANCIAL FEES 15% FINANCIAL INVESTMENT

65K RWF/SQM 13% (Loan 20%, Own Funds 15%, Outside Investors 10%)
50%
250k
RWF/SQM LAND,
50K RWF/SQM
10% PROFIT (15% Financial Investment)
FINANCIAL &
CUSTOM DUTIES DEVELOPMENT
25K RWF/SQM
5% (27.5% of material imports: direct & indirect purchase)
LAND (25 000 RWF average price for 80 DU/ha & average COSTS
30K RWF/SQM 6% surface of 80 sqm per DU)
15K RWF/SQM 3% DESIGN & SUPERVISION (5% of construction cost excl. VAT)
15K RWF/SQM 3% MARKETING AND SALE
125K RWF/SQM 23% STRUCTURE (Fondation, Superstructure, Facade, Roof)

49 % of construction costs (excl. Walling)
250k
RWF/SQM
50%
CONSTRUCTION
COSTS
75K RWF/SQM 14% FINISHES (Exterior joinery, walling, flooring, coating)
50K RWF/SQM 10% MEP & PRIVATE INFRASTRUCTURE

(Mechanical, electrical, plumbing engineering)
PROPER PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE

80k RWF/SQM
100k RWF/SQM
16% (Proper Drainage, Tarmac, Sports, Roads and utilities,
(incl. VAT) landscape
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
LARGE SCALE DEVELOPER > 100 DU (WITH SUBSIDIES)
39
10.2 AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROPERTY PRICES
BREAKDOWN PER SUPPLIER
Prior to the selling price component analysis, this housing the supply chains are different.
market study highlights seven aspects of the formal Profit rate: The level of profit rate expected from a real
housing value chain in Rwanda3 that impact costs: estate development differs depending on the supply chain
involved. This margin depends on the level of risk taken by
Land: costs related to acquisition and/or assembly the private investor or professional promoter engaging in
Infrastructure: volume of investment based on size of real estate development. Other factors that influence this
project and selected technologies margin rate include the project scale, the private capital
Regulations: rezoning, impact assessments (environmental invested, as well as its related opportunity cost.
and social) Infrastructure costs: Development projects of fewer than
Design: professional fees, technical surveys, and insurance 20 dwelling units in aserviced urban area, as undertaken by
for larger projects private investors or micro-developers, does not represent
Building typology: the type of building (single storey the same cost in terms of infrastructure in comparison
versus medium- to high-rise) have a direct impact on with development of a small or large-scale project of
costs as technology, skill, insurance, and other elements more than a hundred units on an unservicd plot of land.
come into play. As per the regulations, developments of 20 or more units
Construction: earthworks (geotechnical and (small-scale) requires a wastewater treatment plant. So if
environmental conditions), scheduling (stops and starts the supply chain is organized to deliver a larger number
are costly for a builder), procurement of materials of units, we can expect a difference in the selling price
Offtake: Limited end-user finance, no marketing budget because of the infrastructure cost burden incurred.
Maintenance: Lack of funds to engage services of Project development and supervision costs: These costs
management companies, who may also suffer from a lack depend on the scale of the project, but also on the
of capacity supply chain involved. Landowners are more likely to act
informally and forgo professional supervision, invoking
These various housing value chain points impact the technical risks, than developers who hire the requisite
property price in different ways depending on the professionals and increase their selling cost.
supply chain involved in the production of the housing. Construction costs: These costs also are affected by
Therefore, it was important to assess the bottlenecks, economies of scale for large projects, but also show
weaknesses, and opportunities of each of the supply differences between professional suppliers such as
chain categories identified in an earlier chapter. However, the developers and the more informal housing supply
understanding value chain pain-points are not the only by private landowners, notably due to the level of
elements to take into consideration. Other costs related construction quality that each supply chain can deliver.
to finance, marketing, market and demand studies, social
facilitation, land holding costs or delays in getting funding Property prices considered here are analysed from
from lenders can also have an impact on cost. recently built projects, those average estimates are based
on price values from 2021.
In parallel to this construction cost benchmarking exercise,
the study identified cost differences depending on the
construction industry channel supplying the dwelling
unit. We highlight these specificities of the supply chain in 3
A housing market typically consists of multiple value chains in both the formal and
the following paragraph: informal sector
Financial costs: The source of funding available for a

professional developer, mainly depending on structural
financing from banks or investors, are quite different from
those for landowner self-builder or private investor who
rely more on savings than on the expensive loans available
on the market. Therefore, the financial costs of each of
40
* Property prices for each housing supplier, analysed from 550K RWF/SQM
existing recently built projects with price values from 2021
55k
10% VAT
for finished dwelling unit RWF/SQM
(previous seismic regulation, 0.16 peak acceleration)

60k RWF/SQM 11% FINANCIAL FEES 45%
LAND,
FINANCIAL &
DEVELOPMENT
COSTS
200k
65k RWF/SQM 12% PROFIT
RWF/SQM
EXCL. VAT
20k RWF/SQM 4% CUSTOM DUTIES
5%
390K RWF/SQM LAND
30k RWF/SQM
15k RWF/SQM 3% DESIGN & SUPERVISION

45k
10k RWF/SQM 2% MARKETING & SALE
RWF/SQM 12% VAT
15k RWF/SQM 4% FINANCIAL FEES

38%
LAND,
280K RWF/SQM 95k
30k RWF/SQM 8% PROFIT FINANCIAL &
DEVELOPMENT
RWF/SQM
EXCL. VAT 10k RWF/SQM 3% CUSTOM DUTIES COSTS 135k RWF/SQM 25% STRUCTURE
35k 30% 30k RWF/SQM 8% LAND
RWF/SQM 13% VAT 18%
LAND,
FINANCIAL &
50k 5k RWF/SQM 2% CUSTOM DUTIES
DEVELOPMENT
295k
RWF/SQM
RWF/SQM 40k RWF/SQM 14% LAND
COSTS EXCL. VAT
EXCL. VAT
55%
130k RWF/SQM 33% STRUCTURE CONSTRUCTION
COSTS
195k
RWF/SQM 120k RWF/SQM 43% STRUCTURE
250k
RWF/SQM 62% 80k RWF/SQM 15% FINISHES
EXCL. VAT CONSTRUCTION
EXCL. VAT
70% COSTS
CONSTRUCTION
COSTS
60k RWF/SQM 15% FINISHES
MEP & PRIVATE
55k RWF/SQM 10% INFRASTRUCTURE
60k RWF/SQM MEP & PRIVATE
MEP & PRIVATE 16% INFRASTRUCTURE PUBLIC
35k RWF/SQM 13% INFRASTRUCTURE 25k RWF/SQM 5% INFRASTRUCTURE

SELFBUILDER PRIVATE INVESTMENT JOINT VENTURE
570K RWF/SQM 555K RWF/SQM 500K RWF/SQM
50K
55K
10% VAT 60K
11% VAT RWF/SQM 10% VAT
RWF/SQM RWF/SQM
12% FINANCIAL FEES 65k RWF/SQM 13% FINANCIAL FEES

48% 70k RWF/SQM 13% FINANCIAL FEES 49% 50%
70k RWF/SQM
LAND, LAND, LAND,
FINANCIAL & FINANCIAL & FINANCIAL &
DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPMENT
COSTS COSTS 50k RWF/SQM 10% PROFIT COSTS
80k RWF/SQM 14% PROFIT 65k RWF/SQM 12% PROFIT 200K
RWF/SQM
EXCL. VAT
220k 215k
RWF/SQM 15k RWF/SQM RWF/SQM 25k RWF/SQM 5% CUSTOM DUTIES
EXCL. VAT 3% CUSTOM DUTIES
EXCL. VAT
5%
30k RWF/SQM 6% LAND
30k RWF/SQM LAND
30k RWF/SQM 5% LAND
DESIGN & SUPERVISION 15k RWF/SQM 3% DESIGN & SUPERVISION
15k RWF/SQM 3%
MARKETING & SALE
10k RWF/SQM 2%
125k RWF/SQM
125k RWF/SQM 23% STRUCTURE 23% STRUCTURE
130k RWF/SQM 23% STRUCTURE
250K
RWF/SQM
280k EXCL. VAT 50%
RWF/SQM
EXCL. TVA CONSTRUCTION
COSTS
52% 51%
75k RWF/SQM
CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION 14% FINISHES
295k COSTS
75k RWF/SQM 14% FINISHES COSTS
RWF/SQM
EXCL. TVA
MEP & PRIVATE

50k RWF/SQM 9% MEP & PRIVATE 50k RWF/SQM 9% INFRASTRUCTURE
INFRASTRUCTURE
55k RWF/SQM 10% MEP & PRIVATE
INFRASTRUCTURE
30k RWF/SQM 5% BASIC INFRASTRUCTURE 80k RWF/SQM 16% PUBLIC

25k RWF/SQM 4% BASIC INFRASTRUCTURE INFRASTRUCTURE
MICRO SCALE SMALL SCALE LARGE SCALE

41
III. HOUSING COST STUDY AT DIFFERENT
SCALES
1. BUILDING CONSTRUCTION SCALE

1.1 Materials and Technologies assessement framework
1.2 Material Kits
1.3 Construction incrementality
1.4 Design principles
1.5 Building typologies
2. URBAN DEVELOPMENT SCALE

2.1 Impact of infrastructure
2.2 Density/ urban regulation
3. REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT SCALE
3.1 Real estate proforma

3.2 Levers for cost optimisation
III. HOUSING COST STUDY AT DIFFERENT SCALES
INTRODUCTION
Our first approach to the question of making housing selected as a fall-back option, which is either painted
affordable is to assess costs of construction materials or smoothed with a fine cement screed to facilitate
and technologies. Before exploring how to address easy cleaning. Penetrating concrete sealants may be
affordability of materials available on the Rwandan market, imported from the region, or South Africa, but are rare
in this chapter we review the different construction and expensive.
technologies currently used by the construction industry
in Rwanda. Despite the availability of options in Rwanda, tiles are
a clear cultural favourite; preferred for their modern
look, and how easy they are to clean. Furthermore,
FOUNDATIONS tiling, like masonry, is a common skill in Rwanda so
tiling is accessible on the market. Polished cement is an
The design of building foundations depend on a variety affordable substitute, but is considered “unfinished”, and
of site-specific factors, including the site’s topographical compacted earth is only becoming more widely accepted
slope, proximity to water and presence of vegetation, soil in rural locations, and isn’t a viable option in upper floors
conditions, regional location (for seismic consideration) of multi-story buildings.
and the height and weight of the building to be supported.
In Rwanda, the typical options include reinforced
concrete footings (for concrete frame systems), and WALLING
continuous stone trench foundations (for load-bearing
walls). Both systems require a grade or ground beam, of Walling materials in Rwanda represent the most variability
varying proportions, for lateral stability, and to provide in material selection of all the systems studied in this
a stable and level base for the walling above. Locally research and are the most innovated and explored on the
sourced stone is used to support concrete beams, bearing market. The selection of wall material is important in the
on deeper solid soil. overall building because it triggers implications for other
important building systems, in particular the structural
Foundations in Rwanda have much in common with the system. Walling options include brick of varying quality
way that foundations are built around the world, and (high quality brick of sufficient load-bearing strength may
despite the potential for enhancing skills to build them remove the need for a concrete frame, reducing material
faster and better, with better engineering to optimize costs; low-quality brick requires a lot of mortar, and is
their implementation, the materials used in foundation not strong enough to obviate the need for a concrete
work are not likely to change or significantly impact frame, though it’s a well-known system in Rwanda, and
construction techniques in the foreseeable future. More masons are experts with it) and concrete blocks which are
sophisticated technologies (such as piles) may be suitable quick to build with but again rely on a concrete frame for
to Rwanda’s hilly terrain. However, such technologies structural support, and are ecologically damaging.
are expensive and uncommon. If affordable housing New systems such as rammed earth and compressed
is the goal, a better strategy for controlling the cost of earth blocks (produced at an efficient scale of sufficient
foundations is to locate the project on a flat site with load-bearing strength) represent potential to upend
good soil conditions, so that the foundations are normal existing systems, if implemented well and efficiently, and
and easy to execute using commonly available materials rely on locally available materials. Steel-framing systems
and techniques. exist but are expensive, imported, and require specialized
technical knowledge and machinery. High quality bricks
and blocks, and monolithic earth walling solutions, may
SLABS AND FLOORING remove the need for expensive cement plastering during
the finishing stages, but only if implemented well.
Materials used for slabs in Rwanda are usually concrete or
clay. Concrete or maxpan slabs with different thicknesses Building material producers and builder companies like
can address different spans. Wood slabs are an interesting ADHI Rwanda have the flexibility to innovate as they
sustainable option but they are not a current technology can modify the structural system, walling material and
because of the quality produced and the public opinion foundation at the same time. The engineers and architects
about wood construction.There is a relative variety of at Skat Consulting (the implementation agency for the
flooring materials available in Rwanda, including exposed Swiss Agency for Develop and Cooperation’s PROECCO
cement, tiling, clay tile, and compacted earth. Tiles are project) also modified walling and structure to devise a
normally selected for their modern feel, with cement
44
MARKET RATE CONSTRUCTION MARKET RATE HOUSING
COST HOUSING CASE STUDIES CONSTRUCTION COST BREAKDOWN
40k RWF/M2 10% FOUNDATION
195k RWF/M2 49%

LANGSTON TERRACE – 135k RWF/M2 34% STRUCTURE & FACADE
MARKET RATE HOUSING STRUCTURE
LAND SIZE:0.1 ha
DU TOTAL: 8
DU / Ha: 80 20k RWF/M2 5% ROOF
420k RWF / M 2
65k RWF/M2 16% FINISHING
130k RWF/M2
39%
FINISHES
90k RWF/M2 23% EXTERIOR JOINERY
12%
CONFIDENTIAL 50k RWF/M2 50k RWF/M2 13% MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL,
PLUMBING MEP
PROJECT
400k RWF / M2
CONFIDENTIAL PROJECT –
MARKET RATE & AFFORDABLE
HOUSING
LAND SIZE: 0.6 ha
DU TOTAL: 52
DU / Ha: 86
440k RWF / M 2
AFFORDABLE HOUSING AFFORDABLE HOUSING

CONSTRUCTION COST HOUSING CONSTRUCTION COST
CASE STUDIES BREAKDOWN
34,5k RWF/M2 12% FOUNDATION
KARAMA ESTATE –
150k RWF/M2 49%
AFFORDABLE HOUSING 96,5k RWF/M2 33% STRUCTURE & FACADE
LAND SIZE: 2.5 ha STRUCTURE
DU TOTAL: 240
DU / Ha: 96 15k RWF/M2
5% ROOF
240k RWF / M2 40k RWF/M2 14% FINISHING
34%
100k RWF/M2
60k RWF/M2
20% EXTERIOR JOINERY FINISHES
17%
MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL,
50k RWF/M2 50k RWF/M2 17% PLUMBING
MEP
300k RWF / M2
MPAZI –
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
LAND SIZE: 0.2 ha
DU TOTAL: 18 Construction costs values 2021
DU / Ha: 90 Prices per SQM living area
300k RWF / M2 (previous seismic regulation, 0.16 peak acceleration)
45
INTRODUCTION
load-bearing reinforced rowlock bond cavity wall system install isn’t readily available. Possible options are worth
that served as both wall and structure, a manoeuvre that exploring, and while they are not expected to compete
reports cost savings of around 30%. with either imported options or wood panelling, they
Structural systems typically comprise more than 30% may make a significant impact on the liveability of new
of the cost of any building and walling directly impact dwelling units.
those costs. Innovative walling options have been widely
explored in Rwandan contexts and given their potential
to significantly impact the overall structural systems of ROOFING
multi-story buildings, they are given special attention in
this study. The dominant roofing solution in Rwanda is the metal
sheet, fixed over a support structure of trusses or rafters
fabricated out of wood or steel tubes. The alternatives
WINDOWS & DOORS are concrete slabs, which are expensive and unnecessary
unless an incremental building strategy is planned, and
The two most common options for windows and doors clay tiles, which are better from an ecological vantage but
in a construction project in Rwanda are imported, require a more robust and thorough steel frame support
prefabricated vinyl framing, and custom-fabricated steel system and are more expensive overall. Both systems use
tube framing, with glazing affixed using cementitious steel-formed gutters and PVC down-spout piping for
mastic. Aluminium frame windows are available rainwater collection. Metal sheets of varying thicknesses
regionally, but have waned in popularity on the Rwandan and colours are readily available.
market in recent years. Steel tube-framed windows
may be purchased prefabricated from within Rwanda, Roofs are significant building systems that serve to
with limited options, or fabricated on-site to custom protect the building from exterior elements, while
specifications. Pre-fabricated, hollow-core wood doors spanning significant distance. A combination of steel
are readily available, if of relatively low-quality. framing with metal sheeting is an effective combination
that meets these basic needs, despite of not being
Windows and doors are readily available and do not ecologically innovative, and the risk of heavily loading
typically affect the overall delivery schedule of a building during rainstorms, and negatively impacting the interiors
in Rwanda, if ordered on time and are not overly of living spaces beneath them. They are thus difficult to
customized. The relative informal nature of window and replace with more innovative materials without adding
door supply chains is where much improvement can be cost; potential options, such as clay tiles, clay, earthen,
made. The lack of standardization requires additional or ferrocement tile vaults, light-gauge steel systems, and
time and material (mastic, etc.) to overcome irregularities. corrugated bamboo are assessed in this study. Another
There is therefore room for improvement in this area, important consideration is the formalization of the timber
which must start by evaluating how best to formalize industry to produce more regularly shaped, stable framing
the value chain to produce standardized inexpensive members, such as dimensional lumber and round poles,
solutions that save both time and money. to impact the roofing industry while helping to refocus
the material supply chain towards regenerative strategies.
CEILING
PLUMBING AND LIGHTING FIXTURES
Material options for ceilings in Rwanda are limited but
represent good potential for growth and exploration. In low-cost construction scenarios, standard fixtures are
Crude wood framing with thin plywood panels is a low- often selected and are relatively easy to procure. They
cost option, competing with imported vinyl panels, meet minimum standards of quality, but do not contribute
imported acoustic panels, gypsum, or cement plaster. to the overall standard of the building. For instance, water-
saving faucet and toilet fixtures represent one of the few
Among the different ceiling variety available on the options for water conservation in housing, but their cost
Rwandan market, few are satisfying from an ecological, is prohibitive at scale. High-quality fixtures are imported
acoustical, and aesthetic point of view. Imported vinyl and expensive and are difficult to justify when easy low-
ceilings and wood panelled ceilings are the most common cost options are readily available and don’t represent
in low-cost housing. A local solution that controls heat, potential schedule issues.
absorbs sound, and is aesthetically pleasing and easy to While they may be reviewed for their ability to mitigate
46
ecological impact on overall building systems, new Landscape is also an under-utilized tool for managing
plumbing and electrical fixture options are not expected stormwater. Given the decentralized nature of liquid waste
to impact cost studies for low-cost housing solutions. management in Kigali and Rwanda more generally, with
a lack of municipal piping systems, landscape solutions
may also be desirable for some large-scale housing
INFRASTRUCTURE developments. Site vegetation can promote good soil
health and lower overall ambient temperature. They will
There is significant cost involved with the systems that absorb stormwater runoff, reduce the need for expensive
support the building and the surrounding site: electrical, stone channels and underground piping, and therefore
plumbing, solid waste, rainwater collection, and site the risk of landslides. Solutions considered include rain
stormwater, as well as retaining walls and roads. gardens, bioswales, and retention ponds.
Management of wastewater is a key determinant and

factor influencing the effective deployment of housing
in Rwanda. For sites that have less than 20 dwelling units,
a septic tank or biodigester is acceptable to manage the
solid waste. Sites that host 20 or more dwelling units
trigger the need for a wastewater treatment plant (WWTP),
which represents a significantly larger financial investment.
This requirement serves as a significant disincentive to
developers who want to build larger scale developments.
Retaining walls are another significant building element

that must be considered in hilly Rwanda. Building form
is impacted by hilly terrain, and most developers opt for
granite stone walling as a standard solution to flatten a
site and enable the construction of building with standard
overlapping stories. Formal solutions within the building
itself that incorporate slopes are considered as part
of building typologies. Other innovative soil-retaining
technologies are reviewed against standard stone walling
techniques. These include planted slopes, using imported
geotextiles to anchor the soil, gabion walls, prefabricated
modular solutions, and timber and terraced walls.
LANDSCAPE
Awareness around the effectiveness of nature-based

solutions (NBS) to improve the well-being of city
inhabitants is growing and has been codified into various
official Rwandan orders and codes. The presence of trees,
vegetation, and general biodiversity contribute positively
to the well-being of the housing development residents
in tangible ways: buffering wind and rain during major
storms, and moderating heat gain in buildings during the
day. Landscape design is a low-cost and effective solution
and should be codified into housing requirements and is
considered in tandem with the exploration of various low-
cost material investigations.
47
1.1 MATERIALS AND TECHNOLOGIES ASSESSMENT
M A T E R I A L S & T E C H N O L O G Y S U P P LY S T R A T E G Y
FRAMEWORK
MATERIAL & TECH ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK
Structure Ranking
STRUCTURE RANKING
The Assessment Framework is organized according to In order to arrive at a series of recommendations,
The toAssessment
family, better conduct aFramework is organized
side-by-side comparison of the
In order to arrive at a series of
particularly when information on the production and
applicability of different resources for the conduct
according to family, to better constructiona recommendations,
selling costs of a new material particularly when
or technology, the
ofside-by-side comparison
affordable housing. In total the of theassessment
ABMT applicability
will information on the includes
Assessment Framework production and system
a ranking sellingto
of different
analyse resources
the environmental, for theconstruction
production, constructionand costs
supportofthea identification
new material or technology,
of materials the
and technologies
of affordable
market profiles of 10housing. In total
different material the ABMT
categories: earth, Assessment Framework
suitable for application in 2025, includes a ranking
2030 and 2050. R
clay, cement, metals (steel, aluminum, iron),
assessment will analyse the environmental, stone, wood, system to support the identification of
bamboo, bio-based materials, glass and composites. For each of the
materials and4 profiles - environmental,
technologies production,
suitable for
production, construction and market profiles
construction and market - a series of criteria have been
of 10 different material categories: earth, application in 2025, 2030 and 2050.
Although materials and construction technologies are established to assign a score of + or - , equivalent to +1 ENV
clay, cement, metals (steel, aluminum, iron),
central elements in determining the construction cost of a or 0 points, respectively. The points of the 4 profiles can
stone,unit,
dwelling wood, bamboo,
infrastructure bio-based
is typically materials,
the most imporant
For each of the 4 profiles - environmental,
be summed in order to assign a score to each material
glass
cost andConsequently,
driver. composites.the Assessment Framework production,
or technology. construction and market
While the information provided in - the
a
shall also examine solutions in the following categories: series
profiles of criteria provides
themselves have been established
a detailed evaluationtoof
Although
water, materials
solid waste, wastewater and construction
treatment, stormwater assign a score
each of the ABMTs,of + scores
the or - , are
equivalent to +1 or
useful in assessing the
technologies are central elements in
management and energy. 0overall
points, respectively.
potential The points
for market acceptance andofscalability,
the 4
determining the construction cost of a profiles canqualities
the intangible be summed
that mostinoften
order
havetoanassign
impact aon
cost. to each material or technology. While
score
dwelling unit, infrastructure is typically the
most imporant cost driver. Consequently, the information provided in the profiles
the Assessment Framework shall also themselves provides a detailed evaluation
examine solutions in the following of each of the ABMTs, the scores are useful
categories: water, solid waste, wastewater in assessing the overall potential for market
treatment, stormwater management and acceptance and scalability, the intangible
energy. qualities that most often have an impact on
cost. CO
2025
ENVIRONMENTAL
+/-
2035 PRODUCTION
+/-
CONSTRUCTION
+/-
2050 MARKET
+/-
1 WORKSTREAM 2
48
M A T E R I A L S & T E C H N O L O G Y S U P P LY S T R A T E G Y
WORK
MATERIAL & TECH ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK

• Specifications
• Company References
eries of GENERAL • Current Producers (local/regional)
DESCRIPTION • Estimated % of Rwandan Market Share
when • Market Constraints
nd selling • Delivery (DU/year)
ology, the
RAW PRODUCT • By unit
a ranking • Transportation CRITERIA USED
cation of COSTS FOR RANKING
table for • Origin
0. • Embodied carbon
ENVIRONMENTAL • Operational carbon
PROFILE • Usage impacts
onmental,
• Recyclability / Reusability
arket - a
blished to • Level of industrialization
t to +1 or • Space Requirement
s of the 4 • Machine Investment
PRODUCTION • Energy Requirement
o assign a • Production Capacity
gy. While PROFILE • Raw Materials
e profiles • Skill
• Labour
evaluation • Rate of Adoption
are useful
or market • Possible typologies
• Construction time
ntangible • Transport
mpact on • Material Wastage
CONSTRUCTION • Finished Quality
PROFILE • Maintenance Considerations
• Dependability on technology
• Labour
+/-
• Rate of adoption
• Complimentary technologies
• Supply constraints
+/- MARKET
PROFILE
•
•
•
Demand constraints
Lender acceptance
Comparable products available on the market
+/-
• Substitution potential
• Market risks
• Urban appropriate
+/- CONTEXT • Peri-urban appropriate

• Rural appropriate
• Low-income
DEMAND • Middle-Income
SEGMENT • High-income
1
Annex 03 includes the complete Building Materials and Technologies Dictionary, which uses the Assessment Framework
to rank a host of materials and infrastructure technologies.
49
STRUCTURE MATERIALS
COST
RWF / SQM CARBON
MATERIAL COMP. TECHNOLOGY UNIT
SUPPLY & FIX FOOTPRINT
(excl VAT)
REINFORCED CONCRETE FOOTING (Grade 25, 300x600, seismic

1. FOUNDATIONS SQM 150 000 RWF 5/5
ground)
CONCRETE SLAB (15 cm, Grade 25 w reinforcement mesh) SQM 37 500 RWF 5/5
2. GROUNDFLOOR SLAB
3D PRINTED CONCRETE SQM 5/5
CONCRETE SLAB (15 cm, Grade 25, Suspended formwork w

SQM 67 500 RWF 5/5
reinforced bars)
CONCRETE SLAB & WOOD JOISTS SQM 110 000 RWF 5/5
3. STRUCTURE
PREFABRICATED CONCRETE SLAB w reinforced bars (15 cm) SQM 100 000 RWF 4/5
(FLOOR SLAB / VERTICAL)
SQM 5/5
CONCRETE
3D PRINTED CONCRETE
POURED IN PLACE CONCRETE LOAD BEARING (15 cm,

SQM 60 000 RWF 5/5
90kg/105kg/m3)
CEMENT BLOCKS (15 cm) SQM 20 000 RWF 3/5
AUTOCLAVED AERATED CONCRETE BLOCKS AAC (20cm) SQM 24 000 RWF 3/5
4. FACADE / PARTITION
(between apartments & POURED IN PLACE CONCRETE NOT LOAD BEARING (15 cm, 60
SQM 42 000 RWF 5/5
kg/m3)
rooms)
PRECAST CONCRETE PANELS SQM 100 000 RWF 4/5
5. ROOF
CONCRETE SLAB (15 cm, Grade 25, Suspended formwork w
SQM 67 500 RWF 5/5
reinforced bars)
1. FOUNDATIONS - - - -
2. GROUNDFLOOR SLAB EARTH ENABLE SQM 2 200 RWF 1/5
3. STRUCTURE
- - - -
ADOBE / RUKARAKARA (20 cm) SQM 10 000 RWF 1/5
ADOBE / RUKARAKARA PLASTERED SQM 12 000 RWF 2/5
ADOBE / RUKARAKARA REINFORCED (20 cm) SQM 13 000 RWF 2/5
DURABRIC (Compressed Earth & Cement Bricks) SQM 2/5

EARTH
OXABRICK (Compressed Earth Blocks, cement-free, non fired) SQM 1/5
4. FACADE / PARTITION CLEANCRETE (Earthern exc. material & constr. waste) SQM 1/5
(between apartments &
rooms) COMPRESSED STABILIZED EARTH BLOCKS (CSEBs 20 cm) SQM 22 000 RWF 2/5
COMPRESSED STABILISED EARTH BLOCKS (CSEB) PLASTERED SQM 25 000 RWF 2/5
GEOPOLYMER SOIL BLOCKS SQM 2/5
RAMMED EARTH (40 cm) SQM 115 000 RWF 1/5
PREFABRICTED RAMMED EARTH PANELS SQM 1/5
3D PRINTED EARTH 2/5
5. ROOF - - - -
MAXPAN SLAB (20 cm,

2. GROUNDFLOOR SLAB SQM 55 000 RWF 3/5
incl 5 cm toping)
3. STRUCTURE MAXPAN SLAB (20 cm,

SQM 55 000 RWF 3/5
(FLOOR SLAB / VERTICAL) incl 5 cm toping)
MODERN BRICK ROWLOCK BOND SQM 23 000 RWF 3/5

CLAY
BRICK ROWLOCK (10cm) SQM 13 200 RWF 3/5
4. FACADE / PARTITION TRADITIONAL CLAY BURNT BRICK (20cm) SQM 25 000 RWF 4/5
TRADITIONAL FIRED BRICKS (10cm) SQM 16 000 RWF 4/5
MODERN BRICK ENGLISH BOND SQM 33 000 RWF 3/5
5. ROOF FIRE BURNT ROOF TILES SQM 20 000 RWF 3/5
50 2. GROUNDFLOOR SLAB - - - -
PREFABRICTED RAMMED EARTH PANELS SQM 1/5
5. ROOF - - - -
Based on the material and technology assessment by the material and its use for every item of building
framework we identified different materials which construction. The embodied carbon foot print is another
MAXPAN SLAB (20 cm,
we used to elaborate a cost benchmarking to define SLAB
2. GROUNDFLOOR important
incl 5 cm toping) component that shall help choosing not only
SQM 55 000 RWF 3/5
construction costs for various material combinations.

3. STRUCTUREWe cost-effective
MAXPAN SLAB (20 cm, but also sustainable
SQM materials
55 000 RWF for3/5 the
(FLOOR SLAB / VERTICAL) incl 5 cm toping)
started our analysis wtih materials suitable for building construction of

MODERN BRICK ROWLOCK BOND
future housing units.
SQM 23 000 RWF 3/5
structure and envelope. This benchmark is organized
CLAY
BRICK ROWLOCK (10cm) SQM 13 200 RWF 3/5
Prices considered here are based on 2023 rates and
4. FACADE / PARTITION TRADITIONAL CLAY BURNT BRICK (20cm) SQM 25 000 RWF 4/5
exclusive VAT.
TRADITIONAL FIRED BRICKS (10cm) SQM 16 000 RWF 4/5
MODERN BRICK ENGLISH BOND SQM 33 000 RWF

COST
3/5
RWF / SQM CARBON
MATERIAL COMP. TECHNOLOGY UNIT
SUPPLY & FIX FOOTPRINT
5. ROOF FIRE BURNT ROOF TILES SQM 20 000 RWF
(excl VAT)
3/5
1. FOUNDATIONS REINFORCED CONCRETE FOOTING

- (Grade 25, 300x600, seismic - - RWF -
SQM 150 000 5/5
ground)
2. GROUNDFLOOR SLAB -
CONCRETE SLAB (15 cm, Grade 25 w reinforcement mesh)
-
SQM
-
37 500 RWF
-
5/5
2. GROUNDFLOOR SLAB
PINE TIMBERS W WOOD PLANKS SQM 1/5
3. STRUCTURE
CONCRETE
TIMBER FLOORSLAB (15 cm,
SLAB CLTGrade 25, Suspended formwork w SQM 32 000 RWF 1/5
(FLOOR SLAB / VERTICAL) SQM 67 500 RWF 5/5
reinforced bars)
EUCALYPTUS
CONCRETE POLES
SLAB & WOOD
& WOOD PIECES
JOISTS SQM
SQM 110 000 RWF 1/5
5/5
3. STRUCTURE SQM 32 000

CLT PANEL
PREFABRICATED CONCRETE SLAB w reinforced bars (15 cm) SQM 100 000RWF
RWF 1/5
4/5
BIOBASED
WOOD &
WOOD FRAME PARTITION WALL CAOTED (20 cm) SQM 70 000 RWF 1/5
SQM 5/5
CONCRETE
3D PRINTED CONCRETE
POURED IN PLACE
WOOD FRAME WALLCONCRETE LOAD BEARING
FACADE CAOTED (20 cm) (15 cm, SQM 140 000RWF
RWF 1/5
SQM 60 000 5/5
90kg/105kg/m3)
4. FACADE / PARTITION WOODENBLOCKS

CEMENT PARTITION WALL
(15 cm) SQM
SQM 100 000RWF
20 000 RWF 1/5
3/5
rooms) HEMPCRETE BLOCKS WITHIN WOOD FRAMING SQM 1/5
AUTOCLAVED AERATED CONCRETE BLOCKS AAC (20cm) SQM 24 000 RWF 3/5
4. FACADE / PARTITION STRAWBOARD PARTITIONS SQM 24 000 RWF 1/5

(between apartments & POURED IN PLACE CONCRETE NOT LOAD BEARING (15 cm, 60
SQM 42 000 RWF 5/5
kg/m3)
rooms) SQM 1/5
TRIPLEX WOOD PANEL ON WOOD FRAMING
PRECAST CONCRETE PANELS SQM 100 000 RWF 4/5
BAMBOO PARTITION WALLS SQM 1/5
TIMBER ROOF & METAL SHEET SQM 27 000 RWF 2/5
EUCALYPTUS POLES & WOOD PIECES SQM 1/5
5. ROOF
5. ROOF CONCRETE SLAB (15 cm, Grade 25, Suspended formwork w
SQM 67 500 RWF 5/5
reinforcedSTRUCTURE
BAMBOO bars) & ROOF SQM 1/5
1. FOUNDATIONS -
BAMBOO STRUCTURE & REED CEILINGS -
SQM - -
1/5
2. FOUNDATIONS
1. GROUNDFLOOR SLAB EARTH ENABLE - -
SQM 2 200- RWF 1/5
-
3. STRUCTURE
2. GROUNDFLOOR SLAB STEEL CONCRETE PAN - -
SQM - 5/5
-
LIGHT
ADOBEGAUGE STEEL FRAMING
/ RUKARAKARA (20 cm) SQM
SQM 10 000 RWF 5/5
1/5
3. STRUCTURE
METAL
STEEL SQM 5/5

(FLOOR SLAB / VERTICAL) ADOBETUBE TRUSSES PLASTERED
/ RUKARAKARA SQM 12 000 RWF 2/5
STEEL CONCRETE PAN SQM 5/5

ADOBE / RUKARAKARA REINFORCED (20 cm) SQM 13 000 RWF 2/5
4. FACADE / PARTITION METAL FRAME WITH PLASTERBOARDS SQM 3/5

DURABRIC (Compressed Earth & Cement Bricks) SQM 2/5
rooms) METAL FRAME WITH CONCRETE FILLING SQM 3/5
EARTH
OXABRICK (Compressed Earth Blocks, cement-free, non fired) SQM 1/5
5. ROOF SELF-LOCKING GALVANIZED ROOF SHEETING SQM 35 000 RWF 4/5

4. FACADE / PARTITION CLEANCRETE (Earthern exc. material & constr. waste) SQM 1/5
1. FOUNDATIONS STONE STRIP FOUNDATION (Volcanic Stone) SQM 75 000 RWF 1/5
rooms) COMPRESSED STABILIZED EARTH BLOCKS (CSEBs 20 cm) SQM 22 000 RWF 2/5
2. GROUNDFLOOR SLAB - - - -
COMPRESSED STABILISED EARTH BLOCKS (CSEB) PLASTERED SQM 25 000 RWF 2/5
STONE
3. FLOOR SLAB - - - -
GEOPOLYMER SOIL BLOCKS SQM 2/5
4. FACADE / PARTITION STONE WALL (20 cm, Volcanic Stone) SQM 75 000 RWF 2/5
RAMMED EARTH (40 cm) SQM 115 000 RWF 1/5
NATURAL STONE ROOF TILES SQM 2/5
5. ROOF PREFABRICTED RAMMED EARTH PANELS SQM 1/5
NATURAL LIMESTONE ROOF TILES SQM 2/5
5. ROOF - - - -
1. FOUNDATIONS
3. STRUCTURE - - - -
- - - -
MAXPAN SLAB (20 cm,
CLAYASSEMBLIES
2. GROUNDFLOOR SLAB SQM 55 000 RWF 3/5

incl 5 cm toping)
LIMESTONE CALCINATED CLAY CEMENT LC3 SQM 70 000 RWF 3/5
3. STRUCTURE MAXPAN SLAB (20 cm,
PASTER SLAB PARTITION SQM 55 000 RWF 3/5
(FLOOR SLAB / VERTICAL) incl 5 cm toping) SQM 4/5
(On Steel Frame)
4. FACADE / PARTITION
(between apartments & MODERN BRICK ROWLOCK BOND SQM
SQM 23 000 RWF 3/5
4/5
PLACOPAN (PLASTERED CARDBOARDS)
rooms)
BRICK ROWLOCK
PLASTER TILES ON(10cm)
WOOD FRAMING SQM
SQM 13 200 RWF 3/5
3/5
4. FACADE / PARTITION TRADITIONALWITHIN

HEMPCRETE CLAY BURNT
WOODBRICK
FRAME(20cm) SQM 25 000 RWF 4/5
1/5
5. ROOF -
TRADITIONAL FIRED BRICKS (10cm) -
SQM - RWF
16 000 -
4/5
MODERN BRICK ENGLISH BOND SQM 33 000 RWF 3/5
Materials of financial or sustainable interest

5. ROOF FIRE BURNT ROOF TILES SQM 20 000 RWF 3/5
Materials selected for cost benchmarking excercise
51
MATERIALS FOR FINISHES
In analogy to the material assessment for structure,

envelope materials and corresponding technologies we
did the same exercise for various finishes possible to be
used in construction. Here the different technologies are
organised by components such as floor, wall and ceiling.
Again the embodied carbon foot print is an important
factor that shall help choosing sustainable technologies
as well.
COSTS RWF CARBON

COMP. NAME UNIT
/ SQM FOOTPRINT
Cement and Sand Screed SQM 3 000 RWF 5/5
Cork Tiles SQM 1/5

Dry Area
Ceramic Tiles 8 mm w concrete bed 12-15 mm SQM 25 000 RWF 3/5
Ceramic Tiles 10 mm w concrete bed 12-15mm SQM 30 000 RWF 3/5

FLOOR
Parquet SQM 32 090 RWF 2/5
Ceramic Tiles 8 mm (incl concrete bed) SQM 30 000 RWF 3/5

Wet Area
Cork Tiles SQM 1/5
Stone Tiles SQM 2/5
Raw Bricks SQM 0 RWF 4/5
Painting SQM 3 000 RWF 3/5

Dry Area
Painting w Preparation SQM 4 500 RWF 3/5
Plaster SQM 3 500 RWF 4/5
WALL Ceramic Wall Tiles 6 mm w concrete bed 12-15mm SQM 20 000 RWF 3/5
Tapestry SQM 4/5

Wet Area
Ceramic Wall tiles on prepared ground ( Concrete bed 10 mm) SQM 25 000 RWF 3/5
CEILING Plaster SQM 5 000 RWF 4/5
Plywood SQM 7 000 RWF 1/5
Plywood with supporting structure SQM 25 000 RWF 2/5
Timber Flush Door PC 90 000 RWF 1/5
Metal-Wood Door (Steel frame/ wood 800x2000) PC 160 000 RWF 3/5
terior
52
Wet A
Cork Tiles SQM 1/5
Stone Tiles SQM 2/5
Dry Area
Tapestry SQM 4/5
Wet Area
CEILING Plaster SQM 5 000 RWF 4/5

COSTS RWF CARBON
COMP. NAME UNIT
Plywood with supporting structure SQM 25/000
SQMRWF FOOTPRINT
2/5
CementFlush
Timber and Sand
DoorScreed SQM
PC 3 000
90 000RWF
RWF 5/5
1/5
Cork Tiles Door (Steel frame/ wood 800x2000)

Metal-Wood SQM
PC 160 000 RWF 1/5
3/5
DryInterior
Area
Wooden Door 8
Ceramic Tiles with
mmmetal frame bed 12-15 mm
w concrete SQM
PC 25 000
230 000RWF
RWF 3/5
DOORS Wooden Tiles

Ceramic Door 10
with
mmtimber frame bed 12-15mm
w concrete SQM
PC 230 000RWF
30 000 RWF 3/5
3/5
FLOOR
Parquet
Metal Door (Steel Sheet) 900x2100 SQM
PC 32 090
150 000RWF
RWF 2/5
4/5
Exterior
Ceramic Tiles Door

Metal -Wood 8 mm(Steel
(incl concrete bed)1000x2000)
frame/ wood SQM
PC 30 000
190 000RWF
RWF 3/5
Metal Wet Area
MetalTiles
Cork Door (Steel, 1000x2000) SQM
PC 300 000 RWF 1/5
4/5
Stone Tiles SQM 2/5

Steel casement (incl. Glass) SQM 55 000 RWF 4/5

Glazed steel casement (incl 6mm laminated glass) SQM 150 000 RWF 4/5
EXTERIOR Painting SQM 3 000 RWF 3/5

JOINERY Wood Casement (incl. Glass) SQM 1/5
Wood
Dry Area

Wood Casement (incl. 6mm laminated glass) SQM 1/5

Exterior shades SQM 20 000 RWF 2/5
Metallic terrace balustrading 1100 high LM 75 000 RWF 4/5
Metal
Tapestry SQM 4/5

Painting of the Balustrading SQM 4 500 RWF 3/5
LOCKSMITH Ceramic Tiles 6 mm (incl concrete bed) SQM 20 000 RWF 3/5
Wooden terrace balustrading 1000 high LM 79 500 RWF 1/5
Wood
Wet Area

Painting of the Balustrading SQM 4 000 RWF 3/5
MATE R IA LS OF F INA NCIA Painting

L SQM 2 500 RWF 3/5
O R SUSTA INA B LE INTE R E ST
MATE R IA LS SE LECTE D F O R
CO ST B E NCHMA R K ING E X-
CEILING
CE R CISE Plaster SQM 5 000 RWF 4/5
Plywood with supporting structure SQM 25 000 RWF 2/5
Timber Flush Door PC 90 000 RWF 1/5
Metal-Wood Door (Steel frame/ wood 800x2000) PC 160 000 RWF 3/5
terior
53
1.2 MATERIAL KITS
MATERIAL KITS STRUCTURE 2023 - 2035
Starting from the typical Rwandan construction process, • Substituting concrete slab with Maxpan
we identify the potential of working by SUBSTITUTION • Substituting concrete pillars and beams with
to improve the construction method from an ecological, bearing row-lock bricks
financial and comfort point of view. • Substituting traditional fired burnt infill bricks
We conclude our analysis with the following with Adobe/ Rukarakara Bricks
recommendations: • Substituting traditional fired burnt partition walls
with compressed stabilized earth blocks
• Substituting traditional fired burnt interior
partition with triplex
EXI STI N G STAN DARD MATERI AL KI T 01
CON STRUC TI ON SYSTEM
6 6
3 3
4 4
2,50 M
5 5
2 2
4,0
M 4,0
1 First Floor 1 Grou nd Floor
1 Concrete Slab (15 cm) 1 Earthen Floor

2 Traditional Clay Burnt Bricks 2 Improved Rukarakara
(20 cm) 3 Improved Rukarakara
3 Traditional Clay Burnt Bricks 4 Triplex Wood Panel On Wood
M A T E R I A L S & T E C H N O L O G Y S U P P LY S T(10cm)
R AT E G Y Framing M AT E R I A L S &
CLAY EARTH 4 Traditional Clay Burnt Bricks 5 Steel casement window

M A T E R I A L S & T E C H N O L O G Y S U P P LY S T R A T E G Y MA
(10cm) 6 Wood frame w metal sheets

5 Steel casement window
6 Wood frame w metal sheets
135 000 RWF / SQM 115 000 RWF / SQM

OVERVIEWOVERVIEW ( excl. f ou ndat ion) ( excl. f ou ndat ion)
Clay is common throughout

Earth-based Rwanda,
construction is the most widely
and forms a key used component
technique offorearth- building homes in
based structures,Rwanda.
and when firedthe
It is also at most
high sustainable and
temperatures gains strengthand
accessible, andhas resilience.
potential to become the
Clay can be formed most into different shapes
affordable.
and sizes of building components that serve
a variety of purposes,
Perceivedincluding
to be bricks and material that
a low-quality
blocks for masonry walling,
families move tiles for roofing,
away from, earth has an image TRADITIONAL BRICK
RUKARAKARA (TRADITIONAL) MODERN BRICK
RUKARAKARA (IMPROVED)
and tiles for paving and flooring.
problem that is undeserved. High quality A useful, non-native tree that the majority of
Composing As a key substitution
Buildingforregulations
concrete are pending that
earth-based construction techniques, is productive for abuilt
majority
homes in the country, frames, transitioning
would the construction
permit Rukarakara to be built
Clay is excavated from Rammed
including valley sources,
Earth, Compressed Earth of the populationthis
andishas
the baseline standard for industry towards regenerative
within Kigali city limits, if standards
low-cost,
potential for broader low-income house
use with ensuring
resources, widely better
available lateral stability and
structural
and the nature ofBlocks,
the clay andinGeopolymers,
that locationare experiencing resiliency are incorporated into
walling inand
investment in machinery Rwanda. timber could be a game-changer for
will determine its new attention
general and support. New building
characteristics, fabrication ofindustry
the Rwandan construction the building material.
training.
regulations are being developed, as well as
including its color.
techniques for construction being refined,
Advantages to render earthen walls higher performance,
Locally available,more durable,
clay-based and more
products are beautiful while
also widely usedmaintaining
in Rwanda some andof skilled
their cost advantage.
masons are common. Fired clay products,
when burnt using Advantages
appropriate waste
biomass materials,- are relatively climate-
54 friendly. They’re also versatile and resilient,
Supply chain
composing beautiful long-lasting buildings.
-
The aim of this substitution strategy is a pragmatic We propose different scenarios for construction systems
approach to align the growth of the Rwandan construction that allow different building typologies to adapt to the
industry with low cost and sustainable materials and development of different industries.
technologies. We also introduced a specific typology: the
duplex apartments that allow the mixture of Maxpan slabs Prices considered here are average costs of structure
and timber slabs. per square meter of living area, defined on a 2023 value,
, adressing seismic regulation at 0.25 acceleration,
These combinations allow a cost optimisation between 10 excluded VAT, based on average proportions of existing
and 20%, while a combination of Earth-and bio-sourced building typologies by substituting materials from the
materials such as wood as vertical structure & Maxpan existing constructions means.
Slab as horizontal structure allows a carbon footprint
optimisation by 50%.
M AT E R IA L K IT 02 MATERI AL KI T 03 MATERI AL KI T 0 4
7 7
1B
3 3 3
4 4 4
5 5
6 6
5 2 2
2
1A G ro und F l o o r 1 First Floor 1 Fir s t Floor
1A Earthen Floor 1 Maxpan Slab (16 cm + topping 4 1 Maxpan Slab (16 cm + topping 4
1B Pine Timbers With Wood Planks cm) cm)
2 Rowlock Bond (21 cm) 2 Compressed Stabilized 2 Modern Brick Bond
3 Rowlock Bond (21 cm) Earthblocks (20 cm), coated 3 Compressed Stabilized Earth
4 Triplex Wood Panel On Wood 3 Modern Brick Bond (20cm) blocks
Framing 4 Modern Brick Bond (10cm) 4 Compressed Stabilized Earth
5 Steel casement window 5 Concrete column blocks
6 Wood frame w metal sheets 6 Steel casement window 5 Concrete column
M AT E R I A L S & T E C H N O L O G Y S U P P LY S T R AT E G Y
M AT E R I A L S & T E C H N O L O G Y S U P P LY S T R AT E G Y M AT E R I A L S & T E C H N O L O G Y S U P P LY S T R AT E G Y
6 Steel casement window M A T E R I A L S & T E C H N O L O G Y S U P P LY S T R A T E G Y
EARTH EARTH
1 2 0 0 0 0 R W F / SQ M 125 000 RWF / SQM 120 000 RWF / S QM
(exc l. f o und ati o n) ( excl. f ou ndat ion) ( excl. f ou ndat io n )
OVERVIEW OVERVIEW
Earth-based construction is the most widely Earth-based construction is the most widely
usedM A technique
T E R I A L S & Tfor
ECHN O L O G Y Shomes
building U P P L Y S Tin
R AT E G Y
used technique for building homes in M A T E R I A L S & T E C H N O L O G Y S U P P LY S T R A T E G Y
CLAY
Rwanda. It is also the most sustainable and
accessible, and has potential to become the
Rwanda. It is also the most sustainable and
accessible, and has potential to become the
most affordable. most affordable.
Perceived to be a low-quality material that Perceived to be a low-quality material that

families move away from, earth has an image RUKARAKARA (TRADITIONAL) families move away from, earth has an image
RUKARAKARA (IMPROVED) COMPRESSED(TRADITIONAL)
RUKARAKARA STABILIZED RUKARAKARA (IMPROVED) COMPRESSED STABILIZED
problem that is undeserved. High quality Composing the majority of problem that is undeserved. High
Building qualityare pending that
regulations EARTH BLOCK (CSEB)
Building regulations are pending that EARTH BLOCK (CSEB)
Composing the majority of
earth-based construction techniques, built homes in the country, earth-based construction
would techniques,
permit Rukarakara to be built Using
built a hand
homes in press, these blocks
the country, would permit Rukarakara to be built Using a hand press, these blocks
including Rammed Earth, Compressed Earth this is the baseline standard for within Kigali city
including Rammed Earth, Compressed limits, if standards
Earth are is
made using a % of cement
for as within Kigali city limits, if standards are made using a % of cement as
OVERVIEW
Blocks, and Geopolymers, are experiencing low-cost, low-income house ensuring better lateral stability and
Blocks, and Geopolymers, resiliency
are experiencing
this the baseline
a binder with
low-cost, low-income
standard
clay andhouse
earth. The ensuring better lateral stability and a binder with clay and earth. The
walling in Rwanda. are incorporated into resultant
walling in masonry
Rwanda. unit is a good infill resiliency are incorporated into resultant masonry unit is a good infill
new attention and support. New building new attention and support. New building
fabrication of the building material. substitute for Rukarakara, cement fabrication of the building material. substitute for Rukarakara, cement
regulations are being developed, as well as regulations are being developed, as well as blocks, or traditional bricks. blocks, or traditional bricks.
techniques
Clay for
is construction being refined,
common throughout Rwanda, techniques for construction being refined,
to render
andearthen
forms walls
a keyhigher performance,
component of earth- to render earthen walls higher performance,
more based
durable, and more
structures, andbeautiful whileat high
when fired more durable, and more beautiful while
maintaining some ofgains
temperatures their strength
cost advantage.
and resilience. maintaining some of their cost advantage.
Clay can be formed into different shapes
Advantages
and sizes of building components that serve Advantages
- a variety of purposes, including bricks and -
blocks for masonry walling, tiles for roofing, TRADITIONAL BRICK MODERN BRICK
Supply chain
and tiles for paving and flooring. Supply chain
A useful, non-native tree that As a key substitution for concrete
- INTERLOCKING STABILIZED - frames,EARTH
INDUSTRIALIZED transitioning
BLOCKS the construction RAMMED EARTH
is productive for a majority INTERLOCKING STABILIZED INDUSTRIALIZED EARTH BLOCKS RAMMED EARTH
SOIL BLOCK (ISSB) industry
Clay is excavated from valley sources, of the population and has While the industry is towards
nascent, regenerative
bamboo An ancientSOIL BLOCKthat
technique (ISSB)
combines While the industry is nascent, bamboo An ancient technique that combines
Scalability
and the nature of the clay in that location broader use Scalability
potential for suspended
As a key substitute with is one of theresources, widely best
fastest-growing, available structural well-mixedAssoils and
a key gravels to
substitute forcreate a
suspended is one of the fastest-growing, best well-mixed soils and gravels to create a
- will determine its general characteristics,
investment
flooring and in machinery -and
walling, transitioning sources for timber
carbon could be a game-changer
sequestration on for monolithic, high-performance,
flooring resilient
and walling, transitioning sources for carbon sequestration on monolithic, high-performance, resilient
training. the Rwandan construction industry wall structure. wall structure.
including its color.
Advantages 55
Locally available, clay-based products are
1.2 MATERIAL KITS
MATERIAL KITS STRUCTURE 2035 - 2050
Based on the ranking system of the assessment framework slabs, clay tiled roofs, wood casement windows, low
that supports the identification of materials and carbon concrete, and gypsum board walls. These materials
technologies suitable for application in 2025, 2030 and represent important contributions to a sustainable future
2050 we also worked on material kits that currently are for the Rwandan construction industry.
not common in Rwandan housing construction such as
hempcrete for load bearing walls, glue laminated timber
M AT E R IA L KIT 05 MATERI AL KI T 06
7 7
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
2 2
1 1
1Glue Laminated Timber 1 Glue Laminated Timber

2 Hempcrete 2 Hempcrete
3 Improved Compressed Earthblocks 3 Gypsum Board Wall
4 Hemp 4 Hemp
5 Concrete column 5 Low carbon concrete column
6 Wood casement window 6 Wood casement window
7 Wood frame w clay tiles 7 Wood frame w clay tiles
TEGY M AT E R I A L S & T E C H N O L O G Y S U P P LY S T R AT E G Y
idely
s in
and
e the
that
mage RUKARAKARA (TRADITIONAL) RUKARAKARA (IMPROVED) COMPRESSED STABILIZED
uality Composing the majority of Building regulations are pending that EARTH BLOCK (CSEB)
ques, built homes in the country, would permit Rukarakara to be built Using a hand press, these blocks
Earth this is the baseline standard for within Kigali city limits, if standards are made using a % of cement as
ncing low-cost, low-income house ensuring better lateral stability and a binder with clay and earth. The
walling in Rwanda. resiliency are incorporated into resultant masonry unit is a good infill
lding fabrication of the building material. substitute for Rukarakara, cement
ell as
ned, 56 blocks, or traditional bricks.
ance,
while
MATERIAL KIT MATRIX
up to 2025 2025 to 2035 2035 to 2050
G+0 G+3 G+0 G+3 G+0 G+3
1 - 200,000 FRW #01 #01 #06 #06 #11 #11
200,000 - 500,000 FRW #02 #02 #07 #07 #12 #12
500,000 - 700,000 FRW #03 #03 #08 #08 #13 #13
700,000 - 1,200,000 FRW #04 #04 #09 #09 #14 #14
1,200,000 FRW and up #05 #05 #10 #10 #15 #15
Increasing supply of:

• Environmentally-Friendly, Reduced-Carbon Materials
• Locally-Available Materials
• Quality of Technical Design, Construction Planning, Labor Skills
57
1.3 CONSTRUCTION INCREMENTALITY
Leaving the realization of part of a construction project The incremental housing approach, as defined originally
to the future enables landlords to reduce their up-front by Ferguson (2008), involves splitting up the housing
construction price. We believe that incrementality may be construction process into stages that align with the
suitable for finishings as these do not present seismic, fire, housing delivery chain. Each of these stages involve
or flood risks. smaller steps where the household then progressively
improves their situation over time. For example, Ferguson
Given pervasive finance, supply and capacity challenges, a notes, the housing delivery value chain might involve the
realistic strategic development plan for Rwanda’s housing following, with finance moments (served by household
sector must allow for progressive growth. While the Kigali savings, family or employer loans or donations, or micro
Master Plan 2050 proposes incremental development finance) at each stage:
as a means of accommodating expected changes in
affordability and demand, neither institutional structures
nor the private sector is currently prepared to address • Stage 1: Acquisition and occupancy of the plot: (i)
these scenarios at scale. So, while strategies like land Physically occupy the plot, (ii) Pay for plot, (iii) Starter
pooling, flexible zoning, incremental construction and infrastructure and (iv) Construct an initial makeshift
participatory approaches are proposed in the KCMP 2050, shelter
no clear implementation roadmap exists, particularly as
it concerns the finance, skills, inspection and monitoring • Stage 2: Upgrading property tenure to obtain security:
facilitation required to realize them. Similarly, the (i) Maintain physical control of the plot, (ii) Achieve
recent review of the RHFP expressly acknowledges the secure tenure, (iii) Obtain full legal title
necessity of availing finance for incremental construction,
underscoring the need for further assessment of lenders • Stage 3: Provision of basic infrastructure and
and financial products. upgrading: (i) Upgrading of basic infrastructure (ii)
Provide adequate sanitation
• Stage 4: Construction of the housing unit and

ongoing improvements: (i) Improve and expand unit,
(ii) Improve fixtures, (iii) add space for relatives and
rental
• Stage 5: Building community institutions to combat

insecurity: (i) Form neighbourhood groups, (ii) Local
and international NGO support (iii) Partner with
public and private sector
58
WITH FINISHING WITHOUT FINISHING ON SURFACES
STEEL CASEMENT
STEEL CASEMENT
PLYWOOD CEILING CEILING WITHOUT
FINISHING
ADOBE/ RUKARAKARA
ADOBE/ RUKARAKARA
PLASTERED
PLASTERED
CERAMIC CERAMIC TILES

TILES ONLY WET
AREAS
PAINTING
.5
10
.5
UNPAINTED
10
PLASTER
SURFACES
CEILING
TIMBER FLUSH
TIMBER FLUSH
6.
0 DOOR 6.
0 DOOR
CERAMIC TILES
5
CEMENT &
1.
5
1.
SAND SCREED
METALLIC TERRACE
METALLIC TERRACE
BALUSTRADING
BALUSTRADING
FROM 65 000 TO 40 000 RWF / SQM 25 000 RWF / SQM

FINISHED DWELLING UNIT DWELLING UNIT TO BE FINISHED BY THE
END USER
Prices considered here are finishing ratios per square

meter of living area, defined on a 2023 value, exclusive
VAT, based on average proportions of existing building
typologies. By simplifying the finishes we can lower their
costs by 30% and by letting the final user do the finishings,
we can lower their costs by another 30% We recommend
the use of ceramic tiles for wet areas to allow a carbon
footprint optimisation of the finishes and profit of the clay
industry.
59
The challenge with the approach relates precisely to health and safety of structures, throughout and after the
the issue that the City of Kigali seems to be addressing building process.
in pilot projects with a range of partners – some things
are more efficiently addressed at scale, while others are There remains the key gap of technical support for the
more affordably addressed by households themselves. construction process itself, however. In some countries,
The identification and accessing of land and the delivery lenders provide “housing support services” as part of their
of bulk infrastructure, particularly water, sanitation and housing microfinance product. A study undertaken in five
roads, are all activities that are most efficiently undertaken East African countries in 2010 found that many lenders
on a project- or group-basis. Similarly, activities that rely of housing microfinance were exploring their role in the
on the state, the delivery of land rights, for example, or provision of support services, seeing this value-add as a
the approval of layout plans, are also usefully done at a mechanism to both stimulate demand for their product,
project or group level. and attract impact capital intent on quality housing
outcomes. The linking of such services to finance ranged
Once these basic ingredients are in place, however, an from the provision of very basic advice at loan origination
individual housing delivery process can be very effective through to qualified housing inspections throughout
and affordable. the building process. Recommendations from that
study included making improvements to the packaging
That said, households are not automatically expert of housing support programmes, and increasing
builders with design, engineering, masonry, carpentry, their flexibility, responding to demands expressed by
plumbing, electrical and other skills. While the incremental households.
housing delivery process leverages household labour and
intentions for development, it will yield poor housing Although the terms of references for the current study
outcomes if it is undertaken without technical support. A do not specifically mention incrementality, they do
key point of focus, therefore, must be on the delivery of recognize the need for home improvement solutions over
technical support interventions that can be flexibly and time. However, given the urgent need to identify scalable
sustainably offered to assist households in the delivery of solutions, it appeared recommendable to consider
their housing over time. The city, or local municipal office, incremental design and finance-based strategies, which
has an important role to play in this regard – providing allow the delivery of both quality and quantity, separately
support, reviewing plans and issuing development from home improvement strategies. In developing these
approvals, and undertaking inspections to ensure the solutions, reference is made to study examples from
60
across the global south that prioritize incremental finance, improved with access to finance, progressive zoning, and
land assembly and design, such as: streamlined building approval processes at the local level.
In case of multi-storey buildings, the possibility of

• Patriminio Hoy (Mexico): Offers construction postponing the construction of additional levels in the
technical assistance to borrowers of CEMEX cement future has an inverse effect on the cost of the initial
who build according to prescribed specifications construction. Indeed, the future extension must be
anticipated from the initial design of the structure and
• Kenya Women’s Microfinance Bank (Kenya): leads to larger dimensioning of the structure than as what
Distributes incremental housing loans to women; would be necessary without this future extension. This
loans are disbursed according to construction phase increases the initial cost of construction rather than the
intended effect of reducing the base investment. On the
• Prodel (Nicaragua): Acts as a wholesale lender to other hand, it is probably impossible to envisage future
MFIs offering housing microfinance – ensuring that structural work over a housing building that is already
with every HMF loan the borrower also receives the occupied. Thus, incremental solutions in case of multi-
services of an engineer storey housing can just be limited to finishing works, since
the building structure and the closure of its envelope can
The benefits of incremental construction and finance only be considered at once.
solutions for households are many. Not only can it ensure
that households build and borrow within their means,
incrementality offers a clear path for households to
increase the economic value of their properties. Through
incremental finance and construction, households
themselves can enhance the performance of their
housing asset by making home improvements – for
example, extending the house to accommodate a growing
family, or installing a ceiling so the interior is not so hot.
They might also build an entirely separate unit on their
property and offer this as rental accommodation or use
it as a home-based enterprise. Their ability to do this is
61
1.4 DESIGN PRINCIPLES
HEIGHT
Beyond the scale of materials, we consider lowering

the cost of construction by defining low cost building
typologies with different heights.
Limiting the building height to G+3 is contributing in

optimising costs as from a height of G+4 buildings
require additional ground works for foundations and
also require the instalment of elevators in order to fulfil
disability regulations. As elevators, shutters and balconies
need regular technical refurbishments, they require
higher maintenance costs after construction (Inception
Report, Project Clichy-Sous-Bois in France). In addition,
the mounting and keeping in place of scaffolding on the
façades during construction should not be neglected and
is an important cost as well.
The maximum building height is dependent on the Kigali

2050 Master Plan Zoning Regulations. For pure residential
zones the maximum building height is limited to G+4
within the densest zone R4 (High density residential zone).
Only within the city commercial zone C3 a maximum
building height of G+10 is possible.
Buildings above G+3 still can be considered for market

rate housing in projects and commercial programs.
62
HOUSE HOUSE
G0 G+1
Staircases
CO N C R E TE SL A B O R STONE STR IP PAD FOUN DATI ON

FO UNDATIO N W ITH E A R THE N
SL A B
COLLECTIVE BUIDLING COLLECTIVE BUILDING

G+3 ABOVE G+3
Elevators
Staircases
PA D F O UNDATION G+4 - G+6

COMBI N ATED PAD FOUN DA-
TI ON
G+6 - G+10
RAFT FOUN DATI ON
63
SEISMIC
Seismic design has a significant impact on the affordability conditions of the precise site where the building is to be
of housing and must be assessed on a case-by-case built. The latter would require a subsurface geotechnical
basis. In the 2019 updated Rwanda Building code, the study to be executed where the building’s foundations are
Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) was increased from planned.
1.6 m/s2 to 2.5 m/s2. PGA is a measure of the intensity
of ground shaking during an earthquake and is used as The nature of the affordable housing typologies
a basis for earthquake-resistant building design. As a developed for this study, ranging from low-rise G+0 to
result, a building’s structural elements would need to be mid-rise G+3 to high-rise G+10, are intentionally generic,
revised to withstand the increased anticipated ground and proposed for consideration by a wide range of
motion. The foundations are strongly affected, as the first developments throughout the country. The design focus
and main building element to resist an earthquake, and is on the conceptual principles of affordability, and for
columns, beams, slabs, and reinforcing bars throughout the purposes of this study that focus has included overall
the structure are also impacted. In most cases, the building massing, efficient plan layouts, logical structural
foundations and overall structure would need to be spans and heights, and unit combinations that meet the
increased in weight and size; in other cases, alternative needs of the Rwandan populace. The specific constraints
methods may need to be considered that would likely be of structural design to meet the seismic requirements
more robust. of the 2019 building code are likewise conceptual in
This adjustment has repercussions for the building cost nature, as they would only appear through a detailed
overall. An increase in the quantity and weight of the structural design that would include calculations based
reinforced concrete, especially the steel reinforcing on geotechnical research on a given site.
bars in a building, correlates to a higher cost of the
structural elements. In the context of affordable housing Seismic design for buildings, alongside other site-specific
developments where even small increases in material characteristics like site shape, size, slope, vegetation
and labor costs can tip the scale towards unaffordability, coverage, rainfall, wind exposure, and solar orientation,
the shift towards higher levels of minimal seismic design requires professional consideration and adaptation
compliance has mandated heavier, and thus more especially as many of these factors will not remain static.
expensive buildings. This has a significant negative affect The advent of climate change, the collection of additional
on housing affordability. In some cases, developers may seismic information to allow for more nuanced code
be obliged to switch to building lower density, low-rise requirements, and the impact of continued development
housing to avoid the cost increase implied by the more across the country will result in significant change over time.
stringent seismic requirements. Detailed structural design for generic housing typologies
The National Risk Atlas of Rwanda, issued in 2015, highlights is inappropriate, as it suggests that the typologies could
several country-specific conditions of assessing seismic be blindly applied to a range of sites across the country
risk in Rwanda. These include the decreasing likelihood without further design intervention. These typologies
of severe earthquakes from the western to the eastern are designed to represent a starting point for a housing
provinces of the country. The Atlas reads, “For zones of developer, who will need to hire professionals to adapt
moderate to low hazard (including Kigali city) reaching them to their land parcel. The characteristics of the parcel
the threshold PGA of 0.05 g, it is also recommended to will guide the selection of which typology is most relevant
use seismic load for a high-rise building.” Low- and Mid- for adaptation. To achieve affordability, the implementing
rise buildings are not highlighted for special concern. The entity must engage qualified design and engineering
Atlas also notes that “Damage patterns in past earthquakes professionals to interpret the code and the particularities
show that soil conditions at a site may have a major effect of a given site so that the buildings are efficient and not
on the level of ground shaking.” Effective structural over-designed. This implies the ability to evaluate sites
design of a particular building is thus highly dependent and buildings conceptually, with affordability as a factor
on two factors: the overall risk level of the region where influencing the structural design while meeting basic
the building is located, and the unique and specific soil safety requirements.
64
As a result, structural educational change is necessary
to equip people to provide this advice and guide these
decisions, which aligns with several of the broad
recommendations made by WS2. A few of these include:
• Continue to promote and encourage development

of technical schools and professional organizations
to train design professionals with the capacity to
evaluate building structures based on conceptual
ideals of efficiency and limits, rather than broad,
generalized requirements imposed by programming
software
• Focus on the specification of performance of
structures based on unique site situations
• Consider the code as a standard for minimal
compliance, and permit broad interpretation of code
requirements to encourage innovation regarding
unique site design, structural components, regional
applicability, and material selections.
• In the case of landowner building for themselves,
public technical assistance and controls by specialised
engineers would lower the risks of construction
damages.
• In the case of developers building for others, public
control over the projects would lower the risks and
the recommendation of G+3 maximum building
height is a reasonable direction regarding the recent
regulation evolution that affects construction cost.
65
WIDTH, LENGTH AND SPAN
6M WIDE BUILDING
The analysis of existing apartment typologies show that a 3X4M STRUCTURAL GRID
span width between 3 and 4 meters is the general base
for structural grids in building construction in Rwanda. 20,0 M
The width of existing buildingsrange between a 6- and
7,5-meters depth.
6,0 M
The compactness of a building is the ratio obtained by the
sum of the envelope surface divided by its floor area. The
reduction of the envelope corresponding to a constant
liveable volume makes construction more cost effective.
The proportion between the floor area and the façade is a
FLOOR AREA 120 SQM
key issue for cost optimisation.
FAC ADE 5 2M
A cost benchmarking for different typologies, from a COLUMN S 18 PC S

single detached dwelling to a multi dwelling unit, based
BEAMS 96M
on ratios from analysis of bills of quantities emphasized
the link between the critical dimensions of length and
depth of a building and the apartment surfaces. Structural
capacities, fire regulation and accessibility issues play a
crucial role to minimize foundation, technical installation
10M WIDE BUILDING
and circulation spaces, that can have a strong impact on
the final cost. 4X5M STRUCTURAL GRID
The cost analysis shows that compact building typologies

such as a multi-dwelling unit allow a cost optimisation 12,0 M
compared to a semi-detached or detached dwelling unit.
In the 2 diagrams on the right we can see that increasing

the width of a building from 6m to 10m can lower the
10,0 M
volume of materials used for the envelope by 20%. As

floors, roofs and partitions keep the same surface, the
final cost optimisation is around 10% of the structural
costs, lowering the structure ratio from between 125 000
and 120 000 to 110 000 RWF / sqm living area, exclusive
VAT, value 2023, considering seismic 0.25 accelerations
constraints.
FLOOR AREA 120 SQM
FAC ADE 44M
COLUMN S 12 PC S
BEAMS 7 6M
COST OPTIMISATION
- 15% FACADE SURFACE
- 30% COLUMNS
- 20% BEAMS
66
EXISTING BUILDING TYPOLOGIES
RHA LOW COST HOUSING MODEL

TWO-BEDROOM BLOCK
14,4 M
14.4
3.0 4.2 4.2 3.0
Terrace Terrace
8 m2 8 m2
Room WC WC Room
2.7
8 m2 3 m2 Kitchen Kitchen 3 m2 8 m2
4 m2 4 m2
6,6 M
6.6
3.9
Room Lving Room Living Room Room
8 m2 16 m2 16 m2 8 m2
2 BR 2 BR
T3 T3
39 SQM
39 m2 3939SQM
m2
LEFT SIDE VIEW

KARAMA INTEGRATED MODEL VILLAGE
ONE-BEDROOM BLOCK TWO-BEDROOM BLOCK
10,8 M 6,8 M
10.8 10.8 13.6
2.8 1.2 2.8 4.0 2.8 1.2 2.8 2.8 4.0 4.0 4.0 2.8 2.8
1.5
1.5
Balcony Access
1.5
1.5
Balcony Access Balcony Access
Living Room Room Living Room Living Room Room RoomLiving Room Living Room Living Room Room Room
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
13 m2 8 m2 12 m2 13 m2 8 m2 9 m2 12 m2 13 m2 12 m2 9 m2 9 m2
6,8 M
Hall Hall Hall Hall H
8.3
8.3
8.2
2 m2
8.2 2 m2 1 m2 1 m2 1
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4
Kitchen WC Room WC Kitchen Kitchen WC Room WC Kitchen
Room 2 WC 2 Kitchen Kitchen WC Room Room W
8 m2 3 m2 8 m2 3 m2 7 m2 8 m2 3 m2 8 m2 3m 7m
9 m2 3 m2 8 m2 8 m2 3 m2 9 m2 9 m2 3
1.5
1.5
Terrace Terrace Terrace Terrace

Terrace Terrace Terrace
1.5
1.5
9 m2 5 m2 9 m2 9m5 2m2 9 m2 9 m2
1 BR 1 BR 2 BR
32 SQM 32 SQM 43 S QM
T3
KINIGI INTEGRATED MODEL VILLAGE
T3 T3
T3 T3 T3 T3 42 m2
43 m2 2 43 m2
32 m2 32 m2 32 m2 32 m
TWO-BEDROOM BLOCK
13,6 M
13.6
3.3 3.5 3.5 3.3 3.3 3
OP VIEW
1.2 1.2
Balcony Access
PROJECT
PROJECT NAME
1.2
NAME
CLIENT:
CLIENT: DISCIPLINE:
DISCIPLINE: Room Room Room
22 BHK
BHK BLOC
LOW
LOW COST
COST HOUSING
HOUSING MODELS
MODELS 9 m2 9 m2
BLOC NAMES:
NAMES: 10 m2
30X45m
30X45m22 DRAWING.
DRAWING. TITLE:
TITLE: PERSPECTIVES
PERSPECTIVES
1.4 2.8
3.0
8,2 M
16
16 (( in
in two
two blocs
blocs sharing
sharing with
with one ramp))
one ramp Living Room Living Room
PROJECT
PROJECT LOCATION
LOCATION Designed
Designed and
and Drawn
Drawn by
by Scale
Scale Drawing
Drawing No. Sheet.
DESIGN
DESIGN DEVELOPED
DEVELOPED BY
BY No. Sheet. WC 1 15 m2 15 m2 WC 1
WC 1
SAHD/RHA
SAHD/RHA ARCH.004
ARCH.004 A3
A3 2 m2 2 m2
Plot
Plot No: 2 m2
8.2
No:
Cell:
Cell:
Sector: Checked
Checked by Project
Project No. WC 2 WC 2
Sector: by No. Date Ha
1.4
Date
WC 2
District:
District: 2 m2 2 m2 5m
Province/City:
Province/City: KIGALI
KIGALI CITY SAHD/RHA
SAHD/RHA AHP.002/KG
AHP.002/KG
2017
2017 2 m2
Onstreet
CITY
Onstreet
Kitchen Kitchen
2.8
Room 6 m2 6 m2
2.8
Room Room Ro
8 m2 Terrace Terrace 8 m2 8 m2 8m
2 m2 2 m2
2 BR 2 BR
42 SQM 42 SQM
T3 T3 T4
42 m2 42 m2 57 m2
HOREZO INTEGRATED MODEL VILLAGE

20,3 M
20.3
1.4 3.1 3.2 2.5 2.5 3.2 3.1 1.4
Room Room
3.1
8 m2 8 m2
WC WC
3 m2 3 m2
4.3
Room Living Room Kitchen Kitchen Living Room Room

12 m2 16 m2 6 m2 6 m2 16 m2 12 m2
8,6 M
8.6
Room Living Room Kitchen Kitchen Living Room Room

12 m2 16 m2 6 m2 6 m2 16 m2 12 m2
4.3
WC WC
3 m2 3 m2
3.1
Room Room
8 m2 8 m2
4 X 2 BR
45 SQM
T3 T3
45 m2 45 m2 67
COLOURS AND ORNAMENTS
Colours have a significant role in characterizing Rwandan ROOFS COATS BRICKS JOINERY GROUND
architecture. Around a palette of shades around of earth,

ranging from pastel pink or orange to light and darker
browns, a series of more intense colours characterize me-
tallic elements such as joinery and roofs. Some of them
are more intense shades of earth colours, some others are
variations of complementary colours around green and
blue, or grey-green and grey blue.
We also consider details of design in the assemblies of

architectural elements to integrate architectural heritage
into modern Rwandan architecture.
INTENSITY
68
COLOURS
ORNAMENTS
69
1.5 BUILDINGS & TYPOLOGIES
INTRODUCTION
ADAPTIVE URBAN TYPOLOGIES floor row houses, G+1 row-houses, G+2 stacked row-
houses, G+2 and G+3 collective buildings with designed
In our study, we designed propositions for several typologies of 28sqm/ 1 Bedroom apartments, 45sqm / 2
housing typologies with different architectural solutions Bedroom apartments, 50sqm / 3 Bedroom apartments
and densities. Each of them can accommodate specific and 65sqm / 4 Bedroom apartments.
geographical and urban solutions, according to its density
and capacity to integrate on sloped terrains. Within the 5m span width we define a minimum depth of
From single floor row houses to G+3 collective buildings, 2,35m for the bedrooms.
we tried to identify a reasonable low-cost construction for Furthermore, the designed typology schemes all foresee
each typology, and to estimate its variations according to natural kitchen lighting and ventilation as they all give
foundation types, vertical cores and structural complexity. direct access to the façade.
These construction costs will serve as basic data to test Our defined standard surface for living rooms is around
urban design and real estate scenarios later in the study. 18sqm.
The global aim of this exercise is to highlight the way Bathrooms are designed with mechanical ventilation to
construction cost can vary from a typology to another, increase building width.
rather than to provide a final architectural design. To facilitate maintenance, we tried to avoid access
balconies and integrated efficient staircases into the
schemes for building typologies above G+1.
APPLICATION OF THE PROPOSED TYPOLOGIES
The construction cost per square meter of a typical 20-
The proposed typologies aim to demonstrate the lowest unit G+3 housing block with a depth of 8.0 meters can be
construction costs that can be achieved by designing 275 000 RWF per square meter.
sustainable and comfortable buildings that will create the
heritage for the future of Rwandan cities. Prices considered in the charts are detailed construction
To outline the most precise possible figures regarding prices per square meter defined on a 2023 value, VAT
construction costs, the typologies are designed in the excluded, custom duties included, both for the finished
organisation of their spaces, in the overall surfaces, in the dwelling unit and its incremental version.
structural principles and in the basic MEP equipment.
Detailed BOQs have been produced to verify construction As custom duties are subsidized for affordable housing,
costs per square meter with real quantities for structure, we deduct from al prices per square meter 25k RWF,
envelope, and all construction lots. representing the average custom duties impact per square
However, these typologies still represent a theoretical meter in current situation, according to our previous
design exercise and are not meant to be ready-to-build analysis.
architectural designs. There is a need to hire qualified
architects and engineers for each real estate project to
design adequate proposals for different final users and
different sites.
Based on our research on existing Rwandan housing

typologies and construction standards we defined a span
width of 4m or 5m for the building structure. This allows
us to
Continue to use standard Rwandan construction systems

and materials
Design maximal efficient floor plan layouts with relatively
small surfaces to limit construction costs.
We designed housing units for four typologies: Single
70
G+0 ROWHOUSES G+0 COLLECTIVE BUILDING
215k RWF/SQM Living Area Excl. VAT Incremental DU 235k RWF/SQM Living Area Excl. VAT Incremental DU
after custom duties exemption (25k RWF/SQM) after custom duties exemption (25k RWF/SQM)
200k RWF/SQM Gross Floor Area Excl. VAT Finished DU 250k RWF/SQM Gross Floor Area Excl. VAT Finished DU
260k RWF/SQM Living Area Excl. VAT Finished DU 270k RWF/SQM Living Area Excl. VAT Finished DU
G+1 SEMI DETACHED DUPLEX HOUSES G+2 STACKED ROWHOUSES

G+2 COLLECTIVE G+3 COLLECTIVE BUILDING

Construction costs values 2023

(new seismic regulation, 0.25 peak acceleration)
average price
245k RWF/SQM
Living Area Excl. VAT Incremental DU
after custom duties exemption (25k RWF/SQM)
71
15/ 20SQM UNIT
A housing typology common in Kigali, Rwanda, is a

small, two-room, single-story structure built by a micro-
developer (also known as a “backyard landlord”) on their
plot and offered for rent. The apartments may be stand- 15 SQM UNIT
alone or combined with other apartments to form larger
structures. Renters are often single men, and the rooms
are used as a salon and private bedroom. If the apartment 4.06
is shared with a roommate, the salon is converted to a 2.03 2.03
bedroom at night. These structures are often clustered
on a single plot, and an exterior kitchen and pit latrine is
shared.
The traditional design of these structures is driven by

cost as rents are typically very low, ranging between
3.26
RWF 15,000 to RWF 30,000, depending on whether an
inexpensive tile floor or wood ceiling is provided. The
foundation may be stone, supporting Adobe mud blocks,
and a simple metal sheet roof over timber rafters, usually
second hand.
This typology is based on this traditional design, using

the updated regulations for Rukarakara, or Adobe block
masonry. While the size and layout of two-rooms,
varying between 15 and 20sqm, is maintained, a stone
foundation, properly executed Adobe blocks, and a
reinforced concrete ring beam are specified. These
20 SQM UNIT
minimal accommodations provide for a safer, healthier
structure, especially when combined with a common
toilet that meets city regulations.
4.80
4.06 MATERIALS & 2.40 2.40
2.03 TECHNOLOGY
4 Metal sheet over

timber rafters
2.50
3.26
3.80
1.30
2 Adobe blocks
1 Earth floor
72
73
G+0 ROWHOUSES
The rowhouse G+0 dwelling unit is the cheapest housing GROUN DF LOOR H OUSE G+0
10,00X5,00
solution, when considering the construction cost without D E S C R IP T IO N U QT Y R AT E /U A MO U N T %
infrastructure, as no special foundation is required, no 1. STRUC TURE 23 864 150 50%
vertical core is needed and, in terms of construction E x c a va ti o n Strip Foundation & Column bases CM 207 4 500 931 500 2%
materials, vertical walls only need to bear the load of the Ba ck fi l l Selected excavated soil CM 168 6 500 1 094 340 2%
Stone Strip Foundation - Stone Masonry CM 33 70 000 2 318 400 5%
roof, providing for a wider range of material options. 50mm thick C15 Blinding SM 55 8 767 483 933 1%
Fo u nda ti o n Ground Beams - C25 CM 6 192 687 1 063 630 2%
1%
The main downside of detached houses for new Steel reinforcement in Ground Beams Kg 386 1 663 642 534
Formwork in Ground Beams SM 83 11 219 928 935 2%

neighbourhoods is the low density of approximately 20 Wa te r pr o o f i ng o f Fo u nda ti o n Bitumen paint on strip foundation SM 83 4 500 372 600 1%
DU/ha, which implies land occupancy and higher costs for G r o und Fl o o r S l a b 150mm thick - Earthen Floor
Reinforced Concrete Lintels (Grade 25,
SM 232 10 000 2 320 000 5%
CM 1 192 687 184 979 0%
roads and utilities for a reduced number of dwelling units.
200x200)
1. D VE R T IC A L S T R U C T U R E Steel reinforcement in Lintels Kg 67 1 663 111 745 0%
Formwork in Columns and beams SM 14 11 219 161 554 0%
Modern Bricks
1. E FA C A D E SQM 160 25 000 4 000 000 8%
This typology design can be adapted to various kinds of 1. F P A R T IT IO N WA L L S
Without interior finishing
Modern Bricks
BE T WE E N A P A R T ME N T S
SQM 120 25 000 3 000 000 6%
slopes ranging from 0% to 20%.
1. G C A R P E N T R Y ( R o o f
Wood Frame w Iron Sheet SQM 250 25 000 6 250 000 13%
The design is based on a 5m span width which leads to a S tr u c tu r e )
2. F IN ISH ES 13 814 700 29%

10m deep building. The distinct dwelling units are simply
Steel Casement (incl. Glass)
2 .A E X T E R IO R JO IN E R Y SQM 42 100 000 4 200 000 9%
organised and divided into two main parts: the living space incl. Entrance door
in the front and sleeping space in the back. Both parts are 2 .B FA C A D E FIN IS H E S - SQM 0 0 0 0%
2 .C IN T E R N A L P A R T IT IO N
connected via a functional service area which includes the WA L L S
CSEB SQM 180 16 000 2 880 000 6%
bathroom and additional storage space. This guarantees 2 .D FIN IS H IN G S D WE L L IN G U N IT S 6 734 700 14%
1%
intimacy between the quiet and active zones. The main 2 .D .A . Fl o o r
Dry Area Earthen Floor Coating
Ceramic Tiles 8 mm (incl concrete bed
SQM 144 4 500 648 000
We t A r e a
with waterproofing)
SQM 36 25 000 900 000 2%
access happens via a covered porch. Dry Area Plastering on CSEB
SQM
walls
100 3 150 315 000 1%
SQM
2 . D . B. Wa l l Plastering on CSEB
walls
118 3 150 371 700 1%
We t A r e a
SQM
Ceramic Tiles 6 mm (incl. concrete bed)
walls
12 20 000 240 000 1%
2 .D .C . C e i l i ng Triplex w supporting structure SQM 180 15 000 2 700 000 6%
2 .D.D. Door s Inte r i o r Wooden Door w Steel frame PC 12 130 000 1 560 000 3%
2 . E L O C K S MIT H Metallic terrace balustrading 1100 high LM 0 75 000 0 0%
3. M E CHANI CAL, E LE CTRI CAL, PLU M B I NG
9 830 508 21%
E NGI NE E RI NG ( M E P)
3. A ME P D WE L L IN G U N IT S 9 830 508 21%
3. A .A . E l e c tr i c a l E ng i ne e r i ng #REF! SQM 232 22 881 5 308 475 11%
MATERIALS & #R E F! #REF! SQM 232 19 492 4 522 034 10%
TECHNOLOGY TOTAL RW F - 47 509 359 100%
GROSS FLOOR AREA 232
TOTAL RWF / SQM Gross Floor Area

200 000
excl Infra (VAT Excl.)
LIV IN G AREA 180
TOTAL RW F / SQ M Li vi ng Ar e a
260 000
ex cl Infr a (V AT Ex cl.)
Add 18% VAT 46 800
TOTAL RWF / SQM Living Area

306 800
excl Infra (VAT Incl.)
3 Modern bricks TOTAL RW F / SQ M Li vi ng Ar e a
240 000
Incr e m e ntal V e r si on V AT EX C L.
283 200
4 CSEB + plastering Incremental Version VAT INCL.
2 Modern Bricks
1 Earthen floor + coating

STRUCTURAL DESIGN DETERMINATIONS
Stone foundation
No Columns
Ring beam only
74
75
1.5 BUILDING TYPOLOGIES
G+0 ROWHOUSES
20.00
5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50
Load
CSEB Bearing Walls:
Traditional Bricks
1.50
1.60
Livingroom/ Livingroom/ Livingroom/ Livingroom/

Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen Facade:
Modern Bricks
3.74
18m2 18m2 18m2 18m2 Traditional Bricks

5.00
Hallway/ Hallway/ Hallway/ Hallway/

10.00
2.10
Stock WC WC Stock Stock WC WC Stock

6m2 5 m2 5 m2 6m2 6m2 5 m2 5 m2 6m2
5.00
Room Room Room Room Room Room Room Room

8m2 9m2 9m2 8m2 8m2 9m2 9m2 8m2 Partition
CSEB Walls:
3.76
Traditional Bricks
2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35
2 BR
45 SQM
2BR 2BR 2BR 2BR
45 m2 45 m2 45 m2 45 m2
SLOPE 10% SLOPE 20%

0.00 10.00 10.00 10.00
5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
2.50 2.502.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.502.50 2.50 2.50 2.50
Livingroom Livingroom/ Livingroom Livingroom Livingroom Livingroom Livingroom

18m2 Kitchen 18m2 18m2 18m2 18m2 18m2
3.74
3.74
18m2
5.00
5.00
5.00
Kitchen Kitchen
Kitchen Kitchen
Hallway/ Hallway/ Hallway/ Hallway/ Hallway/ Hallway/ Hallway/

10.00
10.00
10.00
2.10
2.10
2.10
Stock WC WC Stock Stock WC WC Stock Stock WC WC Stock Stock WC

6m2 5 m2 5 m2 6m2 6m2 5 m2 5 m2 6m2 6m2 5 m2 5 m2 6m2 6m2 5 m2
5.00
5.00
5.00
Room Room
Room Room Room Room
8m2 9m2 9m2 8m2 8m2 9m2 9m2 8m2 8m2 9m2 9m2 8m2 8m2 9m2
3.76
3.76
3.76
2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35 2.35
Modern Bricks Ceramic Floor Tiles
2BR 2BR 2BR 2BR 2BR Earthen Floor 2BR 2BR

45 m2 45 m2 45 m2 45 m2 45 m2 45 m2 45 m2
76
1.2
22%
Carpentry:
3.0
0.8
Wood Frame w Clay Tiles 22
SLOPE 0%
1.6
2.6
22%
4.0
Partition
CSEB Walls:
2.5
2.4
Traditional Bricks
3.2
Room
2.8
2.6
22%
0.4
2.32.2
1.7
Living
22Room
% Living
Facade/
Modern Bricks
4.5
Load Bearing Walls:
2.8
3.1
Traditional Bricks w
2.6
2.2
1.5 1.1
Living Room WC Room Concrete Ring Beam
Groundfloor
Earthen floor Slab:
1.5 1.1
Earthen Floor
Foundation:
Stone strip
Stone Strip Foundation
foundation
22%
SLOPE 10%
1.6
1.2
3.0
% 22%
4.0
1.6
1.2
2.5
2.5
22%
3.0
4.0
1.62.4
0.8
WC Room 22
2.5
2.8 2.6
22%
2.4
3.2
oom
4.0
Living Room
2.5
2.4
3.2
Room
2.8
2.6
2.3 2.2
22%
Living Room Living
1.6
22%
1.1 1.1
4.5
2.9
1.5 1.1 1.1

2.2
SLOPE 20%
22%
1.6
1.2
3.0
% 22%
4.0
1.6
2.5
2.5
4.0
2.4
Room
2.5
2.4
3.2
oom
2.8
Living Room
1.1 1.1 1.1
77
G+0 COLLECTIVE BUILDING
G+0 collective buildings are a denser alternative to GROUND FLOOR HOUS E G+0
12,00x12,00
rowhouses. The reduced surface of private outdoor DE SCRIP TION U QTY RATE /U AMOU NT %
spaces and the limited area of façade reduce the overall 1. S TRUCTURE 38 147 597 52%
cost, while the cost of foundations and vertical structure E x ca va tion Strip Foundation and Ground Beams CM 252 4 500 1 134 000 2%
B a ck f ill Selected excavated soil CM 205 6 500 1 332 240 2%
remain low due to the limited height of the buildings. Stone Strip Foundation - Stone Masonry CM 40 70 000 2 822 400 4%
50mm thick C15 Blinding SM 67 8 750 588 000 1%
F oun d a tion Ground Beams - C25 CM 7 192 687 1 294 854 2%
This typology can easily be adapted to sites with a sloped Steel reinforcement in Ground Beams Kg 470 1 663 782 216 1%
topography and provide an alternative for low density Formwork in Ground Beams SM 101 11 219 1 130 877 2%
Wa te rp ro o f in g o f F o un d a tio n Bitumen paint on strip foundation SM 101 4 500 453 600 1%
urban areas of Kigali, to increase the offer of low-cost G roun d F loor Sla b 150mm thick - Earthen Floor SM 288 10 000 2 880 000 4%
social housing units. 1 . B G ROU NDF L OOR SL AB Earthen Floor SQM 270 10 000 2 700 000 4%
Reinforced Concrete beams (Grade 25) CM 5 192 687 1 048 215 1%
1 . D V E RTICAL STRU CTU RE Steel reinforcement in beams Kg 381 1 663 633 222 1%
Formwork in beams SM 82 11 219 915 472 1%
Modern Bricks
1 . E F ACADE
SQM 192 25 000 4 807 500 7%
1 . F P ARTI TI ON WAL L S Modern Bricks

B E TWE E N AP ARTME NTS Without interior finishing
SQM 180 25 000 4 500 000 6%
1 . G CARP E NTRY ( Roo f

Structure )
Wood Frame w Iron Sheet SQM 445 25 000 11 125 000 15%
2. FINIS HES 24 174 163 33%

2 . A E XTE RIOR J OINE RY
incl. Entrance door
SQM 92 100 000 9 240 000 13%
2 . B F ACADE F INISHE S - SQM 0 0 0 0%
2 . C INTE RNAL P ARTITION

WAL L S
CSEB SQM 219 16 000 3 504 000 5%
2 . D F I NI SHI NG S DWE L L I NG U NI TS 11 430 163 16%
Dry Are a Earthen Floor Coating SQM 207 4 500 931 500 1%
2 . D. A. F loor
Ceramic Tiles 8 mm (incl concrete bed with
We t Are a
waterproofing)
SQM 55 25 000 1 375 000 2%
Dry Are a Plastering on CSEB SQM 413 3 195 1 317 938 2%
2 . D. B . Wa ll Plastering on CSEB SQM 55 3 195 175 725 0%
We t Are a
Ceramic Tiles 6 mm (incl. concrete bed) SQM 55 20 000 1 100 000 2%
2 . D. C. Ce ilin g Triplex w supporting structure SQM 262 15 000 3 930 000 5%
2 . D. D. Doors In te rio r Wooden Door w Timber Steel Frame PC 20 130 000 2 600 000 4%
3. ME C HAN I C AL, E LE C TRI C AL, PLUMB I N G E N G I N E E RI N G
10 341 856 14%
( ME P)
3. A ME P DWE L L I NG U NI TS 10 341 856 14%
3. A. B . E le ctrica l E n gin e e rin g #REF! SQM 288 19 391 5 584 602 8%
#REF ! #REF! SQM 288 16 518 4 757 254 7%
TOTAL RW F - 72 663 615 100%

MATERIALS & TOTAL RWF / SQM Gross Floor Area
250 000
TECHNOLOGY LIV ING AREA 265

TOTAL RW F / S QM Liv ing Are a
270 000
e xcl Infra (V AT Excl.)
Add 18% VAT 48 600
318 600
TOTAL RW F / S QM Liv ing Are a
260 000
Inc re m e ntal V e rs ion V AT EX CL.
306 800
Incremental Version VAT INCL.
3 Modern bricks
4 CSEB + plastering
2 Modern Bricks
1 Earthen floor + coating

Stone foundation
No Columns
Ring beam only
78
79
1 BR 1 BR
1 BR 33 m2 33 m2
33 SQM 12.00
4.00 4.00 4.00
1 BR
33 SQM Load
CSEB Bearing Wal
Livingroom Room Livingroom Traditional Bricks
19 m2 9 m2 19 m2
1 BR 1 BR 4 BR 2 m2
33 m2 65 m2
33 SQM Facade:
Modern Bricks
2 m2 WC WC Room
12.00 3 m2 3 m2 9 m2 Traditional Bricks
4.00 4.00 4.00
w Concrete Ring
Room WC WC Beam
9 m2 3 m2 3 m2
2 m2
Hallway
Livingroom/ Livingroom/ 5 m2 CSEB
Kitchen Room Kitchen 33Partition
Walls:
19 m2 7 m2 22 m2 Traditional Bricks
4.00
Livingroom/
Room Room Kitchen
8 m2 9 m2 19 m2
2 m2
Room WC WC
9 m2 3 m2 3 m2
12.00
4.00
WC WC Room 4 BR
3 m2 3 m2 8 m2
65 SQM
Livingroom/ Hallway
Kitchen 5 m2
21 m2
4 BR
4.00
m2 Room Room Room 1 BR

7 m2 8 m2 10 m2
33 SQM
4 BR
65 SQM
Modern Brick
Earthen Floor
Ceramic Floor Tiles
80
SLOPE 10%
Load
CSEB Bearing Walls:
Traditional Bricks
1.04
1.80
Facade:
Modern Bricks
3.98
Traditional Bricks w
3.69
2.95
2.94
1.70
Concrete
5.78
WC Room
2.97
Ring Beam
WC Room WC
2.50
2.28
Room WC
Partition
CSEB Walls:
Traditional Bricks
81
G+1 SEMI DETACHED DUPLEX HOUSES
The duplex rowhouse represents a compromise between G+1 D uplex

5,00
cost and density, especially for market rate housing or for
D ES C RIPTION U QTY RATE/ U AM OUN T %
higher standards of affordable housing. 1 . S TRU CTU RE 19 456 236 48%
Exc a v a t i o n Ground Beams CM 10 4 500 43 200 0%
The higher cost of the walls bearing the slab of the first Backfill Selected excavated soil CM 7 6 500 46 800 0%
Ground Beams - C25 CM 2 192 687 462 448 1%
floor is balanced by the fact that this typology allows an Stone Strip Foundation - Stone Masonry CM 13 70 000 907 200 2%
average density of 40 DU/ha, thus spreading costs for Fou nd a ti on 50mm thick C15 Blinding SM 22 8 750 189 000 0%
Steel reinforcement in Ground Beams Kg 240 1 663 399 090 1%
roads and utilities on twice as many square meters of floor Formwork in Ground Beams SM 40 11 219 448 761 1%
area. W a terp roof i ng of Fou nd a ti on Bitumen paint on strip foundation SM 40 4 500 180 000 0%
150mm thick - Earthen Floor SM 76 10 000 760 000 2%
150mm thick - C25 Concrete Floor SM 0 28 903 0 0%
Grou nd Fl oor S l a b
BRC ref. A252 reinforcement in Ground Slab SM 0 4 695 0 0%
Formwork in Ground Slab SM 5 11 219 60 583 0%
1.C FL OOR S L AB Pine Timbers w Wood Planks SQM 70 58 500 4 095 000 10%
beams (Grade 25) CM 6 192 687 1 233 194 3%
1. D V ER TIC AL S TR U C TU R E Steel reinforcement in beams Kg 640 1 663 1 064 239 3%
Formwork in beams SM 80 11 219 897 522 2%
1. E FAC AD E Brick Rowlock Bond Load-bearing SQM 181 26 000 4 711 200 12%
1. F PAR TITION W AL L S B ETW EEN
APARTM EN TS
Brick Rowlock Bond SQM 49 22 000 1 078 000 3%
1. G C AR PEN TR Y ( R oof S t r u c t u r e) Wood Frame w Clay Tiles SQM 96 30 000 2 880 000 7%
2 . FINIS HE S 14 336 560 35%

2. A EXTER IOR JOIN ER Y
incl. Entrance door
SQM 36 100 000 3 600 000 9%
2.B FAC AD E FIN IS H ES - SQM 0 0 0 0%
2.C IIN TERN AL PARTITION W AL L S Triplex Wood Panel on Wood Framing SQM 170 24 000 4 080 000 10%
2.D FIN IS H IN G S D W EL L IN G UN ITS 6 656 560 16%
Eearthen floor coating SQM 57 4 500 256 500 1%

D r y Ar ea
2.D .A. Fl oor Woodden floor coating SQM 70 3 195 223 650 1%
W et Ar ea Ceramic Tiles 8 mm (incl concrete bed) SQM 22 25 000 550 000 1%
D r y Ar ea Painting w Preparation SQM 0 3 195 0 0%
MATERIALS &
2.D .B . W a l l Painting w Preparation SQM 38 3 195 121 410 0%
W et Ar ea
Ceramic Tiles 6 mm (incl. concrete bed) SQM 38 20 000 760 000 2%
TECHNOLOGY 2.D .C . C ei l i ng
2.D .D . D oors Interi or

Triplex w supporting structure
Wooden Door w Timber Steel Frame

SQM
PC
79
12
15 000
130 000
1 185 000
1 560 000
3%
4%
Timber Stair and timber handrail: All
2.D .G. S ta i rc a ses complete in approval of site engineer and as PC 2 1 000 000 2 000 000 5%
per drawing details.
2,E L OC KS M ITH Metallic terrace balustrading 1100 high LM 0 75 000 0 0%
3 . MEC HANI C AL, ELEC T RI C AL, P LUMB I NG ENG I NEERI NG

6 805 085 17%
( MEP )
3 .A M EP D W EL L IN G UN ITS 6 805 085 17%
3 .A.B . El ec t r i c a l En gi n eer i n g #REF! SQM 146 25 424 3 711 864 9%
#R EF! #REF! SQM 146 21 186 3 093 220 8%
TOTAL RW F - 40 597 881 100%
1B Pine Timbers w GROSS FLOOR AREA 168

Wood Planks TOTAL RWF / SQM Gross Floor Area
240 000
LIV ING ARE A 132
TOTAL RWF / S QM Living Area
300 000
exc l Infra (V AT E xc l.)
3 Rowlock Bond
Add 18% VAT 54 000
294 000
4 Triplex Wood excl Infra (VAT Incl.)
Panel Incremental Version VAT EXCL.
290 000

342 200
2 Rowlock Bond

Concrete floor + coating
The foundation assumes 1200x1200x300 mm at 65 kg/
m3.
Columns 200x200 mm; assume 150 kg/m3.
Beams 400x200 mm; assume 100 kg/m3.
Slab 150 mm thick; assume 65 kg/m3.
82
83
G+1 SEMI DETACHED DUPLEX HOUSES
UPPER FLOOR UPPER FLOOR
5.0M SPAN WIDTH 4.0M SPAN WIDTH
3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50
5.00
1.55 1.95 1.95 5.001.55 1.15 2.35 2.35 1.15
2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50
1.50
1.50
Load Bearing
BedroomWC2 Kitchen WC
Kitchen Bedroom Walls: Bedroom Bedroom
2.20
2
10 m2 2m 4m2 4m2 2m10 m2 Compressed 7 m2 7 m2
3.03
Stabilized
4.00
4.00
Hallway Hallway Earth Blocks

4m2 6m2 WC (CSEBs) Hallway Hallway
WC
1.60
4 m2 4 m2
0.97
4 m2 4 m2
2.77
8.00
8.00
8.00
Hallway Hallway
4 m2 4 m2 WC WC
3 m2 3 m2
Facade:
Rowlock Bond
Livingroom Livingroom
4.00
4.00
4.00
Reinforced
13 m2 13 m2
3.04
Brick Rowlock Bedroom Bedroom

Bedroom Bedroom Bedroom Bedroom
Bond 7 m2 7 m2
7 m2 8 m2 8 m2 7 m2
Partition Walls:
Triplex Wood
3/4 BR Panel Triplex Wood Panel 2 BR
66 SQM on Wood Framing 44 SQM
GROUNDFLOOR GROUNDFLOOR
3 BR First Floor
5.0M
32 m 2 SPAN WIDTH 4.0M SPAN WIDTH
2 BR
44 m2 3.50 3.50
5.00 5.00 1.55 5.00
1.95 1.95 1.55 5.00
2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50
1.50
Kitchen Guest Guest Kitchen WC Kitchen Kitchen WC

Bedroom Bedroom
2.20
2.20
5 m2 Room Room 5 m2
2
2m10 2
4m2 2m2
m24m 10 m2
5 m2 5 m2
4.00
4.00
4.00
Hallway Hallway
WC WC WC2 6m2 WC
1.80
2 3 m2 4m
3m
2 m2 2 m2 4 m2 4 m2
2.77
8.00
8.00
8.00
Hallway Hallway
4 m2 4 m2
Livingroom Livingroom
4.00
4.00
4.00
4.00
13 m2 13 m2
3.04
Livingroom Livingroom Bedroom Bedroom Bedroom Bedroom

18 m2 18 m2 7 m2 8 m2 8 m2 7 m2
3 BR Groundfloor Brick Rowlock 3 BR

Bond First Floor
Pine timbers w wood planks
33 m2 Earthen Floor 32 m 2
Triplex Wood Panel on
Framing
2 BR
Ceramic Floor Tiles
44 m2
3 BR TOTAL
66 m2
84
Carpentry:
Wood Frame w
Clay Tiles
Concrete Ring
Beam
0.4
1.35
Carpentry:
1.72
Wood frame
Wood
Clay Frame w
tiles
Facade:
Clay Tiles
Reinforced
Brick Rowlock
3.06
Concrete
Ring beam Ring
2.70
2.50
2.70
Bedroom Bedroom Bond
Beam
6.97
0.4
1.35
5.251.72
Partition Walls:
0.20
Facade: Bond
Rowlock
Triplex Wood
Reinforced
Panel on Wood
Brick Rowlock
3.06
Framing
2.70
2.50
2.50
2.70
2.70
2.50
2.70
Bedroom Bedroom Bond
Kitchen Livingroom
6.97
Floor Slab:
Partition Walls:w
Pine Timbers
Triplex Wood
5.25
0.20
Triplex Wood
Wood Planks
Panel
Panel on Wood
Framing
2.70
2.50
2.50
2.70 Foundation:
Kitchen Livingroom Pad Foundation
Wooden
Floor Slab:
Reinforced
Floor
Pine Timbers w
Concrete Footing
Wood Planks
(Grade 25,
300x600, seismic
Foundation:
Triplex
ground)Wood
Pad Foundation
Panel
Reinforced
SLOPE 10% Concrete Footing
(Grade 25,
300x600, seismic
ground)
1.15
0.9
2.21
2.50
Bedroom
1.15
2.81
0.9
5.28
5.57 2.21
Bedroom
2.67
0.20
2.50
Livingroom
Bedroom
2.81
2.50
5.28
Bedroom
Kitchen
5.57
2.67
0.20
Livingroom
2.50
Kitchen
85
G+2 STACKED ROWHOUSES
The stacked town-houses combine urban density, the G+2 STA CKED R OWH OU SE
sense of individual housing with garden or individual DES CR I PTI O N U QTY R ATE/U AMO U NT %
terrace, and a construction cost suitable for affordable 1. STRU CTU RE 63 211 474 55%
housing. Ex c a v a t i on Column bases & Sub-columns CM 91 4 500 411 413 0,4%

Backfill Selected excavated soil CM 68 6 500 442 000 0,4%
Column bases , Sub-Columns and Ground
Beams - C25
CM 23 192 687 4 513 684 4%
Compared to G+1 houses, stacked row houses are 10% Stone Strip Foundation - Stone Masonry CM 26 70 000 1 848 000 2%
F ou ndat ion 50mm thick C15 Blinding SM 44 8 750 385 000 0%
cheaper due to the optimized ratio of external façade per Steel reinforcement in Column Bases , Sub-
Kg 1 968 1 663 3 273 076 3%
Columns and Ground Beams
square meter, as only the two narrow façades are exposed Formwork in Colum bases and sub-Columns and
Ground Beams
SM 162 11 219 1 819 725 2%
to the exterior. This reduction of the envelope allows W a t er p r oof i n g of F ou n d a t i on Bitumen paint on strip foundation SM 162 4 500 729 900 1%
150mm thick - Earthen Floor SM 200 10 000 2 000 000 2%
to compensate the costs of the stairs to access the unit 150mm thick - C25 Concrete Floor SM 0 28 903 0 0%
Gr o u n d F l o o r S l a b
located on the upper floors. BRC ref. A252 reinforcement in Ground Slab SM 0 4 695 0 0%
Maxpan Slab (200mm thick with 80mm toping
slab)
SQM 96 42 500 4 080 000 4%
1 .C F L O O R S L AB
Stacked town-houses can produce a density between 50 Pine Timbers w Wood Planks
Reinforced Concrete Columns and beams (Grade
SQM 180 58 500 10 530 000 9%
CM 33 192 687 6 266 169 5%
and 60 DU/ha, thanks to an height of G+2. 1 . D V ER TI CAL S TR U CTU R E
25)
Steel reinforcement in Columns and beams Kg 3 738 1 663 6 215 823 5%
Formwork in Columns and beams SM 472 4 500 2 122 200 2%
1 .E F ACADE Brick Rowlock Bond Infill SQM 319 22 000 7 018 000 6%
As the 2 stacked dwelling units are facing the two opposite 1 . F PAR TI TI O N W AL L S
Compressed Stabilised Earth Blocks (CSEBs) Infill SQM 391 16 000 6 256 000 5%
directions, this typologies is suitable for east-west
B ETW EEN APAR TMENTS
1 . G CAR PENTR Y ( R o o f
Timber Roof & Metal Sheet SQM 210 25 000 5 250 000 5%
orientation. S t r u c t u r e)
2. FINISH ES 39 585 394 34%

2.A EX TER I O R JO I NER Y
incl. Entrance door
SQM 117 100 000 11 700 000 10%
2.B F ACADE F INIS HES - SQM 0 0 0 0%
2. C I I NTER NAL PAR TI TI O N

W AL L S
Triplex Wood Panel on Woodframework SQM 234 24 000 5 622 000 5%
2. D F I NI S HI NGS DW EL L I NG U NI TS 14 263 394 12%
Dr y Ar ea Earthen floor coating SQM 96 4 500 432 000 0%

2.D.A. F l oor Dr y Ar ea Woodden floor coating SQM 180 3 195 575 100 0%
W et Ar ea Ceramic Tiles 8 mm (incl concrete bed) SQM 60 25 000 1 500 000 1%
Painting w Preparation SQM 0 4 500 0 0%
Dr y Ar ea
Plastering on CSEB SQM 1 100 3 195 3 514 861 3%
MATERIALS & 2.D.B . W a l l
W et Ar ea
Plastering on CSEB SQM 207 3 195 661 433 1%
TECHNOLOGY Ceramic Tiles 6 mm (incl. concrete bed)
Painting on plaster preparation

SQM
SQM
23
100
20 000
6 000
460 000
600 000
0%
1%
2.D.C. Cei l i n g
Triplex w supporting structure SQM 192 15 000 2 880 000 2%
2.D.D. Door s In t er i or Wooden Door w Steel frame PC 28 130 000 3 640 000 3%
Timber Stair and timber handrail: All complete in
2. D. G. S t a i r c a s es approval of site engineer and as per drawing PC 8 1 000 000 8 000 000 7%
details.
2,E L O CK S MI TH Metallic terrace balustrading 1100 high LM 0 75 000 0 0%
3. M EC HANI C AL, ELEC T RI C AL, P LUM B I NG ENGI NEERI NG

12 864 407 11%
( M EP )
3 . A MEP DW EL L I NG U NI TS 12 864 407 11%
1B Pine Timbers w 3 . A. B . El ec t r i c a l En gi n eer i n g #REF! SQM 276 25 424 7 016 949 6%
Wood Planks #REF ! #REF! SQM 276 21 186 5 847 458 5%
TOTAL RWF - 115 661 275 100%

3 Rowlock Bond TOTAL RWF / SQM Gross Floor Area
220 000
LIVING A R EA 400
4 Triplex Wood
Panel excl In f r a (VA T Excl.)
280 0 0 0
Add 18% VAT 50 400
2 Rowlock Bond TOTAL RWF / SQM Living Area

330 400
280 0 0 0
Incremental Version VAT EXCL.
330 400
Concrete floor + coating

The foundation assumes 1700x1700x300 mm at 65 kg/m3.

86
87
G+2 STACKED ROWHOUSES
20.00
5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
20.00
5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
1.50
Living Room/ Living Room/ Living Room/ Living Room/

Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen
5.00
18m2
Bedroom Bedroom Bedroom 18m 2
Bedroom 18m2
Bedroom Bedroom Bedroom 18m 2
Bedroom
3BR 10 m2 10 m2 10 m2
10 m2 10 m2 10 m2 10 m2
10 m2
WC WC WC WC
61 SQM 2m2 2m2 2m2 2m2
10.00
Hallway Hallway Hallway Hallway

4 m2 4 m2 4 m2 4 m2
WC WC WC WC 2
3 m2 3 m2 3 m2 3 m2
5.00

14 m2 14 m2 14 m2 14 m2
20.00
5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
Load Bearing
Rowlock
Partition Walls:
bond
Compressed
Carpentry:
Timber Roof & Metal Sheet Stabilized Earth
Blocks (CSEBs)
7m2 7m2 7m2 7m2 7m2 7m2 7m2 7m2
Facade:
Brick Rowlock
5.00
Floor Slab: Bond

3.00
Rowlock
Facade:
2.70
2.50
2.70
Maxpan Slab Hall- Hall- Hall- Hall-

WC WC
Bedroom WC Bedroom WC Brick Rowlock
bond
way way way way Internal Partition Walls:
2 m2 2 m2 2 m2 2 m2 Bond
5.92
2m2 2m2 2m2 2m2 Triplex Wood Panel on

1
10.00
Woodframework
Floor Slab:
8.62
Bedroom Livingroom/ Vertical Structure:

2.70
2.50
2.50
2.70
Pine Timbers w Reinforced

Groundfloor Slab:
Kitchen Reinforced
Wood Planks Concrete Slab
concrete
Living Room/ Living Room/ Living Room/ Living Room/ Concrete
5.00
Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen Columns

20 m2 20 m2 20 m2 20 m2 (Concrete Frame)
2.70
2.50
Livingroom/
Kitchen Internal Partition
Triplex WoodWalls:
Foundation:
Triplex Wood Panel
Panel
Pad Foundation
on Wood Framing
1.50
Reinforced Concrete
Footing
(Grade 25, 300x600,
seismic ground)
20.00
5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
1.50
Living Room/ Living Room/ Living Room/ Living Room/

Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen
0
5.00
18m2 18m2 18m2 18m2

2 BR
39 SQM WC WC WC WC
2m2 2m2 2m2 2m2
NORTH
10.00
5.00
Brick Rowlock Bond Pine timbers w wood planks
20.00 Brick Rowlock Bond Triplex Wood Panel on

5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 Framing
Concrete Slab Load Bearing
Maxpan Slab
Partition Walls:
Ceramic Floor Tiles Compressed
Stabilized Earth
Blocks (CSEBs)
88 7m2 7m2 7m2 7m2 7m2 7m2 7m2 7m2
0
20.00
5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
Bedroom Bedroom Bedroom Bedroom Bedroom Bedroom Bedroom Bedroom

10 m2 10 m2 10 m2 10 m2 10 m2 10 m2 10 m2 10 m2
Hallway Hallway Hallway Hallway

4 m2 4 m2 4 m2 4 m2
WC WC WC WC
3 m2 3 m2 3 m2 3 m2

14 m2 14 m2 14 m2 14 m2
EXTRACTOR FAN WITH SOLAR PANEL

METALIC SHAFT
Carpentry: Timber roof
& &metal
Timber Roof Metalsheet
Sheet
Facade: Bond
Rowlock
Brick Rowlock
Floor Maxpan
Slab: Bond
3.00
2.70
2.50
2.70
Maxpan Slab
slab Bedroom Bedroom Triplex Wood
Internal Partition Walls:
5.92
Panel
Triplex Wood Panel on
Woodframework
FloorWooden
Slab:
8.62
Bedroom Livingroom/
2.70
2.50
2.50
2.70
Pine Timbers w Groundfloor
Earthen Slab:
floor
Floor Kitchen
Wood Planks Concrete Slab
2.70
2.50
Livingroom/
Kitchen Stone strip
Foundation:
Pad Foundation
foundation
+Reinforced Concrete
ground beam
Footing
(Grade 25, 300x600,
seismic ground)
89
G + 2 C OLLE C TIVE BUILDIN G
5 ,0 0
The stacked town-houses can either adapt to a sloped D ES CR I PTI ON U Q TY R A TE/U A MO UN T %
terrain or be located on flat land. In the case of a flat land, 1. S TR UCTUR E 99 981 230 57%
the upper duplexes can be reached by a ramp and an Ex c a v a t io n Column bases & Sub-columns CM 156 4 500 700 043 0,4%
Ba c k f ill Selected excavated soil CM 116 6 500 756 600 0,4%
exterior passageway. Column bases , Sub-Columns and
CM 39 192 687 7 546 571 4%
Ground Beams - C25
In order to limit the ramp to only reach first level, ground Fo u n d a t io n 50mm thick C15 Blinding
Steel reinforcement in Column Bases ,
SM 64 8 750 561 750 0%
Sub-Columns and Ground Beams

Kg 3 380 1 663 5 620 555 3%
floor will be occupied by single floor apartments while Formwork in Colum bases and sub-
SM 272 11 219 3 046 974 2%
first and second floor will be occupied by duplexes. W a t er p r o o f in g o f Fo u n d a t io n Bitumen paint on strip foundation SM 272 4 500 1 222 155 1%
150mm thick - Earthen Floor SM 0 10 000 0 0%
Intermediate slabs in duplexes will be made out of timber. 100mm thick - C25 Concrete Floor SM 280 19 269 5 395 225 3%
G r o u n d Fl o o r S l a b
BRC ref. A252 reinforcement in Ground
Slab
SM 280 4 695 1 314 559 1%
Maxpan Slab (200mm thick with 80mm
1 . C FL O O R S L A B
toping slab)
SQM 238 42 500 10 115 000 6%
Pine Timbers w Wood Planks SQM 200 58 500 11 700 000 7%
Reinforced Concrete Columns and
1 . D VER TI CAL S TR UCTUR E
beams (Grade 25)
CM 58 192 687 11 214 939 6%
Steel reinforcement in Columns and
beams
Kg 6 804 1 663 11 314 942 6%
Formwork in Columns and beams SM 840 11 219 9 426 669 5%
1 . E FA C A D E Brick Rowlock Bond Infill P 368 22 000 8 096 000 5%
1 . F PAR TI TI ON W AL L S Compressed Stabilised Earth Blocks

BETW EEN A P A R TMEN TS (CSEBs) Infill
SQM 180 16 000 2 880 000 2%
1 . G CAR PEN TR Y (R o o f
S tr u c tu r e)
2 . FIN IS H ES 54 119 943 30%

2. A EXTER I OR JOI N ER Y
incl. Entrance door
SQM 180 100 000 18 000 000 10%
2 . B FA C A D E FI N I S H E S - SQM 0 0 0 0%
2. C I I N TER N AL PAR TI TI ON Compressed Stabilised Earth Blocks

WALLS (CSEBs)
SQM 360 25 960 0 0%
2 . D FI N I S H I N G S D W E L L I N G UN I TS 22 018 480 12%
D r y Ar ea Exposed concrete SQM 310 6 000 1 860 000 1%

2 . D . A . Fl o o r Woodden floor coating SQM 169 3 500 591 500 0%
W et Ar ea Ceramic Tiles 8 mm (incl concrete bed) SQM 180 25 000 4 500 000 3%
D r y Ar ea Plastering on CSEB SQM 1 060 3 195 3 386 700 2%
MATERIALS & 2. D . B. W a ll
W et Ar ea
Plastering on CSEB SQM 504 3 195 1 610 280 1%
1%
TECHNOLOGY
Ceramic Tiles 6 mm (incl. concrete bed) SQM 56 20 000 1 120 000
2. D . C . C eilin g Triplex w supporting structure SQM 250 15 000 3 750 000 2%

Metal-Wood Door (Steelframe w Wood
2. D. D. Doors I n t er io r
Door)
PC 40 130 000 5 200 000 3%
2 . E FI N I S H I N G S C O L L E C TI VE S P A C E S 8 431 463 5%
Concrete Stair: Reinforced cement

2. E S TAI R CAS ES
concrete (RCC) in 1:2:4
CU M 13 192 687 2 543 463 1%
2. F R A MP S 200 mm cast in-situ concrete C25 SQM 70 84 000 5 880 000 3,3%
Timber Stair and timber handrail: All

2. D . G . S t a ir c a s es complete in approval of site engineer PC 8 1 000 8 000 0%
and as per drawing details.
2 . G L O C K S MI TH Metallic terrace balustrading 1100 high LM 76 75 000 5 670 000 3%
3 . M ECHA N ICA L, ELECT R ICA L, PLU M BIN G

24 144 068 14%
EN G IN EER IN G ( M EP)
3 . A MEP D W EL L I N G UN I TS 24 144 068 14%
Power supply, DBs, conduits, cabling,

3 . A . B. Elec t r ic a l En gin eer in g
sockets, switches, lighting fixtures
SQM 518 25 424 13 169 492 7%
3 . A . B. P lu m b in g & Mec h a n ic a l Water supply, piping, drainage, sanitary

en gin eer in g ware and extractor fans
SQM 518 21 186 10 974 576 6%
3 CSEB TOTA L R WF - 178 245 241 100%

4 Light gauge steel
TOTAL RWF / SQM Gross Floor Area
240 000
LIVIN G ARE A 560
TOTA L R WF / S QM Livin g A r ea
310 0 0 0
ex c l In f r a (VA T E x c l.)
Add 18% VAT 55 800
2 Rowlock Bond TOTAL RWF / SQM Living Area
295 800
TOTA L R WF / S QM Livin g A r ea
30 0 0 0 0
In c r em en tal Ver si on VA T E X C L.
354 000
1 Maxpan Slab STRUCTURAL DESIGN DETERMINATIONS

The foundation assumes 1700x1700x300 mm at 65 kg/m3.
Frame concrete structure 300x300 mm; assume 150 kg/m3.
90
91
28.00
3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50

8m2 8m2 8m2 8m2 8m2 8m2 8m2 8m2
2.45
4.25
WC WC WC WC WC WC WC WC
3 m2 3 m2 3 m2 3 m2 3 m2 3 m2 3 m2 3 m2
1.80
8.50
Hallway Hallway Hallway Hallway Hallway Hallway Hallway Hallway

3m2 3m2 3m2 3m2 3m2 3m2 3m2 3m2
1.88
4.25
2.37

8m2 8m2 8m2 8m2 8m2 8m2 8m2 8m2
2
33.71
3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 5.71
1.50 1.50 1.50

1.50
Living Room/ Living Room/ Living Room/ Living Room/ Living Room/ Living Room/ Living Room/ Living Room/
3.12
Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen

20m2 20m2 20m2 20m2 20m2 20m2 20m2 20m2
4.25
1.88
2 m2 2 m2 2 m2 2 m2 2 m2 2 m2 2 m2 2 m2
8.50
1.28
4.25
3.68
1.50
2BR
2 BR
4444m
SQM2
1
33.71
3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 3.50 5.71
1.50
Living Room/ Living Room/ Living Room/ Living Room/ Living Room/ Living Room/ Living Room/ Living Room/
Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen Kitchen
15m2 15m2 15m2 15m2 15m2 15m2 15m2 15m2
4.25
4.25
8.50
1.88
4 m2 4 m2 4 m2 4 m2 4 m2 4 m2 4 m2 4 m2
4.25
2.37

8m2 8m2 8m2 8m2 8m2 8m2 8m2 8m2
1BR
26 SQM 0
1 BR
26m2
Pine timbers w wood planks Brick Rowlock Bond
Triplex Wood Panel on Concrete Slab
Framing
Maxpan Slab Ceramic Floor Tiles
CSEBs
92
EXTRACTOR FAN WITH SOLAR
PANEL
METALIC SHAFT
Carpentry:
Timber roof
&Timber
metalRoof &
sheet
Metal Sheet
Facade: Bond
1.48
Rowlock
Brick Rowlock Bond
Room WC Room
2.50
2.50
2.12
Pine
Floortimber
Slab: slab
Pine Timbers w
Wood Planks
Living Room WC Kitchen
2.70
2.50
2.50
7.52
Maxpan
Floor Slab:
slab
Maxpan Slab
Living Room/ WC Room

2.70
2.50
Kitchen 2.50
Earthen floorSlab:
Groundfloor
Concrete Slab
Internal Partition
CSEB
Walls:
Compressed
Stabilized Earthblocks
(CSEBs)
Foundation:
Stone strip
Pad Foundation
foundation
+Reinforced
ground beamConcrete
Footing
(Grade 25, 300x600,
seismic ground)
CROSS RAMP
1.50
Slope 8%
1.50
1.50
Slope 8%
2.70
1.50
1.97
93
G +3 C OLLEC T I VE B UI LDI NG
Collective buildings up to G+3 are the most cost-effective
DE S CRI P T I ON U QTY RA T E / U A M OU NT %
urban typology, thanks to the shared staircases and to an
1. ST RUCT URE 107 583 486 56%
increased floor area covered by the same roof surface. E x c a va ti o n Column bases & Sub-columns CM 134 4 500 603 000 0%
Ba c k fi l l Selected excavated soil CM 105 6 500 682 500 0%
Column bases , Sub-Columns and
CM 30 192 687 5 780 598 3%
We identified G+3 as the best option to reduce foundation Ground Beams - C25
costs, to avoid the need of elevators and to align with the Fo un da ti o n 50mm thick C15 Blinding
SM 50 8 750 435 750 0%
Kg 3 480 1 663 5 786 801 3%
many urban areas that allow this height in the Kigali City
Formwork in Colum bases and sub-
SM 180 11 219 2 022 116 1%
Master Plan. W a te r pr o o fi n g o f Fo un da ti o n Bitumen paint on strip foundation SM 180 4 500 811 080 0%
150mm thick - Earthen Floor SM 213 14 000 2 982 000 2%
100mm thick - C25 Concrete Floor SM 0 19 269 0 0%
Gr o un d Fl o o r S l a b
Collective buildings, blended in projects with other

Slab
SM 0 4 695 0 0%
typologies, enable densities between 60 and 80 DU/ha, 1 . C FL OOR S L A B
toping slab)
SQM 555 42 500 23 587 500 12%
according to specific zoning areas. This increased density

beams (Grade 25)
CM 70,944 192687 13 669 959 7%
1 . D V E RT I CA L S T RU CT U RE Kg 13390 1663 22 265 881 12%
also optimizes roads and utilities expenses and land
beams
Formwork in Columns and beams SM 809 11219 9 076 636 5%
purchase costs, which are crucial to achieve the balance 1 . E FA CA DE Brick Rowlock Bond SQM 491 22 000 10 802 000 6%
1 . F P A RT I T I ON W A L L S B E T W E E N Compressed Stabilised Earth Blocks

1%
of developments including a major amount of affordable
SQM 100 16 000 1 600 000
A P A RT M E NT S (CSEBs) Infill
1 . G CA RP E NT RY (Ro o f
housing. S truc ture)
2. FI NI SHES 55 345 375 29%

2 . A E X T E RI OR JOI NE RY
incl. Entrance door
SQM 135 100 000 13 500 000 7%
2 . B FA CA DE FI NI S H E S - SQM 0 0 0 0%
2 . C I I NT E RNA L P A RT I T I ON
WALLS
Steel gauge SQM 320 25 960 8 307 200 4%
2 . D FI NI S HI NGS DW E L L I NG U NI T S 22 309 925 12%
Dry A rea Earthen floor coating SQM 650 4 500 2 925 000 2%
2 . D. A . Fl o o r
Wet Area Ceramic Tiles 8 mm (incl concrete bed) SQM 90 25 000 2 250 000 1%
Dry A rea Plastering on CSEB SQM 695 3 150 2 187 675 1%
2 .D.B. W a l l Plastering on CSEB SQM 315 3 150 992 250 1%
Wet Area
Ceramic Tiles 6 mm (incl. concrete bed) SQM 105 20 000 2 100 000 1%
Painting on plaster preparation SQM 555 8 000 4 440 000 2%
2 . D. C. Ce i l i n g
Triplex w supporting structure SQM 165 15 000 2 475 000 1%
2 .D.D. Do o rs I n teri o r
Door)
PC 38 130 000 4 940 000 3%
2 . E FI N I S H I N GS COL L E CT I V E S P A CE S 5 072 250 3%
2 . D. A . Fl o o r Exposed concrete SQM 38 4 500 171 000 0,1%

2 .D.B. W a l l Painting w Preparation SQM 123 4 500 551 250 0,3%
2 . D. C. Ce i l i n g Plywood w supporting structure SQM 38 15 000 570 000 0,3%
MATERIALS & 2 .D.D. Do o rs
2 . F. S T A I RCA S E S
I n teri o r -

PC
CU M
0
9
0
420 000
0
3 780 000
0,0%
2%
TECHNOLOGY 2 . G L OCK S M I T H Metallic terrace balustrading 1100 high LM 68 90 000 6 156 000 3%
3. ME CHANI CAL , E L E CTRI CAL , P L U MB I NG E NG I NE E RING

27 639 831 15%
(ME P)
3 .A M E P DW E L L I NG U NI T S 25 868 644 14%

3 .A .B. El ec tri c a l En gi n eeri n g
SQM 555 25 424 14 110 169 7%
3 .A .B. P l umbi n g & M ec h a n i c a l Water supply, piping, drainage, sanitary

en gin eerin g ware and extractor fans
SQM 555 21 186 11 758 475 6%
3 . B M E P COL L E CT I V E S P A CE S 1 771 186 1%

3 .B.B. El ec tri c a l En gi n eeri n g
SQM 38 25 424 966 102 1%
3 . B . B . P l um bi n g & M ec h a n i c a l Water supply, piping, drainage, sanitary

en gin eerin g ware and extractor fans
SQM 38 21 186 805 085 0%
CSEB T OT AL RWF - 190 568 691 100%

4 Light gauge steel
TOTAL RWF / SQM excl Infra
250 000
Standard Version
LI VI NG AREA 600
T OT AL RWF / SQM Li vi ng Area
310 000
e x cl I nfr a ( VAT Ex cl.)
2 Rowlock Bond Add 18% VAT 55 800

365 800
T OT AL RWF / SQM Li vi ng Area
300 000
Incr e m e nt a l Ve r si o n VAT EXC L.
354 000

1 Maxpan Slab The foundation assumes 2000x2000x450 mm at 65 kg/m3.
94
95
18.50
3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70
Balcony Balcony Balcony

1.50
5m2 10m2 10m2
Livingroom Room Livingroom/ Room Livingroom

2 BR 17m2 11m2 Kitchen 13m2 17m2
2.90
53 SQM 17m2
5.00
Bathroom Bathroom Bathroom

2.10
1 BR 3m2 3m2 4m2

30 SQM
10.00
Hallway Hallway >1

Kitchen 4m2 4m2 Kitchen
2.10
4m2 4m2
WC WC
3 BR 2m2 2m2
5.00
67 SQM Room Room Room Room

11m2 11m2 11m2 11m2
2.90
3.50 3.55 3.50 3.55 3.55
Vertical Structure:
2 BR 1 BR 3 BR
Reinforced Concrete
53 m2 30 m2 67 m2
Columns
(Grade 25, 30x30)
18.50
3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70
1.50
Reinforced
Internal Partition
Livingroom Room Entrance Hall Room Livingroom concrete
Walls:
17m2 14m2 20m2 13m2 17m2
2.90
Compressed
Stabilised Earth
5.00
Blocks (CSEBs)
CSEB
Bathroom Bathroom
2.10
3m2 4m2
3 BR
10.00
Facade:
67 SQM Hallway Hallway Brick Rowlock
Bond
2.10
4m2 4m2
WC WC
2m2 2m2 Rowlock
Load
Bond Bearing
5.00
Room Room Room Room Partition Walls:

11m2 11m2 11m2 11m2 Improved Adobe
2.90
CSEB
3.50 3.55 3.50 3.55 3.55 0
3 BR 3 BR
67 m2 67 m2
Brick Rowlock Bond Concrete Slab
CSEBs
96
Timber roof
Carpentry:
&Timber
metalRoof & Metal
sheet
Sheet
2.76
2.73
2.50
2.41
Room Bathroom WC Room

Floor Slab:
Maxpan
Maxpan Slab
slab
2.70

11.80
Rowlock
Facade: Bond
Brick Rowlock Bond
2.70
Room Bathroom WC Room CSEB

Internal Partition Walls:
Compressed Stabilised
Earth Blocks (CSEBs)
2.70
Groundfloor
Earthen Slab:
floor
Concrete Slab
Foundation:
Stone strip
Pad Foundation
foundation
Reinforced Concrete
+ ground beam
Footing (Grade
25,300x600, seismic
ground)
97
G+10 COLLECTIVE BUIILDING
Living in the heights of Kigali can allow to enjoy the views G+10 COLLE CT IV E B U ILDIN G
over the surrounding hills. This condition can be offered D E S CRI P T I O N U QT Y RA T E / U A M O UNT %
by buildings of 10 floors. The technical requirements of 1. ST RU CT U RE 1 019 997 540 52%
these buildings in terms of foundations, vertical structure E x c av ati o n

Raft foundation, Column bases & Sub-
columns
CM 700 4 500 3 149 280 0,2%
and fire security can be managed within a reasonable cost B ac kf i l l Selected excavated soil
Raft foundation, Column bases , Sub-
CM 299 6 500 1 942 168 0,1%
Columns and Ground Beams - C30

CM 358 204 963 73 285 934 4%
range. We precisely estimated tha global construction Stone Strip Foundation - Stone Masonry CM 43 70 000 3 044 160 0%
cost at 410000 RWF/sqm. F o u n d ati o n 50mm thick C15 Blinding

SM 72 8 750 634 200 0%
Kg 88 389 1 663 146 979 576 7%
Buildings of this type can be sold as market rate housing Sub-Columns and Ground Beams
SM 458 11 219 5 140 555 0%
in order to enhance cross financing of affordable housing W ater p r o o f i n g o f F o u n d ati o n Bitumen paint on strip foundation SM 458 4 500 2 061 900 0%
100mm thick - C30 Concrete Floor SM 324 20 496 6 640 799 0%
typologies. G r o u n d f l o o r s l ab
SM 324 4 695 1 521 132 0%
Slab
Fire security is assured by double staircase and double 1 . C F LO O R S LA B
toping slab)
150mm thick Reinforced Concrete Roof
SQM 3 423 42 500 145 456 250 7%
1 . C RO O F S LA B
Slab (Grade 30)
SM 324 30 744 9 961 199 1%
elevators, while the structural stability is provided by Reinforced Concrete Columns, beams
and shear walls (Grade 30)
CM 801 204 963 164 076 277 8%
Steel reinforcement in Roof slab,
continuous concrete wall constituting the core, plus 4 1 . D V E RT I C A L S T RUC T URE
Columns, beams and shear walls
Formwork in roof slab, Columns, beams,
Kg 182 178 1 663 302 939 528 15%
SM 7 766 11 219 87 125 562 4%
perpendicular walls reaching the façades.
and shear walls
1. E FA CA D E Brick Rowlock Bond SQM 1 128 22 000 24 816 000 1%
Pillars are positioned on the perimeter. Foundations are 1 . F P A RT I T I O N W A LLS

B E T W E E N A P A RT M E NT S
Compressed Stabilised Earth Blocks
(CSEBs) Infill
SQM 2 065 16 000 33 040 000 2%
made of reinforced concrete ground beams. 1 . G C A RP E NT RY ( Ro o f

S tr u c tu r e)
2 . FINISHE S 596 027 000 30%
The typical floor plan is composed by four compact 2 2 . A E XT E RI O R J O I NE RY Steel Casement (incl. Glass) SQM 960 55 000 52 800 000 3%
bedroom apartments, 47 sqm each, in order to contain 2 . B F A C A D E F I NI S HE S - SQM 0 0 0 0%
selling costs. Each apartment has a comfortable balcony

2 . C I I NT E RNA L P A RT I T I O N Compressed Stabilised Earth Blocks
W A LLS (CSEBs)
SQM 1 918 25 960 0 0%
at the corner. Upper levels can be occupied by larger 2 . D F I NI S HI NG S D W E LLI NG UNI T S 171 977 000 9%
Ceramic Tiles 8 mm w concrete bed 12-
D r y A r ea SQM 1 820 25 000 45 500 000 2%
duplex apartments. 2 . D . A . Flo o r
W et A r ea
15 mm
Ceramic Tiles 8 mm (incl concrete bed) SQM 310 30 000 9 300 000 0%
D r y A r ea Painting w Preparation SQM 5 406 4 500 24 327 000 1%
2 . D . B . W al l
1%
Maintenance Costs for each elevator coverd by a 5 years
W et A r ea Ceramic Tiles 6 mm (incl. concrete bed) SQM 1 200 20 000 24 000 000
2 . D . C. Cei li n g Plywood w supporting structure SQM 2 130 25 000 53 250 000 3%

warranty have been estimated at 50 000 RWF every 10 2.D.D. Do o rs I n ter i o r
Door)
PC 120 130 000 15 600 000 1%
years. 2 . E F I NI S HI NG S C O LLE C T I V E S P A C E S 23 730 000 17%

Ceramic Tiles 8 mm w concrete bed 12-
2 . D . A . Flo o r
15 mm
SQM 362 25 000 9 050 000 0%
2 . D . B . W al l Painting w Preparation SQM 1 040 4 500 4 680 000 0%
MATERIALS & 2 . D . C. Cei li n g
I n ter i o r
Plywood w supporting structure
SQM
PC
362
5
25 000
190 000
9 050 000
950 000
0%
0%
Door)
TECHNOLOGY
2.D.D. Do o rs
E x ter i o r - PC 0 0 0 0%
2 . F . S T A I RCA S E S
CU M 36 420 000 15 120 000 1%
2 . G . E LE V A T O RS Elevators 10 stops - 13 Pl - 1000Kg No 2 150 000 000 300 000 000 15%
2 . H LO C K S M I T H Metallic terrace balustrading 1100 high LM 432 75 000 32 400 000 2%
3 . MEC HA NI C A L, ELEC T RI C A L, P LU MB I NG ENG I NEERI NG
349 222 500 18%
(MEP )
3 . A M E P D W E LLI NG UNI T S 318 452 500 16%

3 . A . B . E l ec tr i c al E n g i n eer i n g
SQM 3 747 45 000 168 592 500 9%
3 . A . B . P l u m b i n g & M ec h an i c al Water supply, piping, drainage, sanitary

en g i n eer i n g ware and extractor fans
SQM 3 747 40 000 149 860 000 8%
3 . B M E P C O LLE C T I V E S P A C E S 30 770 000 2%

3 Rowlock Bond Power supply, DBs, conduits, cabling,
3 . B . B . E l ec tr i c al E n g i n eer i n g
SQM 362 45 000 16 290 000 1%
4 Light gauge steel

3 . B . B . P l u m b i n g & M ec h an i c al Water supply, piping, drainage, sanitary
en g i n eer i n g ware and extractor fans
SQM 362 40 000 14 480 000 1%
T OT AL R W F - 1 965 247 040 100%
GROSS FLOOR AREA 3 564

TOTAL RWF / SQM excl Infra
560 000
Standard Version
LIV IN G AR E A 2 06 8
2 Rowlock Bond
T OT AL R W F / SQ M Li v i ng Ar e a
960 000
e xcl Inf r a ( V AT E xcl .)
Add 18% VAT 172 800
1 132 800
1 Maxpan Slab
98
99
COLLECTIVE BUILDING G+10
Floor >1
1.80 3.60 3.60 3.60 3.60 1.80

1.80
Living Room/ Living Room/

Kitchen Room Room Kitchen
19m2 10m2 10m2 19m2
3.60
Bathroom Bathroom
2BR 4m2 4m2
47m2 Hallway Hallway
4m2 4m2
3.60
Room 1.20 Room

10m2 10m2
Hallway
18.00
1.20
1.20 20m2 1.20

Room Room
10m2 10m2
3.60
Hallway Hallway
4m2 4m2
Bathroom Bathroom
4m2 4m2
3.60
Living Room/ Room Room Living Room/

19m2 19m2
1.80
2 BR
47 SQM
Brick Rowlock Bond Concrete Columns

Light Gauge
CSEBs
Steel
100
31.70
4.20 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70 2.70
4.00 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50
101
SHARED FACILITIES
Destined to the rental market, small apartment typologies

limited to a single room with shared facilities can
be an important factor of cost reduction, thanks to
limited surfaces and reduced ventilation and plumbing
equipment.
G+0
25.00
5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00
2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50
1.50
Bathroom
5.00
Room Room Room Room Room Room

17 m2
11 m2 11 m2 11 m2 11 m2 11 m2 11 m2
10.00
Room Room Room Room Room Room Communal Space

5.00
11 m2 11 m2 11 m2 11 m2 11 m2 11 m2 48 m2
Kitchen
6 m2
1.50
102
SHARED APARTMENTS
Destinated to the rental market, this typology is a large

apartment with bedrooms rented separately sharing
common bathrooms, kitchen and living room. It is more
expensive than the typology of the previous page but
offers a greater sense of intimacy.
G+1, 2 OR 3
23.00
5.00 5.00 3.00 5.00 5.00
2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 3.00 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50
Room Room Room Room

8 m2 8 m2 Communal Space Communal Space 8 m2 8 m2
20 m2 20 m2
5.00
Terrace
15 m2
WC WC
4 m2 4 m2
Hallway Hallway
10.00
10 m2 10 m2
WC WC WC WC
4 m2 4 m2 4 m2 4 m2
5.00
Staircase
8 m2 8 m2 8 m2 8 m2 8 m2 8 m2 8 m2 8 m2
103
2.1 IMPACT OF INFRASTRUCTURE
TOPOGRAPHIC IMPACT OF RWANDA water and sanitation services, leading to increased risks
of waterborne diseases. Wastewater treatment can help
The impact of topography on affordable housing design to reduce these risks by removing harmful pathogens and
in Rwanda is significant. Rwanda is a country of hilly contaminants from wastewater before it is discharged
terrain, and this presents unique challenges for affordable back into the environment.
housing design. To address these challenges, architects Incorporating wastewater treatment facilities into
and designers must consider the slope and elevation of affordable housing design can also help to promote
the land, and invest research and design into alternative, environmental sustainability by reducing the amount of
creative ways to minimize cost while ensuring the untreated wastewater that is released into rivers, lakes,
safety and viability of the housing design. One common and other water bodies. This can help to protect aquatic
approach to affordable housing design in Rwanda is to ecosystems and support sustainable water management
use a terracing technique that involves cutting into the practices.
hillside to create flat platforms for building. This technique Moreover, wastewater treatment facilities can also be
not only makes use of the available land but also helps to designed in a way that makes them more affordable and
prevent erosion and landslides. In general retaining walls accessible to low-income communities. For instance,
should be limited in height to reduce bearing pressure the use of decentralized wastewater treatment systems
on the back of the wall, using basic principles to ensure such as constructed wetlands, biogas digesters, and
safety. composting toilets can help to reduce infrastructure costs
while also providing additional benefits such as energy
generation and soil fertilization.
STORMWATER MANAGEMENT Overall, incorporating wastewater treatment into
affordable housing design in Rwanda can have significant
Stormwater management can have a significant impact positive impacts on public health, environmental
on the design of affordable housing in Rwanda. Rwanda sustainability, and community resilience.
is a country that experiences heavy rainfall, and without
proper stormwater management, it can lead to flooding
and erosion. This can cause damage to the housing PUBLIC ROADS AND PATHS
infrastructure and negatively impact the health and
wellbeing of the residents. Roads and paths are important components of successful
To address this issue, affordable housing designs in housing developments. Thoughtful design that puts
Rwanda should incorporate stormwater management the human inhabitants first provides for the safety of
systems that can effectively collect, treat, and discharge pedestrians, people of all ages and levels of mobility, and
stormwater runoff. The design should also prioritize green controls vehicle speeds. Designing roads and paths to
infrastructure such as bioswales and rain gardens, which meet all needs, and not only the needs of vehicles, will
can absorb stormwater and reduce the amount of runoff. attract a broader swathe of potential clients and cater
In addition, the use of permeable paving materials can to people at all ages and mobility capability. Stormwater
help to reduce the amount of stormwater runoff that management is another important component of road
enters adjacent roads and waterways. These materials and path design. Preference in the selection of roads and
allow stormwater to infiltrate into the ground, reducing paths should be for permeable surfaces that allow for the
the amount of runoff that needs to be managed. infiltration of stormwater into the gravel base substrate
It is also important to consider the location of affordable below, and ultimately into the ground water table. This
housing developments in relation to flood-prone areas. will lessen the pressure on other areas of the development
Avoiding areas prone to flooding can help to reduce the to manage stormwater. The incorporation of trees, plants
risk of damage to the housing infrastructure and minimize and flowers, and nature-based solutions such as bioswales
potential health risks to the residents adjacent to new roads can also enhance the quality of life
in an affordable housing development.
WASTERWATER TREATMENT
WATER & ELECTRICITY NETWORKS EXPANSION
The impact of wastewater treatment on affordable
housing design in Rwanda can be significant in terms The expansion of water and electricity networks in
of both improving public health and environmental Rwanda can have a significant impact on the design of
sustainability. affordable housing in several ways.
In many areas of Rwanda, there is limited access to safe Firstly, the availability of these basic services can enable
104
more sophisticated and modern design solutions. For
example, with access to reliable electricity, affordable
housing can be designed with energy-efficient lighting
and appliances. Similarly, with access to clean water,
affordable housing designs can incorporate modern
plumbing fixtures and wastewater treatment systems that
can reduce water waste and improve sanitation.
Secondly, the expansion of water and electricity networks RETAINING WALLS RAIN WATER MANAGEMENT
can help to improve the affordability of housing by

reducing the cost of basic services. For example, with
access to affordable electricity, households can benefit
from reduced energy costs, while the availability of
clean water can reduce healthcare costs by reducing the
incidence of waterborne diseases.
Thirdly, the expansion of water and electricity networks
can facilitate the development of new affordable housing
projects in previously underserved areas. This can help to SOLID WASTE WASTEWATER TREATMENT
MANAGEMENT
reduce urban sprawl and promote the development of
more sustainable communities by reducing the need for
long commutes and improving access to essential services.
Overall, the expansion of water and electricity networks
in Rwanda can have a positive impact on the design
of affordable housing by enabling more sophisticated
FACT SHEET
and modern design solutions, improving affordability,
facilitating new housing development, and promoting
economic development.
Mars Systems ROADS & PATHS SANITATION &

PLUMBING
LANDSCAPE DESIGN IMPORTANCE

Product Description Integrated Treatment Steps
BioKube’ Mars systems are small STP plants

A well-designed landscape enhances most commonly
theused for singleof
quality households
life
or smaller residential groups treating up to
in an affordable housing development. By aincorporating
30 m³ wastewater day. The Mars systems
must be installed after a septic tank either
green spaces, community gardens, underand recreational
- or above ground. areas, Septic tank Buffer Tank Bio Zone Clarifier
residents can enjoy the benefits of nature and social
Mars 3000 / 4000
interaction, which can have a positive impact on their
mental and physical health. Excellent landscape design Mars 5000can/ 6000 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT BIODIGESTER
Mars system installed at a Boarding School
also increase the value of affordable
Dimensions housing
& Pipeproperties,
Placement
making them more attractive to potential renters or buyers.
Ø2010 Ø2300 Ø2010 Ø2300
This can help to ensure the long-term sustainability of
affordable housing projects. Lastly, sustainable landscape 350 350 350 350
950 950
design can help to reduce the environmentalOutletimpact Outlet
Outlet Outlet
2200
1580
2200 1580 2200
of affordable housing developments by incorporating 2200
Inlet Inlet
features such as rain gardens, native tree species, and via
pump
via
pump
Inlet Inlet hose hose
permeable paving. This can help to reduce stormwater
runoff, improve air quality, and provide habitat for wildlife.
Mars 3000 -3C & 4C Mars 5000
Mars 4000 CONSTRUCTED WETLANDS MLATRINE
VENTILATED PIT ars 6000
MARS SYSTEMS 3000-3C 3000-4C 4000 5000 6000

Height (mm) 2,220 2,220 2,220 2,220 2,220
Diametre (mm) 2,010 2,010 2,300 2,010 2,300
Weight (kg) 570 590 700 630 700
Weight with Water 5,970 5,990 7,350 5,990 7,350

Power consumption (kwh/year) 2,400 3,100 55,200 2,650 6,34,19000
Integrated buffertank / pump well Yes**** Yes**** Yes No No
Size of Internal Pump well (L) 1,200 1,200 1,600 NA NA

POWER & ELECTRICAL LANDSCAPE
Number of Blowers (pcs) 3 4 4 1 2
Tank Material Polypropylene Polypropylene Polypropylene Polypropylene Polypropylene
Piping Material PVC PVC PVC PVC 105
PVC
2.2 DENSITY / URBAN REGULATION
The comparison of different urban regulations highlights Calculations are based on a ratio of 100 000 RWF per built
the link between density and possible cost improvements square meter which is the result of a comparative analysis
in the construction costs of infrastructure per square of the bills of quantities for four existing projects analysed
metre: using the Real Estate Costing Tool: Kagarama Estate,
Gahanga Riverside Estate, Galilee Satellite Estate and the
Using a 1ha area, schematic urban layouts based on the Next Generation Housing Estate.
Kigali Master Plan Zoning Regulations with different
densities ranging from 40 Dwelling units per hectare up The cost for roads
V0 70% and utilities
Affordable must
- 30% Market Rate be evaluated and
60 Du/ha
to 100 Dwelling units per hectare are displayed with a compared in correspondence to their surface area of
corresponding cost calculation. housing sold. As a result, we can conclude that denser
40 DU / HA 60 DU / HA
FAR: 0,17 FAR: 0,4

+ 40 parking lots + 66 parking lots
35 % Natural conservation zone 32 % Natural conservation zone
Conform with Zone R1B, R2, R3, C1 & C4 Conform with Zone R2 & R3, C1 & C4
100 M
100 M
100 M 100 M
COST 115 000 RWF / SQM 100 000 RWF / SQM
A MORE DENSE BUILT ENVIRONMENT ALLOWS A COST REDUCTION UP TO 40 %

COMPARED TO LESS DENSE URBAN LAYOUTS.
106
KIGALI 2050 MASTER PLAN ZONING REGULATIONS
M ax Lot si z e D en si ty D u / H a D en si t y Du / H a
ZONE Description M ax . h ei ght M ax FAR M ax . b ui l t surf ace
m2 Si n gl e Use M i x ed -Use
R1 Low Density Residential Zone 500 10 - 15 7 - 10 G+1 0,5 40%
Low Density Residential

R1A 300 20 -30 15 - 20 G+2 1 50%
Densification Zone
100 for Row-Housing or Single- G+1 for single family houses
R1B Rural Residential Zone 40 - 70 30 - 50 1,2 60%
Family Units G+2 for all other typologies
Medium Density Residential
R2 200 for row houses 60 - 100 40 - 70 G+3 1,4 60%
Improvement Zone
Medium Density Residential 100 for Single-Family Housing
R3 50 - 90 40 - 70 G+2 1,2 60%
Improvement Zone 150 for Row-Housing
R4 High Density Residential Zone 750 80 - 120 60 - 80 G+4 1,8 50%
C1 Mixed Use Zone 500 N.a. N.a. G+4 1,6 60%
C3 City Commercial Zone 1000 N.a. N.a. G+10 2,4 70%
urban layouts are more cost-efficient than less dense An important variable for these considerations is the
urban layouts. specific state of the terrain such as existing vegetation,
slope or existing connections to public infrastructure
Through the comparison, we conclude that a denser built networks that could have an additional impact on the
environment with 100 Dwelling units per hectare allows a construction costs of required infrastructure as they
cost reduction up to 40% compared to a less dense urban require more invasive groundworks.
layout of only 40 Dwelling units per hectare, which in this
case means a significant price
V0 50% Affordable - 50%reduction
Market Rate of 45 000 RWF
80 Du/ha
per square metre of the built surfaces.
80 DU / HA 120 DU / HA
V0 50% Affordable - 50% Market Rate

80 Du/ha
FAR: 0,6 FAR: 0,7

+ 100 parking lots + 110 parking lots
34 % Natural conservation zone 31 % Natural conservation zone
Conform with Zone R2, R3, R4, C1 & C3 Conform with Zone R2, R4, C1 & C4
100 M
100
100 100 M
85 000 RWF / SQM 70 000 RWF / SQM
107
3.1 REAL ESTATE PROFORMA
Before committing to a real estate development, any The expenses are subdivided into five general categories
developer must assess the overall feasibility of the namely:
project they are considering, especially in terms of market • Financial costs and Taxes
demand, infrastructure availability, construction costs, • Land costs
specific technical constraints related to the land, regulator • Development costs
impositions and other administrative imperatives and • Infrastructure costs
above all funding availability and cost. All these elements • Construction costs
have in impact on the financial result of the operation.
Therefore, any developer must make their investment In perspective of mixed-used project developments,
decision based on a precise, project-specific technical incomes on their side are subdivided into four principal
and financial feasibility study. categories:
• Sale of dwellings
Every real estate project is different, even when their • Sale of other buildingss
purpose is identical, for instance “affordable housing • Subsidies
projects”. Each one has its own financial specificities, • Other revenues
depending on the location, size, topography and
configuration of the land, the nature of the soil, the We purposely separate the incomes generated by
technical characteristics of the designed project, and the “affordable housing” from that resulting from the sale at
planning of its development and execution. Each project “market rate” dwellings.
is also substantially dependent on potential tax incentives The calculation of the different revenues and expenses of
and subsidies on which its developer can rely. a project are based on average market prices and costs
established by comparative analysis of previous similar
The purpose of the proposed “Real Estate proforma” projects.
is to provide a hands-on tool that analyses in detail the
global financial feasibility of any project. The submitted In the fictitious scenario shown on the following page, we
“Analysis Model” enables a developer to determine observe on the “balance sheet” of the real estate operation
which parameters are of key importance to make an that the main cost of the project lies in the construction
affordable housings project viable. The tool also enables costs (66,3%) followed by the financial costs (21,3%) and
the comparison of different projects with similar financial the infrastructure costs (5,9%), while the project’s main
structures, helping the developer to assess whether the source of income comes from the sale of housing at
project is eligible for incentives. market price (46,9%), followed by the sale of offices, retail
The “Real Estate proforma” tool we propose generates and logistical buildings (19%). We can also observe that
a synthetic table, the “Balance Sheet”, that offers a the cost of land and the cost of project development have
quick global overview of balance between income lower relative weight in this example, i.e., a less significant
from different sources and project costs of different impact in the financial balance of this fictitious project.
natures, thus displaying the projected financial margin Therefore, they are not the first to focus on trying to
on the project. In addition, this “balance sheet” makes it improve the financial feasibility of the scenario.
possible to measure the relative weight, and therefore the
importance, of the different parts composing the overall
financial balance of the real estate transaction, identifying
which lever is most appropriate to coptimise cost.
The tool is composed of three detailed parts; one related
the project composition, the second one to expenses,
the last one to incomes. This offers the possibility of
studying different scenarios of project envisaged by easily
modifying its composition, as well as all other cost and
revenue parameters.
108
E XP E NSE S
A F IN A N C IA L C OST S & T A X E S 7 9 42 01 7 5 00 RW F 21 , 3 %
A .1 I nt e r e s t c ha r g e s on l oa ns 2 777 655 000 RWF 7,5%
A .2 I n t e r e s t o n i n t e r n a l fi n a n c i n g 46 137 500 RWF 0,1%
A .3 T axe s 5 118 225 000 RWF 13,7%
B LA N D C OST S 9 07 5 00 000 RW F 2, 4%
B.1 Land pu r chas e v al u e 867 500 000 RWF 2,3%
B.2 L a nd a c q u i s i t i on c os t s 40 000 000 RWF 0,1%
C D E V E L O PM E N T C O S T S 1 49 0 5 00 000 RW F 4, 0%
C.1 Pr oj e c t i n c e p t i on c os t s 5 000 000 RWF 0,0%
C.2 L a n d m a s t e r p l a n a n d i n fr a s t r u c t u r e d e v e l o p m e n t c o s t s 175 000 000 RWF 0,5%
C.3 B u i l d i ng s d e v e l op me nt c os t s 410 500 000 RWF 1,1%
C.4 S e l l i ng c os t s 900 000 000 RWF 2,4%
D I N F RA S T RUC T URE C OS T S 2 200 000 000 R W F 5,9%
D.1 I n fr a s t r u c t u r e c o n s t r u c t i o n c o s t 2 200 000 000 RWF 5,9%
E C ON S T RU C T I ON C OS T S 24 7 1 0 7 5 0 000 R W F 66,3%
E .1 B u i d i ng s c ons t r u c t i on c os t s 24 710 750 000 RWF 66,3%
TO TAL E XP E NSE S 3 7 2 50 76 7 50 0 R W F 1 00, 0%
I NCOM ES
A I N C OM E F ROM T H E S A LE OF D WE LLI N G S 3 1 26 2 5 00 000 R W F 7 3 , 2%
A .1 A ffo r a b l e d w e l l i n g s u n i t s 11 237 500 000 RWF 26,3%
A .2 M ar ke t r at e dw e l l i ng s u ni t s 20 025 000 000 RWF 46,9%
B I N C OM E F ROM T H E S A LE OF OT H E R B UI LD I N G S 9 7 9 0 000 000 RW F 22, 9 %
B.1 S oc i a l , S t u d e nt & E l d e r l y H ou s i ng 1 692 500 000 RWF 4,0%
B.2 O ffi c e s , R e t a i l , L o g i s t i c a n d i n d u s t r y b u i l d i n g s 8 097 500 000 RWF 19,0%
C SUBSID IE S 1 5 43 7 5 0 000 RW F 3,6%
C.1 I n fr a s t r u c t u r e s s u b s i d i e s 1 131 250 000 RWF 2,6%
C.2 Pu b l i c i n t e r e s t s u b s i d i e s 75 000 000 RWF 0,2%
C.3 E nv i r onme nt a l s u b s i d i e s 337 500 000 RWF 0,8%
D OT H E R RE V E N UE S 1 25 000 000 R W F 0, 3 %
Ot he r r e v e nu e s 125 000 000 RWF 0,3%
T O T AL R E V E N UE S 4 2 72 1 2 50 0 0 0 R W F 1 00, 0%
F I NAN C I AL M AR GI N 5 4 70 4 8 2 500 R W F 12, 8%
109
3.2 LEVERS FOR COST OPTIMISATION
Based on the real estate tool, we propose to work on VAT EXEMPTION

different levers when it comes to lower the cost of In real estate stakeholders involved in construction
affordable housing units. The blend of these levers can individuals or professionals pay a 18% VAT. A reduction of
be adapted to the challenges of each specific market, the VAT from 18% to 0% for affordable housing units allows
depending on the type of housing, on the stakeholders lowering the sales prices for affordable housing units under
and on the size of the project. 500 000 RWF per square meter, while guaranteeing a
They all have a direct impact on the overall costing financial margin of 10% for the developer and thus making
scheme. affordable housing attractive for stakeholders.
INFRASTRUCTURE SUBSIDIES
Infrastructure subsidies can significantly help to lower MIX-USE / CROSS FINANCING
the sales prices for affordable housing units, even for The introduction of 10% of market rate products on
projects that until now do not fulfil the eligibility criteria projects have a seemingly big impact on the income side
for infrastructure support including projects on a smaller for construction costs due to their high sales prices of 1
scale with less than 100 Dwelling units. 000 000 RWF per square meter and thus help to lower
the sales prices for affordable housing units while still
LAND PURCHASE SUBSIDIES guaranteeing financial margins.
Through our real estate tool, we identified a sensitive
threshold in terms of land purchase at 30 000 RWF per
square meters. For projects on sites more expensive than FINANCIAL COSTS
that, the gap between this threshold and the real price The application of favourable low-interest loans at
could be covered by subsidies, proportioned to the part of 10% contribute to still obtain a financial margin and
housing sold as affordable, in order to guarantee a positive simultaneously to lower the sale prices for affordable
real estate balance with a margin of minimum 10%. housing units.
CONSTRUCTION COSTS TAX EXEMPTIONS ON IMPORTED MATERIALS

Thanks to the work of previous chapters, we aim to We consider a tax exemption on imported materials
contain construction cost for affordable housing within another significant lever to lower prices for affordable
the limit of 350 000 RWF per square meter including housing units as a large proportion of construction
infrastructure, 20% lower than initial construction costs materials are being imported today.
that lies at around 420 000 RWF per square meter.
GREEN FINANCE
INCREMENTALITY We consider Green Finance another model to be
Leaving the realization of interior finishes to future included when it comes to subsidies. This aligns with the
landlords can reduce the cost of one square meter of sustainability strategy of the country.
approximately 8 000 RWF/ sqm, corresponding to 20% of
the cost of a unit.
We consider that incrementality, could contribute to a
cost optimisation and simultaneously allows a careful
monitoring of the execution works and safety regulations.
However, if included in large scale developments,
incrementality can be an effective lever that provides
people with cheap land with proper water supply and
sewage system. Besides, developers can provide future
inhabitants materials, produced on site if possible, and
training on construction technologies.
110
SELLING PRICE EXISTING SITUATION PROJECTED IMPACT ON
PRICE VALUE 2023 SITUATION AFFORDABLITY
(10% INFLATION)
520K 350K 520K

RWF/SQM RWF/SQM RWF/SQM
EXISTING SITUATION
INCLUDING
INFRASTRUCTURE SUBSIDIES 100 UNITS > 1 UNIT - INFRASTRUCTURE
SUBSIDIES
LAND PURCHASE SUBSIDIES > 30K EXISTING LAND COST ON

/ LAND VALUE CAPTURE NONE RWF/SQM - 5K RWF/SQM AVERAGE 30K
AND DENSITY INCREASE 80 DU/HA 100 DU/HA RWF / SQM
CONSTRUCTION COSTS 325K 285K - 40K RWF/SQM

(DENSITY, BUILDING TYPOLOGY, MATERIALS) RWF/SQM RWF/SQM
EXCL. VAT
FINISHED DWELLING UNIT
INCL. CUSTOM DUTIES
SEISMIC 0.25
PER SQM/LIVING AREA 475K RWF/SQM
VAT EXEMPTION 18% 0% - 50K RWF/SQM
MIXED-USE/ CROSS-FINANCING BASED ON

(MAX SHARE) NONE YES - 10K RWF/SQM PARTICULAR
CONDITIONS
FINANCIAL COSTS 20% 10% - 30K RWF/SQM
TAX EXEMPTIONS ON IMPORTED

MATERIALS, EXCEPT COMPETITION 0% 100% - 15K RWF/SQM
WITH DOMESTIC MATERIALS
370K RWF/SQM
INCREMENTALITY / 0% 100% - 10K RWF/SQM

SELF-BUILT
360K RWF/SQM
111
IV. SCENARIOS
1. URBAN DESIGN SCENARIOS
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Landowner Self Builder
1.3 Landowner Private Investment
1.4 Landowner Joint venture
1.5 Micro scale developer
1.6 Small scale developer
1.7 Large scale Developer
2. SUBSIDY AND INCENTIVE

IMPACT SCENARIOS
3. INDUSTRY GROWTH STRATEGY

IV. SCENARIOS
1.1 INTRODUCTION
The design team of workstream 2 tested housing

typologies and real estate scenarios on several physical
sites presenting different urban characteristics. The
objective of this part of the study is to give an image to
future affordable housing neighbourhoods for Rwanda
and to verify the viability of the previous hypothesis.
The Kigali multi-site scenarios will be the opportunity to

test the approach for infill densification and upgrade of
existing urban neighbourhoods, involving landowner self
builder, landowner private investment, landowner joint
venture, and micro-scale developers.
The Nyamata site extends on 24 hectares and will be
the test for a large-scale development in a satellite
city undergoing significant transformation, due to the
proximity to the future airport.
The site in Musanze is an inspiring middle-scale urban

fringe at the frontier between urban fabric and the rural
environment at the foothill of the northern mountains.
With its size of 13ha, it allows to test an interesting mix
of programs in a dynamic secondary city interested by
international flows, tourism and educational institutions.
114
P I LO T S I T E S
OVERVIEW
MUSANZE MUS
(SECONDARY CITY) (SEC
1 plot, ca. 13ha 1 plo
KIGALI
KIGALI CITY)
(CAPITAL KIG
Case study
(CAPITAL CITY)Claudette (CAP
Agatare cells:
Agatare Cell: Infill Agat
Infill
NYAMATA NYA
(SATELITE CITY) (SAT
1 plot, ca. 24ha 1 plo
115
IV. SCENARIOS
PRO1.1 INTRODUCTION
J EC T SITES
3 SITES
KIGALI, AGATARE
100 m Caméra : 2 849 m 1°58'03"S 30°03'45"E 1 472 m
KIGALI NYAMATA
Airbus
Agatare Cell: Infill 24HA
116
LANDOWNER LANDOWNER MICRO-SCALE
SELFBUILDER JOINT VENTURE DEVELOPER
30 m Caméra : 1 822 m 1°58'10"S 30°03'35"E 1 489 m

Airbus 100 SQM 2 500 SQM
30 m Caméra : 1 822 m 1°57'55"S 30°03'55"E 1 507 m
860 SQM
Airbus
635 M
m 1536 m
635
1534 m
1530 m
1526 m
1520 m
1516 m
1511 m
1502 m
1493 m
1485 m
1477 m
1468 m
1458 m
1446 m
1434 m
The three unbuilt plots are located on the sloped side of These sites demonstrate the potential of infill and incre-
a hill in Agatare, south of Kiowu. We propose to test on mental urban development in improving the existing ur-
Each a different ownership type and development mech- ban neighbourhoods and the affordable housing supply.
anisms. Being situated in an existing urban context, these sites
don’t require much roads and utilities investment.
We make the assumption that the first is developed by a
single landlord, building one single housing unit for him-
self. The second is the joint venture between different
neighbouring owners, that decide to come together to
develop a unique construction project for several hous-
ing units. The third is a plot big enough to attract a micro
scale developer that creates a mixed housing project.
117
IV. SCENARIOS
1.1 INTRODUCTION
MUSANZE
NYAMATA MUSANZE
MUSANZE
24HA 13HA
30
13HA
30
118
HA
14
39
5M
0M
36
SMALL-SCALE DEVELOPER LARGE-SCALE DEVELOPER
317 M
317
1892 m
1885 m 1883 m 1883 m 1883 m 1879 m
1883 m
1873 m 1883 m 1869 m
1883 m 1865 m
The plots belonging to RHA at the northern edge of the

Ruhengeri city centre is an interesting example for a
mixed-density and mixed-stakeholder development pro-
ject.
We tested on this site of 14 hectares, with a road network

already traced defining approximately 9 plots, a scenario
mixing affordable housing with market rate housing.
According to the situation, the capacity of de developers

and the topography, the density can vary between 65 and
95 DU/ha.
119
IV. SCENARIOS
1.1 INTRODUCTION
NYAMATA KIGALI NYAMATA
Agatare Cell: Infill

NYAMATA 24HA
MUSANZE
24HA 13HA
30
120
PUBLIC TRANSPORT CON-
PRODUCTION NECTION
COMPANY HIGH DENSE
MIX-USE PLOT
PUBLIC ANIMATED SQUARE G+3
MEDIUM DENSE PARKING LOTS

MIXED RESIDENTIAL PLOTS
G+3/ G+2 W
ACTIVE GROUNDFLOORS WATER DITCH
MEDIUM DENSE
MIXED RESIDENTIAL PLOTS
WATER DITCH G+2/G+1/G+0
400 M
406
MEDIUM DENSE
RESIDENTIAL PLOTS INCREMENTAL PLOT
G+0
GREEN SPACE
INCREMENTAL PLOT
PARKING LOTS
LOW DENSE
RESIDENTIAL PLOT
G+0/ G+1
125 M
125
PHASE 1
5 HA
800 DU
477
477 M
1433 m
1429 m 1431 m
1426 m
1420 m 1423 m
1418 m
1415 m
1410 m 1412 m
1406 m 1408 m
The site in Nyamata is an example of publicly owned large

site in a satellite city context. For its proximity to the new
airport and to the national road leading to Kigali, we pro-
pose in such an urban situation an average density of 150
DU / ha.
The proximity to the airport and the presence of schools,

cultural and sport facilities, hospitals, and hotels allows to
think of a mixed project on this site.
121
IV. SCENARIOS
1.2 LAND OWNER SELFBUILDER
KIGALI, AGATARE
Landowner self-builder is the primary way of getting a Zoning: R2 Medium Density Residential Improvement
property with no cost of loan and profit to pay to a hous- zone, MAx G+3
ing supplier. We consider all levers to lower the cost and Housing Supplier: Landowner self-builder
Housing Demand: 40 SQM,
formal low-cost ways of construction to ensure basic 1DU Very affordable Housing (100%) on 0.06ha
safety and comfort. The final cost of the property is 335 Density: 50 DU/HA
000 RWF per sqm. We considered the minimum need for Land Price: Agatare 34 492 RWF/SQM
the dwelling unit without a parking lot and with a minima Price/ SQM: 345 000 RWF/SQM
size of private garden.
Considering a parking lot, the access road and minimal

public spaces would lead to a density of around 40 DU/
HA.
0.01 HA
The construction of a new single housing unit on the scale
of the landowner requires a total investment of 1160k
RWF per sqm. Due to the high land price of 34 492 RWF
per sqm for the plot in Kigali, Agatare
subsidies in limiting land costs at 30k RWF per sqm are 8M
being introduced.
50% BUILT SURFACES
MATERIALITY TYPOLOGY
EARTH ENABLE & HOUSE G0
TRADITIONAL BRICKS
Rukarakara/
Adobe
Mud blocks
Earth Enable
122
EXPENSES
EXPE NSE S
c os t/U
A L AND COST U Q ty 2 7 86 9 5 4 2 3%
RW F
A.1 Land purchase value sqm 80 34 492 2 759 360 23%
Land acquisition costs

A.2 27 594 0,2%
(1%)
INFRAS TRUCTURE c os t/U
B U Q ty 420 0%
COSTS RW F
B.1 Infrastructure costs sqm 40 10 400 0%
Infrastructure
B.2 20 0,0%
development (5%)
CONST RUCTION c os t/U
C U Q ty 9 240 00 0 77%
COSTS RW F
Construction costs
C.1
affordable housing
sqm 40 220 000 8 800 000 73%
C.3 Development costs (5%) 440 000 4%
D FINAN CIAL COSTS 0 0%

Loan 70% of the costs at
D.1 5 051 497 42%
10% rate, over 20 years
TOTAL E XPENSE S RWF
1 2 02 7 37 4 1 00 ,0%
Excl . VAT
TOTAL E XPENSE S RWF
2 164 927 1 8, 0 %
Incl. VAT
TOTAL Costs RWF / SQM 355 000
C SUB SIDIES 359 36 0 17%

Land purchase value covered
C.1 at 30k RWF/SQM
sqm 80 4 492 359 360
TOTAL Costs RWF / SQM 346 000
• CONSTRUCTION COSTS 220K RWF / SQM

• INCREMENTALITY: YES
• VAT: 18%
• MIXED-USE/CROSS-FINANCING NONE
• LOW INTEREST LOANS 10%
• TAX EXEMPTIONS ON IMPORTED MATERIALS NONE
• INFRASTRUCTURE SUBSIDIES NONE
• LAND PURCHASE SUBSIDIES: FOR LAND ABOVE 30K/ SQM
• FINANCIAL COSTS: not considered for this supplier NONE
because it is a landowner building for himself
123
IV. SCENARIOS
1.3 LAND OWNER PRIVATE INVESTMENT
CLAUDETTE
The landowner private investment is an interesting

housing supplier because it creates a stakeholder for House 01
rentals and avoids the costs of loan and profit to pay to a 5 Bedrooms, Salon, Kitchen
professional housing supplier like a developer. This profile Area: 120sqm
is well represented in Rwanda and can supply a great Owner Occupied
number of dwelling units. From a sustainable point of
view, it is densifying an existing plot so it does not amplify House 02
urban sprawl. 4 Bedroom, Salon, Kitchen
Area: 100sqm
Claudette owns 9 houses on her plot in Kibenga, Ndera, Rent: RWF 120,000
not far from the Special Economic Zone. She’s a “backyard
landlord” - but she should be a microdeveloper, making
House 03
more money and housing more people than she currently 1 Bedroom, Salon
is. Area: 40sqm
Rent: RWF 30,000
She lives in one, and rents the other eight, which are House 04
sporadically occupied because her tenants are mobile,
1 Bedroom, Salon
informal workers.
Area: 15sqm
As of February, 2023, Claudette was earning RWF 210,000
Rent: RWF 26,000
per month, and maintaining 8 individual rental dwelling House 05
units, with a total of 11 bedrooms. Her parcel is zoned R3, Area: 15sqm
which prescribes 50-90 DU/hectare, and it is 1,148sqm/ 1 Bedroom, Salon
.1148ha in area. The plot is built up by approximately Rent: RWF 24,000
323sqm, or roughly 28%, meaning open space is at about
72%. House 06
Area: 15sqm
The current density of her plot is roughly on par with the 1 Bedroom, Salon
recommended maximum density for the site by 2038, Rent: RWF 24,000
when Phase 3 of the master plan development is planned
House 07
to complete.
Area: 1a5sqm
Applying the material kits to Claudette’s plot will assist
1 Bedroom, Salon
in understanding how to progressively densify her plot
Rent: RWF 26,000
over time, utilizing new materials and technologies that House 08
will reduce the embodied carbon of her development, Area: 18sqm
manage the sanitation and waste, and balance the open 1 Bedroom, Salon
space relative to built area to be more equitable between Rent: RWF 24,000
the tenants.
House 09
Claudette’s plot provides a good example of how the Area: 18sqm
masterplan can be regularized over time, through the 1 Bedroom, Salon
steady agglomeration of irregularly-sized plots by small Rent: RWF 24,000
landowners.
House 10
Plot 6723 was segmented by Claudette for a member
Area: 72sqm
of her family, and plot 987, while owned by a neighbor,
3 Bedroom, Salon
could be purchased and merged to square off the corner. Rent: RWF 120,000
124
Plot 6723
10 5096
6723
09 08 01
Plot 6722
07
6722
06 04 03
05
Plot 987 987
02
986
WAT E R 979
METER
2/25/2023, 5:01:56 PM
Kigali Parcels
SHA R E D TO IL E T H OUSE 09
A RE A : 8 S Q M AREA: 18SQM
1 BEDROOM, SALON
REN T: RWF 24,000
HOUS E 0 3 H OUSE 01 H OUSE 07

AREA: 40SQM 4 B E DR O O M, SA LON, KI TC H EN AREA: 25 SQM
1 B E DR O O M , S A LO N A R E A: 100SQM 1 BEDROOM, SALON
RE NT: R W F 3 0,0 0 0 OW NE R OCC UPI ED REN T: RWF 26,000
125
IV. SCENARIOS
MATERIAL KIT #01: 2025 / BELOW RWF 200,000
SINGLE STORY (G) SUBSTITUTIONS
FOUNDATION Simplified Stone Masonry

BUILDING with Cement Mortar
Load-Bearing Walls with

STRUCTURE
Reinforcing Bars
EXTERIOR Upgraded Rukarakara with

WALLS Cement Plaster Finish
GROUND
Earthen Floor
FLOOR
PARTITION Basic Rukarakara with Self-Built Wood Frame

WALLS Clay Plaster Finish with Triplex Sheathing
SUSPENDED
FLOOR
ROOF Sawn Wood Framing

Eucalyptus Poles (Pine or Cypress)
STRUCTURE
ROOF 30ga Iron Roof Sheets
PROJECTED
5 Years
LIFESPAN
CONSTRUCTION Assume minimum RWF 150,000-250,000/sqm;

COST RWF 2,250,000 to RWF 3,500,000
15 to 20 sqm, 2-Room House with Exterior Kitchen

TYPOLOGY and Exterior, Private Ventilated Pit Latrine
EMBODIED
CARBON
126
TWO-STORY (G+1) SUBSTITUTIONS
FOUNDATION Stone Masonry with RC

Grade Beam
Concrete Frame
STRUCTURE (Incremental)
EXTERIOR Rukarakara Blocks with Compressed Earth Blocks

WALLS Clay Plaster Finish w/ Clay Plaster Finish
GROUND
FLOOR Earthen Floor
PARTITION Basic Rukarakara Thin Plywood Partitions

WALLS w/ Clay Plaster Finish with wood framing
SUSPENDED Timber Joists with T&G

Panels over Plywood
FLOOR Sheathing (Incremental)
ROOF Eucalyptus Poles
Sawn Wood Framing
STRUCTURE (Pine or Cypress)
PROJECTED 5-10 Years; Established as an

LIFESPAN Incremental Process
CONSTRUCTION Assume minimum RWF 250,000/sqm

COST
2-Story, 15 sqm, 2-Room House with Exterior Kitchen

TYPOLOGY and Exterior, Private Ventilated Pit Latrine
EMBODIED
CARBON
127
IV. SCENARIOS
MATERIAL KIT APPLICATION - #1
CLAUDETTE
Material Kit 01 is based on the upgraded regulations for
Rukarakara, providing Claudette with a way to upgrade her
units to a safe standard, easier to maintain, and improve
her chances of keeping her units consistently rented.
This kit would be available for immediate implementation,

through 2030, with various possible substitutions for her
to consider.
SINGLE STORY (G) SUBSTITUTIONS
FOUNDATION Simplified Stone Masonry

BUILDING with Cement Mortar
Load-Bearing Walls with

STRUCTURE
Reinforcing Bars
EXTERIOR Upgraded Rukarakara with

WALLS Cement Plaster Finish
GROUND
Earthen Floor
FLOOR
PARTITION Basic Rukarakara with Self-Built Wood Frame

WALLS Clay Plaster Finish with Triplex Sheathing
SUSPENDED
FLOOR
ROOF Sawn Wood Framing

Eucalyptus Poles (Pine or Cypress)
STRUCTURE
128
Roof Sheet
Ring Beam
Improved
Rukarakara
Rukarakara
Partition
Substitution:
Wood Partition
129
IV. SCENARIOS
MATERIAL KIT APPLICATION - #7
CLAUDETTE
Material Kit 07 provides Claudette with a way to build her
housing stock that satisfies the zoning requlations for R3,
making her plot compliant in the future.
This kit would be available for immediate implementation

when Claudette has been able to secure additional
funding, which could be savings, or a small personal loan.
The concrete frame allows for an array of wall infill

substitutions, and sets the stage for incremental additions
over time.
TWO-STORY (G+1) SUBSTITUTIONS
FOUNDATION Stone Masonry with RC

Grade Beam
Concrete Frame
EXTERIOR Rukarakara Blocks with Compressed Earth Blocks

WALLS Clay Plaster Finish w/ Clay Plaster Finish
GROUND
FLOOR Earthen Floor
PARTITION Basic Rukarakara Thin Plywood Partitions

WALLS w/ Clay Plaster Finish with wood framing

Panels over Plywood
ROOF Eucalyptus Poles
Sawn Wood Framing
STRUCTURE (Pine or Cypress)
130
Roof Sheet
Compressed
Earth Block
Concrete
Frame
Wood Partition
Compressed
Earth Blocks
131
IV. SCENARIOS
MATERIAL KIT APPLICATION - #11: 2035 / BELOW RWF 200 000
SINGLE STORY (G) SUBSTITUTIONS TWO-STORY (G+1) SUBSTITUTIONS
FOUNDATION Simplified Stone Masonry Stone Masonry with RC

with Cement Mortar Grade Beam
Load-Bearing Walls with Concrete Frame

Reinforcing Bars
EXTERIOR Upgraded Rukarakara with Compressed Earth Blocks Compressed Earth

Blocks w/ Clay Plaster Hemp Blocks
WALLS Cement Plaster Finish with Clay Plaster Finish
Finish
GROUND
Earthen Floor Earthen Floor
FLOOR
PARTITION Self-Built Wood Frame Compressed Earth Blocks Self-Built Wood Frame
with Plywood Sheathing with Clay Plaster Finish Hemp Blocks
WALLS with Plywood Sheathing

Panels over Plywood
ROOF Steel Tubes Steel Tubes
Eucalyptus Poles Eucalyptus Poles
STRUCTURE
ROOF 28ga Iron Roof Sheets Bamboo Roof Sheets 30ga Iron Roof Sheets Bamboo Roof Sheets
PROJECTED 5-10 Years; Established as an

10 Years Incremental Process
LIFESPAN
CONSTRUCTION Assume minimum RWF 150,000-250,000/sqm;

RWF 2,250,000 to RWF 3,500,000 Assume minimum RWF 250,000/sqm
COST
15 to 20 sqm, 2-Room House with Exterior Kitchen 2-Story, 15 sqm, 2-Room House with Exterior Kitchen
TYPOLOGY and Exterior, Private Ventilated Pit Latrine and Exterior, Private Ventilated Pit Latrine
EMBODIED
CARBON
132
133
IV. SCENARIOS
VENTILATED PIT LATRINE
DESCRIPTION
Ventilated Improved Latrines have a vertical vent pipe

directly over the pit. Wind that passes over the pipe causes
air to escape, creating a downward draught through the
drop hole. This effectively channels odours away from
the user. The vent pipe also aids fly control as flies are
prevented from leaving through a fly screen at the top.
The pit is lined so that solid waste can be emptied when
required A school requires a pit with a volume of 6000L
for every 100 children, provided it is emptied once a year.
ADVANTAGES
• More sanitary than a standard Pit Latrine
• Cost effective for rural locations
Support
The Belgian development agency, Enabel, support

initiatives to promote climate responsive designs,
including improved sanitary wastewater outcomes. More
information is available in the Manifesto for Climate
Responsive Design, produced by Fielden Clegg Bradley
Studios, on behalf of Enabel.
134
LAKE BUNYONYI SECONDARY TEMPORARY LATRINES HAVE BEEN REPLACED WITH TWO PERMANENT
FOUR-STANCE LATRINE BLOCKS
135
IV. SCENARIOS
1.4 LAND OWNER JOINT VENTURE
KIGALI, AGATARE
Landowner joint venture is an interesting way of creating Zoning: R2 Medium Density Residential Improvement
formal, dense, urban fabric in an existing context, not zone, MAx G+3
needing any additional infrastructure. Putting together Housing Supplier: Landowner joint venture
Housing Demand: 16 DU
individual efforts allows creating a property with no cost
Density: 75DU/HA
of loan and profit to pay to a housing supplier. It is also Land Price: Agatare 34 492 RWF/SQM
an interesting model to use building height opportunities Price/ SQM: 405 000 RWF/SQM
impossible to get with small lots independently.
We consider all levers to lower the cost and formal ways

of construction to ensure safety and comfort. The final 0.12 HA
cost of the property is 470 000 RWF/SQM. We considered
dwelling units with parking lots and private shared
gardens. This model also allows to create possible public
spaces in specific contexts.
The possible clustering of several land owners allows the

introduction of the three housing segments due to the
joint venture of multiple sites and parties.
It eventually requires a total investment of 420k RWF per
sqm with 100% infrastructure subsidies and land purchase
subsidies at 30k RWF per sqm because of the high land
prices.
40
M
M
32
10% BUILT SURFACES

8PARKING LOTS
MAXPAN SLAB & COLLECTIVE
CSEB’S BUILDING G+3
3 Improved Adobe
pk 4 Rukarakara/
Adobe
2 CSEBs
pk
1 Maxpan Slab
136
pk
EXPENSES
EXPENS ES
c o s t/ U
A L A ND C OST U Qty 43 546 1 50 1 0%
RW F
A.1 Land purchase value sqm 1 250 34 492 43 115 000 10%

A.2 431 150 0%
(1%)
INFRA ST RU CTU RE c o s t/ U
B U Qty 6 4 8 7 3 536 15%
COSTS RW F
B.1 Infrastructure costs sqm 891 70 000 62 378 400 15%
Infrastructure
B.2 2 495 136 1%
development (0,4%)
CONST RU CTION c o s t/ U
C U Qty 26 1 9 54 000 62%
COSTS RW F
Construction costs very
C.1
affordable housing
sqm 891 280 000 249 480 000 59%
C.4 Development costs (5%) 12 474 000 3%
D FINA NC IA L COSTS 50 356 9 42 12%

D.1 50 356 942 12%
TOTA L EXPE NSES RW F

420 7 30 6 28 1 00 %
Ex cl. Ta x
TVA 0% A ff orda b le hou s i ng, 1 8%
1 30 5 6 52 0%
M a rk e t R a t e H o u s i n g
TOTAL Costs RWF / SQM 480 00 0
L a nd p u rc ha s e s u bs i di es s q
1250 5 6 6 1 0 00
30k RW F/SQ M m
Infra s t ru ct u re s u bs i di es s q
89 1 7 0 000 6 2 3 7 8 40 0
1 00 % m
TOTAL Costs RWF / SQM 400 00 0
• CONSTRUCTION COSTS 280K RWF / SQM

• INCREMENTALITY YES
• VAT: 0%
• INFRASTRUCTURE SUBSIDIES 100%
• LAND PURCHASE SUBSIDIES FOR LAND ABOVE 30K/ SQM
137
IV. SCENARIOS
$ 1.5 MICRO-SCALE DEVELOPER
KIGALI, AGATARE
The microscale developer is the first formal housing sup- Zoning: R2 Medium Density Residential Improvement
plier, with the capacity of building proper formal con- zone, MAx G+3
Housing Supplier: Micro Scale Developer
struction quality.
Housing Demands: 12 DU
7 DU Very affordable Housing 60%
In this scenario, we develop a model of mixed income 4 DU Affordable Housing (34%)
dense project, in an existing context where infrastructure 1 DU Market Rate Housing (6%)
investment is reduced. With a G+3 building, the founda- Density: 150 DU/HA
Land Price: Agatare 34 492 RWF/SQM
tion cost is well profitable. This example show that by ap- Price/ SQM:
plying levers to lower the costs, including cross-financ- Very affordable housing 350 000 RWF/SQM
ing, we can lower the selling cost to 350 RWF/ sqm for Affordable housing: 500 000 RWF/SQM
the very affordable housing segment. Market Rate housing: 1 000 000 RWF/SQM
Due to the cross financing concept between the three in-

troduced housing segments a selling price reduction for
affordable housing can be achieved, while still guarantee- 0.08 HA
ing an overall margin of 12%. Market observations allow
to leave the selling price for market rate housing within
Kigali at 1 000k RWF per sqm.
As the land price for the chosen site in Kigali, Agatare with
34 492 RWF per sqm is above 30k per sqm land purchase
subsidies are being introduced.
With an application of 0% VAT for affordable housing units
48
and 18% for market rate housing units, low interest loans M
of 11% for affordable housing units and 17% for market
rate housing, 100% tax exemptions on imported materials M
and 100% infrastructure subsidies for the affordable hous-
15
ing segment, we achieve the following selling prices for
the three segments: 20% BUILT SURFACES
350k RWF per sqm for very affordable housing units 10 PARKING LOTS
500k RWF per sqm for affordable housing units
1000k RWF per sqm for market rate housing units
MAXPAN SLAB & COLLECTIVE
ROWLOCK BOND BUILDING G+3
4 Improved Adobe
pk 3 CSEBs
2 Rowlock Bond
pk
1 Maxpan Slab
138 pk
EXPEN SES
EXPENSES
cos t/ U SA LE OF
A LA N D COST U Q ty 28 28 0 000 9% A
RW F D WEL LIN GS
A.1 Land purchase value sqm 800 35 000 28 000 000 9% A,1 Very Affordable Housin

A.2 280 000 0,1% A,2 Affordable Housing
(1%)
IN FRA ST RUCTU RE cos t/ U
B U Q ty 4 9 4 6 5 500 15% A,3 Market Rate Housing
COS TS RW F
B.1 Infrastructure costs sqm 673 70 000 47 110 000 15% C S UB SID IES
Infrastructure Infrastructure costs
B.2
development (5%)
2 355 500 0,7% C.1 100%
REA L EST ATE cos t/ U Infrastructure
C U Q ty 202 1 77 500 62% C.2
COS TS RW F development (5%)
Construction Costs Very Land purchase value

C.1
Affordable Housing
sqm 343 250 000 85 750 000 27% B.3
covered at 30K RWF/SQM
Construction Costs
C.2
Affordable Housing
sqm 252 300 000 75 600 000 23% D OTH ER REVENU E
Construction Costs
C.3
Market Rate Housing
sqm 78 400 000 31 200 000 10%
C.4 Development costs 5% 9 627 500 3% TOTAL REVENU ES RW F
D F I N A N CI A L C O S T S 4 3 66 1 03 4 13% PROFIT RWF

D.1 sqm 343 21 315 965 7%
D.2 sqm 252 16 427 389 5%
D.3 sqm 78 5 917 680 2%
TOTAL EXP EN SES R WF
3 23 58 4 0 34 1 00, 0%
Excl. Ta x
INCOMES
IN COMES
Incl. Tax (0%) Excl. Ta x
%
RWF RWF
SA LE OF i nc ome/ U
28 28 0 000 9% A U Qty 3 1 2 350 00 0 8 5%
DWEL LIN GS RWF
28 000 000 9% A,1 Very Affordable Housing sqm 343 350 000 350 000 120 050 000 33%
280 000 0,1% A,2 Affordable Housing sqm 252 500 000 500 000 126 000 000 34%
4 9 4 6 5 500 15% A,3 Market Rate Housing sqm 78 850 000 1 000 000 66 300 000 18%
47 110 000 15% C S UB SID IES 6 3 3 74 8 50 53 7 07 500 15%

Infrastructure costs
2 355 500 0,7% C.1 100%
sqm 673 70 000 47 110 000 13%
Infrastructure
202 1 77 500 62% C.2
development (5%)
2 355 500 0,6%
Land purchase value

85 750 000 27% B.3 sqm 4 242 000 1,2%
covered at 30K RWF/SQM
75 600 000 23% D OTH ER REVENU ES 0 0%
31 200 000 10%
9 627 500 3% T O T A L R E V E NU E S R W F 4 31 94 7 8 50 3 6 6 057 500 1 00, 0%
4 3 66 1 03 4 13% PROFIT RWF 4 2 4 73 4 66 12%
21 315 965 7%
16 427 389 5%
5 917 680 2%
3 23 58 4 0 34 1 00, 0%
139
IV. SCENARIOS
$ 1.5 MICRO-SCALE DEVELOPER
CONCLUSIONS KIGALI, AGATARE
VERY AFFORDABLE
HOUSING
350K RWF/SQM
65k
18% LOAN
27%
100k RWF/SQM
35k
DEV ELOPME N T
RWF/SQM 9% LAND
RWF/SQM COST S
250k
73%
73% CONSTRUCTION
RWF/SQM CON STRUCT IO N
COST S
85k
25% INFRASTRUCTURE
RWF/SQM
15k 5% LAND
RWF/SQM
• CONSTRUCTION COSTS 250K RWF/SQM

• VAT 0%
• MIXED-USE/CROSS-FINANCING 60%
• TAX EXEMPTIONS ON IMPORTEDMATERIALS 100%
• LAND PURCHASE SUBSIDIES > 30K RWF/SQM
140
AFFORDABLE MARKET RATE
HOUSING HOUSING
500K RWF/SQM 1000K RWF/SQM
150k 15% VAT 18%

RWF/SQM
600k 280k
28% PROFIT
60%
RWF/SQM RWF/SQM
DEVE LO PME N T
CO S T S
75k
RWF/SQM 8% LOAN
100k 15k 1% LAND

RWF/SQM 20% PROFIT RWF/SQM
80k 8% DESIGN & SUPERVISION

200K
RWF/SQM
65k
RWF/SQM 13% LOAN
40% RWF/SQM
25k DE VE LOPMEN T
RWF/SQM 5% LAND COSTS
RWF/SQM
40%
400k CON S T R U C T IO N
40% CONSTRUCTION
300K
RWF/SQM 60% CONSTRUCTION
60% RWF/SQM
CO S T S
CONSTRUC TI ON
COSTS
65k 40k INFRASTRUCTURE

13% INFRASTRUCTURE RWF/SQM
4%
RWF/SQM
7k 1% LAND
15k 3% LAND RWF/SQM
RWF/SQM

YES YES
0% 18%
34% 6%
10% 18%
100% 100%
100% 100%
> 30K RWF/SQM > 30K RWF/SQM
141
IV. SCENARIOS
URBAN DESIGN SCENARIOS
$$ 1.6 SMALL SCALE DEVELOPER
MUSANZE
The application of the 8 levers at the scale of a small scale Zoning: Residential Area, still to be defined
developer shows a big effectiveness. Housing Supplier: Small Scale Developer
Above all it is due to the cross financing concept between Housing Demands: 40 DU
the three introduced housing segments that allows a sell- 14 DU Affordable Housing (34%)
ing price reduction for both, affordable and market rate 2 DU Market Rate Housing (6%)
housing, while still guaranteeing an overall margin of 10%. Density: 100 DU/HA
Land Price: Cyuve 7 874 RWF/SQM
Price/ SQM:
As the land price for the chosen site in Musanze, Cyuve
Very affordable housing 350 000 RWF/SQM
with 7874 RWF per sqm is much lower compared to the Affordable housing: 500 000 RWF/SQM
sites in Kigali no land purchase subsidies are required. Also Market Rate housing: 700 000 RWF/SQM
it has a general positive effect on the expenses side and
allows to lower the selling price not only for the afforda-
ble housing but also for the market rate housing units.
With an application of 0% VAT for affordable housing units

and 18% for market rate housing units, low interest loans
rate housing, 100% tax exemptions on imported materials
and 50% infrastructure subsidies for the affordable hous-
ing segment, we achieve the following selling prices for
0.42HA
the three segments:
350k RWF per sqm for very affordable housing units

The cross financing here happens between the two seg- 65

M
ments of affordable housing. The affordable housing units M
take over the financing and land costs of the very afforda- 65
ble housing segment which makes it possible to keep the
selling price at 250k RWF per sqm for the latter segment.
MATERIALITY
G+0 G+2 G+1
MAXPAN SLAB & MAXPAN SLAB & CONCRETE SLAB & PINE
CSEB’S ROWLOCK BOND TIMBERS & ROWLOCK BOND
1B Pine
Timbers w
4 Traditional 4 Improved
Wood Planks
Bricks Adobe
3 Ruk- 3 CSEBs 3 CSEBs
arakara/
Adobe 4 Triplex
Wood Panel
2 Traditional 2 Rowlock
Bricks Bond 2 Rowlock
Bond
1 Earth 1 Maxpan
Enable Slab
1A Concrete
Slab
142
EXEXPENSES
PENS ES
co s t/U S ALE OF
A LAN D C OS T U Q ty 3 3 6 00 3 2 7 3% A
RWF D W ELL INGS
A.1 Land purchase value sqm 4 225 7 874 33 267 650 3% A,1 Very Affordable Hou

A.2 332 677 0,0% A,2 Affordable Housing
(1%)
INFRAS TRUCTURE co s t/U
B U Qty 16 3 1 7 0 0 0 0 16 % A,3 Market Rate Housin
COST S RWF
B.1 Infrastructure costs sqm 2 220 70 000 155 400 000 16%
Infrastructure
B.2
development (5%)
7 770 000 0,8% C S UBS IDIES
CONS TRUCTION co s t/U
C U Qty 6 5 7 2 16 0 0 0 66% C.1 Infrastructure costs
COST S RWF
Construction costs very Infrastructure
C.1
affordable housing
sqm 1 176 250 000 294 000 000 30% C.2 development (5%)
Construction costs
C.2
affordable housing
sqm 857 300 000 257 040 000 26% D OTHE R REVEN U
Construction costs
C.4
market rate housing
sqm 187 400 000 74 880 000 8%
C.5 Development costs (5%) 31 296 000 3% TOTAL REVENU ES RW
D FIN ANC IAL COS TS 13 7 8 4 6 0 5 4 14 % PROFIT RW F

D.1 sqm 1176 69 365 207 7%
10% , over 5 years
D.2 sqm 857 53 867 791 5%
10% , over 5 years
D.3 sqm 187 14 613 057 1%
18% , over 5 years
TOTAL EXPENS ES RWF
9 9 1 83 2 38 1 100 ,0 %
Exc l. Ta x
INCOMES
INCOMES
Incl . T ax (0%) Exc l. Ta x
%
RW F RW F
S ALE OF inc om e/ U
3 3 6 00 3 27 3% A U Qty 1 0 50 00 0 9 5 2 3 2 0 00 0 87 %
D W ELL ING S RW F
33 267 650 3% A,1 Very Affordable Housing sqm 1176 350 000 350 000 411 600 000 37%
332 677 0,0% A,2 Affordable Housing sqm 857 500 000 500 000 428 400 000 39%
16 3 1 70 00 0 16 % A,3 Market Rate Housing sqm 187 600 000 700 000 112 320 000 10%
155 400 000 16%
7 770 000 0,8% C S UBS ID IES 17 3 286 540 146 853 0 00 13 %
6 57 216 00 0 66% C.1 Infrastructure costs 50% sqm 1 110 70 000 77 700 000 7%
Infrastructure
294 000 000 30% C.2 development (5%)
3 885 000 0%
257 040 000 26% D OTHE R REVEN UES 0 0%
74 880 000 8%
31 296 000 3% TOTAL REVENU ES RW F 1 2 9 7 0 2 4 1 40 1 09 9 17 3 00 0 100 ,0 %
13 7 84 6 05 4 14% PROFIT RW F 107 34 0 6 19 10 %
69 365 207 7%
53 867 791 5%
14 613 057 1%
9 9 1 83 2 38 1 100 ,0 %
143
IV. SCENARIOS
$$ 1.6 SMALL SCALE DEVELOPER
CONCLUSIONS MUSANZE
VERY AFFORDABLE
HOUSING
350K RWF/SQM
63k
RWF/SQM 18% PROFIT 28%
98k 20k
RWF/SQM 6% LOAN DEVELOPMENT
RWF/SQM 5% DESIGN & SUPERVISION
15k COSTS
RWF/SQM
72% CONSTRUCTION
72%
252k CONSTRUCTION
RWF/SQM COSTS
84k 24% INFRASTRUCTURE

RWF/SQM

• VAT 0%
• TAX EXEMPTIONS ON IMPORTED MATERIALS 100%
• LAND PURCHASE SUBSIDIES NONE
144
HOUSING HOUSING
100k 15% VAT 18%

RWF/SQM
245k 40k
35%
6% PROFIT
RWF/SQM RWF/SQM DEVELOPMENT
80k
COSTS
RWF/SQM 11% LOAN
15k
60k 2% LAND
12% PROFIT RWF/SQM
DESIGN & SUPERVISION
RWF/SQM
10k
1%
RWF/SQM
200k
RWF/SQM
115k
23% LOAN
40%
RWF/SQM
15k DEVELOPMENT
RWF/SQM 3% LAND COSTS
RWF/SQM 400k
455k
RWF/SQM
RWF/SQM
58% CONSTRUCTION
65%
CONSTRUCTION
300k 60% CONSTRUCTION

60% COSTS
RWF/SQM CONSTRUCTION
COSTS
55k INFRASTRUCTURE
RWF/SQM
7%

RWF/SQM
• CONSTRUCTION COSTS 300K RWF/SQM • CONSTRUCTION COSTS 400K RWF/SQM

• INCREMENTALITY YES • INCREMENTALITY YES
• VAT 0% • VAT 18%
• MIXED-USE/CROSS-FINANCING 34% • MIXED-USE/CROSS-FINANCING 6%
• LOW INTEREST LOANS 10% • LOW INTEREST LOANS 10%
• TAX EXEMPTIONS ON IMPORTED MATERIALS 100% • TAX EXEMPTIONS ON IMPORTED MATERIALS 100%
• INFRASTRUCTURE SUBSIDIES 50% • INFRASTRUCTURE SUBSIDIES NONE
• LAND PURCHASE SUBSIDIES NONE • LAND PURCHASE SUBSIDIES NONE
145
IV. SCENARIOS
$$$ 1.7 LARGE SCALE DEVELOPER
Zoning: Residential Area, still to be defined
MUSANZE Housing Supplier: Large Scale Developer
Due to the application of each of the 8 levers we achieve 46 DU Affordable Housing (34%)
8 DU Market Rate Housing (6%)
a selling price reduction even on the large scale for both, Density: 80 DU/HA
affordable and market rate housing, while still guarantee- Land Price: Cyuve 7 874 RWF/SQM
ing an overall margin of 10%. Price/ SQM:
Very affordable housing 300 000 RWF/SQM
As the land price for the chosen site in Musanze, Cyuve Affordable housing: 500 000 RWF/SQM
Market Rate housing: 920 000 RWF/SQM
with 7874 RWF per sqm is much lower compared to the
sites in Kigali no land purchase subsidies are required. Also
it has a general positive effect on the expenses side and
allows to lower the selling price not only for the afforda-
ble housing but also for the market rate housing units.
With an application of 0% VAT for affordable housing units 0.7HA

and 18% for market rate housing units, low interest loans
rate housing, 100% tax exemptions on imported materials
and 35% infrastructure subsidies for all housing segments,
we achieve the following selling prices for the three seg-
1.0HA
ments:
350k RWF per sqm for very affordable housing units

The cross financing here happens between every seg-

ment. The affordable housing units take over the financ-
ing costs of the very affordable housing segment which
makes it possible to keep the selling price at 250k RWF
per sqm for the latter segment. Due to the higher density The large scale of the project allows the introduction of
of housing units within the operation it is the market rate construction work related companies on site especially
housing segment and affordable housing segment that during construction period which rises the productivity
manage to generate a higher profit within their segments. significantly.
MATERIALITY
G+3 G+2 G+1
1B Pine
Timbers w
4 Improved 4 Improved
Wood Planks
Adobe Adobe
arakara/
Adobe 4 Triplex
Wood Panel
2CSEB’S 2 Rowlock
Coated Bond 2 Rowlock
Bond
1 Maxpan 1 Maxpan
Slab Slab
1A Concrete
Slab
146
EXPENSES
EXPENS ES
c os t/U S ALE OF
A LAN D C OS T U Q ty 13 5 19 6 580 4% A
RW F D W ELL ING S
A.1 Land purchase value sqm 17 000 7 874 133 858 000 4% A,1 Affordable Housin

A.2 1 338 580 0,0% A,2 Affordable Housin
(1%)
INFRAS TRUCTURE c os t/U
B U Qty 554 77 8 0 00 16 % A,2 Market Rate Hous
COST S RW F
B.1 Infrastructure costs sqm 7 548 70 000 528 360 000 16%
Infrastructure
B.2
development (5%)
26 418 000 0,8% C S UBS IDIES
CONS TRUCTION c os t/U Infrastructure cos
C U Qty 2 23 4 53 4 400 66% B.1
100%
COST S RW F
Construction costs Infrastructure
C.1
affordable housing
sqm 3 998 250 000 999 600 000 29% B.2
development (5%)
Construction costs Land purchase value ab
C.2
affordable housing
sqm 2 913 300 000 873 936 000 26% B.3 20k RWF/sqm (35%)
Construction costs
C.4
market rate housing
sqm 636 400 000 254 592 000 7% D OTHE R REVEN
C.5 Development costs (5%) 106 406 400 3%
D FIN ANC IAL COS TS 4 72 0 55 44 5 14 % TOTAL REVENU ES R

D.1
sqm 3 998 237 866 003 7% PROFIT RW F
D.2 sqm 2913 184 297 591 5%
D.3 sqm 636 49 891 852 1%
TOTAL EXPENS ES RWF 3 3 9 6 56 4 4 25 100 ,0 %
INCOMES
INCOMES
Incl . T ax (0%) Exc l. Ta x
%
RW F RW F
S ALE OF inc om e/ U
13 5 19 6 580 4% A U Qty 3 241 6 41 6 0 0 3 152 53 4 400 84%
D W ELL ING S RW F
133 858 000 4% A,1 Affordable Housing sqm 3998 300 000 300 000 1 199 520 000 32%
1 338 580 0,0% A,2 Affordable Housing sqm 2913 500 000 500 000 1 456 560 000 39%
554 77 8 0 00 16 % A,2 Market Rate Housing sqm 636 780 000 920 000 496 454 400 13%
528 360 000 16%
26 418 000 0,8% C S UBS IDIES 71 0 474 228 6 02 09 6 803 16 %

2 23 4 53 4 400 66% B.1
100%
sqm 6 793 70 000 528 360 000
Infrastructure
999 600 000 29% B.2 26 418 000
development (5%)
Land purchase value above
873 936 000 26% B.3 20k RWF/sqm (35%)
47 318 803
254 592 000 7% D OTHE R REVEN UES 0 0%
106 406 400 3%
4 72 0 55 44 5 14% TOTAL REVENU ES RW F 4 43 0 46 4 820 3 7 54 6 31 203 100 %
237 866 003 7% PROFIT RW F 3 58 06 6 7 78 1 0%
184 297 591 5%
49 891 852 1%
3 3 9 6 56 4 4 25 100 ,0 %
147
IV. SCENARIOS
CONCLUSIONS MUSANZE
VERY AFFORDABLE
HOUSING
300K RWF/SQM
25k
RWF/SQM
10k 8% LOAN 17%
50k RWF/SQM 4% Land
DEVELOPMENT
RWF/SQM 15k 5% Design & supervision
COSTS
RWF/SQM
250k 83% Construction 83%

COSTS
85k 27% infrastructure

RWF/SQM

• INCREMENTALITY INTERIOR
• VAT 0%
• TAX EXEMPTIONS ON IMPORTED MATERIALS 100%
148
HOUSING HOUSING
140k
RWF/SQM
15%
520k
RWF/SQM
180k
RWF/SQM
20% PROFIT
57%
DEVELOPMENT
COSTS
80k
9% LOAN
RWF/SQM
10k
RWF/SQM 1% LAND
70k 13% PROFIT 110k
RWF/SQM
200k
RWF/SQM 110k
40%
RWF/SQM
22% LOAN DEVELOPMENT
10k COSTS
RWF/SQM 2% LAND
RWF/SQM
43%
400k 40% CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION
300k
RWF/SQM
60% RWF/SQM COSTS
60% CONSTRUCTION
CONSTRUCTION
COSTS
65k 55k 6% INFRASTRUCTURE

13% INFRASTRUCTURE RWF/SQM
RWF/SQM

• INCREMENTALITY INTERIOR • INCREMENTALITY NONE
• VAT 0% • VAT 18%
• TAX EXEMPTIONS ON IMPORTED MATERIALS 100% • TAX EXEMPTIONS ON IMPORTED MATERIALS 100%
• INFRASTRUCTURE SUBSIDIES 35% • INFRASTRUCTURE SUBSIDIES 35%
149
IV. SCENARIOS
Zoning: Residential Area, still to be defined
NYAMATA Housing Supplier: Large Scale Developer
40 DU Incremental Housing (5%)
440 DU Very affordable Housing (55%)
272 DU Affordable Housing (34%)
48 DU Market Rate Housing (6%)
The large-scale developer can achieve large scale pro- 2000 sqm Commercial Activities
Density: 160 DU/HA
jects beyond the scale of a residential project. Those
Land Price: Nyamata 3 089 RWF/SQM
projects are an opportunity for diversity: of typologies, of Price/ SQM:
programs and of incomes. In this vision, we propose that Very affordable housing 300 000 RWF/SQM
this size of project allows to create public facilities, com- Affordable housing: 500 000 RWF/SQM
mercial spaces, shops, a small factory, public spaces with Market Rate housing: 750 000 RWF/SQM
Commercial Buildings : 1 000 000 RWF/SQM
green areas.
Due to the application of each of the 8 levers we achieve The cross financing here happens between the two af-
a selling price reduction even on the large scale for both, fordable housing units segments. The affordable housing
affordable and market rate housing, while still guarantee- units take over a part of the financing costs of the very
ing an overall margin of 1%. affordable housing segment which makes it possible to
As the land price for the chosen site in Nyamata with 3089 keep the selling price at 300k RWF per sqm for the latter
RWF per sqm is very much lower compared to the sites segment. Due to the higher density of housing units with-
in Kigali and Musanze no land purchase subsidies are re- in the operation it is the market rate housing segment;,af-
quired. Also it has a high positive effect on the expenses fordable housing segment and the commercial activities
side and allows to lower the selling price not only for the that manage to generate a higher profit within their seg-
affordable housing but also for the market rate housing ments in order to achieve an overall margin of 12%.
units. In such large-scale developments, incrementality can be
With an application of 0% VAT for affordable housing units an effective lever that provides people with cheap land
and 18% for market rate housing units, low interest loans with a proper water supply and sewage system. Besides,
of 11% for affordable housing units and 17% for market developers can provide materials, produced on site if pos-
rate housing, 100% tax exemptions on imported materials sible, and training on construction technologies to future
and 35% infrastructure subsidies for all housing segments, inhabitants.
we achieve the following selling prices and five segments:
160k RWF per sqm for incremental housing We propose to reserve plots for self-builders and to pro-
300k RWF per sqm for very affordable housing units vide them with raw materials, technologies and training.
500k RWF per sqm for affordable housing units By doing so, sanitary conditions can be guaranteed and at
750k RWF per sqm for market rate housing units the same time an even cheaper affordable housing solu-
1000k RWF per sqm for commercial surfaces tion is offered.
MATERIALITY
G+0 G+2 G+1
1B Pine
Timbers w
4 Traditional 4 Improved
Wood Planks
Bricks Adobe
arakara/
Adobe 4 Triplex
Wood Panel
2 Traditional 2 Rowlock
Bricks Bond 2 Rowlock
Bond
1 Earth 1 Maxpan
Enable Slab
1A Concrete
Slab
150
EXPENSES
EXP ENS ES
cos t/U SA L E OF
A L A ND COST U Q ty 39 7 6 37 000 3% A
RWF D W EL L ING S
A.1 Land purchase value sqm 50 000 7 874 393 700 000 3% A,1 Affordable Housing

A.2 3 937 000 0,0% A,2 Affordable Housing
(1%)
INFRA STRU CTU RE cos t/U
B U Q ty 2 36 9 41 9 500 17% A,2 Market Rate Housin
COSTS RWF
B.1 Infrastructure costs sqm 32 237 70 000 2 256 590 000 16%
Infrastructure
B.2
development (5%)
112 829 500 0,8% C SU BSI D IES
CONS TRU CTION cos t/U Infrastructure costs
C U Q ty 9 5 53 3 57 500 67% B.1
100%
COSTS RWF
Construction costs Infrastructure
C.1
affordable housing
sqm 18 095 250 000 4 523 750 000 32% B.2
development (5%)
Construction costs Land purchase value abo
C.2
affordable housing
sqm 10 248 300 000 3 074 400 000 21% B.3 20k RWF/sqm (35%)
Construction costs
C.4
market rate housing
sqm 1 785 400 000 714 000 000 5% D OTHER RE VE NU
Sale of Commercial
C.5 Commercial Buildings sqm 2 064 400 000 825 600 000 6% D,1
Buildings
C.6 Development costs (5%) 415 607 500 3% TOTA L RE VENU E S RW
D FINA NCIA L COSTS 1 9 9 0 508 89 3 14 % P ROFIT R WF

Loan 70% of the costs
D.1 sqm 18 095 1 035 769 092 7%
at 10% rate, over 5 years
D.2 sqm 10248 669 197 427 5%
D.3 sqm 2064 136 224 000 1%
D.4 sqm 1785 149 318 374 1%
TOTA L E XPE NS ES RW F 1 4 3 10 9 2 2 8 9 3 1 00, 0%
INCOMES
INCOMES
Incl . Ta x ( 0%) Ex cl . Ta x
%
RWF RWF
SA L E OF incom e/ U
39 7 6 37 000 3% A U Qty 1 1 8 91 250 00 0 1 1 6 94 900 00 0 72%
D W EL L ING S RWF
393 700 000 3% A,1 Affordable Housing sqm 18095 300 000 300 000 5 428 500 000 33%
3 937 000 0,0% A,2 Affordable Housing sqm 10248 500 000 500 000 5 124 000 000 31%
2 36 9 41 9 500 17% A,2 Market Rate Housing sqm 1785 640 000 750 000 1 142 400 000 7%
2 256 590 000 16%
112 829 500 0,8% C SU BSI D IES 2 9 60 1 39 09 1 2 508 59 2 45 0 15%

9 5 53 3 57 500 67% B.1
100%
sqm 29 013 70 000 2 256 590 000
Infrastructure
4 523 750 000 32% B.2 112 829 500
development (5%)
Land purchase value above
3 074 400 000 21% B.3 20k RWF/sqm (35%)
139 172 950
714 000 000 5% D OTHER RE VE NU ES 2 06 4 0 00 000 13 %

Sale of Commercial
825 600 000 6% D,1
Buildings
sqm 2064 850 000 1 000 000 2 064 000 000 13%
415 607 500 3% TOTA L RE VENU E S RW F 1 9 1 9 5 6 4 1 09 1 16 26 7 4 9 2 4 50 1 00%
1 9 9 0 508 89 3 14 % P ROFIT R WF 1 95 6 569 55 7 12%
1 035 769 092 7%
669 197 427 5%
136 224 000 1%
149 318 374 1%
1 00, 0% 151
IV. SCENARIOS
CONCLUSIONS NYAMATA
PRODUCTION COMPANY
MIX-USE G+3
PUBLIC SQUARE
G+3/ G+2
ANIMATED
ACTIVE GROUNDFLOORS
G+2/ G+1/
G0
INCREMENTAL
PLOTS
GREEN SPACE
G+0/G+1
WATER DITCH
SL G0
OP
E
INCREMENTAL
PLOTS
152
INCREMENTAL VERY AFFORDABLE
HOUSING HOUSING
160K RWF / M2 300K RWF / M2
25k
50k
RWF/SQM
10k
8%
3%
LOAN
LAND
16%
RWF/SQM RWF/SQM 5% DESIGN & SUPERVISION DEVELOPMENT
15k
RWF/SQM COSTS
25k
22%
35k RWF/SQM
RWF/SQM 10k
8%
3%
LOAN
LAND
DEVELOPMENT
COSTS
250k
84% CONSTRUCTION
84%
RWF/SQM RWF/SQM
CONSTRUCTION
125k
RWF/SQM
84% CONSTRUCTION 78% COSTS
CONSTRUCTION
COSTS
85k 85k
34% INFRASTRUCTURE 34% INFRASTRUCTURE
RWF/SQM RWF/SQM

• INCREMENTALITY INTERIOR • INCREMENTALITY INTERIOR
• VAT 0% • VAT 0%
• TAX EXEMPTIONS ON IMPORTEDMATERIALS 100% • TAX EXEMPTIONS ON IMPORTEDMATERIALS 100%
153
IV. SCENARIOS
CONCLUSIONS NYAMATA
AFFORDABLE
HOUSING
500K RWF / M2
90k
18% PROFIT
RWF/SQM
200k
RWF/SQM 90k 18% LOAN
40%
RWF/SQM DEVELOPMENT
10k COSTS
RWF/SQM 2% LAND
RWF/SQM
60%
300k 60% CONSTRUCTION
COSTS

RWF/SQM

• INCREMENTALITY INTERIOR
• VAT 0%
• TAX EXEMPTIONS ON IMPORTEDMATERIALS 100%
154
MARKET RATE COMMERCIAL
HOUSING ACTIVITIES
750K RWF / M2 1 000K RWF / M2
150k
15% VAT 18%
RWF/SQM
200k
RWF/SQM 21% PROFIT 60%
600k DEVELOPMENT
100k 15% VAT 18% RWF/SQM
RWF/SQM
COSTS
45%
90k DEVELOPMENT 100k
RWF/SQM 10% PROFIT RWF/SQM 10% LOAN
COSTS
350k 15k LAND
1%
RWF/SQM RWF/SQM
120k 12% LOAN
135k
20k RWF/SQM
RWF/SQM 2% LAND
RWF/SQM
55% 400k
RWF/SQM
40%
400k 55% CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION 40% CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION
RWF/SQM COSTS COSTS
50k 7% INFRASTRUCTURE 80k 8% INFRASTRUCTURE

RWF/SQM RWF/SQM

• INCREMENTALITY NONE • INCREMENTALITY NONE
• VAT 18% • VAT 18%
• TAX EXEMPTIONS ON IMPORTEDMATERIALS 100% • TAX EXEMPTIONS ON IMPORTEDMATERIALS 100%
155
HEALTH FACILITY
MARKET WORKSHOPS
SCHOOLS
SHOPS MARKET RATE

HOUSING
EARTH BLOCKS FACTORY

& LEARNING CENTER
G+2 COLLECTIVE
BUILDING
RENTAL HOUSING
LARGE SCALE DEVELOPER
WOODEN FLOORS
VERY AFFORDABLE
HOUSING
FARMING
& KIOSK
156
OUTSIDE
SPACES
DIVERSITY OF
TYPOLOGIES
SELF-BUILT HOUSES
SERVICE
PATHWAY
EARTH BLOCKS
AFFORDABLE
HOUSING
ROWLOCK BOND
BRICKS
G
RESTAURANT SPORTS FIELD,
TRANSFORMABLE INTO
PARKING LOTS SMALL SCALE
DEVELOPER
157
IV. SCENARIOS
2. SUBSIDY AND INCENTIVE IMPACT SCENARIOS
As stated in previous chapters, the financial feasibility of a • Ratio of imported construction materials
real estate project is substantially dependent on whether • Ratio of external financing sources
its developer can rely on potential tax incentives and • Internal rate of return on invested equity
subsidies, especially in the case of affordable housing To run a selling price optimisation scenario, different
development. Different selling price optimisation levers optimization parameters have to be adjusted to suit the
have been identified, including those listed below that subsidy policies considered per the supply chain segment:
rely on public funds: • VAT rate applied on technical studies and other services
• Subsidies for the land purchase • VAT rate applied on infrastructure costs
• Subsidies for infrastructure cost • VAT rate applied on construction costs
• Subsidies for the reduction of financial costs reduction • Customs duties on imported construction materials
• Subsidies for technical assistance • Reduced rate interest of subsidized loans for the housing
• Tax incentive through reduced VAT for the formal suppliers
construction industry • Contribution to land purchase cost through
• Tax incentive through exemption from customs duties direct subsidy
for imported materials • Ratio of public infrastructure subsidized
• Ratio of private infrastructure subsidized
To assess which subsidy or tax incentive measure is • Amount of money for public intervention for
politically sustainable, it is imperative to measure its technical assistance
annual impact on the State’s budget. It is with this in mind The adjustments of the parameters above have a double
that we have developed a simplified “impact simulation correlated impact, both on the level of selling prices
tool” that allows for analysis of various scenarios for according to the supply chain and on the amounts of the
annual production, through different supply chains, of direct subsidies paid by the State and the amount of the
subsidized affordable housing. As a result, we are able to drop in tax revenue due to the incentives granted.
quantify the financial impact for the government. A scenario is also established by determining the number
The “impact simulation tool” calculations are based on of housing units that are projected on annual basis per
modifiable assumptions that are made on the following typology and per supply chain segment.
parameters for each of the six identified supply chain
categories:
• Projected construction costs optimisation due to
innovative construction materials and technologies
• The projected inflation rate
166
To illustrate the results of this simulation tool, in this study • Half cost subsidy (50%) for all private infrastructure on
we have produced three (3) scenarios that highlight the the condition that these are related to wastewater treat-
important financial issues underlying affordable housing ment or stormwater management.
subsidy policies. All of these scenarios are based on the This scenario follows the optimized average selling prices
same subsidization and incentive-based policy orienta- for code-compliant “formal” construction, organized by
tion consisting of: housing supplier as listed below:
• Total VAT exemption (0%) on all costs of affordable • Landowner Self-Builder 335.000 RWF
housing produced through “professionally structured” / Sqm
construction supply chain (projects by developers and • Landowner Private Investment 420.000 RWF
landowners’ joint ventures) / Sqm
• Total VAT exemption (0%) of custom duties on import- • Landowner Joint-Venture 410.000 RWF
ed materials that are significantly underproduced on the / Sqm
local market • Micro-scale Developer 400.000 RWF
• Provision of sources of financing at an attractive overall / Sqm
cost which gradually increases from 10% (for large-scale • Macro-scale Developer 370.000 RWF
developers) to 16% (private investment by landowner) due / Sqm
to a public subsidy • Micro-scale Developer 360.000 RWF
• Capped profit (at 10% or 12%) for developers who bene- / Sqm
fit from subsidies from public funds
• Partial public subvention of the land cost (10.000 RWF
per dwelling sqm for micro-scale developers, and 5.000 The variable parameter between the three scenarios is the
RWF for small-scale and large-scale developments) total number of the housing units and its distribution be-
• Total public infrastructure subsidies (100%) for all supply tween the six (6) housing supplier segments.
chains
• Scenario 01:
o Annual production of 6.000 affordable housing units
(Prices ranging from 335.000 RWF to 420.000 RWF per
square meter)
o Equal distribution of 1.000 units for every one of the six
supply chain segments
o Distribution of units among all typologies
Studio - 16.5% ; 1BR - 21% ; 2BR - 28% ; 3BR - 28% ; 4BR
- 6.5%
Scenario 01 : 6000 units per year / Equal distribution of 1000 units per supply chain / All typologies
Landowner
Landowner Landowner Micro-Scale Small-Scale Large-Scale
Dwelling typology Units Dimensions private Total
Self-Builder Joint-Venture Developer Developer Developer
investment
Project Scale 1 - DU 1 - 5 DU 5 - 20 DU 5 - 20 DU 20 - 100 DU > 100 DU
Studio 30 SQM 100 25 125

Studio 25 SQM 100 150 100 75 50 475
Studio 15 SQM 150 150 100 400
1 BR Dwelling 45 SQM 100 100 200
1 BR Dwelling 40 SQM 100 150 100 150 100 600
1 BR Dwelling 35 SQM 150 150 150 450
2 BR Dwelling 55 SQM 250 100 125 475
2 BR Dwelling 45 SQM 150 100 150 100 150 100 750
2 BR Dwelling 40 SQM 150 150 150 450
3 BR Dwelling 80 SQM 250 100 125 475
3 BR Dwelling 65 SQM 150 100 150 100 150 100 750
3 BR Dwelling 55 SQM 150 150 150 450
4 BR Dwelling 100 SQM 150 50 200
4 BR Dwelling 80 SQM 50 50 50 150
4 BR Dwelling 65 SQM 50 50
Total 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 1000 6000
16,7% 16,7% 16,7% 16,7% 16,7% 16,7%
167
•Scenario 02: growth is projected over 3 years, thus +/- 24,000 units
o Annual production of 24.000 affordable housing units per year
(Prices ranging from 335.000 RWF to 420.000 RWF per o Distribution of 24.000 units between the six housing
square meter affordable) supply segments with a major contribution by small- and
This number is based on the projected growth of Rwandan large-scale developments (50% for both)
households in 2025 (236.250 additional) of which 30% are o Distribution of units among all types of typologies
expected to be in urban areas (70.875 households). The Studio – 10,5%; 1BR - 13% ; 2BR – 34,5% ; 3BR – 34,5%
; 4BR - 7.5%
Scenario 2 : 24.000 houising units per year / All units typologies / Landowners 40% - Developers 60% / Small & Large scale 50%
Landowner
Dwelling typology Units Dimensions private Total
investment
Project Scale 1 - DU 1 - 5 DU 5 - 20 DU 5 - 20 DU 20 - 100 DU > 100 DU
Studio 30 SQM 240 120 360 240 960

Studio 25 SQM 240 240 120 360 240 1200
Studio 15 SQM 360 0 0 0 0 360
1 BR Dwelling 45 SQM 120 120 360 240 840
1 BR Dwelling 40 SQM 240 240 240 720 480 1920
1 BR Dwelling 35 SQM 360 0 0 0 0 360
2 BR Dwelling 55 SQM 1200 0 360 360 1080 720 3720
2 BR Dwelling 45 SQM 720 240 360 480 1440 960 4200
2 BR Dwelling 40 SQM 360 0 0 0 0 360
3 BR Dwelling 80 SQM 1200 0 240 360 1080 720 3600
3 BR Dwelling 65 SQM 720 240 480 480 1440 960 4320
3 BR Dwelling 55 SQM 360 0 0 0 0 360
4 BR Dwelling 100 SQM 480 0 120 120 0 0 720
4 BR Dwelling 80 SQM 480 0 0 0 360 240 1080
4 BR Dwelling 65 SQM 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 4800 2400 2400 2400 7200 4800 24000
20,0% 10,0% 10,0% 10,0% 30,0% 20,0%
• Scenario 03: o Distribution of 24.000 units between the six sup-

o Annual production of 24.000 affordable housing units ply-chain segments with a focus on medium-size projects
(Prices ranging from 335.000 RWF to 420.000 RWF per (landowner joint-ventures, micro- and small -scale devel-
square meter) opments) with a contribution of 60%
This number is based on the projected urban households o Distribution of units between the smallest typologies
that can afford a 20-year mortgage loan at a rate of 11% in whose price is less than 15 million, using the affordable
2023 to acquire a 43 sqm – 2-bedroom housing unit sold mortgage loan (20 years at 11% rate) for households earn-
at an affordable price of 15 million RWF. This represents ing between RWF 500K and RWF 700K.
74.465 households, and growth is distributed over 3 years, Studio - 20% ; 1BR - 25% ; 2BR - 55%
thus +/- 24.000 units per year
Scenario 3 : 24.000 houising units per year / Small units < 45 SQM / Landowners 50% - Developers 50% / Small & Large scale 30%
Landowner
Supply chain Units Dimensions private Total
investment
Project Scale (Dwelling units number) 1 - DU 1 - 5 DU 5 - 20 DU 5 - 20 DU 20 - 100 DU > 100 DU
Studio 30 SQM 0
Studio 25 SQM 480 480 240 1200
Studio 15 SQM 960 480 960 480 480 240 3600
1 BR Dwelling 45 SQM 0
1 BR Dwelling 40 SQM 480 480 240 1200
1 BR Dwelling 35 SQM 1440 720 1440 480 480 240 4800
2 BR Dwelling 45 SQM 2400 1200 2400 1440 1440 720 9600
2 BR Dwelling 40 SQM 1440 1440 720 3600
Total 4800 2400 4800 4800 4800 2400 24000
20,0% 10,0% 20,0% 20,0% 20,0% 10,0%
168
From these “simple” simulation scenarios, we conclude: and incentives, we produce 20% more dwellings units
through both supply chains, although with 73% budget
• For the same number of units to be produced by each allocated to small- and large-scale developments we pro-
segment of the housing supply chain, it will be more duce only 50% additional dwellings. The same appears in
costly for public funds to promote small- and large-scale scenario 03; with 45,5% of the budget spent, landowner
developments, which require extensive new public infra- joint ventures and micro-scale developments produce
structure. 40% of additional units, while with 49% spent, larger scale
of projects contribute 30% of the new units.
• The most expensive optimisation lever is to reduce the • Focusing public funds on small units produced though
VAT rate to zero, applied across the entire real estate de- medium-size projects in areas already supplied by infra-
velopment operation. structure would be the fastest way to develop new hous-
ing at a lower investment cost. This argues strongly for
• It is more effective and relevant to focus on landowner urban upgrading in place of the creation of new neigh-
joint ventures and micro-scale developments. In fact, as bourhoods in the urban periphery, far from the city center.
shown in scenario 02, with 22% of total public subsidies
Scenario 01 : Total public support per lever and per year
Landowner
Landowner Self- Landowner Joint- Micro-Scale Small-Scale Large-Scale
SUPPLY CHAIN private TOTAL
Builder Venture Developer Developer Developer
investment
1 - DU 1 - 5 DU 5 - 20 DU 5 - 20 DU 20 - 100 DU > 100 DU
Subventions Land cost 0 0 0 196.250.000 277.500.000 222.500.000 696.250.000
Subventions Infrastructure cost 692.500.000 392.500.000 1.417.500.000 1.570.000.000 3.330.000.000 3.115.000.000 10.517.500.000
Subventions Technical assistance 692.500.000 392.500.000 196.250.000 196.250.000 0 0 1.477.500.000
Subventions Financial costs 0 0 463.393.350 523.646.025 745.254.000 531.152.000 2.263.445.375
TOTAL SUBSIDIES per YEAR 1.385.000.000 785.000.000 2.077.143.350 2.486.146.025 4.352.754.000 3.868.652.000 14.954.695.375
Fiscal incentive Customs duties exemption 0 0 468.056.250 450.393.750 699.300.000 560.700.000 2.178.450.000
Fiscal incentive Reduced VAT 0 0 2.048.850.000 1.978.200.000 2.647.350.000 2.122.650.000 8.797.050.000
TOTAL FISCAL INCENTIVES per year 0 0 3.029.118.750 2.753.878.125 3.862.800.000 3.097.200.000 10.975.500.000
TOTAL PUBLIC SUPPORT per supply chain and per year 1.385.000.000 785.000.000 5.106.262.100 5.240.024.150 8.215.554.000 6.965.852.000 25.930.195.375
Landowner
investment
1 - DU 1 - 5 DU 5 - 20 DU 5 - 20 DU 20 - 100 DU > 100 DU
Subventions Land cost 0 0 0 675.000.000 1.989.000.000 1.326.000.000 3.990.000.000
Subventions Infrastructure cost 3.276.000.000 942.000.000 3.798.000.000 5.400.000.000 23.868.000.000 18.564.000.000 55.848.000.000
Subventions Technical assistance 3.276.000.000 942.000.000 471.000.000 675.000.000 0 0 5.364.000.000
Subventions Financial costs 0 0 1.112.144.040 1.801.075.500 5.341.658.400 3.165.427.200 11.420.305.140
TOTAL SUBSIDIES per YEAR 6.552.000.000 1.884.000.000 5.381.144.040 8.551.075.500 31.198.658.400 23.055.427.200 76.622.305.140
Fiscal incentive Customs duties exemption 0 0 1.123.335.000 1.549.125.000 5.012.280.000 3.341.520.000 11.026.260.000
TOTAL PUBLIC SUPPORT per supply chain and per year 6.552.000.000 1.884.000.000 12.651.029.040 18.023.013.000 58.885.538.400 41.513.347.200 130.994.905.140
Landowner
investment
1 - DU 1 - 5 DU 5 - 20 DU 5 - 20 DU 20 - 100 DU > 100 DU
Subventions Land cost 0 0 0 888.000.000 888.000.000 444.000.000 2.220.000.000
Subventions Infrastructure cost 1.728.000.000 864.000.000 5.184.000.000 7.104.000.000 10.656.000.000 6.216.000.000 31.752.000.000
Subventions Technical assistance 1.728.000.000 864.000.000 432.000.000 888.000.000 0 0 3.912.000.000
Subventions Financial costs 0 0 1.020.055.680 2.369.414.880 2.384.812.800 1.059.916.800 6.834.200.160
TOTAL SUBSIDIES per YEAR 2.160.000.000 2.671.693.632 6.849.792.000 13.431.000.000 14.430.000.000 9.483.840.000 44.718.200.160
Fiscal incentive Customs duties exemption 0 0 1.030.320.000 2.037.960.000 2.237.760.000 1.118.880.000 6.424.920.000
TOTAL PUBLIC SUPPORT per supply chain and per year 2.160.000.000 2.671.693.632 13.517.712.000 25.891.860.000 26.790.960.000 15.664.320.000 77.311.520.160
169
IV. SCENARIOS
3. INDUSTRY GROWTH STRATEGY SUPPLY STRA
• Lack of a comprehensive system of certifications,

creates lack of confidence between various actors
and makes it difficult to create linkages across and MATERIALS &
along supply chains TECHNOLOGY
• Construction sector con-

sists of mostly of unskilled labour
(relative scarcity of qualified manpower), meaning
that quality is often compromised STANDARDIZED TOOLS &
PROCESSES
• Low purchasing power of end-user prioritizes self-
build solutions
• High cost and unavailability of domestic raw mate-

rials
WORKFORCE
• Fragility in technology absorption and diffusion MANAGEMENT
• Informal and small-scale building cannot carry ex-

penses long-term, so investment into improved
equipment or materials is not possibleSUPPLY STRATEGY
ACCESS TO
FINANCE
As part of its research into alternative building materi-

al technologies, the team prepared an industry growth
strategy that includes a review of the policy, finance and
capacity needs forMATERIALS & and adoption of new
the production BUSINESS &
TECHNOLOGY
materials at scale. The strategy includes recommended INVESTMENT SUPPORT
actions across 8 categories, from standardization to re-
source management and access to finance. The actions
are organized over time so as to guide decision makers in
drafting comprehensive and evolutive policies for 2025,
2035 and 2050.
STANDARDIZED TOOLS & RESOURCE
PROCESSES MANAGEMENT
The full breakdown of the strategy with associated case
studies is available in the Building Materials and Technol-
ogies Dictonary (Annex 3).
WORKFORCE REGULATORY
MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK
ACCESS TO MARKET
FINANCE ENABLERS
170
2025 2030 -2035 2050
Subsitution of costly building elements CS

Large-scale industrialization serving all
MATERIALS & (e.g., slabs, partition walls, etc.) with Semi-industrial production of materials
segments (with priority given to the
TECHNOLOGY cost-efficient and environment-friendly scaled and servicing 2 demand segments
production of ABTs)
alternatives
CS Small-scale builders are equipped with CS

Construction kits are available for non- Inspectors use machine learning to monitor
STANDARDIZED TOOLS & pre-designed and pre-engineered solutions
structural housing elements to support self- quantity and quality of affordable housing
PROCESSES to independently deliver neighborhood
build incremental housing solutions delivery
densification and upgrading programs
Training and certification in the application

Technical schools specialize in the design,
WORKFORCE of new materials and technologies is
planning and implementation of off-grid
MANAGEMENT available for TVET Level 1 through 5 / Sector
infrastructure solutions
inspection capacities strengthened
CS
ACCESS TO
Lenders develop financial products Green finance pipeline for environment-
FINANCE suitable for building material producers and friendly building materials is active via
contractors MINICOM (e.g., through NIRDA and PSF)
Free-of-charge business advisory CS CS CS 100% of SMEs and MSMEs engaged in

Material suppliers increasingly adopt
BUSINESS & services to SMEs and MSMEs in the the building materials and construction
franchise business models that allow for
INVESTMENT SUPPORT construction sector & Tax code and import sector are certified as green builders and
decentralized production
subsidy/rebate review completed contractors
RESOURCE
Public database with localization of all Localized building vernaculars are
Extractive industries are capped at less than
MANAGEMENT
natural resources in Rwanda and associated promoted and successfully adopted by local
20% of building material suppliers in Rwanda
policies communities
REGULATORY
Industrial Zoning Plans for Kigali, Satellite
Alignment of environmental and
FRAMEWORK
and Secondary Cities are updated to include
development plans, policies and targets
regional production hubs
CS Building material and technology depots are

A digital marketplace for production
MARKET located at sector-level nationwide & local
orders and sales of building materials and
ENABLERS green building material land technology
technologies is available online
abeling and certification sponsored by RSB
171
V. CONCLUSIONS
1. SUPPLY CHAIN CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES

PER SUPPLIER : RECOMMENDATIONS
2. CONCLUSION
V. CONCLUSIONS
1. SUPPLY CHAIN CONSTRAINTS AND OPPORTUNITIES PER
SUPPLIER : RECOMMENDATIONS
Given the variety of suppliers and affordable housing de- tions for improvement for each supplier with every one of
livery approaches reviewed over the course of this study, those links. The goal is to recognize the diversity of the
recommendations shall be discussed at the value chain market by designing solutions tailored specifically to par-
level. For this reason, the following pages summarize 1/ ticular submarkets with the hopes of unlocking Rwanda’s
the main constraints facing each supplier for every link in housing market as a whole.
the value chain and 2/ the opportunities/recommenda-
LAND
LA N D - K e y Ri s k s /
L A N D - O p p o r t u n i ty
I m p l e m e n t a t i o n I s s ue s
L a n d o w n e r S e lf B u i l d e r • Road reserve renders a • Land subsidies

1 Dwelling Unit large area of the plot
undevelopable • Land capture or land subsidies
La n d ow n e r Pri v a t e
• Land located in areas
Inves t ment
now designated as
1 – 5 Dwelling Unit
agricultural areas
• Incongruence between • Vouchers to support land consolidation and titling to
plot size and zoning encourage partnership and densification in accordance with
L a n d o w n e r J o i n t V e n tu r e regulations: parcel is too regulations and condominium law
5 – 2 0 D w e l l i n g U n i ts small to develop multi- • Land capture or land subsidies
family housing
• City to capture land prices
M i c r o - S c a l e D ev e l o p e r • Land located within a 5-10km radius of employment hubs
5 – 2 0 D w e l l i n g U n i ts could benefit from development credits
• Land consolidation can • Infrastructure credit for environmentally responsible and
be a lengthy process sustainable land use planning that accommodates higher
even with the support of densities
local authorities, as
current landowner may • Provision of public land for affordable housing projects at a
not agree to the sale favorable rate
terms, thereby stalling • Increased market transparency to quiet speculation (land
the process cost, taxes, etc.)
S m a l l - S c a l e D e v e l op e r • No formal finance • Land capture or land subsidies
2 0 – 10 0 D w e l l i n g U n i ts offered for the purchase
• Create independent public planning institutions dedicated to
of land for the
sites development to give a frame to developers
development of
affordable housing. Bank • City to capture land prices
loans for the purchase of
land do not have
favorable terms (IR 14-
16% with a 2-year
payback period)
• In the instance where the • Mechanism to facilitate transfer between private individuals
developer may not need and GoR in the case of expropriation in the public interest
to pay to acquire the • Encourage institutions with large land holdings to act as
land, he/she must finance developers and provide land to their constituents
the parcellation • Land capture or land subsidies
according to a plan • Create independent public planning institutions dedicated to
approved by the district. sites development to give a frame to developers
La rge -S c a l e D e v e l op e r • Even if land is “given” by • City to capture land prices
10 0 + D w e l l i n g U n i ts the government, the
developer still bears the
cost and risk associated
with earthworks, a
particular challenge on
steep terrain.
174
INFRASTRUCTURE
I N F R A S T R U C T UR E - K e y
R is ks / I N F R A S T R U C T UR E - O p p o r t u n i t y
L a n d o w n e r S e lf B u i l d e r • Insufficient municipal • Promotion of off-grid infrastructure solutions offered at an
1 Dwelling Unit budget to provide 100% affordable rate through micro-finance
infrastructure coverage • In-situ infrastructure upgrades for basic water and sanitation
in unplanned areas • Housing microfinance to support installation of water pipes and
Inves t ment
1 – 5 Dwelling Unit flush toilets
• High infrastructure
standards that do not
promote off-grid due to
L a n d o w n e r J o i n t V e n tu r e competing interests
5 – 2 0 D w e l l i n g U n i ts from utility agencies
• Non-existent central
sewerage system • Infrastructure credit for environmentally responsible and
sustainable land use planning that accommodates higher
• Density requirements in
densities
M i c r o - S c a l e D ev e l o p e r already built-up areas
5 – 2 0 D w e l l i n g U n i ts will increase pressure • Help projects with infrastructure subsidies from the smallest
on existing project sites
infrastructure • Define basic amenities to prioritize open and green spaces for all
income levels
• Affordability reduced
due to high
infrastructure costs for
S m a l l - S c a l e D e v e l op e r
developments with
2 0 – 10 0 D w e l l i n g U n i ts
more than 20 DU
where a WWTP is
required
• Design and promote PPP models where developer is
• Lack of implementation compensated over time for up-front infrastructure investments
guidelines for • Help projects with infrastructure subsidies from the smallest
infrastructure subsidy project sites
La rge -S c a l e D e v e l op e r • Define basic amenities to prioritize open and green spaces for all
expose developer to
10 0 + D w e l l i n g U n i ts income levels
delays which have
significant cost
implications, costs are
passed on to the buyer
175
REGULATIONS
R EGU LA T I ON S - K e y R i s ks /
R E G U L A T I O N S - O p p o r t u n it y
L a n d o w n e r S e lf B u i l d e r • Neighborhoods and areas

1 Dwelling Unit with no approved plan
La n d ow n e r Pri v a t e are ineligible for
Inves t ment permitting
1 – 5 Dwelling Unit • Uncertified labor force
• Regulations are too
onerous; landowners
cannot afford to densify
and provide common
infrastructure as per
regulations
• Landowners can take
shortcuts since they are
• Create a municipal-approved sample plan catalogue offered
L a n d o w n e r J o i n t V e n tu r e managing the entire
freely to micro builder to support the construction of
5 – 20 Dwelling Units construction process.
affordable, quality structures
Risk of renting a home
• One Stop Center to provide regulatory support to builders for
that does not meet the
incrementally achieving density requirements
standards set by the
• Development of a builder warranty scheme to create a
Building Code or National
standard for quality design and construction
Standards Board. This is
particularly risky with • Advocate VAT exemption and create a dedicated desk to
storied solutions in high- manage it. VAT exemption is considered for affordable
density areas housing only (not for market rate).
• Tax importation exemption
• Zoning regulations place
• Define a maximum selling price for housing suppliers to be
arbitrary limits on
eligible for exemptions and subsidies and index it on inflation
ancillary structures,
blocking the developer
M i c r o - S c a l e D ev e l o p e r from densifying as per
5 – 20 Dwelling Units regulations
• Micro- and small-scale
developers can take
shortcuts since they are
managing the entire
construction process. • Advocate VAT exemption and create a dedicated desk to
Risk of purchasing home manage it. VAT exemption is considered for affordable
that does not meet the housing only (not for market rate).
standards set by the • Tax importation exemption
Building Code or National • Define a maximum selling price for housing suppliers to be
Standards Board eligible for exemptions and subsidies and index it on inflation
• Study condominium law to ensure the capacity to design
20 – 100 Dwelling Units
mixed use neighborhoods
• Adapt the law forbidding industries in residential areas to allow
not polluting small size factories or workshops under precise
conditions
• Regulations should ensure the independence of the architects
and engineers of having them inside the developer team
• Advocate VAT exemption and create a dedicated desk to
• Target prices and size manage it. VAT exemption is considered for affordable
requirements outlined in housing only (not for market rate).
subsidy policies have not • Tax importation exemption
been market-tested / • Explore synergies between large project housing
developer has been development and education of young engineers or architects
expected to pioneer risk • Define a maximum selling price for housing suppliers to be
La rge -S c a l e D e v e l op e r
regarding mixed-income eligible for exemptions and subsidies and index it on inflation
100+ Dwelling Units
and mixed-use • Study condominium law to ensure the capacity to design
developments mixed use neighborhoods
• Adapt the law forbidding industries in residential areas to
allow not polluting small size factories or workshops under
precise conditions
• Regulations should ensure the independence of the architects
and engineers of having them inside the developer team
176
DESIGN
D E S I G N - K e y R i s k s/
D ES I GN - Op p ort u n i t y
• Possible safety and • Loan products to be structured as SME loans if home

code violation due to improvement/upgrade is for livelihood purposes
mix of activities in • Develop incremental housing and self-build solutions
home (residence and • Encourage density to benefit from economies of scale and to
livelihood operations) contain urban sprawl (max lot size: 150 sqm / minimum density
on the lot: 30 DU/HA / ideal heights G+1)
• Max built surface 50%
• Impose an architect and engineer for a construction above 100
L a n d o w n e r S e lf B u i l d e r sqm
1 Dwelling Unit • Impose building permit with technical control on design and
construction for all dwelling units
• Support self-builders and other non-traditional development
partners
• Advocate pilot projects
• Help incrementality by public technical support for all
constructions providing architectural typologies and support
against flood, fire, or seismic risks
• • Develop incremental housing and self-build solutions

• Encourage density to benefit from economies of scale and to
contain urban sprawl (minimum density on the lot: 30 DU/HA /
ideal height: minimum G+1)
• Max built surface 50%
sqm
Inves t ment
• Impose building permit with technical control on design and
• Help incrementality by public technical support for all
constructions providing architectural typologies and support
against flood, fir or seismic risks
La n d o w n e r J o i n t V e n tu r e • Lack of design skills • Development of a sample plan catalogue with construction

5 – 20 Dwelling Units means that structures details of multifamily housing solutions with rental component
undermine the • Technical assistance to young designers for affordable housing
opportunity for suited to all categories as outlined in the NLUDMP
increased density • Exploit natural grade changes to avoid expensive lifts and
• Cost-cutting measures terracing
and limited design skills • Advocate mechanical ventilation to increase building width and
means that units often lower the costs
do not respond to • Advocate building width of 10m and structural spans of 5m
tenant needs minimum to lower construction costs
• Lack of capacity means • Encourage density to benefit from economies of scale and to
that new and innovative contain urban sprawl (minimum density on the lot: 40 DU/HA /
materials cannot be ideal height: minimum G+1)
introduced at the • Max built surface 50%
M i c r o - S c a l e D ev e l o p e r smaller scale • Advocate buildings up to G+3 but not above for seismic and
5 – 20 Dwelling Units • Inadequate skills and elevator costs issues
familiarity with cost- • Promote mixed-use, mixed-income development
reducing techniques • Impose an architect and engineer for a construction above 100
like building widths and sqm
heights • Impose building permit with technical control on design and
• construction for all dwelling units
177
DESIGN
• Lack of higher density • Opportunity to develop family and single-worker housing

options, most prototypes
developments include • Exploit natural grade changes to avoid expensive lifts and
standalone or twin terracing
houses only. Missed • Incorporate urban services to lower household transport costs
opportunity for • Advocate mechanical ventilation to increase building width and
densification by actors lower the costs
who have the means to • Advocate building width of 10m and structural spans of 5m
better manage the minimum to lower construction costs
construction process. • Encourage density to benefit from economies of scale and to
• New technologies that contain urban sprawl (minimum density on the lot: 60 DU/HA /
permit better execution ideal height: minimum G+1)
speed often require • Max built surface 40%
materials and design • Advocate buildings up to G+3 for affordable housing, but not
S m a l l - S c a l e D e v e l op e r skills not the in country above for seismic, elevator and foundation costs issues
20 – 100 Dwelling Units • Incrementality is • Promote mixed-use, mixed-income development
unappealing to both • Impose an architect and engineer for a construction above 100
the government and sqm
middle- income
Rwandans
• Foster a local culture of building and design education
• Increase exposure to outside references and best practices:
design exhibition, shows, lectures
• Reinforce links between architectural and engineering education
courses to achieve quality of design and construction
• Promote events to share experiences of international architects
and engineers through exhibitions, talks, TV shows, events at the
university of architecture and engineering
• RSB/RHA/NIRDA to introduce an innovation board, capable of
granting approvals and allocating finance to new technologies.
• Introduce a grant program to test out new materials and
technologies and to purchase licensing to proprietary
technologies/products (start-up venture capital funding)
• Exploit natural grade changes to avoid expensive lifts and
terracing
• Incorporate urban services to lower household transport costs
• Explore synergies between industrial growth and large-scale
housing development like creating not polluting small factories in
future urban projects
• Advocate mechanical ventilation to increase building width and
lower the costs
• Advocate building width of 10m and structural spans of 5m
minimum to lower construction costs
La rge -S c a l e D e v e l op e r • Encourage density to benefit from economies of scale and to
100+ Dwelling Units contain urban sprawl (minimum density on the lot: 80 DU/HA)
• Advocate buildings up to G+3 for affordable housing, but not
above for seismic, elevator and foundation costs issues
• Advocate developments > 80 DU/ha
• Promote mixed-use, mixed-income development
sqm
• Foster a local culture of building and design education
• Reinforce links between architectural and engineering education
courses to achieve quality of design and construction
• Promote events to share experiences of international architects
and engineers through exhibitions, talks, TV shows, events at the
university of architecture and engineering
178
CONSTRUCTION
C O N S T R U C T I O N - K ey
R is ks / C O N S T R U C T I O N - O p p o r tun i t y
L a n d o w n e r S e lf B u i l d e r • Micro-finance lenders • Construction financing to support owner- builders finish their
1 Dwelling Unit have very high rates construction quickly.
La n d ow n e r Pri v a t e • Construction financing to assist small builders formalise and
Inves t ment scale their operations
1 – 5 Dwelling Unit • Prioritize the use of energy-efficient, low-cost technologies
and materials
• Business-as-usual design • Champion cost-efficient innovation through hybrid solutions
fails to be cost-conscious that minimize environmental and economic costs
(e.g., partition walls • Diversify material and technology selections in order to avoid
L a n d o w n e r J o i n t V e n tu r e erected as load-bearing creating monopolies in the market that raise costs
5 – 20 Dwelling Units walls), unnecessarily • Consider incrementality for finishings to lower the cost of the
keeping costs high housing property
• Micro-finance lenders • Promote design quality and innovative materials on mass
have very high rates advertising
Small-scale developers
M i c r o - S c a l e D ev e l o p e r • Improve financing for small-scale builders with track record
5 – 20 Dwelling Units can take shortcuts since
of business activity
they are managing the
• Digitization opportunity to connect supply chain linkages
entire construction
• Prioritize the use of energy-efficient, low-cost technologies
process.
and materials
• Champion cost-efficient innovation through hybrid solutions
that minimize environmental and economic costs
• Diversify material and technology selections in order to avoid
creating monopolies in the market that raise costs
• Consider incrementality for finishings to lower the cost of the
housing property
• Promote design quality and innovative materials on mass
advertising
• Pilot project with model demonstration houses showcasing
• High cost and limited new materials and technologies
availability of building • Prioritize the use of energy-efficient, low-cost technologies
materials and materials
• Limited construction • Champion cost-efficient innovation through hybrid solutions
financing so developers that minimize environmental and economic costs
are constrained by their • Diversify material and technology selections in order to avoid
ability to independently creating monopolies in the market that raise costs
raise capital • Promote the use of low-carbon materials and technologies,
• New technologies require minimize the use of concrete and substitute existing
La rge -S c a l e D e v e l op e r an important effort in materials: concrete by maxspan, metal sheet by clay tiles,
100+ Dwelling Units marketing and traditional brick by CSEBs or modern brick, brick partition wall
dissemination in order to by wood partition wall.
sensitize the public. They • Embrace passive infrastructure solutions
also require investment in • Minimize ground cover surfaces (reduced footprints) and
capacity building and maximize natural conservation zones
upskilling to ensure • Consider incrementality for finishings to lower the cost of the
proper execution and housing property
minimize construction • Promote design quality and innovative materials on mass
losses advertising
179
OFFTAKE
OFFT A K E - K ey R i s ks /
O F F T A K E - O p p o r t u ni t y
• No significant
L a n d o w n e r S e lf B u i l d e r challenges as owners
1 Dwelling Unit occupy their own
residences
• High demand for rental • Demand side rental vouchers redeemable only by landlords who
makes this a landlord’s upgrade their properties to meet standards outlined in codes and
Inves t ment
market with poor regulations who live in proximity of a verified employment hub
tenant protection
• Lack of incentive for
L a n d o w n e r J o i n t V e n tu r e landlords to upgrade or
5 – 20 Dwelling Units bring properties into
compliance given
current high demand,
consequently renters in
the affordable housing
bracket occupy poor
quality housing
• Specialist financing for small-scale developers and rental
(inadequate access to
developers to provide assistance in the management of their
services, non-durable
businesses to improve the overall quality of their housing
M i c r o - S c a l e D ev e l o p e r materials)
developments
5 – 20 Dwelling Units • No rent control
• Demand side rental vouchers redeemable only by landlords who
program to protect
upgrade their properties to meet standards outlined in codes and
tenants if property
regulations who live in proximity of a verified employment hub
undergoes significant
upgrades • Interrogate the limits of scale by context and market
• Limited sector capacity • Investigate shared land development models
for rental property • Green finance programs
management
• Given the lack of
construction finance,
buyers take on the
construction risk when
houses are sold off-
plan to finance the
construction process
• Opportunity to test rent-to-own products that are attractive to
• Despite subsidies, units developers and builders
remain unaffordable to • Provide offtake guarantees for developers to ensure that they can
most of the population. raise sufficient capital to deliver housing. However, government
involvement should be predicated on the ability of the developer
to deliver on a promise of affordability, lest the guarantee
becomes a liability for the state who would be delivering housing
to people who aren’t in their target market.
100+ Dwelling Units
• 10% loan
• Interrogate the limits of scale by context and market
• Investigate shared land development models
• Create independent public institution for rent to develop rental
supply and buy stock from developers to lower their commercial
risk
• Green finance programs
180
MAINTENANCE
M A I N T E N A N C E - K ey
R is ks / M A I N T E N A N C E - O p p o r t u n it y
L a n d o w n e r S e lf B u i l d e r
1 Dwelling Unit • Informal incremental
building practices leads • Housing specific micro-finance for building materials to
to ongoing service and accelerate construction with quality materials
Inves t ment
maintenance needs
• Tenants unfamiliar with • SME development of property management capacity including
L a n d o w n e r J o i n t V e n tu r e shared maintenance of support for commissaires / brokers to growth their businesses to
5 – 20 Dwelling Units common areas include property management & maintenance.
• Very few property
management
companies or
M i c r o - S c a l e D ev e l o p e r caretakers trained to
5 – 20 Dwelling Units manage rental and
ensure ongoing
maintenance
S m a l l - S c a l e D e v e l op e r • Potential for investment REITSs to support long-term
20 – 100 Dwelling Units • Property management management capacity for mixed-use large-scale projects
and maintenance is • Build maintenance into construction financing
underdeveloped on the • Develop regulations/training for home owner associations
Rwandan market, this is
especially important for
mixed-use projects
and/or projects with
100+ Dwelling Units
multiple suppliers
181
V. CONCLUSIONS
2. CONCLUSION
CREATING A BROADER ACCESS TO HOUSING backyard landowners to micro-developers -- deliver

PROPERTY rental housing, property owners in Rwanda shall not be
overlooked as an important source of rental housing. A
Throughout our study, we have nurtured the ambition to strong social housing program would help to complete
consider all the determining aspects of housing supply, the market offering.
from sustainability to diversity, all the way through to
design, with the objective of testing a comprehensive
approach capable not only of shaping the future of
Rwandan cities, but of providing decent housing for every COMBINING STRATEGIES
Rwandan household.
Today, private housing suppliers are responsible for the
To achieve this objective, the team examined all vast majority of housing delivered to the market, in both
components of the final cost of a housing asset: land, the informal and formal sectors, be they units offered
finance, development, construction, infrastructure, and for sale or for rent. In order to support them in lowering
maintenance costs, and worked on each cost to lower it overall project costs to 335.000 RWF for private individual
to create a broader access to housing in Rwanda. We used housing suplliers – or 350.000 RWF per square meter
eight levers, from technical to regulations levers, from all for private professional housing suppliers, the study
scales of construction to all scales of development, land, investigated two main strategies:: a bottom-up strategy
and financial costs. By using all levers, we could lower helping individuals who build for themselves or for others,
down the cost of a housing property from 500.000 RWF and a top down strategy helping developers to achieve
per square meter of livable area, which is the existing small to large scale real estate projects. Each strategy
average price in the so-called affordable real estate represents a specific impact on public finances depending
market, to between 335.000 and 350.000 RWF per square on the types of levers activated.
meter, depending on the supply channel and the size of
the project. The bottom-up strategy is the most effective one in the
short-term, because self-builders can achieve the lowest
The average price of the housing asset depends on the construction costs by avoiding the profit and financial
housing supplier: a minimum of 335.000 RWF per square costs associated with professional housing suppliers.
meter is achievable for households hiring contractors to Relying on self-builders to continue to supply the market
build for themselves with formal means. On the other requires a tacit acknowledgement of the associated
hand, a minimum of 350.000 RWF per square meter risks, namely individuals building without respect of
can be achieved for households buying a property from construction standards, generating fire, seismic or flood
developers. Although there is a limited price difference risks. Therefore, in this strategy we raised the existing
between the formal self-builder and the large-scale property cost from 280.000 RWF to 335.000 RWF per
developer market, the lowest property price remains the square meter to improve the existing construction
scenario of households building for themselves. standards of projects supplied by landowner builders. In
this strategy we recommend that public support focuses
By lowering costs, three times the number of urban on quality control, technical support, and financial
households -- from 45 000 to 110 000 -- with incomes regulation to help keep the prices low and ensure a safe
below 1.2 million RWF will be able to access a mortgage future for those constructions. This strategy can produce
and purchase a home. The price for a 45 square meter many properties for a large number of households.
2-bedroom home would fall from 21,5M RWF to 15M
RWF, thereby providing access to households earning On the other hand, the top-down strategy, is an
450K RWF and 1,2M RWF rather than 650K and 1,2M RWF opportunity to create good urban and architectural
per month. conditions for Rwandan cities if it is focused on achieving
However, as a result of demand-side capacity constraints, mixed used, mixed income, public spaces and facilities for
lowering the cost of housing only increases the number the future neighborhoods. A top-down strategy is capable
of urban households able to purchase a property of creating a common urban good whereas individuals
outright from 7% to 15%, which leaves 85% of the of the building for themselves can only address individual
population to pursue other housing solutions. Given that residential needs. A top-down strategy can also achieve
nearly 50% of the population are renters, the typologies a higher density as in our scenarios we could foresee a
and projects designed in this study are suitable for both density raising from 50 dwelling units per hectare for
the sale and rental markets. Given that most individual individual housing to 150 dwelling units per hectare for
housing suppliers active on the market today -- from large scale developer projects, density being a critical
182
question in Rwanda considering the size of the country other existing strategic planning reports. None of them
and the challenges of its geography. For the large-scale deserves to be privileged to the detriment of the others,
developer projects, we could lower the cost of a property because none of them will have the capacity to supply all
to 350.000 RWF per square meter, not very far from the these complementary units on their own. Therefore, both
prices achieved by individuals. Cross financing could be strategies do not have to be in opposition, we consider
used more effectively in some scenarios to lower the cost that they can be developed in parallel or even combined.
of a developer project’s property to get closer to the price In a scenario presented in the report, the consultant team
of the property achieved by individuals. This strategy, analyzed a large-scale project where lands are kept for
helping developers through subsidies and financial self-builders, who benefit from the large-scale project
regulation, creates significant public investments and lost resources: buying materials from the suppliers of the
profits. developer and receiving technical help from the engineers
working on the large-scale project.
The six housing suppliers’ profiles operating on Rwandan
housing market will all have to contribute to producing
the large number of additional housing units to be built
over the next 30 years to meet the strong growth of urban
households projected in the last national census and

RWF 1.2M+ 20 5 61 RWF 15 MILLION UNIT

2 BEDROOM, 43 SQM
RWF 1M-1.2M 10 815 MINIMUM HOUSEHOLD INCOME

REQUIRED:
RWF 464,500*
RWF 700K-1M 27 15 7
110 000 HOUSEHOLDS CAN

RWF 500K-700K 61 619 AFFORD
RWF 300K-500K 139 690 12 868
RWF 200K-300K 15 1 95 7
RWF 100K-200K 25 8 7 5 1
RWF 50K-100K 199 094
RWF 1K-50K 94 644
Can afford Cannot afford
Income distribution based on EICV expenditure data inflated to June 2022 and applied to total number of urban
households reported in Census 2022
Note*: Based on a mortgage of 20 years, 11% interest rate and LTV of 90%. Assumed that household can contribute
30% of net household income to loan
183
V. CONCLUSIONS
2. CONCLUSION
PHASING STRATEGIES for access to sanitation in these words: “Modern sanitation

sewer and management services in urban areas to handle
The Government subsidy policies will need to consider solid and liquid waste shall be established. All households
all the housing supply channels inclusively. In the short in urban areas will be connected to sewer networks where
term, with limited financial means to assign to housing, waste shall be treated at the central sewage systems”.
it is more effective for the government to allocate more Generalised urban sewer systems is the ideal infrastructure
subsidies and incentives on micro-scale and landowner condition but can require excessive public investment.
joint-venture projects. In fact, in case of small-scale and Other means of sanitation, like off-grid solutions at the
large-scale developments, it requires proportionally more neighborhood level, have to be considered.
public funds to produce the same number of housing
units, or in other words, for the same amount of funds Large-scale housing projects on “virgin” land that require
we deliver fewer units with the last two supply channels to be equipped with all the urban infrastructure are more
than with the first two. Contrary to what one might think, demanding in terms of public funds than landowners
large scale developments are not the best option for involved in construction. The cost of the infrastructure
increasing the number of affordable units on the market must be largely subsidized because it cannot be integrated
in the short-term. The costly need to set up completely in the sale price of housing and still maintain an affordable
new infrastructures weighs heavily on this supply chain. price. In any case, since in essence no one owns public
infrastructure and must pay for it directly, it would be kind
Public investment in urban retrofit appears to be the of a social injustice because all public infrastructure is
option to focus on for a mid-term strategy. This could globally funded by the community and not supported by
be done through the landowner joint-venture supply a limited community of home buyers on a specific site.
channel as well through the micro-scale or small-scale Ultimately, both financing means can be combined for
development channels. This will require a solid political this matter through mixed financing: public and private
and technical assistance from public institutions, to put investments.
in place a new structured inclusive model that allows for
the development of projects in unplanned settlements, Landowners and micro-scale developers target urban
in opposition to the expropriation model that costs a lot areas where access to water and electricity is already
of time and that may meet social resistance. By properly guaranteed for developing their projects. In a proactive
designing improved neighborhoods and investing in way to increase the number of housing units put to the
public infrastructure upgrading, the Rwandan government market by acting on all supply chains, the subsidy for
has an opportunity to upgrade living conditions in some extensions of water and electricity networks should not
parts of its cities and at the same time to achieve the dual be limited exclusively to large-scale developments. As
objective of providing good quality affordable housing not Rwandan vision 2050 emphasizes, it is about universal
far from downtown and increase the density of housing in access to quality services and amenities for all. In urban
these neighborhoods. areas, access to electricity, through on-grid connections
to reliable infrastructure, and access to water, thanks
Public efforts are focused on supplying affordable housing to modern, safe, and reliable water supply network as it
for sale. Results from the Housing Market Study reveal is stated. Extending public support to smaller housing
that the rental segment represents the largest market developments to finance basic infrastructure appears
share in urban areas, as most of its inhabitants are unable to be one of a recommended and appropriate solutions
to acquire a property. In line with the government’s to the issue of shortage of decent, quality, affordable
aspirations to provide universal access to affordable and housing on the Rwandan market.
decent housing by 2050, more attention needs to be
given to the development of social rental housing, for For mid-term and long-term strategy, large scale
example including them in the mixed-use programs of developments are indicated to create completely new
small-scale or large-scale developments as well as in the neighborhoods, urbanistically designed on a mixed-
urban retrofit programs. used and inclusive model. In fact, on sites of more than 5
Ha, it makes more sense to develop projects integrating
The issue of wastewater management and stormwater other programs than only affordable housing; on the one
management is key in urban areas. In the long term, this hand to make these benefit from cross-financing which
cannot be handled on a household individual level and contributes to the reduction in price, and on the other
must be addressed through public investment in required hand to avoid creating ghettos by isolating classes of
infrastructure, be it for large scale-development or for people in specific neighborhoods. In addition, for such
micro-scale or urban retrofit development. This is in line large-scale projects it is necessary to integrate various
with the Rwandan vision 2050 which sets its aspirations urban facilities such as schools, offices, commercial
184
410K RWF/SQM
145k
40k RWF/SQM 10% PROFIT 35%
RWF/SQM
EXCL. VAT
LAND,
FINANCIAL &
DEVELOPMENT
COSTS
30k RWF/SQM 7% LAND
4%
415K RWF/SQM 15k RWF/SQM
10k RWF/SQM 2%
DESIGN & SUPERVISION
MARKETING & SALE
50k
RWF/SQM 12% VAT

39%
LAND,
335K RWF/SQM 110k
40k RWF/SQM 8% PROFIT FINANCIAL &
DEVELOPMENT
RWF/SQM
EXCL. VAT 15k RWF/SQM 3% CUSTOM DUTIES COSTS
45k 28% 30k RWF/SQM 8% LAND
RWF/SQM 13% VAT 18%
LAND,
FINANCIAL &
50k 5k RWF/SQM 1% CUSTOM DUTIES
DEVELOPMENT 265k
RWF/SQM
EXCL. VAT
40k RWF/SQM 12% LAND
COSTS RWF/SQM 65%
5k RWF/SQM 1% DESIGN & SUPERVISION EXCL. VAT
CONSTRUCTION
COSTS

255k
RWF/SQM 61%
240k 72% COSTS
RWF/SQM
COSTS MEP & PRIVATE
75k RWF/SQM 18% FINISHES 65k RWF/SQM 15% INFRASTRUCTURE
PUBLIC
MEP & PRIVATE 55k RWF/SQM 13% MEP & PRIVATE 30k RWF/SQM 7% INFRASTRUCTURE
INFRASTRUCTURE

SELFBUILDER PRIVATE INVESTMENT JOINT VENTURE
400K RWF/SQM 370K RWF/SQM 360K RWF/SQM

40k RWF/SQM 10% PROFIT 35% 115K

RWF/SQM
145k LAND,
35k RWF/SQM 9% PROFIT
EXCL. VAT 30k RWF/SQM 8% PROFIT
RWF/SQM
EXCL. VAT
10k RWF/SQM
3% CUSTOM DUTIES 125k
FINANCIAL & RWF/SQM 34% 33%
DEVELOPMENT EXCL. VAT 10k RWF/SQM 3% CUSTOM DUTIES
LAND, 10k RWF/SQM 3% CUSTOM DUTIES
LAND,
COSTS FINANCIAL & FINANCIAL &
30k RWF/SQM 8% LAND 25k RWF/SQM 7% LAND DEVELOPMENT 25k RWF/SQM 7% LAND DEVELOPMENT
COSTS COSTS
15k RWF/SQM 4% DESIGN & SUPERVISION 15k RWF/SQM 4% DESIGN & SUPERVISION 15k RWF/SQM 4% DESIGN & SUPERVISION
10k RWF/SQM 3% MARKETING & SALE 10k RWF/SQM 3% MARKETING & SALE
115k RWF/SQM 29% STRUCTURE 110k RWF/SQM 30% STRUCTURE

255K 245K 245K

RWF/SQM RWF/SQM RWF/SQM
-EXCL. VAT -EXCL. VAT -EXCL. VAT
- EXCL.
CUSTOM
- EXCL.
CUSTOM
- EXCL.
CUSTOM 67%
DUTIES DUTIES DUTIES CONSTRUCTION
65% 66% COSTS
CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION 70k RWF/SQM
75k RWF/SQM 19% FINISHES COSTS 70k RWF/SQM 19% FINISHES COSTS 19% FINISHES
MEP & PRIVATE

MEP & PRIVATE 60k RWF/SQM 17% MEP & PRIVATE 60k RWF/SQM 17%
INFRASTRUCTURE
INFRASTRUCTURE
PUBLIC PUBLIC PUBLIC

MICRO SCALE SMALL SCALE LARGE SCALE

185
V. CONCLUSIONS
2. CONCLUSION
buildings, shops, green public spaces, etc. These allow National Land Use Development Master Plan (NLUDMP)
a quality of urban life for its inhabitants, avoiding long as the more affordable typology among the multi-family
and costly journeys, which de facto reduce individuals’ dwellings, which does not require an elevator and can be
purchasing power, and in practice affect their ability to slotted almost everywhere.
acquire housing developed on this site, ultimately making In our report we determine what could be a maximum
them unaffordable. Those projects can also help to launch selling price for developers that would become the
small facilities and participate to develop the construction condition for them to be eligible for exemptions and
industry. subsidies. Elements of the overall construction costs,
imported materials for example, were subject to high
As expected, in accordance with the urban population inflation in recent years. This inflation, by raising
growth, all Rwandan cities, be it the Kigali capital, its construction costs, can break the financial balance for
satellite cities or secondary cities are called upon to also developers. To mitigate this risk for , it is important to
grow physically. As these urban expansions are known put in place means to formally index these maximum
and unavoidable, they provide an excellent mid-term prices and avoid compromising the financial viability of
opportunity to properly plan and manage in the most cost- any long-term development, especially large-scale ones,
effective way the issue of public infrastructure on large- a factor that increases the risk level for the developer,
scale development projects. In fact, working upstream on thereby decreasing the attractiveness of the investment
urban planning of certain projected neighborhoods in a into affordable housing.
coordinated and structured way, starting with the servicing
of the site with public infrastructure equipment will save a The planned expansion of cities should also serve as an
lot of public money in the long-term. It will be less costly opportunity for the Rwandan government to anticipate
to develop these public facilities before construction and mitigate high land price inflation. Servicing land
of housing and other buildings rather than to intervene with infrastructure without mastering its destiny, will
a posteriori to adequately set up these infrastructures, just increase the land value for the benefit of its owners
particularly in sites with informal occupation. without due return on investment for public funds and
will also affect the affordability of future housing to be
developed on this site. It is highly recommended that the
ADDRESSING ALL SCALES OF THE HOUSING government anticipates these city expansions by securing
ECOSYSTEM strategic sites for future urbanization, on which it will be
appropriate for the state to operate as an urban developer
A strategy focused on developing new materials and producing the specific master plan for these sites and
technologies will not be a sufficient solution, neither in equipping them, in a progressive and coherent way, with
the short-term nor mid-term, to address the challenging public infrastructure that will properly accommodate
issue of affordable housing in Rwanda. In fact, the part future neighborhoods based on a mixed-used and inclusive
of construction cost in a global housing property price model. On the other side, the government should act on
breakdown is roughly 50% for housing produced through the increase of land tax and property tax where it provides
“professionally structured” construction supply chains. appropriate urban infrastructure without controlling the
Low-cost materials and technologies will only have a land destiny.
limited impact on half of the final price.
Developing new materials and technologies will require The project management of urban development
some financial investment and time to develop the projects will require the establishment of a specialized
production capacity of those innovative materials at large public institution, particularly to manage the Public
scale and to have them adopted by the construction Private Partnerships that will be necessary to structure
industry. For this matter we recommend a series of landowners Joint Venture for urban retrofit developments
measures in 8 areas to assist in building up the industry’s or to manage large-scale developments in which the
capacity with benchmarks for 2025, 2035 and 2050. state will decide to operate as an urban developer as
recommended.
Constructing dense neighborhoods above 80 dwelling
units per hectare, building heights up to G+3, building The fourth pillar of the Rwandan Vision 2050 strategy
widths of 10m, optimized appartement units in terms is “Urbanization and Agglomeration”. According to the
of surface, simplified structural design, adequate NLUDMP, the National Housing Policy and the National
composition of material finishings, are the recommended Urbanisation Policy, the issue of affordable housing
solutions that meet the double objective of affordability will be properly addressed by integrating it in an overall
and sustainability for housing. This also corresponds urban planning and into global economic approach
to type B typology that already is recommended in the that measures the return on investment of public funds.
186
Bringing the huge part of parallel-operating construction apartment-style units. Where and when possible,
ecosystem into the formal economy and further landowners are encouraged to maintain relationships and
professionalizing the construction industry while creating agreements with their former tenants. The City of Kigali
new neighborhoods and carrying out urban retrofit should and its partners at the Swiss Agency for Development
become a solid pillar for economic growth and contribute and Cooperation and UN-Habitat are currently evaluating
to creating prosperity. how to make this rehousing process a self-sustaining one.
In other words, what are the mechanisms that can allow
for the “retrofit” of the site (houses and infrastructure)
URBAN RETROFIT AND UNPLANNED SETTLEMENT by low-income landowners without causing massive
UPGRADING: STRATEGIZING THE DELIVERY OF relocation and displacement? The project has proposed
AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR LOW-INCOME TENANTS a blended finance model, whereby an SPV is created that
BY PRIVATE LANDOWNERS uses public and private investments to upgrade the site.
In order to achieve this, the model divides the unplanned
A study into affordable housing would be incomplete settlement into 2 areas: one to be demolished, sold and
without addressing the opportunities represented by redeveloped as market-rate housing or tertiary services
urban retrofitting and the upgrading of unplanned that finances the upgrading/retrofit of the second area,
settlements. In this case, retrofitting and upgrading where substandard homes are replaced by high-density,
refer to the improvement, provision, or replacement of low-rise multi-story housing blocks co-owned by existing
infrastructure and buildings. Retrofitting takes many forms, property owners. Any undevelopable land (where the
but may be categorized into 2 main approaches. The first slopes are the most extreme and housing would be
is the relocation of residents to planned communities unsafe and most expensive) are used for green space or
on greenfield sites on the periphery of the city, where community facilities. While the project manages to re-
land is cheap and available. The second is to upgrade house the landowners on the same site, the process is
communities in place, which brings many benefits in disruptive to the lives of tenants, who receive no guarantee
comparison: It enables existing residents to remain in or commitment given their lack of ownership.
their communities, allowing embedded social networks
to remain intact. In addition, unplanned settlements are Although the Mpazi project proposes one method to
frequently located near urban centers where more jobs finance large-scale interventions to upgrade swaths of
are available, limiting the transportation time and expense unplanned settlements across the city, the present study
to low-income residents. While both strategies are viable argues that retrofitting could be implemented among
ways of adding to and improving the stock of affordable a host of housing suppliers, particularly those who are
housing in the city, this study prefers the latter approach, engaged in housing delivery for households at the lower-
and will argue that successful affordable housing must end of the income pyramid. The Housing Market Study
take existing community networks into consideration. (WS1) revealed that a significant amount of housing
in urban areas is being supplied by the landowner self-
This housing market study has detailed the profiles of builders, private investors, and joint-ventures, in addition
six housing suppliers in Rwanda, and highlighted that to Micro-Developers; and at this time there are no active
all are key to reach the full range of income segments retrofitting programs that address them. Retrofitting
represented by the Rwandan population. Some initiatives can be seen to be limited to large-scale actions and
underway in Kigali that target individual property owners developments, something that this study endorses,
include the RUDP Program (Phases 1 and 2), which features but it is also possible to apply impactful retrofitting for
infrastructure upgrades in unplanned settlements. To date, the affordable housing market, through small-scale,
there have been 2 models for this: the first, which requires individual interventions. Targeted technical assistance
expropriation that may result in the displacement of some and access to a small amount of finance, and/or off-grid
households via expropriation, and the second, piloted infrastructural and technological solutions for the wide
by the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation range of landowners and micro-developers in Rwanda
via Skat, which seeks to limit resettlement by rehousing would help to improve livelihoods, living conditions, and
families in new, denser dwelling units on the same site neighborhoods overall.
with the intent to sell-off a portion of the cleared land to
finance the construction. Small-scale retrofitting has the benefit of being more
feasible in the near term, acknowledging that funds are
The latter model, known as Mpazi after the channel that not currently available for retrofitting at the scale of
bisects the neighborhood, is a recently implemented Mpazi or RUDP for the majority of the city’s residents. This
model that provides for existing landowners to be strategy would begin to address the backlog of housing
rehoused on the same site, in upgraded, modernized and infrastructural provision in the city while waiting
187
V. CONCLUSIONS
2. CONCLUSION
for the long-term implementation of centralized trunk housing infrastructure in Rwanda. Simultaneously, in the
infrastructure. Small-scale retrofitting avoids expensive near- to mid-term, small-scale urban retrofitting provides
expropriation and has the potential to immediately impact a quick, cost-efficient strategy to upgrading unplanned
people’s lives, including the rental market, an otherwise and micro-developments while quickly supplying
difficult demographic to reach. It also has the potential to affordable housing in neighborhoods close to the city, for
keep costs low by working at micro-scales that develop a greater number of prospective buyers. It also has the
slowly over time. Some specific examples of retrofitting potential to quickly improve health outcomes for a broad
could include: number of the city’s inhabitants. Overall, a combination
of approaches from the bottom up to the top down will
• Replacing a shared pit latrine with a low-cost but be necessary to ensure Kigali achieves its goal of finding
more sanitary alternative, such as a ventilated pit latrine affordable housing solutions for all of its residents by
(VIP), compost toilet, or a small septic tank, on a single 2050.
plot as part of a subsidy provision for a micro-developer;
• Providing a rainwater collection tank with a first-
flush diverter and water filter for a single plot as part of a
subsidy provision for a micro-developer;
• Rebuilding existing Rukarakara (Adobe) housing
in-place with improved foundations, earth block quality,
and concrete ring beams, to match new code regulations
(pending);
• Building small-scale, new housing using
sustainable materials and technologies on plots with
appropriate zoning, aligned with the master plan;
• Planting trees along common pedestrian paths,
to manage erosion and provide shade;
• Replacing low-quality plumbing fixtures with
sustainable low-flow alternatives.
Interventions should be tied to sustainable materials

and innovative, environmentally-friendly off-grid
infrastructure solutions, popularizing unfamiliar
techniques that are necessary to the sustainable
development of the city. These interventions allow Kigali
to promote sustainable and affordable manufacturing
supply chains that otherwise may struggle for visibility
throughout the construction industry and broader
housing market, in a similar way that the modern, row-
lock brick supply chain was tied to the implementation of
IDP model villages throughout the country
This approach can be implemented at various levels of the

housing supply chain: landowner self-built and private
investment, to encourage use of sustainable materials
and nature-based infrastructure; landowner joint venture
supply chain with technical assistance provided by a
public urban institution; micro-developers, with shared
sanitary solutions; and small-scale developers, with public
support for the consolidation of land held by several
owners who will receive subsidized properties in the new
development.
Large-scale retrofitting which enables people to remain

within their existing communities, is vital affordable
188
H o u s i n g Su p p l i e r R e t r o f i t I n t e r v e nt i o n
• T e c h n i ca l As s i st a n c e
• N a t i v e T r e e P l a nt i n g ( e r o s i o n c o n t r o l )
• R a i n w a t e r T a n k w / F i rs t - F l u s h D i v e r t e r & W a t e r F i l t e r
• R a i n G a rd e n ( e r o s i o n a n d s t o r m w a t e r c o n t r o l )
• S u s t a i n a b l e R o o m F i n is h e s : C l a y o r L i m e P l a s t e r W a l l i n g
1 . L a n d o w n e r - S e lf • S u s t a i n a b l e R o o m F i n is h e s : E a r t h e n F l o o r
Bu i l t • S u s t a i n a b l e I n f ra s t ru c t u r e : L o w - F l o w P l u m b i n g F i x t u r e s
• S u s t a i n a b l e I n f ra s t ru c t u r e : L E D L i g h t F i x t u r e s
• S u s t a i n a b l e I n f ra s t ru c t u r e : S o l a r o r E l e c t r i c W a t e r H e a t e r
• S u s t a i n a b l e I n f ra s t ru c t u r e : S o l a r P a n e l s
• P l a n t e d R e t a i n i n g W a l ls ( G e o g r i d )
• R a i n w a t e r T a n k w / F i rs t - F l u s h D i v e r t e r & W a t e r F i l t e r
2 . La n d o w n e r - Pr i v at e • S u s t a i n a b l e R o o m F i n is h e s : E a r t h e n F l o o r
Inves t ment • S u s t a i n a b l e I n f ra s t ru c t u r e : L o w - F l o w P l u m b i n g F i x t u r e s
• S h a r e d R a i nw a t e r T a n k w / F ir s t - F l u s h D i v e r t e r & W a t e r F il t e r
• D o w n s p o u t s t o C a p t u r e R a in w a t e r
• S h a r e d V e nt i l a t e d P i t L a t r i n e
• S h a r e d C o m p o s t T o i l et
• S h a r e d B a t h r o o m w / S ep t i c T a n k o r B i o d i g e s t e r
• S u s t a i n a b l e R o o m F i n is h e s : E a r t h e n F l o o r
3 . La n d ow n e r - J oi n t
Vent u re • D w e l l i n g U n i t R e t r of i t : F o u n d a t i o n S u p p o r t
• D w e l l i n g U n i t R e t r of i t : R u k a ra k a r a U p g r a d e
• D w e l l i n g U n i t R e t r of i t : R i n g B e a m
• D w e l l i n g U n i t R e t r of i t : N e w R o o f i n g
• C o m m u n i t y K i t c h e n G a rd e n
• S u s t a i n a b l e I n f ra s t ru c t u r e : L o w - F l o w P l u m b i n g F i x t u r e s
• S h a r e d R a i nw a t e r T a n k w / F ir s t - F l u s h D i v e r t e r & W a t e r F il t e r
• D o w n s p o u t s t o C a p t u r e R a in w a t e r
• S h a r e d V e nt i l a t e d P i t L a t r i n e
• S h a r e d C o m p o s t T o i l et
• S h a r e d B a t h r o o m w / S ep t i c T a n k o r B i o d i g e s t e r
4. M i c ro-S c a l e
Develop er
• S u s t a i n a b l e R o o m F i n is h e s : E a r t h e n F l o o r
• D w e l l i n g U n i t R e t r of i t : F o u n d a t i o n S u p p o r t
• D w e l l i n g U n i t R e t r of i t : R u k a ra k a r a U p g r a d e
• D w e l l i n g U n i t R e t r of i t : R i n g B e a m
• D w e l l i n g U n i t R e t r of i t : N e w R o o f i n g
• C o m m u n i t y K i t c h e n G a rd e n
• L a n d ( u r b a n i nf i l l p l o t - s i z e? )
• W a s t ew a t e r T r e a t m e n t P l a nt ( 2 0 - 1 0 0 D w e l l i n g U n i t s )
• N e i g h b o r h o o d S c a l e S t o r mw a t e r M a n a g e m e n t - B i o s w a l e
• N e i g h b o r h o o d S c a l e S t o r mw a t e r M a n a g e m e n t - R e t e n t i o n P o n d
5. S ma l l -S c a l e
• D w e l l i n g U n i t R e t r of i t : M od e r n B r i c k s
Develop er
• P e d e s t r i a n Pa t h s
• R oa d s
• L a n d ( u r b a n i nf i l l p l o t o r p e r ip h e r a l t o c i t y - s i z es ? )
• W a s t ew a t e r T r e a t m e n t P l a nt ( 1 0 0 + D w e l l i n g U n i t s )
6. La rge -S c a l e • N e i g h b o r h o o d S c a l e S t o r mw a t e r M a n a g e m e n t - B i o s w a l e
Develop er • N e i g h b o r h o o d S c a l e S t o r mw a t e r M a n a g e m e n t - R e t e n t i o n P o n d
• P e d e s t r i a n Pa t h s
• R oa d s
• E l e c t r i c a l T r a n sf o r m e r
• L a n d ( E x u r b a n G r e e n f i e ld S it e )
189
VI. APPENDIX
1. REAL ESTATE PERFORMA
2. IMPACT SIMULATION TOOL
3. STRUCTURAL PLANS G+3

VI. APPENDIX
1.REAL ESTATE PROFORMA
BALANCE SHEET
Real Estate Proforma model 4.0.xlsx Balance sheet
REAL ES TA TE P ROFORMA
/ ! \ (fic titiou s da ta ! ) / ! \ ( fic titious da ta ! )
EXP E N SES IN COMES
A FIN AN CIAL COS T S & TAX ES 7 9 42 01 7 500 RWF 21,3 % A IN COM E FROM T H E S AL E OF DW EL L IN G S 3 1 2 62 500 000 RW F 73, 2%
A.1 Interes t c ha rge s on loa ns 2 777 655 000 RWF 7,5% A.1 Affora ble dwell ings u nits 11 237 500 000 RWF 26,3%
A.2 Interes t on interna l fina nc ing 46 137 500 RWF 0,1% A.2 Ma rk et ra te dwellings u nits 20 025 000 000 RWF 46,9%
A.3 Ta xes 5 118 225 000 RWF 13,7%
B L AN D COS T S 907 500 000 RWF 2, 4% B IN COM E FROM T H E S AL E OF OT H ER BUIL D IN G S 9 7 90 000 000 RWF 22 , 9%
B .1 L a nd purc ha s e va lue 867 500 000 RWF 2,3% B .1 S oc ia l, S tu dent & Elderly H ous ing 1 692 500 000 RWF 4,0%
B .2 L a nd a c qui s ition c os ts 40 000 000 RWF 0,1% B .2 Offic es , Reta il , L ogis tic a nd indu s try bu ildings 8 097 500 000 RWF 19,0%
C D EV EL OPM EN T CO S TS 1 490 500 000 RWF 4, 0% C S UB S ID IE S 1 543 7 50 000 RWF 3,6%
C.1 Proje c t inc eption c os ts 5 000 000 RWF 0,0% C.1 Infra s truc tu res s ub s idie s 1 131 250 000 RWF 2,6%
C.2 L a nd ma s terpla n a nd infra s truc tu re develop ment c os ts 175 000 000 RWF 0,5% C.2 Pu blic interes t s u bs idie s 75 000 000 RWF 0,2%
C.3 B uil ding s development c os ts 410 500 000 RWF 1,1% C.3 Environmenta l s ub s idies 337 500 000 RWF 0,8%
C.4 S el ling c os ts 900 000 000 RWF 2,4%
D IN FRAS T RUCT URE COS T S 2 2 00 000 000 RWF 5, 9 % D OT H ER RE VEN UE S 1 25 000 000 RW F 0, 3 %
D .1 Infra s truc tu re c ons truc tion c ost 2 200 000 000 RWF 5,9% Other revenue s 125 000 000 RWF 0,3%
E CON S T RUCT ION COS TS 24 7 1 0 7 50 000 RWF 66 , 3 %
E.1 B uiding s c onstruc tion c os ts 24 710 750 000 RWF 66,3%
TOTA L E XP EN SES 37 2 50 76 7 50 0 RWF 10 0 ,0 % TOTA L RE VE N UE S 4 2 72 1 2 50 0 0 0 RW F 10 0 ,0 %
DEVE LOP ER MA RG IN 5 4 7 0 4 8 2 5 0 0 RW F 12, 8 %
22/04/2023 - 11:21 Page 1 / 1
192
INCOMES
REAL ESTA TE P ROFORM A

/! \ (fi cti ti o us data !)
I N C O ME S
N u m be r o f Sqm gro ss
A Inco m e fro m the sale o f dw e lli ngs P ri ce per Sqm T o tal Se lli ng pri ce %
uni ts co nstru cti o n
5 30 2 8 7 37 31 2 62 50 0 0 0 0 10 0 %
A.1 A ffo rab le dw e lli ngs uni ts 11 2 37 50 0 0 0 0

Affordable houses 70 13% 5 600 500 000 2 800 000 000 9%
Affordable apartments 250 47% 18 750 450 000 8 437 500 000 27,0%
- -
A.2 Marke t rate dw elli ngs uni ts 20 0 25 000 000
Standard houses at free market price 50 9% 7 500 650 000 4 875 000 000 16%
Standard appartments at free market price 100 19% 12 000 600 000 7 200 000 000 23%
High standing houses at free market price 20 4% 4 000 825 000 3 300 000 000 10,6%
High standing appartments at free market price 40 8% 6 000 775 000 4 650 000 000 14,9%
- -
N u m be r o f Sqm gro ss
B Inco m e fro m the sale o f o ther bu i ldi ngs P ri ce per Sqm T o tal Se lli ng pri ce 0%
uni ts co nstru cti o n
14 1 19 10 0 9 790 0 0 0 0 0 0 0%
B.1 So ci al, Student & E lde rly Ho u si ng 1 692 50 0 0 0 0

Social apartments for rent 50 2500 350 000 875 000 000 9%
Students accomodations 30 1050 350 000 367 500 000 3,8%
Housing for the elderly 50 1000 450 000 450 000 000 4,6%
- -
B.2 Offi ces , Re tai l, Lo gi s ti c a nd i ndustry bui ldi ngs 8 0 97 50 0 0 0 0
Office buildings 3 4500 650 000 2 925 000 000 30%
Retail buildings 5 5000 600 000 3 000 000 000 31%
Logistics buildings 1 2000 400 000 800 000 000 8%
Industry buildings 2 3050 450 000 1 372 500 000 14%
Public facilities 0 - -
- -
A mo u nt per
C Sub si di e s Q u an ti ty U ni t Rem arks T o tal A mo unt
uni t
1 54 3 750 0 0 0 10 0 %
C.1 Infras tru ctu re s s ub si di es 1 1 31 2 5 0 0 0 0

Retaining Walls / Land Shaping 25% 150 000 000 37 500 000 2,4%
Erosion control infrastrure 25% 75 000 000 18 750 000 1,2%
Roads 80% 900 000 000 720 000 000 46,6%
Water and Electricity networks 100% 295 000 000 295 000 000 19,1%
Public lighting 80% 75 000 000 60 000 000 3,9%
C.2 P ubli c i nter es t sub si di es 75 0 0 0 0 0 0
Public plazas 50% 50 000 000 25 000 000 1,6%
Playgrounds 50% 100 000 000 50 000 000 3,2%
Nursery 0% 0 - -
School complex 0% 0 - -
Sport facilities 0% 0 - -
Library 0% 0 - -
Multipurpose Hall 0% 0 - -
C.3 Envi ro nme ntal s ub si di es 3 37 5 0 0 0 0 0
Wastewater management 75% 225 000 000 168 750 000 10,9%
Renewable energy 75% 75 000 000 56 250 000 3,6%
Stormwater drainage 75% 150 000 000 112 500 000 7,3%
- -
-
D Other re venue s 12 5 0 0 0 0 0 0
- -
Land Sale 1 100 000 000 100 000 000 80,0%
Commercial partnership and Sponsorship 1 25 000 000 25 000 000 20,0%
- -
TOTA L IN COME S 4 2 72 1 2 5 0 0 0 0
193
VI. APPENDIX
REA L EST A TE P RO FO RM A
EXPENSES E XPE NSE S
/! \ (f i ct i ti o us da ta !)
U ni t Qua nti ty C o s t per uni t T o ta l c o s t %
A .1 I nterest cha rges o n lo a ns a nd o ther f i na nci a l cha rges 15% 2 7 7 7 655 0 0 0 100%
A.1.1 Land acquisition financial cost Year 3,5 3 000 000 10 500 000 0%
A.1.2 Land development financing Year 3,5 13 125 000 45 937 500 2%
A.1.3 Infrastructure costs financing Year 1,5 330 000 000 495 000 000 18%
A
. A.1.4 Development costs financing Year 3 750 000 2 250 000 0,1%
A.1.5 Construction works financing Year 3 741 322 500 2 223 967 500 80,1%
F A.1.6 Cautional fees FFT 1 - - -
I - -
N A2 I nterest o n i nterna l f i na nci ng 10% 4 6 1 37 5 0 0 100%
A
-
N
A.2.1 Land acquisition financial cost Year 3,5 2 000 000 7 000 000 15%
C
I
A.2.2 Land development financing Year 3,5 825 000 2 887 500 6%
A A.2.3 Infrastructure costs financing Year 1,5 22 500 000 33 750 000 73%
L A.2.4 Development costs financing Year 3 - - -
A.2.5 Construction works financing Year 3 - - -
C A.2.6 Cautional fees FFT 1 2 500 000 2 500 000 5,4%
O
- -
S
A .3 Ta xes 5 1 18 2 2 5 0 0 0 100%
T
-
S
A.3.1 Property Taxes 1 1 000 000 1 000 000 0,0%
A.3.2 Infrastructure-related taxes 1 1 000 000 1 000 000 0,0%
A.3.3 Development-related taxes 1 4 000 000 4 000 000 0,1%
A.3.4 VAT 18% 28 401 250 000 5 112 225 000 99,9%
- -
B .1 L a nd p urcha s e va lue 867 50 0 0 0 0 10 0%
B.1.1 Land price / Land value 1 750 000 000 750 000 000 86%
B
B.1.2 Notary costs 1 37 500 000 37 500 000 4%
.
B.1.3 Legal costs 1 5 000 000 5 000 000 1%
L B.1.4 Expropriation costs 1 75 000 000 75 000 000 9%
A - -
N
D B .2 L a nd a cqui si ti o n si de co s ts 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 100%
C
B.2.1 Broker 1 7 500 000 7 500 000 19%
O
B.2.2 Demolitions and site clean-up 1 25 000 000 25 000 000 62,5%
S
T B.2.3 Decontamination 0 - - -
S B.2.4 Contribution to public interests (infrastructures, public facilities, ..) 0 - - -
B.2.5 - -
B.2.6 Miscellaneous fees 1 7 500 000 7 500 000 18,8%
- -
C.1 Pro j ect i ncept i o n co s ts 5 000 000 10 0 %
C.1.1 Socio-economic/market/demand studies 1 1 500 000 1 500 000 30,00%

Preliminary concept and feasibility studies (if not
C.1.2 1 750 000 750 000 15,00%
included in professional fees elsewhere)
C.1.3 Technical consultancy costs 1 1 750 000 1 750 000 35,00%
C.1.4 Miscellaneous costs 1 1 000 000 1 000 000 20,00%
C.2 L a nd m a s terpla n a nd i nf ra s truct ure develo pm ent c o s ts 175 000 000 10 0 %
Development Manager
C.2.1 Months 24 750 000 18 000 000 10%
(for this phase of the development only)
C.2.2 Urban Architect 1 75 000 000 75 000 000 43%
C.2.3 Land surveyor / Topographer 1 7 500 000 7 500 000 4%
C.2.4 Landscape Architect 1 15 000 000 15 000 000 9%
C.2.5 Assistant urban planning procedures 1 10 000 000 10 000 000 6%
C.2.6 Environmental Assessment Specialist 1 1 500 000 1 500 000 1%
C.2.7 Geotechnical engineer 1 8 500 000 8 500 000 5%
C.2.8 Roads and utilities engineer 1 16 500 000 16 500 000 9%
C C.2.9 Electrical and Telecom engineers 1 1 500 000 1 500 000 1%
. C.2.10 Other Technical consultants 1 2 500 000 2 500 000 1%
C.2.11 Legal consultancy fees 1 2 500 000 2 500 000 1%
D
C.2.12 Insurances 1 2 000 000 2 000 000 1%
E
C.2.13 Site guarding Months 24 500 000 12 000 000 7%
V
E C.2.14 - -
L C.2.15 Miscellaneous costs 1 2 500 000 2 500 000 1%
O
P
M C.3 B ui ldi ngs develo pm ent c o s ts 41 0 50 0 0 0 0 10 0%
E
N
Development Manager
T C.3.1 Months 36 750 000 27 000 000 6,58%
(for this phase of the development only)
C.3.2 Architect 3 60 000 000 180 000 000 43,85%
C
C.3.3 Structure engineer 3 25 000 000 75 000 000 18,27%
O
C.3.4 MEP Engineer 3 17 500 000 52 500 000 12,79%
S
T C.3.5 Acoustician 0 - -
S C.3.6 Quantity surveyor 3 15 000 000 45 000 000 10,96%
C.3.7 Other Technical consultants 0 - -
C.3.8 Legal consultancy fees 1 7 500 000 7 500 000 1,83%
C.3.9 Insurances 1 1 000 000 1 000 000 0,24%
C.3.10 Site guarding Months 36 500 000 18 000 000 4,38%
C.3.11 - -
C.3.12 - -
C.3.13 - -
C.4 Selli ng c o s ts 90 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 %
C.4.1 Website 1 5 000 000 5 000 000 0,56%
C.4.2 Agent fees 1 767 087 500 767 087 500 85,23%
C.4.3 Media Advertising 1 35 000 000 35 000 000 3,89%
C.4.4 Marketing support documents 1 25 000 000 25 000 000 2,78%
C.4.5 Management and charges for unsold completed housing 1 50 000 000 50 000 000 5,56%
C.4.6 - -
D. 1 I nf ra s truct ures co nst ructi o n co s ts 2 2 00 000 000 100%

194 D
D.1.1 1 150 000 000 150 000 000 6,82%
C.4 Selli ng c o s ts 90 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 %
C.4.1 Website 1 5 000 000 5 000 000 0,56%
C.4.2 Agent fees 1 767 087 500 767 087 500 85,23%
C.4.3 Media Advertising 1 35 000 000 35 000 000 3,89%
C.4.4 Marketing support documents 1 25 000 000 25 000 000 2,78%
C.4.5 Management and charges for unsold completed housing 1 50 000 000 50 000 000 5,56%
C.4.6 - -
D. 1 I nf ra s truct ures co nst ructi o n co s ts 2 2 00 000 000 100%

D
. D.1.1 Retaining Walls / Land Shaping 1 150 000 000 150 000 000 6,82%
D.1.2 Erosion control infrastructure 1 75 000 000 75 000 000 3,41%
I D.1.3 Road network, sidewalks and cycle paths Km 10 90 000 000 900 000 000 40,91%
N D.1.4 Public lighting 1 75 000 000 75 000 000 3,41%
F
C D.1.5 Public Plazas 1 50 000 000 50 000 000 2,27%
R
O D.1.6 Playgrounds 2 50 000 000 100 000 000 4,55%
A
S D.1.7 Stormwater drainage 1 150 000 000 150 000 000 6,82%
N
T D.1.8 Collective wastewater management 1 225 000 000 225 000 000 10,23%
S
S
T D.1.9 Drinking water network extension 1 145 000 000 145 000 000 6,59%
R D.1.10 Electricity network extension 1 150 000 000 150 000 000 6,82%
U D.1.11 Renewable energy installations 1 75 000 000 75 000 000 3,41%
R
D.1.12 Fencing M 150 200 000 30 000 000 1,36%
E
D.1.13 Landscaping Sqm 750 100 000 75 000 000 3,41%
S
D.1.15 - -
- -
E B ui ldi ngs co nst ructi o n co s ts 2 4 7 1 0 7 50 0 0 0 100%
E .1 A f f o rda ble Ho us es 1 680 0 0 0 0 0 0 6, 8%
Earthwork Sqm 5600 5 000 28 000 000 1,67%

Substructure / Foundations Sqm 5600 16 500 92 400 000 5,50%
Structural frame Sqm 5600 7 500 42 000 000 2,50%
Roofs Sqm 5600 40 000 224 000 000 13,33%
External facades and Balustrading Sqm 5600 30 500 170 800 000 10,17%
External joinery Sqm 5600 10 500 58 800 000 3,50%
Electrical, Plumbing and Ventilation installations Sqm 5600 50 000 280 000 000 16,67%
Interior Walls, Ceiling and Finishes Sqm 5600 128 000 716 800 000 42,67%
Private landscaping Sqm 5600 12 000 67 200 000 4,00%
- -
E .2 . 2 A f f o rda ble A ppa rtm ents 5 1 56 2 50 0 0 0 2 0 ,9%
Earthwork Sqm 18750 5 000 93 750 000 1,82%

Structural frame Sqm 18750 75 000 1 406 250 000 27,27%
Roofs Sqm 18750 12 500 234 375 000 4,55%
E
Electrical, Plumbing and Ventilation installations Sqm 18750 55 000 1 031 250 000 20,00%
.
Interior Walls, Ceiling and Finishes Sqm 18750 97 500 1 828 125 000 35,45%
C Private landscaping Sqm 18750 7 500 140 625 000 2,73%
O - -
N E .2 . 3 Ho us es a t f ree m a rk et pri c e 4 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8,6%
S
T
Earthwork Sqm 11500 7 500 86 250 000 1,88%
R
U
C
T Roofs Sqm 11500 50 000 575 000 000 12,50%
I External facades and Balustrading Sqm 11500 47 500 546 250 000 11,88%
O External joinery Sqm 11500 20 000 230 000 000 5,00%
N Electrical, Plumbing and Ventilation installations Sqm 11500 65 000 747 500 000 16,25%
C
O
- -
S
E .2 . 4 A ppa rt m ents a t f ree m a rk et pri ce 6 4 80 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6, 2 %
T
S
Earthwork Sqm 18000 7 500 135 000 000 2,08%
Structural frame Sqm 18000 82 500 1 485 000 000 22,92%
Roofs Sqm 18000 15 000 270 000 000 4,17%
Electrical, Plumbing and Ventilation installations Sqm 18000 70 000 1 260 000 000 19,44%
- -
E .2 . 5 Speci f i c Ho us i ng ( So ci a l ho us i ng, Stu dent ho m es, E lderery ho m es, ) 1 2 51 2 50 0 0 0 5, 1 %
Earthwork Sqm 4550 5 000 22 750 000 1,82%

Roofs Sqm 4550 12 500 56 875 000 4,55%
E .2 . 6 Of f i ce a nd Reta i l bui ldi ngs 3 80 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5, 4 %
Earthwork Sqm 9500 7 500 71 250 000 1,88%

Roofs Sqm 9500 15 000 142 500 000 3,75%
- -
E .2 . 7 L o gi s ti c a nd i ndus try bui ldi ngs 1 590 7 50 0 0 0 6, 4%
Earthwork Sqm 5050 7 500 37 875 000 2,38%

E
Roofs Sqm 5050 15 000 75 750 000 4,76%
.
C External joinery Sqm 5050 15 000 75 750 000 4,76%
O Electrical, Plumbing and Ventilation installations Sqm 5050 55 000 277 750 000 17,46%
N Interior Walls, Ceiling and Finishes Sqm 5050 95 000 479 750 000 30,16%
S Private landscaping Sqm 5050 10 000 50 500 000 3,17% 195
T
- -
- -
E .2 . 5 Speci f i c Ho us i ng ( So ci a l ho us i ng, Stu dent ho m es, E lderery ho m es, ) 1 2 51 2 50 0 0 0 5, 1 %
VI. APPENDIX Earthwork Sqm 4550 5 000 22 750 000 1,82%


Roofs Sqm 4550 12 500 56 875 000 4,55%
EXPENSES Interior Walls, Ceiling and Finishes

Private landscaping
Sqm
Sqm
4550
4550
100 000
7 500
455 000 000
34 125 000
36,36%
2,73%
E .2 . 6 Of f i ce a nd Reta i l bui ldi ngs 3 80 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5, 4 %
Earthwork Sqm 9500 7 500 71 250 000 1,88%

Roofs Sqm 9500 15 000 142 500 000 3,75%
- -
E .2 . 7 L o gi s ti c a nd i ndus try b ui ldi ngs 1 590 7 50 0 0 0 6, 4%
Earthwork Sqm 5050 7 500 37 875 000 2,38%

E
Roofs Sqm 5050 15 000 75 750 000 4,76%
.
C External joinery Sqm 5050 15 000 75 750 000 4,76%
O Electrical, Plumbing and Ventilation installations Sqm 5050 55 000 277 750 000 17,46%
N Interior Walls, Ceiling and Finishes Sqm 5050 95 000 479 750 000 30,16%
S Private landscaping Sqm 5050 10 000 50 500 000 3,17%
T
- -
R
E .2 . 8 Publi c f a ci li ti es (Nursery, S cho o l, Spo rt co m plex, L i bra ry, M ulti purpo s e Ha ll, … ) - 0
U
C
T Earthwork Sqm - -
I Substructure / Foundations Sqm - -
O Structural frame Sqm - -
N Roofs Sqm - -
External facades and Balustrading Sqm - -
C
External joinery Sqm - -
O
Electrical, Plumbing and Ventilation installations Sqm - -
S
Interior Walls, Ceiling and Finishes Sqm - -
T
S Private landscaping - -
- -
E .2 . 9 U ti li t y bui ldi ngs 1 0 2 50 0 0 0 0 0 , 4%
Earthwork Sqm 500 5 000 2 500 000 2,44%

Roofs Sqm 500 37 500 18 750 000 18,29%
- -
E .2 . 10 E xcepti o na l E xpens es a nd U nf o reseen co s ts 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,2 %
Miscellaneous costs - -
1 50 000 000 50 000 000 100,00%
- -
T O T A L E X P E N SE S 37 2 50 7 67 50 0
196
REAL E S TAT E P ROFORMA
PROJECT SUMMARY PROJ E CT SU M M ARY
A . LA N D A N D INFRA S TRU CTURE FEA TURE S
La n d u s e Su rfac e % Remarks
A.1 Constructed area 20 000 sqm 50%

A.2 Roads 2 000 sqm 5%
A.3 Public parking 750 sqm 2%
A.4 Public plazas 1 000 sqm 3%
A.5 Public gardens 4 800 sqm 12%
A.6 Playgrounds 200 sqm 1%
A.7 Private parking 750 sqm 2%
A.8 Private gardens 10 500 sqm 26%
A.9 0%
A.10 Other use 0%
Tot al Lan d Su rfac e 40 0 00 s qm 10 0%
In frans t ru c t u res Q u a n t it y Un i t Remarks
A.10 Roads KM
A.11 Water network KM
A.12 Electricity network KM
A.13 Public lighting KM
A.14 Wastewater plant Pce
A.15 Renewable energy installation Pce
A.16 Stormwater drainage KM
A.17
A.18
A.19
A.20
B . PROJ EC T PROGRA MMIN G
A v e r a ge
Qu an t it y of To t a l gr o s s Remarks
Dw el ii ng u n it s s u rfac e p er % S u rfac e
u nits s u rfac e
u nit
B.1 Affordable houses 70 80 sqm 5 600 sqm 10%

B.2 Affordable apartments 250 75 sqm 18 750 sqm 32%
B.3 Standard houses at free market price 50 150 sqm 7 500 sqm 13%
B.4 Standard apartments at free market price 100 120 sqm 12 000 sqm 21%
B.5 High standing houses at free market price 20 200 sqm 4 000 sqm 7%
B.6 High standing apartments at free market price 40 150 sqm 6 000 sqm 10%
B.7 Social apartments for rent 50 50 sqm 2 500 sqm 4%
B.8 Students homes 30 35 sqm 1 050 sqm 2%
B.9 Elderly homes 50 20 sqm 1 000 sqm 2%
B.10 Other dwelling units sqm -
To t a l d w e l l in g u n it s 660 584 0 0 100 %
A v e r a ge
Ot h er b u i l d in gs s u rfac e p er % S u rfac e
u nits s u rfac e
u nit
B.11 Office buildings 3 1 500 sqm 4 500 sqm 31%

B.12 Retail buildings 5 1 000 sqm 5 000 sqm 34%
B.13 Logistics buildings 1 2 000 sqm 2 000 sqm 14%
B.14 Industry buildings 2 1 525 sqm 3 050 sqm 21%
B.15 Nursery 0 sqm sqm -
B.16 School complex 0 sqm sqm -
B.17 Sport facilities 0 sqm sqm -
B.18 Library 0 sqm sqm -
B.19 Multipurpose Hall 0 sqm sqm -
B.20 Other buildings 0 sqm sqm -
To t a l o t h e r b u il d in g s 11 14 550 100 %
A v e r a ge
Ot h er equ ip men t s s u rfac e p er % S u rfac e
u nits s u rfac e
u nit
B.21 Public parking sqm -

B.22 Private parking sqm -
B.23 Technical facilities sqm -
B.24 sqm -
B.25 sqm -
To t a l o t h e r e q u ip m e n t s 0 0 0%
C . DWELLIN G TYP OLOGIE S
Du p l ex 3 or 4
Dw el ii ng u n it s S t u dio 1 B ed room 2 B edrooms 3 B edrooms 4 B edrooms Ot h ers
b edrooms
# Units # Units # Units # Units # Units # Units # Units
C.1 Affordable houses 197
C.2 Affordable apartments
A verage
Qu an t it y of Tot al gros s Remarks
Ot h er equ ip men t s s u rfac e p er % S u rfac e
VI. APPENDIX u nits
u nit
s u rfac e

B.21 Public parking sqm -
B.22 Private parking sqm -
B.23 Technical facilities sqm -
B.24 sqm -
PROJECT SUMMARY
B.25 sqm -
Tot al ot her equ ip ment s 0 0 0%
C . DWELLIN G TYP OLOGIE S
Du p l e x 3 o r 4
Dw el ii ng u n it s S t u d io 1 B ed room 2 B edrooms 3 B e d r o oms 4 B edrooms Ot h ers
b edrooms
# Units # Units # Units # Units # Units # Units # Units
C.1 Affordable houses
C.2 Affordable apartments
C.3 Standard houses at free market price
C.4 Standard apartments at free market price
C.5 High standing houses at free market price
C.6 High standing apartments at free market price
C.7 Social apartments for rent
C.8 Students homes
C.9 Elderly homes
C.10 Other dwelling units
To t a l d w e l l in g u n it s 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
D. P ROJ EC T P HA SING
Dw el l i ng u n it s P h as e 1 P h as e 2 P h as e 3 Ot h er P has es Remarks
# Units # Units # Units # Units

D.1 Affordable houses
D.2 Affordable apartments
D.3 Standard houses at free market price
D.4 Standard apartments at free market price
D.5 High standing houses at free market price
D.6 High standing apartments at free market price
D.7 Other dwelling units
To t a l d w e l l in g u n it s 0 0 0 0
Ot h er b u i l d in gs P h as e 1 P h as e 2 P h as e 3 Ot h er P has es Remarks
# Units # Units # Units # Units
D.8 Office buildings
D.9 Retail buildings
D.10 Logistics buildings
D.11 Industry buildings
D.12 Other buildings
To t a l o t h e r b u il d in g s 0 0 0 0
E . PROJ EC T PLA N N IN G
S t art E nd Du rat ion

Remarks
(d d /mm/yy yy ) (d d /mm/yy yy ) (Mont h s )
E.1 Land purchase

E.2 Expropriation process
E.3 Site cleaning
E.4 Masterplan and Infrastructure development
E.5 Real Estate development
E.6 Infrastructure construction
E.6.1 Phase 1
E.6.2 Phase 2
E.6.3 Phase 3
E.6.4 Other phases
E.7 Real Estate construction
E.7.1 Phase 1
E.7.2 Phase 2
E.7.3 Phase 3
E.7.4 Other phases
E.8 Sales planning
E.8.1 Phase 1
E.8.2 Phase 2
E.8.3 Phase 3
E.8.4 Other phases
198
199
VI. APPENDIX
3.IMPACT SIMULATION TOOL
SUBSIDIES AND FISCAL INCENTIVES PROJECTION
Total Annual Subsidies and Fiscal Incentives
Land cost
696.250.000 RWF
3%
Reduced VAT
8.797.050.000 RWF
34%
Total Annual Subsidies and Fiscal Incentives10.517.500.000
Infrastructure cost
RWF
40%
Land cost
696.250.000 RWF
Customs duties exemption 3%
2.178.450.000 RWF
Reduced VAT
8%
8.797.050.000 RWF
34% Financial costs Technical assistance
2.263.445.375 RWF 1.477.500.000 RWF Infrastructure cost
9% 6% 10.517.500.000 RWF
40%
Customs duties exemption

2.178.450.000 RWF
8%
Financial costs Technical assistance
2.263.445.375 RWF 1.477.500.000 RWF
9% 6%
Total Annual Subsidies and Fiscal Incentives per supply chain

Landowner Self-Builder Landowner private investment
1.385.000.000 RWF 785.000.000 RWF
5% 3%
Large-Scale Developer
6.552.002.000 RWF
Landowner Joint-Venture
25%
4.594.049.600 RWF
Total Annual Subsidies and Fiscal Incentives per supply chain 18%
Landowner Self-Builder Landowner private investment

1.385.000.000 RWF 785.000.000 RWF
5% 3%
Micro-Scale Developer
4.914.739.775 RWF
Large-Scale Developer
19%
Small-Scale 6.552.002.000
Developer RWF
Landowner Joint-Venture
7.699.404.000 RWF 25%
4.594.049.600 RWF
30%
18%
Micro-Scale Developer
4.914.739.775 RWF
19%
Small-Scale Developer
7.699.404.000 RWF
30%
200
ANNUAL IMPACT SIMULATION
Subsidies and Fiscal Incentives per Dwelling Surface
Subsidies Land cost RWF/SQM RWF/SQM RWF/SQM 5.000 RWF/SQM 5.000 RWF/SQM 5.000 RWF/SQM
Subsidies Infrastructure cost 10.000 RWF/SQM 10.000 RWF/SQM 30.000 RWF/SQM 40.000 RWF/SQM 60.000 RWF/SQM 70.000 RWF/SQM
Subsidies Technical assistance 10.000 RWF/SQM 10.000 RWF/SQM 5.000 RWF/SQM 5.000 RWF/SQM RWF/SQM RWF/SQM
Subsidies Financial costs RWF/SQM RWF/SQM 11.806 RWF/SQM 13.341 RWF/SQM 13.428 RWF/SQM 11.936 RWF/SQM
Fiscal incentive Customs duties exemption RWF/SQM RWF/SQM 11.925 RWF/SQM 11.475 RWF/SQM 12.600 RWF/SQM 12.600 RWF/SQM
Fiscal incentive Reduced VAT RWF/SQM RWF/SQM 52.200 RWF/SQM 50.400 RWF/SQM 47.700 RWF/SQM 47.700 RWF/SQM
Total Annual Subsidies and Fiscal Incentives
Landowner private
SUPPLY CHAIN Landowner Self-Builder Landowner Joint-Venture Micro-Scale Developer Small-Scale Developer Large-Scale Developer TOTAL
investment
1 - DU 1 - 5 DU 5 - 20 DU 5 - 20 DU 20 - 100 DU > 100 DU
Subsidies Land cost 0 RWF 0 RWF 0 RWF 196.250.000 RWF 277.500.000 RWF 222.500.000 RWF 696.250.000 RWF
Subsidies Infrastructure cost 692.500.000 RWF 392.500.000 RWF 1.417.500.000 RWF 1.570.000.000 RWF 3.330.000.000 RWF 3.115.000.000 RWF 10.517.500.000 RWF
Subsidies Technical assistance 692.500.000 RWF 392.500.000 RWF 196.250.000 RWF 196.250.000 RWF 0 RWF 0 RWF 1.477.500.000 RWF
Subsidies Financial costs 0 RWF 0 RWF 463.393.350 RWF 523.646.025 RWF 745.254.000 RWF 531.152.000 RWF 2.263.445.375 RWF
TOTAL SUBSIDIES per YEAR 1.385.000.000 RWF 785.000.000 RWF 2.077.143.350 RWF 2.486.146.025 RWF 4.352.754.000 RWF 3.868.652.000 RWF 14.954.695.375 RWF
Fiscal incentive Customs duties exemption 0 RWF 0 RWF 468.056.250 RWF 450.393.750 RWF 699.300.000 RWF 560.700.000 RWF 2.178.450.000 RWF
Fiscal incentive Reduced VAT 0 RWF 0 RWF 2.048.850.000 RWF 1.978.200.000 RWF 2.647.350.000 RWF 2.122.650.000 RWF 8.797.050.000 RWF
TOTAL FISCAL INCENTIVES per year 0 RWF 0 RWF 2.516.906.250 RWF 2.428.593.750 RWF 3.346.650.000 RWF 2.683.350.000 RWF 10.975.500.000 RWF
TOTAL PUBLIC SUPPORT per supply chain and per year 1.385.000.000 RWF 785.000.000 RWF 4.594.049.600 RWF 4.914.739.775 RWF 7.699.404.000 RWF 6.552.002.000 RWF 25.930.195.375 RWF
Subsidies and Fiscal incentives impact per dwelling unit
Landowner private
investment
1 - DU 1 - 5 DU 5 - 20 DU 5 - 20 DU 20 - 100 DU > 100 DU
Number of Dwelling units projected per year 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 6.000
Subventions Land cost 0 RWF 0 RWF 0 RWF 196.250 RWF 277.500 RWF 222.500 RWF
Subventions Infrastructure cost 692.500 RWF 392.500 RWF 1.417.500 RWF 1.570.000 RWF 3.330.000 RWF 3.115.000 RWF
Subventions Technical assistance 692.500 RWF 392.500 RWF 196.250 RWF 196.250 RWF 0 RWF 0 RWF
Subventions Financial costs 0 RWF 0 RWF 463.393 RWF 523.646 RWF 745.254 RWF 531.152 RWF
TOTAL SUBSIDIES per Dwelling unit 1.385.000 RWF 785.000 RWF 2.077.143 RWF 2.486.146 RWF 4.352.754 RWF 3.868.652 RWF
Fiscal incentive Customs duties exemption 0 RWF 0 RWF 468.056 RWF 450.394 RWF 699.300 RWF 560.700 RWF
Fiscal incentive Reduced VAT 0 RWF 0 RWF 2.048.850 RWF 1.978.200 RWF 2.647.350 RWF 2.122.650 RWF
TOTAL FISCAL INCENTIVES per Dwelling unit 0 RWF 0 RWF 2.516.906 RWF 2.428.594 RWF 3.346.650 RWF 2.683.350 RWF
201
VI. APPENDIX
3.IMPACT SIMULATION TOOL
SELLING PRICE BREAKDOWN
Landowner Self-Builder Landowner private investment Landowner Joint-Venture
Selling price breakdown VAT % Optimised scenario Selling price breakdown VAT % Optimised scenario Selling price breakdown VAT % Optimised scenario
Exclusive VAT Exclusive VAT Exclusive VAT Exclusive VAT Exclusive VAT Exclusive VAT
Land cost 40.000 RWF/SQM 40.000 RWF/SQM Land cost 30.000 RWF/SQM 30.000 RWF/SQM Land cost 30.000 RWF/SQM 30.000 RWF/SQM
Design & Supervision 5.000 RWF/SQM 18% 5.000 RWF/SQM 18% Design & Supervision 10.000 RWF/SQM 18% 10.000 RWF/SQM 18% Design & Supervision 15.000 RWF/SQM 18% 15.000 RWF/SQM 0%
Marketing & Sales RWF/SQM 18% RWF/SQM 18% Marketing & Sales RWF/SQM 18% RWF/SQM 18% Marketing & Sales 10.000 RWF/SQM 18% 10.000 RWF/SQM 0%
Technical Assistance RWF/SQM 18% RWF/SQM 18% Technical Assistance RWF/SQM 18% RWF/SQM 18% Technical Assistance RWF/SQM 18% RWF/SQM 0%
Public infrastructures RWF/SQM 18% RWF/SQM 18% Public infrastructures RWF/SQM 18% RWF/SQM 18% Public infrastructures 25.000 RWF/SQM 18% RWF/SQM 0%
Private infrastructures 10.000 RWF/SQM 18% 10.000 RWF/SQM 18% Private infrastructures 15.000 RWF/SQM 18% 10.000 RWF/SQM 18% Private infrastructures 10.000 RWF/SQM 18% 10.000 RWF/SQM 0%
Structure 120.000 RWF/SQM 18% 130.000 RWF/SQM 18% Structure 130.000 RWF/SQM 18% 125.000 RWF/SQM 18% Structure 135.000 RWF/SQM 18% 120.000 RWF/SQM 0%
Mechanical Electrical & Plumbing 25.000 RWF/SQM 18% 40.000 RWF/SQM 18% Mechanical Electrical & Plumbing 45.000 RWF/SQM 18% 45.000 RWF/SQM 18% Mechanical Electrical & Plumbing 45.000 RWF/SQM 18% 55.000 RWF/SQM 0%
Finishes 40.000 RWF/SQM 18% 60.000 RWF/SQM 18% Finishes 60.000 RWF/SQM 18% 75.000 RWF/SQM 18% Finishes 80.000 RWF/SQM 18% 80.000 RWF/SQM 0%
Total VAT 36.000 RWF/SQM 44.100 RWF/SQM Total VAT 46.800 RWF/SQM 47.700 RWF/SQM Total VAT 57.600 RWF/SQM RWF/SQM
Custom duties 4.875 RWF/SQM 6.000 RWF/SQM Custom duties 9.375 RWF/SQM 12.750 RWF/SQM Custom duties 18.438 RWF/SQM 7.950 RWF/SQM
Financial cost RWF/SQM RWF/SQM Financial cost 10.385 RWF/SQM 17.773 RWF/SQM Financial cost 61.349 RWF/SQM 40.666 RWF/SQM
Profit RWF/SQM RWF/SQM Profit 34.618 RWF/SQM 43.778 RWF/SQM Profit 63.906 RWF/SQM 41.713 RWF/SQM
Total Selling price / Sqm 280.875 RWF/SQM 335.100 RWF/SQM Total Selling price / Sqm 391.178 RWF/SQM 417.001 RWF/SQM Total Selling price / Sqm 551.293 RWF/SQM 410.329 RWF/SQM
Horizon 2023 2023 Horizon 2023 2023 Horizon 2023 2023
Selling price impacted by inflation 280.875 RWF/SQM 335.100 RWF/SQM Selling price impacted by inflation 391.178 RWF/SQM 417.001 RWF/SQM Selling price impacted by inflation 551.293 RWF/SQM 410.329 RWF/SQM
Construction cost optimisation 335.100 RWF/SQM Construction cost optimisation 417.001 RWF/SQM Construction cost optimisation 410.329 RWF/SQM
Micro-Scale Developer Small-Scale Developer Large-Scale Developer
Selling price breakdown VAT % Optimised scenario Selling price breakdown VAT % Optimised scenario Selling price breakdown VAT % Optimised scenario
Exclusive VAT Exclusive VAT Exclusive VAT Exclusive VAT Exclusive VAT Exclusive VAT
Land cost 30.000 RWF/SQM 30.000 RWF/SQM Land cost 30.000 RWF/SQM 25.000 RWF/SQM Land cost 30.000 RWF/SQM 25.000 RWF/SQM
Design & Supervision 15.000 RWF/SQM 18% 15.000 RWF/SQM 0% Design & Supervision 15.000 RWF/SQM 18% 15.000 RWF/SQM 0% Design & Supervision 15.000 RWF/SQM 18% 15.000 RWF/SQM 0%
Marketing & Sales 10.000 RWF/SQM 18% 10.000 RWF/SQM 0% Marketing & Sales 15.000 RWF/SQM 18% 10.000 RWF/SQM 0% Marketing & Sales 15.000 RWF/SQM 18% 10.000 RWF/SQM 0%
Technical Assistance RWF/SQM 18% RWF/SQM 0% Technical Assistance RWF/SQM 18% RWF/SQM 0% Technical Assistance RWF/SQM 18% RWF/SQM 0%
Public infrastructures 25.000 RWF/SQM 18% RWF/SQM 0% Public infrastructures 30.000 RWF/SQM 18% RWF/SQM 0% Public infrastructures 80.000 RWF/SQM 18% RWF/SQM 0%
Private infrastructures 10.000 RWF/SQM 18% 10.000 RWF/SQM 0% Private infrastructures 10.000 RWF/SQM 18% 10.000 RWF/SQM 0% Private infrastructures 10.000 RWF/SQM 18% 10.000 RWF/SQM 0%
Structure 130.000 RWF/SQM 18% 115.000 RWF/SQM 0% Structure 125.000 RWF/SQM 18% 110.000 RWF/SQM 0% Structure 125.000 RWF/SQM 18% 110.000 RWF/SQM 0%
Mechanical Electrical & Plumbing 45.000 RWF/SQM 18% 55.000 RWF/SQM 0% Mechanical Electrical & Plumbing 40.000 RWF/SQM 18% 50.000 RWF/SQM 0% Mechanical Electrical & Plumbing 40.000 RWF/SQM 18% 50.000 RWF/SQM 0%
Finishes 85.000 RWF/SQM 18% 75.000 RWF/SQM 0% Finishes 75.000 RWF/SQM 18% 70.000 RWF/SQM 0% Finishes 75.000 RWF/SQM 18% 70.000 RWF/SQM 0%
Total VAT 57.600 RWF/SQM RWF/SQM Total VAT 55.800 RWF/SQM RWF/SQM Total VAT 64.800 RWF/SQM RWF/SQM
Custom duties 18.438 RWF/SQM 7.650 RWF/SQM Custom duties 24.500 RWF/SQM 8.400 RWF/SQM Custom duties 28.875 RWF/SQM 8.400 RWF/SQM
Financial cost 66.462 RWF/SQM 40.659 RWF/SQM Financial cost 70.610 RWF/SQM 34.316 RWF/SQM Financial cost 69.649 RWF/SQM 29.840 RWF/SQM
Profit 76.687 RWF/SQM 44.471 RWF/SQM Profit 63.045 RWF/SQM 35.808 RWF/SQM Profit 53.204 RWF/SQM 29.840 RWF/SQM
Total Selling price / Sqm 569.186 RWF/SQM 402.780 RWF/SQM Total Selling price / Sqm 553.955 RWF/SQM 368.524 RWF/SQM Total Selling price / Sqm 606.528 RWF/SQM 358.080 RWF/SQM
Horizon 2023 2023 Horizon 2023 2023 Horizon 2023 2023
Selling price impacted by inflation 569.186 RWF/SQM 402.780 RWF/SQM Selling price impacted by inflation 553.955 RWF/SQM 368.524 RWF/SQM Selling price impacted by inflation 606.528 RWF/SQM 358.080 RWF/SQM
Construction cost optimisation 402.780 RWF/SQM Construction cost optimisation 368.524 RWF/SQM Construction cost optimisation 358.080 RWF/SQM
202
SCENARIOS PARAMETERS
Landowner private
investment
Dwelling units number 1 - DU 1 - 5 DU 5 - 20 DU 5 - 20 DU 20 - 100 DU > 100 DU
Units to be constructed per year 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 6.000
Studio 30 SQM - - 100 - 25 - 125
Studio 25 SQM - 100 150 100 75 50 475
Studio 15 SQM - 150 - 150 - 100 400
1 BR Dwelling 45 SQM - - 100 - 100 - 200
1 BR Dwelling 40 SQM - 100 150 100 150 100 600
1 BR Dwelling 35 SQM - 150 - 150 - 150 450
2 BR Dwelling 55 SQM 250 - 100 - 125 - 475
2 BR Dwelling 45 SQM 150 100 150 100 150 100 750
2 BR Dwelling 40 SQM - 150 - 150 - 150 450
3 BR Dwelling 80 SQM 250 - 100 - 125 - 475
3 BR Dwelling 65 SQM 150 100 150 100 150 100 750
3 BR Dwelling 55 SQM - 150 - 150 - 150 450
4 BR Dwelling 100 SQM 150 - - - 50 - 200
4 BR Dwelling 80 SQM 50 - - - 50 50 150
4 BR Dwelling 65 SQM - - - - - 50 50
Total surface to be constructed per year 69.250 SQM 39.250 SQM 47.250 SQM 39.250 SQM 55.500 SQM 44.500 SQM 295.000 SQM
Initial Selling price 280.875 RWF/SQM 391.178 RWF/SQM 551.293 RWF/SQM 569.186 RWF/SQM 553.955 RWF/SQM 606.528 RWF/SQM
Optimised Selling price 335.100 RWF/SQM 417.001 RWF/SQM 410.329 RWF/SQM 402.780 RWF/SQM 368.524 RWF/SQM 358.080 RWF/SQM
54.225 RWF/SQM 25.823 RWF/SQM -140.964 RWF/SQM -166.406 RWF/SQM -185.431 RWF/SQM -248.448 RWF/SQM
Scenarios Assumptions
Suppy chain Données Landowner Self-Builder
Landowner private investment
Landowner Joint-Venture Micro-Scale Developer Small-Scale Developer Large-Scale Developer
Horizon projection / Construction cost optimisation 2023 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0%
Projected Inflation rate 2023 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Imported materials ratio 10% 20% 30% 30% 35% 35%
External financing ratio 0% 25% 60% 70% 75% 80%
Intenal Financing ratio 100% 75% 40% 30% 25% 20%
Internal interest rate 0,0% 0,0% 10,0% 10,0% 10,0% 10,0%
Optimization levers
Supply chain Category Landowner Self-Builder
Landowner private investment
Landowner Joint-Venture Micro-Scale Developer Small-Scale Developer Large-Scale Developer
VAT - Studies & Services Fiscal 18,0% 18,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0%
VAT - Infrastructures Fiscal 18,0% 18,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0%
VAT - Constructions costs Fiscal 18,0% 18,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0% 0,0%
Customs duty on imported materials Fiscal 25,0% 25,0% 10,0% 10,0% 10,0% 10,0%
External financing rate (reduced) Subsidies 20,0% 20,0% 14,0% 14,0% 12,0% 10,0%
Capped profit - Subsidized project Incentive 0,0% 14,0% 14,0% 14,0% 12,0% 10,0%
Land Pruchase subsidy Subsidies RWF/SQM RWF/SQM RWF/SQM 5.000 RWF/SQM 5.000 RWF/SQM 5.000 RWF/SQM
Public infrastructure Financing Subsidies 0% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Private infrastructure Financing Subsidies 50% 50% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Technical assistance - Public subsidy Subsidies 10.000 RWF/SQM 10.000 RWF/SQM 5.000 RWF/SQM 5.000 RWF/SQM RWF/SQM RWF/SQM
203
VI. APPENDIX
COLLECTIVE BUILDING G+3 / NON-SEISMIC ZONE 0.16G

A B C D
F2(1800x1800x350) F2(1800x1800x350) F2(1800x1800x350)
C1 C1 C1 F1: 2000x2000x400 mm
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
6
F2: 1800x1800x350
Pad Foundation Weight of Steel : 100 kg /m3
F1(2000x2000x400)
F2(1800x1800x350) F2(1800x1800x350)
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
5
F1(2000x2000x400)
F2(1800x1800x350) F2(1800x1800x350)
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
4
Foundations
Layout
Scale: 1:50
F1(2000x2000x400)
F2(1800x1800x350) F2(1800x1800x350)
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
3
F1(2000x2000x400)
F2(1800x1800x350) F2(1800x1800x350)
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
2
F2(1800x1800x350) F2(1800x1800x350) F2(1800x1800x350)
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
1
Columns C1 : 400x400 mm
A B C D Weight of Steel : 220 kg/m3
200mm
1 mm thick slab on grade
A142 BRC mesh at 0mm from slab top
Ground Beams : 300x200 mm
50mm quarry dust filling Weight of Steel : 150 kg/m3
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
6 Natural soil or approved fill compacted
Ground Slab : 150mm Thick

Weight of Steel : 65 kg/m3
200mm
50mm quarry dust filling
C1 C1 C1
200mm thick hardcore
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)

C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
4
G
Layout
Scale: 1:50
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
3
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
2
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
1
204
D
Weight of Steel : 200kg/m3
A B C
Floor Beams : 400x200 mm

C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
6 200x400 200x400
Floor Slab : 150mm Thick

RC Slab Typical
200x400
200x400
200x400
Floor
d=150
RC Slab Typical
RC Slab Typical Floor
Floor d=150
d=150
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
5 200x400 200x400
RC Slab Typical
Floor d=150
d=150
RC Slab Typical
200x400
200x400
200x400
Floor
d=150
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
4 200x400 200x400
Typical Floor
RC Slab Typical
Layout
Floor
d=150
T.A. Top Additional Reinf.
B.A. Bottom Additional Reinf.
200x400
200x400
200x400
200x400
Scale: 1:50
RC Slab Typical
RC Slab Typical
Floor
d=150
Floor d=150
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
3 200x400 200x400
RC Slab Typical
Floor
d=150
200x400
200x400
200x400
RC Slab Typical RC Slab Typical

Floor Floor
d=150 d=150
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
2 200x400 200x400
RC Slab Typical
200x400
200x400
200x400
Floor
d=150

Floor Floor
d=150 d=150
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
1 200x400 200x400
A B C D
Ring Beams :300x200 mm

C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
6 200x300 200x300
200x300
200x300
200x300
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
5 200x300 200x300
200x300
200x300
200x300
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
4 200x300 200x300
Roof
Layout
Scale: 1:50
200x300
200x300
200x300
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
3 200x300 200x300
200x300
200x300
200x300
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
2 200x300 200x300
200x300
200x300
200x300
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
1 200x300 200x300
205
COLLECTIVE BUILDING G+3 / SEISMIC ZONE 0.25G
A B C D
F1(2000x2000x400) F1(2000x2000x400) F1(2000x2000x400)
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
6
2000x2000x400 mm
Pad Foundation Weight of Steel : 120 kg /m3
F1(2000x2000x400) F1(2000x2000x400) F1(2000x2000x400)
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
5
F1(2000x2000x400) F1(2000x2000x400) F1(2000x2000x400)
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
4
Foundations
Layout
Scale: 1:50
F1(2000x2000x400) F1(2000x2000x400) F1(2000x2000x400)
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
3
F1(2000x2000x400) F1(2000x2000x400) F1(2000x2000x400)
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
2
F1(2000x2000x400) F1(2000x2000x400) F1(2000x2000x400)
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
1
A B C D Weight of Steel : 280kg/m3
200mm
50mm quarry dust filling Weight of Steel : 180 kg/m3
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)

200mm
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)

C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
4
G
Layout
Scale: 1:50
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
3
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
2
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
1
206
D
A B C
Floor Beams : 400x200 mm

C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
6 200x400 200x400

RC Slab Typical
200x400
200x400
200x400
Floor
d=150
RC Slab Typical
Floor d=150
d=150
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
5 200x400 200x400
RC Slab Typical
Floor d=150
d=150
RC Slab Typical
200x400
200x400
200x400
Floor
d=150
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
4 200x400 200x400
Typical Floor
RC Slab Typical
Layout
Floor
d=150
T.A. Top Additional Reinf.
B.A. Bottom Additional Reinf.
200x400
200x400
200x400
200x400
Scale: 1:50
RC Slab Typical
RC Slab Typical
Floor
d=150
Floor d=150
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
3 200x400 200x400
RC Slab Typical
Floor
d=150
200x400
200x400
200x400

Floor Floor
d=150 d=150
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
2 200x400 200x400
RC Slab Typical
200x400
200x400
200x400
Floor
d=150

Floor Floor
d=150 d=150
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
1 200x400 200x400
A B C D
Ring Beams :300x200 mm

C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
6 200x300 200x300
200x300
200x300
200x300
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
5 200x300 200x300
200x300
200x300
200x300
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
4 200x300 200x300
Roof
Layout
Scale: 1:50
200x300
200x300
200x300
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
3 200x300 200x300
200x300
200x300
200x300
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
2 200x300 200x300
200x300
200x300
200x300
C1 C1 C1
(400x400) (400x400) (400x400)
1 200x300 200x300
207
COLLECTIVE BUILDING G+3 /
STRUCTURE COST COMPARISON SEISMIC ZONE 0.16G / 0.25G
G + 3 CO L L E CT I V E BU I L D I N G - S E I S M I C R E S I S T A N CE CO S T CO M P A R I S O N
D e s i g n p e a k a c c e l e ra t i on 0. 2 5 g D e s i g n p e a k a c c e l e ra t i on 0. 1 6 g
D E SCRIP TI O N U QTY RA TE /U AMOUNT % U QTY RA TE /U AMOUNT %
1 . S T R U CT U R E 114 559 344 54% 104 675 450 51%
E x ca v a t i on Column bases & Sub-columns CM 150 4 500 676 485 0,3% CM 134 4 500 604 665 0,3%
Ba ckf i ll Selected excavated soil CM 114 6 500 742 599 0,3% CM 105 6 500 681 265 0,3%
Column bases , Sub-Columns and

Ground Beams - C25
CM 36 190 000 6 855 960 3,2% CM 30 190 000 5 616 400 2,8%
Stone Strip Foundation - Stone Masonry CM 30 70 000 2 091 600 1% CM 30 70 000 2 091 600 1,0%
F ou nd a t i on 50mm thick C15 Blinding SM 50 8 750 435 750 0% CM 50 8 750 435 750 0,2%

Kg 4 998 1 500 7 496 280 3,5% Kg 3 481 1 500 5 222 220 2,6%

SM 1 80 7 500 1 351 800 0,6% SM 1 71 7 500 1 280 400 0,6%
W a t e rp roof i ng of F ou nd a t i on Bitumen paint on strip foundation SM 1 80 4 500 811 080 0,4% SM 1 71 4 500 768 240 0,4%
150mm thick - Earthen Floor SM 0 0 0 0,0% SM 0 0 0 0,0%
100mm thick - C25 Concrete Floor SM 213 19 000 4 042 250 1,9% SM 213 19 000 4 042 250 2,0%
G rou nd F loor S la b
Slab
SM 213 5 500 1 170 125 0,5% SM 213 5 500 1 170 125 0,6%
Formwork in Ground Slab SM 6 7 500 45 000 0,0% SM 6 7 500 45 000 0,0%
Pad Foundation
1 . A F O U N D A TIO N Reinforced Concrete Footing (Grade 25, CM 3 190 000 0% CM 3 190 000 0%
600x600x400, seismic ground)
1 . B G RO U N D F LO O R SLA B Concrete Slab (150 mm thick) SQM 122 74 340 0% SQM 122 0 0%

1 . C F LO O R SLA B
toping slab)
SQM 638 42 500 27 125 625 13% SQM 638 42 500 27 125 625 13%

beams (Grade 25)
CM 71 190 000 13 479 360 6% CM 71 190 000 13 479 360 7%

1 . D V E RTICA L STRU CTU RE beams
Kg 17 474 1 500 26 210 880 12% Kg 13 392 1 500 20 088 000 10%
Formwork in Columns and beams SM 809 7 500 6 067 800 3% SM 809 7 500 6 067 800 3%
1 . E F A CA D E B r i ck Ro wl o ck B o n d SQM 49 1 1 8 000 8 838 000 4% SQM 49 1 1 8 000 8 838 000 4%
1 . F PA RTITIO N W A LLS B E TW E E N Co m p r e s s e d St a b i l i s e d E a r t h B l o ck s
A PA RTM E N TS ( CSE B s ) I n f i l l
SQM 1 00 1 8 000 1 800 000 1% SQM 1 00 1 8 000 1 800 000 1%
1 . G CA RP E N TRY ( Ro o f St r u ct u r e ) Timber Roof & Metal Sheet SQM 213 25 000 5 318 750 2% SQM 213 25 000 5 318 750 3%
208
209
VI. APPENDIX
COLLECTIVE BUILDING G+10
Foundation Weight of Steel : 165kg /m3
Layout
Base reinforcement in mat foundations
Panels: L1..L5
Top: ∅16 every 30 cm
Bottom: ∅16 every 30 cm Not detailed in drawing
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
F2 (5200x5200x750) F2 (5200x5200x750)
F3 (10200x21000x1000) Pad Foundation Weight of Steel : 80 kg /m3
Raft Foundation Weight of Steel : 210 kg /m3
C2 C1 C1 C1 C2
M
C2 C2 C1 C1 C1 C2 C2
L
F1 (3100x3100x650) F1 (3100x3100x650)
K
C2 C1 C1 C2
J
F1 (3100x3100x650) F1 (3100x3100x650)
H Foundations
Layout
Base reinforcement in mat foundations

C2 C1 C1 C2 Panels: L1..L5
Top: ∅16 every 30 cm Bottom: ∅16 every 30 cm
G Not detailed in drawing
Scale: 1:50
F1 (3100x3100x650) F1 (3100x3100x650)
C2 C1 C1 C2
D
C
F2 (5200x5200x750) F2 (5200x5200x750)
C2 C2 C1 C1 C1 C2 C2
B
C2 C1 C1 C1 C2
A
210
200mm
50mm quarry dust filling Columns C1 & C2: 500x500 mm

10 11
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Natural soil or approved fill compacted

C2 C1 C1 C1 C2
M 20x30 20x30 20x30 20x30

20x30
20x30
20x30
20x30
200mm

C2 C2 C1 C1 C1 C2 C2
L 20x30 20x30 20x30 20x30 20x30 20x30 Shear Wall : 250 mm Thick
Natural soil or approved fill compacted Weight of Steel : 200 kg/m3
20x30
20x30
20x30
20x30
K
200mm

C2 C1 C1 C2
Natural soil or approved fill compacted
J 20x30 20x30
20x30
20x30
20x30
20x30
H
Floor 1
Layout
Scale: 1:50 C2 C1 C1 C2
G 20x30 20x30
F
20x30
20x30
20x30
20x30
E
C2 C1 C1 C2
D 20x30 20x30
C
20x30
20x30
20x30
20x30
C2 C2 C1 C1 C1 C2 C2
B 20x30 20x30 20x30 20x30 20x30 20x30
20x30
20x30
20x30
20x30
C2 C1 C1 C1 C2
A 20x30 20x30 20x30 20x30
Columns C1 & C2: 500x500 mm

Ground Beams : 300x200 mm Weight of Steel : 180 kg/m3
Ground Slab : 150mm Thick Weight of Steel : 65 kg/m3

Shear Wall : 250 mm Thick Weight of Steel : 200 kg/m3
Columns C1 & C2: 500x500 mm 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Floor Beams : 450x200 mm C2 C1 C1 C1 C2

Weight of Steel : 220 kg/m3 M 20x45 20x45 20x45 20x45 20x45 20x45
RC Slab Typical
Floor
d=150
RC Slab RC Slab Typical
Typical
Floor RC Slab Typical RC Slab Typical
Floor d=150
20x45
20x45
d=150 Floor d=150

Floor
d=150
20x45
20x45
20x45
20x45
20x45
Weight of Steel : 100 kg/m3 C2 C2 C1 C1 C1 C2 C2

Shear Wall : 250 mm Thick L 20x45 20x45 20x45 20x45 20x45 20x45

Typical
Floor
d=150
Floor d=150
20x45

Floor Floor
d=150 d=150
20x45
20x45
20x45
20x45
C2 C1 C1 C2
J 20x45 20x45 20x45 20x45
I RC Slab Typical
Floor
d=150
20x45
20x45
20x45
20x45
20x45
20x45
20x45
20x45
RC Slab Typical
H d=150
Floor
G+1
Layout
Scale: 1:50 C2 C1 C1 C2
G 20x45 20x45 20x45 20x45
F
RC Slab Typical
Floor
d=150
20x45
20x45
20x45
20x45
20x45
20x45
20x45
20x45
RC Slab Typical
Floor
E d=150
C2 C1 C1 C2
D 20x45 20x45 20x45 20x45
RC Slab Typical
Floor
C d=150
20x45
20x45
20x45
20x45
RC Slab
20x45
Typical
Floor
d=150
Floor Floor
d=150 d=150
C2 C2 C1 C1 C1 C2 C2
B 20x45 20x45 20x45 20x45 20x45 20x45

Typical RC Slab Typical
Floor d=150
Floor RC Slab Typical
d=150 d=150
Floor
20x45
20x45
20x45
20x45
20x45
Floor
d=150
20x45
20x45
C2 C1 C1 C1 C2
A 20x45 20x45 20x45 20x45 20x45 20x45
Columns C1 & C2: 500x500 mm

Floor Beams : 450x200 mm Weight of Steel : 200kg/m3
Floor Slab : 150mm Thick Weight of Steel : 100 kg/m3
Shear Wall : 250 mm Thick Weight of Steel : 200 kg/m3
211
Development Bank of Rwanda (BRD)
71point4 Lambert Lénack

Yves Nsengiyumva Philibert de Viron
Kecia Rust, CAHF James Setzler
Fatou Dieye Vincent-Robert Ngirabacu

Housing Market and Low-Cost and Efficient Materials and Technologies Final Report June2023 Compressed

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Housing Market and Low-Cost and Efficient Materials and Technologies Final Report June2023 Compressed

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Final Report

A Study on the Rwandan Housing Market and

For and on behalf of the Government of Rwanda

PART I : Housing Market Study

II. HOUSING DEMAND 8

III. SEGMENTATION AND HOUSING JOURNEYS IN EACH SEGMENT 24

IV. HOUSING SUPPLY: A HIGH-LEVEL OVERVIEW 48

APPENDIX A: OVERVIEW OF URBAN HOUSEHOLDS IN KEY DISTRICTS 74

APPENDIX B: HOUSING FINANCE CASE STUDIES 89

PART II : Low-cost and Efficient Building Materials

II. RWANDA’S HOUSING ECOSYSTEM : A SECTOR DIAGNOSTIC 11

III. HOUSING COST STUDY AT DIFFERENT SCALES 43

IV. SCENARIOS 113

APPENDIX A: REAL ESTATE PERFORMA 192

APPENDIX B: IMPACT SIMULATION TOOL 200

APPENDIX C: STRUCTURAL PLANS G+3 204

A Thirty-Five Thousand Holdings company

Together with CAHF, Kigwa Consulting and Fatou Dieye

2. HOUSING DEMAND ........................................................................................................................ 8

3. SEGMENTATION AND HOUSING JOURNEYS IN EACH SEGMENT .................................................. 24

4. HOUSING SUPPLY: A HIGH-LEVEL OVERVIEW .............................................................................. 48

5. HOUSING FINANCE ...................................................................................................................... 56

APPENDIX A: OVERVIEW OF URBAN HOUSEHOLDS IN KEY DISTRICTS ................................................. 74

APPENDIX B: HOUSING FINANCE CASE STUDIES .................................................................................. 85

Source: Census 2022, 10% sample

Source: Census 2022, 10% sample

Chart 5 Segmentation of households in high density (proxy) urban settlements based on

Source: Census 2022, 10% sample

Source: Census 2022, 10% sample

To improve our understanding of affordability, we have analysed data on monthly pensionable

Source: Data on pensionable incomes provided by RSSB

Source: Data on pensionable incomes provided by RSSB

Source: Data on pensionable incomes provided by RSSB

Leavers – seen previously, but not seen in future months

Source: Data on pensionable incomes provided by RSSB

Source: Data on pensionable incomes provided by RSSB

Source: Data on pensionable incomes provided by RSSB

Source: Data on pensionable incomes provided by RSSB

Source: Historical data on pensionable incomes provided by RSSB

Source: Historical data on pensionable incomes provided by RSSB

Chart 17 Urban households with at least one formally employed person

Source: Labour Force Survey (LFS) 2021

Higher earners who earn more than RWF500 000

Source: EICV 5 and Census 2022

Chart 20 Household segments categorised by housing need

A detailed overview per segment is included below.

Key metrics for the segment are summarised below.

BOX 1: SECURITY GUARDS IN URBAN AREAS29

Chart 24 Key affordability and bankability metrics: Urban, Low earners

BOX 2: FACTORY WORKERS IN URBAN AREAS

BOX 3: THE INFORMAL SECTOR

Chart 28 Key affordability and bankability metrics: Urban, High-income earners

BOX 6: HIGH INCOME, URBAN DWELLERS

Table 2: Five main developer types

Question: Can you explain what densification means?

Respondent: To live in area which is surrounded by cheap houses.

Respondent: : I am happy, but I am worried how it will be done especially financially

Questions: Do you think there will be people to rent from you?

Respondent: Very few because of poor means

Demand-side factors include:

Risk and cost Risk and cost Risk and cost

Credit information sharing and market information systems

Policy and legislation

Urban Management and Development Processes