5

AN ANALYSIS OF HOUSING CONDITIONS AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY IN THE CONTEXT OF ABUJA MASTERPLAN

BY

GODSWILL AMOS ESSIEN

Department of Estate Management,

School of Environmental Studies,

Federal Polytechnic, Nasarawa.

E -mail: godswillessien@gmail.com;

&

Arc P. K. NWANOKWA,

Department of Architecture,

School of Environmental Studies,

Federal Polytechnic, Nasarawa.

ABSTRACT

Housing as a basic human need is beset by problems which vary from place to place and stem from imbalances in the demand-supply equation especially in cities. The resultant effect of these problems is overstretching of facilities, overcrowding in dwelling and poor environmental quality in general with their attendant health implication on the population. This research has attempted to set the theoretical context for housing and also analyze housing within the context of the Abuja master plan with special focus on the three main sectors that make up the Abuja Municipal Area Council (AMAC) namely the Low Quality Residential Areas (LQRAs), the Medium Quality Residential Areas (MQRAs), and the High Quality Residential Areas (HQRAs). The study found that the need for improved housing conditions and environmental quality are most critical in the LQRAs where overcrowding is most pronounced and that most households in the sector share common facilities and amenities which are in most cases inadequate. The study also found that MQRAs and HQRAs use these facilities and amenities exclusively and are adequate. The study concluded that housing conditions and environmental quality in the study areas fall far short of the expected datum for Nigeria’s new Federal Capital Territory (FCT) and recommended that the city’s waste disposal apparatus should be improved on continuous basis so as to

5

enhance environmental quality and the quality of the housing stock to keep pace with the anticipated area and population growth rate of the city if we have to attain the goal of sustainable development.

INTRODUCTION

Cities all over the world provide the basis of economic growth and development. They generate enormous revenues for urban government as well as providing income for individuals to meet up their welfare requirements. In carrying out these functions, cities create a lot of environmental problems which, include inadequate and insalubrious housing, land degradation, deterioration of urban physical environment via pollution (air, water, and noise), rapid urbanization resulting in overcrowding and congestion, unemployment, poverty, crime, urban squalor and overstretched municipal infrastructure and services. All these have consequent effects on social equity, human health and well – being, economic welfare, social and political stability, housing infrastructure and services as well as the sustainability of natural resources.

Over the years, various Nigerian governments have made concerted efforts to address these urban problems with minimal success. Some of the efforts made at the national level include: formation and launching of National Housing policy, National Policy on the Environment and most recently the Urban Development Policy. In fact, other efforts made since independence pertain to the provision as well as maintenance of a balance between development and housing environment. Although these efforts are commendable, they have not been able to adequately address the problem of housing the urban population particularly the urban poor. This situation has brought about spontaneous housing developments, which have been described by Gilber and Gugler (1982) as follows:

Most of the dwellings were built by the family which originally occupied or now occupy them.

The settlements originally founded suffer from some degree of illegality or lacked planning permission;

When the settlement were first formed most type of infrastructure and services are lacing and in many settlements, services are still lacking;

The settlements are occupied by the poor, however defined. Other sub-types of spontaneous development include: invasions of either public or private land, whether organized or incremental, where no purchase of the plot involved; private settlements, where the land is purchased, but lacks planning permission; rental settlements, where the properties are built on rented land; and usufruct settlements, where permission has been granted by tribe, local government or private owner.

By and large, spontaneous developments usually have their attendant problems pertaining to environmental quality. These types are always occupied by the poor and the migrants

5

who are entering the city for the first time and lack the financial muscle to secure accommodation in the residential sectors of the city.

Generally, environmental problems in Nigeria cities are to a large extent, associated with the pattern of urban land use. These problems emanate from uncontrolled intense land use within the built up areas. In most of the urban centres, available spaces have been covered up with residential, commercial, industrial, public buildings with little or no space for other essential activities such as community services, recreation and other facilities. This situation makes most urban centres look massive and dense, hence eroding their beauty as well as environmental quality.

The problems presently facing Nigerian cities are so enormous that no single actor whether federal state and/ or municipal authorities or even the organized private sector can meet the challenges alone. Most of our cities therefore have the problem of housing their inhabitants and of maintaining urban quality.

Abuja was planned taking into consideration all these aforementioned problems. The city, which officially replaced Lagos, as federal capital in December, 1991, after fifteen years of planning and construction was designed and expected to grow in four developments phases, with a target population of 3, 1555, 000. It was expected to be among the best functional cities in the world where problems such as uncontrolled land use, inadequate housing and residential environmental degradation can be adequately and effectively tackled.

Abuja, the capital city is supposed to be symbol of regulated urban growth and was carefully planned and developed in a very short time. Urban slums at city outskirts and even within the city were to be avoided and Abuja was to be the symbol of a new era in Nigeria. We shall see later how all these dreams have become largely unfulfilled owing largely to the over-concentration in only one of four developmental phases that Abuja was originally intended for.

Theoretical Context

The importance of Abuja master Plan in this Study cannot be underestimated. The master plan determines the quality of the residential environment as it also determines the character of the buildings in the city. Consequently, the Abuja Master Plan is a central issue to this study and hence, the justification for its analysis.

This segment takes a look at provisions made for housing within the Abuja Master Plan. The aim is to see how far the provision made for housing has been achieved. The implementation of the housing aspect of the Master Plan will go a long way to help us understand the housing conditions in Abuja, particularly the study area.

5

By examining the provisions for housing of the Master Plan, it would be easy to find the appropriate housing standards and environmental quality in Abuja. It would also help to show – the extent to which the provision of housing achieves the goals of finding an “appropriate balance” in housing standards and quality.

The analysis of the housing aspect of Abuja Master Plan would provide answers to two important questions. The first is, to what extent have the original goals, standards and guidelines of the plan been adhered to. The second is, whether these goals and standards are still appropriate, given the very different economic, social and political conditions in the country.

The main focus of this segment will be five-fold namely:

a) Examination of the philosophy and concepts embodied in the original plan.b) Identification of specific goals, standards and guidelines;c) Extent to which these were adhered to or modified in plan implementation;d) Current reality in the city;e) Establishment of relevant principles to guide the search for future courses of action.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

On 9th August, 1975, General the Federal Military Government, headed by General Murtala Mohammed, set up a seven man panel to examine the issue of a new capital for Nigeria in all ramifications with clear terms of reference. The panel, among others recommended that Lagos was incapable of performing a dual role as capital of Nigeria and that of Lagos State due to inadequate space for development. A new capital was needed as a symbol of Nigeria’s aspirations for unity and progress. The panel chose Abuja as the most suitable location for the Federal Capital. On 3rd February, 1976, government accepted the panel’s recommendations and on 5th February 1976, Decree No.6 was promulgated establishing the Federal Capital Development Authority (FCDA). The Decree vested the ownership, control and governance of the F.C.T. in the hands of government. In June 1977, FCDA commissioned International Planning Associates (IPA) to produce a Master Plan for the new Federal Capital City. The Master Plan was handed over to FCDA on 15 th February 1979. The construction of Abuja commenced immediately.

HIGHLIGHTS OF THE MASTER PLAN.

Although the total area of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) is 8000 square kilometres, the Abuja master plan covers an area of about 250 square kilometres, or approximately 3% of the entire FCT land. Some of the important features of its plan include:

A citywide open space structure based on a longitudinal parkway system internal to the city;

5

A city designed as an efficient and attractive environment at each stage of growth-with Phase 1 accommodating 150,000 residents, 1.6 million in year 2000, an ultimate limit of 3.2 million;

Residential districts of 40,000 to 60,000 residents focussed in a hierarchy of commercial, community and utility services organised into a hierarchy of small-scale residential community areas;

A mix of residential density representing a range of housing options with respect to size, location and access to services while concentrating high densities directly to transit corridors and lower densities in the peripheries;

A programme of staged growth planned to occur in incremental stages so that the construction of one sector is completed before the next is begun to reduce impacts of noise, dust and disruption;

An organised pattern of land use and development guidelines for 500 hectares of government activity, 89 hectares of services, 12,486 hectares for residential, 1,840 hectares for transport infrastructure, 561 hectares of commercial and 8,300 hectares of open and recreational land.

PLAN CONTENT

The plan intended to cover and co-ordinate land use, transportation, infrastructure, housing, and economic services in a way that recognizes both their interrelationships and spatial requirements. The plan proposed and apportioned land to various uses as follows: 500 hectares for government activities; 891 hectares for services; 12,486 hectares for residential: 920 hectares for light industry, 1,840 hectares for commercial and 8,300 hectares for recreational.

EVOLUTION OF FEDERAL CAPITAL TERRITORY

The authors of the master plan confessed that the production of the plan was severely handicapped by two major issues namely, inadequacy of available basic data about the territory and lack of foreknowledge of how the new territory would develop (FCDA, 1979). Nonetheless, the master plan is a remarkably well-conceptualized and articulated document and has powerfully influenced development (Ukwu, 1999). Events since the phased movement to Abuja, which started in 1982 when the seat of Government was officially transferred from Lagos, have established the new realities on the ground.

The evolution of the Federal Capital Territory has followed the original script fairly well. The Territory carved out of Niger, Plateau and Kwara States then, involved displacement and relocation of several communities, the concentration of new structures and massive population movement into the chosen capital.

5

Specific Goals, Standards and Guidelines of the Plan

The Abuja master Plan called for an overall location and orientation of a crescent – shaped pattern of development. Growth was to be organised in development sectors that expand outwards from the Central Area in a phased pattern of development. Each development sector included secondary employment centres and residential districts forming a mini-city with planned population of 100, 000 to 250, 000. Residential districts with populations of 40, 000 to 60, 000 were to be focused around a hierarchy of services (commercial, community and utility) with a mix of residential densities and housing options with higher densities located nearest to transit corridors.

An essential element of the master plan scheme is the hierarchically organised residential community structure consisting of sectors, districts local areas. The key to sector, district and local residential community organization is the hierarchy of service and facility systems. Grouping the residential communities provides the population required to support higher level facilities according to the architects of plan.

Local Residential Communities are the lowest of the hierarchy for the provision of social infrastructure. Within residential communities the housing programme for the city is formulated to strike a balance between the improved standards of housing which the government might wish to produce.

The Realities of Housing Plan Implementation

At the inception of the city’s implementation, a housing target of 25, 000 dwelling units were projected to accommodate the projected population of 150, 000 inhabitants expected to be in residence in phase 1 of the city in 1986. This was projected with a household size of six (6) persons. By 1986, the target was still far from being implemented. This notwithstanding, the FCDA provided over 30, 000 housing units for accommodation of public servants of all grade levels located in different parts of the territory. In Abuja Municipality alone, there were about 20, 000 housing units of intermediate public servants and seven – bedroom-detached houses for Chief Executives and other public servants.

The cardinal principle of the Ministry of Federal Capital Territory (F.C.T) in 1998 was to match the increasing demand for shelter with adequate provision of decent accommodation facilities across the territory. The upsurge in the demand for housing became more acute shortly after the movement of the seat of government to Abuja in 1991. The 1996 Federal Government directive that all ministries and parastatals be relocated to Abuja further aggravated this situation. To this end, special efforts were made to complete ongoing housing projects, which included:

5

a) Completion and allocation of 33 blocks of 66 units of 3 bedroom duplexes to senior public servants in Wuse II.

b) Construction of 32 blocks of 198 units of 2 bedroom flats completed and allocated to intermediate staff in Garki II.

c) 28 houses with supporting staff quarters were completed for Ministers and Permanent Secretaries at Mabushi and Asokoro Districts;

d) Completion of 98 – 2 bedroom flats in Garki II;

e) 224 1 – bedroom flats (Security Quarters), Asokoro.

Housing stock in Abuja is over hundreds of thousand units built by both public and private developers. Abuja, perhaps, is one of the cities in Nigeria with the highest rate of urbanization today. This massive urbanization has perpetuated enormous deficiencies in both quality and quantity of housing. These deficiencies constitute the main focus of this research study and are clearly spelt out and fully identified in several of its sections.

In Abuja, the vast majority of the populations are tenants crowded into one and two storey rooming houses with densities as high as 2000 dwelling units per hectare, and with 50 – 70 percent of households occupying one room and sharing inadequate or intermittent service. Furthermore, tenants are often paying rents, which exceed 70% of their official income.

The most satisfactory housing is, either self-provided by the upper income groups, representing a small proportion of the population, or is wholly or partially subsidized by employers to senior personnel in public service and private organizations. To date, however, neither the public sector nor the private sector has made substantial in roads into the low-income housing problems relevant to the needs of seventy (70) percent of the population.

Although private individuals have used a variety of construction and financing methods to build housing of different types, these efforts have not been able to provide adequate housing. On the other hand, the public sector has also been unable to make substantial inroads into the low-income housing sector. The units earlier built by public housing agencies, although intended for low-income earners, but in view of the enormous housing shortage were taken over by the middle and even high-income groups. In any case, housing targets set by public agencies are not usually achievable because the methods of implementation are too ambitious.

Some of the problems relating to provision of housing in Abuja include:

a) Failing to mobilize all available financial resources for housing;

b) Setting of unrealistic standards of housing quality not matched up by experiences, desires and capabilities of the population to be served;

5

c) Inaccessibility to service land by most prospective housing developers/builders in Abuja, whether private firms or individuals. This problem is very likely to be exacerbated with the recent 900% increase in land charges.

d) Pre-occupation with building technology rather than delivery of affordable houses.

The following factors also affect adversely housing provision in Abuja namely:-

Substantially increasing the supply of housing and serviced land for households and businesses;

Achieving cost recovery, financial substantially and accountability in the housing sector;

Supplying affordable housing and service lands, especially to low-income groups.

Gaps in the Master Plan Implementation in the housing sector

While Abuja is meant for the seat of government and administrative offices, it has turned into an elitists’ area, with high cost of housing and services. As a result of the exorbitant real estate prices and rents, middle and low-income class resides at neighbouring Nassarawa and Niger States respectively. Although these classes of people were able to secure low-quality housing at Mabushi, Gwagwa, Karimo, Jabi and Idu where the infrastructure is inadequate, and even when in existence, the recent demolition of these settlements have exacerbated the housing problems for these categories of city dwellers and made provision of houses in areas not yet demolished to be of low quality. The future of these settlements is so uncertain and dicey, hence no sensible housing investor in the area would like to provide good quality houses and environment as well as services. Consequently, the residents drink water from local wells and streams, which expose them to health hazards.

Other observable deficiencies in these areas are lack of access roads to buildings, seasonal flooding and washing away of few available roads due to lack of drainage and lack of toilet facilities in these houses. Details of these poor quality houses and their deficiencies, which are the main concern of this research study, are well spelt out in relevant segments of this study.

In addition, there is a severe housing problem for officials below grade level 10. The responses have been development of shanty and slum housing created for low-income groups. Markets are scarce, non-hygienic and randomly located at Wuse, Garki, Nyanyan and Gwagwa. There is presently a lot of traffic congestion during rush hours especially in Area 1, Berger Junction, Karimo-Life Camp road, and Wuse market areas. All these create a haphazard planning system and are missing the Master Plan goals.

5

The goal of the master plan was to address the issues of housing, infrastructure and services for all classes of people, but in reality the above facilities are provided for only the top class segment of the society. Below the top class, everything is poor and virtually non-existent. Hence the slogan “Abuja is meant for the rich only”.

Housing problems in Abuja are intractable and rapidly rising. While the adverse effects of unplanned human settlements in urban and suburban areas in the FCT are already visible, urban dwellers and workers in Abuja suffer from poor state of energy needs. Thus, the absence of proper implementation and consequent distortions in the housing sector of the Abuja master plan calls for a thorough review of the urban and regional planning strategy to meet the growing population and deteriorating situation which is quite visible in most of the areas of the FCT.

Some of the major deviations that have been noticed in the implementation of Abuja master plan and which adversely affect housing conditions are:

Lack of encouragement of the private sector in provision of housing;

Non-provision of underground electricity cables in some districts;

Abandonment of the phasing programme. Only phase 1 of the Abuja development has seen concentration of activities; the other phases have not been developed;

Non-implementation of sewage treatment plants, leading to pressure on existing sewage system which has broken down in a number of districts within Abuja;

Improper waste disposal system; no sanitary land-fill for solid waste management;

Inadequate development of satellite towns and villages before the city is fully developed;

Lack of solution to the resettlement problem and;

Inadequate development and even encroachment on green areas for other uses;

Building of houses in flood- prone areas even with approval of the authority.

On the whole, the rapid urbanization of Abuja has been fuelled by rapid increase and surge in population of Abuja, thus creating deficiencies in both quality of housing. Government policy of compulsory and sudden movement of ministries, parastatals, etc to Abuja in 1996 as well as issues beyond the control of government such as religious and ethnic clashes in parts of the country have combined to increase the population of Abuja beyond the planned limit. Thus a city that is expected to have a projected target population of 1.7 million in four phases already has an estimated population of over 3 million crowded up in just phase 1 of the city alone. The effects of these on housing conditions, the focus of this study, will be clearly seen in subsequent segments.

5

STUDY METHODOLOGY

This study utilized two of the most popular data collection methods in the social and environmental sciences. These are field observations, the use of questionnaires and interviews. The questionnaire was designed such that it enabled the assessment and the collection of data required in all aspects of housing conditions. These include an examination of the housing unit itself, internal facilities such as toilets, bathrooms, kitchens, electricity and water supply. Also addressed were the issues of house types (compound, row – houses, semi-detached and detached). The physical condition of the houses including age structure, condition of maintenance of the dwelling units was also considered. The questionnaire also covered issues of waste management (refuse collection and disposal techniques) as well as frequency of refuse collection.

Field observations complemented the data collected through the use of questionnaires. For example, the neighbourhood in which the houses are located was examined. Furthermore, a direct field observation was undertaken to fine-tune the questionnaire to suit local environment.

The housing variables that were selected and their measurement indices are shown in table 4.1

Table 1: Housing Variables and Measurement Indices

Housing Variables Measurement Indices

Overcrowding Average size of household vis-a-vis number of rooms occupied

Degree of overcrowding No of liveable rooms occupied.

Occupancy ratio Number occupying a room.

Domestic water supply Sources, frequency and quality.

Sewage disposal Type, availability.

Bathrooms Availability, number and usage.

Kitchen Availability and usage.

Electricity Availability and reliability.

Construction materials Sandcrete, cement, mud, galvanized iron sheet, etc.

Roofing Galvanised iron sheet, asbestos, etc.

Maintenance condition Construction materials, type of occupant, income of

5

occupant, government or private house.

House types Compound house, row – house, semi – detached or detached.

Physical conditions Age structure, minor repairs required, deteriorated, dilapidated.

Waste management Refuse collection, disposal and collection frequency.

Source: Field Survey, 2008.

Number in the Population

301 questionnaires were administered in each of the three identified sectors in which AMMAC was divided for the purpose of this study, namely: Low Quality Residential Areas (Nyanyan, Mabushi, Jabi, Karmo), Medium Quality Residential Areas (Garki District, Wuse District) and High Quality Residential Areas (Asokoro,Maitama, Garki II and Wuse II).

It should be noted however, that the equality in the number of questionnaires administered in each case does not imply same in terms of population or number of houses. The figures were used for convenience and ease of administration. A 100% response was ensured by the replacement of lost or nullified questionnaire. The streets within each of the identified quarters were stratified and the houses were selected by randomization.

The target population was the heads of the respective households or the persons responsible for the maintenance of the buildings. The projected target population of Abuja when all the Phases (I - IV) are completed was 3, 155, 000. However, table 4.2 shows some relevant statistics in the Phase 1 of the Master Plan, which is the area of concentration of this research work.

Table 2: Planned Population and Number of Residential Plots.

Districts Area(Ha) Planned Population

Number of Neighbourhoods

Number of Residential

Plots

Area

Garki (I & II)

Wuse (I & II)

Asokoro

1658

865

1530

897

30, 000

50, 000

69, 000

30, 000

-

8

15

4

-

1754

1059

416

5

Maitama 1050 35, 000 6 469

TOTAL 6, 000 214, 000 33 3698

SOURCE: FCDA, Abuja.

Thus the planned population of the area is 214, 000 and the number of plots and indeed buildings are 3698. Apart from the Central Area, all the other areas were to be residential.

The Sample Selection

The sample data collected were from Phase 1 Area, which has almost been completed and is already experiencing serious housing and environment problems. One can easily observe that the housing problems have manifested in the development of spontaneous and squatter settlements in such areas as Jabi, Karmo, Mabushi, Gwahwa and Nyanyan. These settlements are unsightly and lack the most basic municipal infrastructure. In addition, the environmental condition of Phase 1 is unwholesome and not befitting the status of Abuja as a new city.

To give a representative coverage, the sample frame for taking samples of houses is the list of plot numbers (for MQRA & HQRA). Random numbers were taken as sampling units (for houses with plot numbers). In terms of environmental quality, sample of households within the study area was undertaken. Observations were, made in respect of existing facilities such as toilets, bathrooms, kitchens, refuse/waste collection and disposal, open spaces, etc.

Sources and nature of Data Collection

In eliciting the necessary information, both primary and secondary data were utilised in the survey. The primary sources were through oral interview, personal observations and structured questionnaires, which were administered on the inhabitants/residents, selected household and other stakeholders, in the study area. The secondary data were collected from works and opinions of other people through textbooks, newspapers, journals, unpublished works and statistical reports related to the present study.

Problems of Data Collection

Availability of data is crucial to research work of its nature. Data collection for this study was not devoid of problems. Every effort was, however, made to overcome the problems so as to achieve the desired results. There was the problem of collecting pertinent data from relevant government organizations who either feign ignorance of the existence of such information or deployed all known bureaucratic bottlenecks to deny the researcher important information.

Time constraints were also major impediments that affected the ease of this study. Considering the theme, a lot of time would be required to undertake the study exhaustively. Finally, the study was undertaken at a time when the economy of the country was at its

5

lowest ebb. Therefore, financial constraints were part of the problems that raised its ugly head.

In spite of the above problems, however, the study was successfully undertaken and the conclusion made can be taken with reasonable degree of accuracy.

Processing of Data

This study has adopted descriptive method of data processing. The responses from the questionnaires were processed using manual calculators to produce tables and percentages, which have clearly revealed the housing conditions in the study area, based on selected variables. Manual computation was applied in the analysis of the data from the primary source

DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS

The aim, here, is to analyse and synthesize the information collected through the questionnaires, observations and personal interviews conducted towards the achievement of the objectives of this study. For this study, Abuja Municipal Area Council is divided into three major sectors, namely:

i) Low Quality Residential Areas (LQRAs);

ii) Medium Quality Residential Areas (MQRAs);

iii) High Quality Residential Areas (HQRAs);

i) LOW QUALITY RESIDENTIAL AREAS (LQRAs)

These areas comprise such places as Nyanyan, Mabushi, Jabio, Karmo, Durumi and Kado Village, etc. The indigenous population and migrants to the city largely occupy them.

ii) MEDIUM QUALITY RESIDENTIAL AREAS (MQRAs)

Garki District 1 and Wuse District falls within that group. Here government, to accommodate senior civil servants, constructed most of the properties. Recently, however, private developers have added to the housing stock on these areas.

iii) HIGH QUALITY RESIDENTIAL AREAS (HQRAs)

This covers places such as Asokoro, Maitama, Garki District II and Wuse District II

HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS

5

The survey of the housing characteristics in these three residential sectors of AMAC shows some interesting variations in both quality and quantity. Since the study dwells on a comparative analysis of the housing environment in these areas, specific characteristics are to be considered and examined in order to further highlight the differentials.

OVERCROWDING

Overcrowding is usually measured in terms of the number of persons per habitable room. It also expresses the relationship between the average size of household and the number of rooms in its dwelling. Overcrowding also helps in estimating the housing need as it tries to ascertain the number of households living in crowded conditions. Hence the degree of overcrowding is usually expressed in two ways. The first type refers to the number of persons per room which is commonly termed an occupancy ratio, while the second refers to the number of households per living unit. This study uses the two indices though some difficulties were encountered particularly in the size and use of rooms. As a result, quality of accommodation has been ignored. This is because to go into more details require time and finance, which are beyond the capability of the researcher.

It has been established from the survey that 47.1% of households in the LQRAs occupy one room each; 5.2% in MQRAs and 0.85% in HQRAs. 30% occupies two rooms each in LQRAs, 41.2% and 5.7% for MQRAs and HQRAs respectively. 9.4% occupies three rooms each on LQRAs while the corresponding figures for MQRAs and HQRAs are 38.2% and 3.4% respectively. 7.1% households occupy four rooms each in LQRAs while MQRAs and HQRAs have 13.4% and 42%.

Those occupying five rooms each account for 3.5% in LQRAs, 1.0% and 42% in MQRAs and HQRAs. In the LQRAs 2.4% of the households occupy six rooms or more each. For the MQRAs and HQRAs 1.0% and 10.1% of the households occupies six rooms or more each. More than one household sharing a room is uncommon but many household sharing a compound are common particularly in the LQRAs of AMAC. The table below explains succinctly the salient points.

Table 3: Degree of Overcrowding in Housing in selected Areas of AMAC

Type of occupancy/No of persons/Liveable Room

LQRAs MQRAs HQRAs Total for AMAC (No of

H.H Surveyed

5 Surveyed

One Room

Two Rooms

Three Rooms

47.1

30.5

9.4

5.2

41.2

38.2

0.8

1.7

3.4

113

130

3

28

43

11

5

Four Rooms

Five Rooms

Six Rooms or more

7.1

3.5

3.4

13.4

1.0

1.0

42.0

42.0

10.1

15

6

4

5

2

1

TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 301 100

Source: Field Survey, 2008

Discussion of Results

Based on the analysis of levels and degree of overcrowding in terms of number of liveable rooms per household, it is seen that in the LQRAs more households share one and two rooms per household with an average size of 8 persons. The LQRAs also signifies areas where the low-income earners stay.

Table 3 shows that more households share two and three room apartments in the MQRAs. This, incidentally, is the area where the middle-income earners reside. It is also marked by an average household size of 6 persons.

The inference drawn here is that considering the household size and the number of liveable room per household, they are staying in overcrowded conditions. The United Nations Planning Standards stipulates 2.5 persons per room for developing countries. Based on this, then only 57% of the household live in adequate housing without overcrowding conditions while 43% of the household surveyd live on crowded conditions. The average occupancy ratio derived from the survey is 3.0 and the average household size is 6.0. the occupancy ratios for the study area are as follows:

LQRAS – 3.2

MQRAs – 3.2

HQRAS – 2

Table 4: Occupancy Ratio in Selected Sectors of AMAC

SECTOR HOUSEHOLD SAMPLE SIZE

PERCENTAGE OCCUPANCY RATIO

5

(%)

HQRAs

MQRAs

LQRAS

85

97

119

28.0

32.0

40.0

2.8

3.1

3.2

TOTAL 301 100.0 -

Source: Filed Survey: 2008

Discussion of Results

The survey reveals that in the LQRAs, most households that need separate dwellings tends to share the same unit with other households, which indicates that overcrowding is likely to result. It is also observed that more than five households are found in a housing unit. Thus, looking at the average household size of six persons per household, there is an over thirty (30) person per housing unit of average Plot size of 225m2 which shows overcrowding in the LQRAs of AMAC leading to pressure on existing facilities with its consequent effects on the housing conditions.

HOUSING FACILITIES AND UTILITIES IN AMAC

This deals with the quality and availability of facilities and amenities that are closely related to housing. These facilities and amenities are water supply, sewage disposal and auxiliary facilities such as washrooms, kitchens and electricity. The result of the survey shows that in the LQRAs where services and utilities are available, all the residents of that particular housing unit mostly share them. In the MQRAs and HQRAs, the household exclusively uses these facilities and utilities.

a. Domestic Water

Water supply and sewage disposal are very important to residents’ health and well-being. In considering the availability of these amenities, attention has been paid to the type of supply, its location and the extent to which the facility is shared by the households and individuals.

The survey carried out shows that in the MQRAs and HQRAs, households as well as individuals exclusively use water. The situation is, however, different in the LQRAs. In the LQRAs, 76.6% of the households have access to water supply within their dwelling premises. Of these, 77.3% share water points while 9.3% is exclusively used and 13% have none. The source of water is largely pipe borne with a few from wells and commercial water sellers. The study shows that the MQRAs and HQRAs, 66.7% of supply directly from the public mains. In the LQRAs, 66% of the households surveyed obtain their supply through the public mains while 20.3% obtain their

5

water supply from wells and 13% from commercial water sellers. In the MQRAs and HQRAs, hardship in water supply is hardly experienced. On the other hand, commercial use of water creates hardship on the people particularly those far from their houses. This is quite a common phenomenon in the LQRAs.

b. Latrines

In the MQRAs and HQRAs the commonest type of latrines is the water closet (WC) and is exclusively used. Pit latrines are not a common phenomenon. In the LQRAs, the survey shows that 96.7% of the households have latrines while 3.3% do not have any of this. Sharing within the premises dominates the type of use, which accounts for 78% of the household. However, two types of latrines pit and water closets are predominant. Pit latrines account for 77% while water closet account for 22.4%

c. Bathrooms

The survey conducted shows that households do have bathrooms. However in the MQRAs and HQRAs, the bathrooms are exclusively used. On the other hand, in the LQRAs, the bathrooms are mostly shared. Of the household survey conducted in the LQRAs, 89.7% of the households have bathrooms while 10.3% have none within the premises. Out of this 70.2% of the household share the use of the facility within the premises and 20.8% have exclusive use of bathrooms within the dwelling unit?

d. Kitchens

The survey shows that in the LQRAs, 4.7% of the households do not have kitchens but use is either shared or exclusive. It is a common phenomenon that the inadequacy of this facility in smoke houses force occupants to resort to cooking along the veranda, corridor or in the open with attendant health and risk implications (especially the risk of fire). In some cases, the living room is used as kitchen.

In the MQRAs and HQRAs the situation is quite different. Kitchens are provided in the buildings and are exclusively used by the households.

e. Electricity

This service is available in all the three sectors of AMAC. Just like any other service or utility, in the MQRAs and HQRAs, its use is exclusive to the dwelling unit. On the other hand, in the LQRAs the survey shows that 13.1% of the households have no electricity supply. Shared use is common accpu8nting for 64% of the total/ dwelling units with exclusive use of this public utility is only 22.9%.

Inference

5

From the survey, it is discovered that in the MQRAs and HQRAs, facilities and utilities are quite adequate and exclusive in use. On the other hand, households in the LQRAs share compounds and facilities. In fact in some cases the most essential facilities are absent or do not exist. This situation is responsible for the overuse of the housing environment in the LQRAs of AMAC.

The practice of sharing facilities by numerous households not only poses some problems of privacy and convenience but more importantly provide sites for the spread of diseases particularly during an epidemic. The unavailability of water supply, kitchen and washrooms, aggravates the already poor provided.

HOUSE TYPES

There are four basic house types in the selected study areas of AMAC. These are:

a) Compound House

This is a number of adjacent rooms facing a courtyard, the compound being set in a rectangular plot. The compound types are either owner occupied containing a number of housing structures inhabited by a group of household relatives or owned by private landlords. The rented households usually occupy one or two rooms, and therefore contain a relatively large number of households who are mostly not related and sharing facilities in the compound. The compound house-type makes up to 75% of houses in the LQRAs while none exists in the MQRAs and HQRAs.

b) Row House

A row house is made up of three or more housing units attached side by side in a row. It could take as many numbers of families or households as there are units. This house type account for 24% of houses in the LQRAs. For the MQRAs and HQRAs, the corresponding figures are 32% and 25% respectively.

c) Semi-Detached House

This consists of two units attached side by side by a common wall. It is usually built for families or households. The survey shows that the LQRAs records 11% of this type of house while for the MQRAs and HQRAs, the figures are 55% and 30% respectively.

d) Detached House

This is a single unit normally built for a single family or household. In the LQRAs, it accounts for 9% of the houses surveyed, 39% in the MQRAs and 45% in the HQRAs.

The distribution of the various house-types is shown in table 5 below.

5

Table 5: Distribution of House Types in Selected Areas of AMAC

LQRAs MQRAs HQRAs

House Type No % No % No %

Compound

Row

Semi-Detached

Detached/Duplex

67 56.15

28 23.92

13 10.96

11 8.96

-

31 31.9

54 55.7

13 13.4

-

21 24.7

25 29.4

39 45.9

TOTAL 119 100.00 98 100.00 85 100.0

Source: Field survey, 2008

PHYSICAL CONDITION OF HOUSES

Age Structure

The ages of the housing units involved in the survey varies between one to over thirty years. However, majority of the buildings are between four (4) and twenty (20) years. This group constitutes 61.8% of the sample. At face value one would be tempted to conclude that since the buildings in AMAC are relatively new, they are solid, sound and fit for human habitation and, face no threat of demolition except a few at the core area of the LQRAs and MQRAs. This is because for the past few years building activities have been concentrated in this area. It is, however, discovered that buildings above 20 years age are found mostly in the LQRAs and MQRAs. The table below shows the classification of units according to their age structure.

Table 6: Classification of Housing Units According to Age Structure in Selected Areas of AMAC

5

AGE OF HOUSE ABSOLUTE FREQUENCY % OF TOTAL

0 – 3

4 – 6

7 – 10

11 – 12

21 – 30

Above 30

55

58

43

89

25

31

18.27

19.26

14.28

29.65

8.30

10.29

TOTAL 301 100.0

Source: Field Survey, 2008

Construction Materials

Another important characteristic, which should not be lost sight of in this study, concerns the physical features of the dwelling themselves. Table 5.5 shows five main combinations of building materials that could be used in the selected area of AMAC.

Table 7: Construction Materials of Dwelling Units (Percentage of Total)

LQRAs MQRAs HQRAs

Construction Materials of Dwelling

No % No % No %

Sandcrete block wall,

G.I.S roof/asbestos

Cement rendered mud walls/G.I.S roof

Makeshift wooden wall/G.I.S roof

13 12.87

32 31.68

37 36.63

19 18.96

100 100.0

- -

- -

- -

100 100.0

- -

- -

39 45.9

- -

TOTAL 119 100.00 98 100.00 85 100.0

Source: Field Survey, 2008

From the above table, it is observed that majority of houses in the LQRAs have mud walls/galvanized iron sheet roof. A paltry 12.87% of the total surveyed in this area have

5

sandcrete block walls/galvanised iron sheet roofing. What is responsible for this state of affairs is the temporary nature of these dwellings.

Condition of Maintenance of Dwelling Units

The condition of maintenance is closely related to the mode of construction, the materials used and the standard of workmanship. The probability of good maintenance is when good and durable materials are used in construction, when the structure is less complicated and occupied by persons who place a high premium on proper use of the dwelling unit. Table 5.6 indicates that most of the dwellings in the study area, especially the LQRAs and MQRAs are not adequately maintained. The reason for this is not farfetched. In the LQRAs, most of the dwellings are temporary in nature and occupied mostly by those on the lower rungs of the income ladder, who do not have sufficient interest nor have the necessary financial wherewithal to effect maintenance as at when due. The rents paid for such dwelling units, in majority of cases; do not give the “Landlord” sufficient incentive to effect even the most minor type of repairs.

In the MQRAs government owns majority of the dwelling units. The survey reveals that most of the dwellings suffer from one form of physical obsolescence or the other and maintenance is hardly done by the occupants or the owner. In the HQRAs, as would be expected; the level of maintenance is very high. 76.5% of the dwelling units in the area have sound physical condition brought about by planned/preventive maintenance. 12.5% of the surveyed and sample needs minor repairs, while 4% are deteriorating.

Table 8: Conditions of Maintenance of Dwelling Units in Selected Areas of AMAC

Physical Condition LQRAs

No %

MQRAs

No %

HQRAs

No %

Sound 13 10.9 49 50.50 65 76.5

Requires minor repairs

30 25.2 25 25.50 11 12.5

Needs major repairs 53 44.5 14 14.90 4 5.0

Deteriorating 13 10.9 4 3.98 3 4.0

Dilapidated 10 8.4 5 4.98 2 2.0

Total 199 100 97 100 85 100

Source: Field Survey, 2008

REFUSE COLLECTION TECHNIQUES

5

The poor environmental sanitation situation in AMAC is a consequence of inadequate refuse collection system. The public authority responsible for solid wastes management in the city seems to have neglected this very important aspect of overall environmental management by not collecting and evacuating refuse and disposing of same at regular interval.

The survey reveals that 87.5% of the households surveyed dump their refuse in an unauthorised collection points for the authority to collect, while house to house collection system accounts for only 3% (Table 9).

Table 9: Refuse Collection Techniques in AMAC

Techniques Adopted No. (in sample) %

House to House

Community Collection Points

Unauthorized Collection Points

9.0

29.0

283.0

3.0

9.5

87.5

Total 300.0 100.0

Source: Field Survey, 2008

Refuse Disposal Techniques

The survey reveals that majority of the households, in the study area resort to indiscriminate dumping and burning of refuse in any available space without considering the effects of such on the residential environment. It is observed that 80% of the total sample disposed their refuse in unauthorised places while 20% dump their refuse in authorised collection points. This situation is depicted in Table 10.

Table 10: Refuse Disposal Techniques in Selected Areas of AMAC.

Techniques Adopted Number %

Refuse Dump Points (unauthorised)

Public Collection Points

160

40

80

20

Total 300.0 100.0

Source: Field Survey, 2008

Frequency of Refuse Collection

5

From the survey, it can be deduced that AEPB does not collect refuse regularly in the study area. This is at variance with the cardinal objectives of the Board, which, among others, is to “secure a quantitative environment adequate for the health and well being of resident of the F.C.T. as a result, the residential environment is rendered unwholesome and not befitting the status of the city. 42.5% of the sample indicated that refuse is evacuated weekly while 15.5% confirmed that it is evacuated at infrequent intervals.

Table 11: Frequency of Refuse Collection in AMAC

No of Times Number surveyed %

Daily

Every two days

Weekly

Monthly

Infrequent

10

46

85

28

31

05.0

23.0

42.5

14.0

15.5

Total 200 100

Source: Field Survey, 2008

DISCUSSION OF FINDINGS

A comparative analysis is usually carried out on order to identify differences that exist in a particular study area. In most cases, the study is usually conducted to answer specific questions as to why some areas are, in terms of quality, better than others, why some areas a richly endowed and why others are not.

A cursory look at Abuja underscores the need for this study. This is more so because the city in terms of development, divides itself into three glaring sectors that have been clearly identified and made the subject of this analysis. These sectors have their peculiar characteristics in terms of housing conditions and environmental quality. Within Abuja Municipal Area Council, three sectors are clearly identified namely the LQRAs, MQRAs and HQRAs. In the course of the study, problems peculiar to each of these sectors were identified. Amongst the problems identified were those associated with inadequate and insalubrious housing, poor residential environment, poor refuse management, traffic congestion, crime, juvenile delinquency, etc. The purpose of this segment of the study is to summarize the major findings encountered and make appropriate recommendations.

FINDINGS

5

Amongst the problems identified are those associated with the following:

(a) Overcrowding in the LQRAs due to inadequate and affordable housing. Incidentally, this is the area that provides accommodation for the low-income group as well as new entrants into the city. It is observed that most households share one or two rooms, with an average household size of eight (8) persons. On the other hand the MQRAs and HQRAs experience little or no overcrowding.

(b) Inadequate Facilities: The study reveals that in the LQRAs, essential facilities such as kitchen, bathrooms and toilets are, mostly shared. In some cases such efacilities are non-existent and as such, expose the occupants to hazards of epidemics. In fact where the essential facilities are found, they are usually over used, hence reducing their quality and life span. There is also the problem of lack of privacy and convenience.

(c) Management: Effective management enhances the quality of houses. The study reveals that the individuals concerned carry out housing management in the LQRAs. The management is done directly but gradually due to lack of money. In the LQRAs, quite a good number of buildings lack adequate maintenance. Hence it is common to see houses with cracks, even crumbling and at the verge of collapse.

(d) Residential Environmental Quality: In MQRAs and HQRAs, the housing environment is fairly acceptable because designated areas have been allocated for dumping of solid wastes. In fact, in some places, the government at such designated points has provided covered dustbins, where evacuation is done by refuse collection vans. However, it was observed that in these seemingly highbrow areas refuse management leaves much to be desired. In some locations, refuse are not evacuated frequently. It is not uncommon within this area to see dustbins that have over stayed without evacuation and hence filled up and spilled over thus providing breeding ground for vermin, flies and rodents. In the LQRAs, major streets have designated points for refuse disposal, which are less frequently evacuated. However, 80% of the areas do not have designated points. As a result, refuse is dumped indiscriminately. The situation is further compounded by lack of accessibility, which impedes free movement of refuse collection vans. This makes it extremely difficult for refuse to be evacuated frequently. Private concerns presently charged with waste management in the city lack the necessary executive capacity to effectively discharge this responsibility. They lack modern equipment such as trucks, road sweepers, manpower, etc.

(e) Housing Quality and Quantity: In the MQRAs and HQRAs the quality of houses available is good; the quantity is also adequate even though rents are outrageous. In the LQRAs, the study reveals that there is acute housing shortage. The quality of

5

housing is equally appalling. This is so because a good number of the low income earners find it easy to get accommodation here, where the rent is within reach compared to rents in the other two areas (MQRAs and HQRAs). Moreover, the HQRAs are occupied by the high-income group, who can easily afford the rent payable for any residential unit.

(f) Socio-Economic Characteristics of Households: From the data collected and analysed, most of the housing problems faced by residents of the study area could be traced to the socio-economic status of the residents. The level of awareness and anxiety of inhabitants’ of the study area about their environmental and housing condition is a function of the socio-economic status of inhabitants. The level of education and size of household income of residents have greatly affected its efforts towards improving the conditions of houses. Higher level of education is a pre-requisite for choice of appropriate housing. For example, the educational status of the respondents, according to the survey shows that 25% are uneducated, 10% are primary school leavers, while those with secondary and tertiary education accounts for 10% and 35% respectively. This disparity in education levels affects the demand for houses and types of houses. On a comparative basis, the most educated, highly skilled and technically qualified residents are found in the MQRAs and HQRAs. This group significantly contributes to the housing conditions and environmental quality of these areas. On the other hand, the LQRAs offer accommodation to the largely illiterate and unskilled, uneducated segment of population of the study area.

The type of occupation of the head of household has a bearing on the life style of the household and equally portrays the educational background. This has a direct bearing on the housing demand and environmental condition consciousness. Income has a single socio-economic factor on housing. The survey showed that a socio-economic polarization exists between the high and the middle income classes. While middle and high-income groups have access to decent and luxurious accommodation in the MQRAs and HQRAs, the low-income groups could only afford rented accommodation both in decaying houses and non-conventional houses at spontaneous settlements. The high household sizes, particularly in the MQRAs also indicate some indices if housing problems. This situation adds more pressure on the little facilities available.

On house tenure, 68% of the residents live in rented houses while 32% are owner-occupiers. The situation will become worse as more migrants move into the area. The rents paid for some of these houses in majority of the cases are not in consonance with the level/standard of facilities/utilities provided.

(g) Housing Programs: Inadequate policy and programs for providing houses for the low-income group further accentuate the deplorable housing condition. The survey revealed that currently there is no deliberate housing program targeted towards this

5

group. It is not an over statement today that in the study area, the residential property market discriminates strongly against the urban poor. The FHA housing project at Gwarinpa is not targeted towards the low income earner who is being progressively marginalised and who have no option but to scramble for housing at the various squatter settlements within around the city. Another of its projects at Lugbe, paints a similar picture.

(h) Development Control: Abuja Municipal Area Council is the core of the Federal Capital City. One would have therefore expected that housing development of any kind conform to the master plan and related standards expected of a city of this nature. A fall out of the marginalisation of the low-income group in terms of accommodation is the rise in the development of squatter settlements comprised of houses that fail to meet minimum standards for healthy living. Failure of the Development Control Department of the MFCT has given an added impetus to the rate at which low quality houses are sprouting up at the LQRAs of the city.

Some of the major principles that underpin Abuja Master Plan include:

a) The principle of environmental conservation,

b) The principle of “city beautiful” and

c) The principle of the functional city.

These three principles combined were meant to produce a new city, a functional city, devoid of traffic congestion, decayed infrastructure and a city of ornamental parks and open spaces in the fashion of “garden city” of Ebenezer Howard’s city planning philosophy. However, this research found that the implementation of the plan and the development of Abuja City are far from attaining these principles. The research study found two main problems that affect housing conditions and quality of houses in Abuja. These are environmental pollution and incompatible land uses.

Another issue, which has affected the quality of housing and condition of houses in Abuja, is the glaring failure of urban governance. It was discovered that no one can be adequately answer the question “who is in charge of Abuja”? The three Agencies charged with the responsibilities of managing Abuja namely FCDA, AMAC, and AEPB have failed to manage Abuja effectively. Their activities are largely un-coordinated, with each one functioning in isolation, thus performing below expectation. The consequence of this failure in governance by these agencies are: lack of city parks, lack of open spaces; lack of recreational facilities; environmental degradation; incompatible land use where commercial activities are in competition with residential uses.

The research found the land use development pattern has suffered alteration and there are developments, which one can best, describe as “after-thoughts”. Where specific districts

5

were allocated for specific uses as residential, it was found that such specific uses were usually altered along the line with incompatible uses. A typical example is in Area 7, which was designated on the master plan as a residential neighbourhood, but where most of the buildings have been converted to banking offices with reckless abandon without sanction by development control department. This sudden change of use has created great traffic congestion during working hours in that area.

SUMMARY, RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS

Policy Recommendations

Abuja Master Plan provided a long term guideline for the orderly development of the city. The plan was more than land use maps for it provided a general framework for development within which planning for various systems and sectors can continue. The 25 years plus focus of the plain recognized changes and uncertainty and therefore made provisions for foreseen growth and transition as well as unforeseen events. The city was therefore planned for functionality, aesthetics and sustainability even though the principle of sustainable development had not become popular at that time. Had the plan been fully implemented with provision for changes and accommodation for uncertainties, the city would, to a larger extent, become environment friendly today.

But like any other human activity, the development of Abuja lost its bearing early in the day. While it was planned by the military, the democratic government of Alhaji Shehu Shagari started its orderly development. The development at that stage was gradual and steady. President Shagari in one of his philosophical sayings maintained, “Movement to Abuja is a gradual process”. This was not to be when the government was ousted in a military coup. Subsequent governments brought different methods and attitudes for the actualization of Abuja dream. Today, through a combination of factors of a political and economic nature over time, according Bunu (2000), a number of deviations arose from the master plan. Some of these have resulted to greater adverse effects for the young city. Again some government policies directly have resulted in an unsustainable development of the city.

A crucial policy/decision of government that has serious implications to the housing situation in the study area is the directive given to ministries, parastatals, etc to move their operations to Abuja. The movements were rapid thus negating the “gradual process” pattern of the Master Plan envisaged/adopted by the Shagari government. This bought unimaginable acute accommodation problems, which have led to rapid decay of infrastructural facilities in the study area, which are being over used. Inadequate accommodation resulted in demand outstripping supply leading to unbelievable real estate rents and prices. This resulted in the development of shanties, slum and squatter settlements in most parts of the city particularly the AMAC.

Other unsustainable activities that has led to the poor housing conditions in the study area include, amongst others,

5

a) The criminal neglect of the built environment resulting in inefficient garbage collection;

b) Absence of sanitary landfill sites;

c) Non-stoppage of illegal developments at the inception stages;

The above background is crucial as it provides a platform for the advocacy of comprehensive policy recommendations to improve housing conditions and environmental quality of the study area. The following recommendations are therefore proffered:

i) The Rehabilitation of Slums: The current programme of destruction of squatter settlements is not the solution to improving housing conditions in the study area especially in the LQRA. Man has an alienable right to shelter. Government, as far as the development of the city of Abuja is concerned, has consistently marginalised a large segment of population by not providing adequate and affordable housing or land for them to develop. Their problem should not be compounded be demolition. The best solution is to rehabilitate these slums using the Indian model, whereby necessary infrastructural developments are put in place and plots redesigned for the inhabitants to develop. Demolition becomes justified only when it obstructs the infrastructural provisions.

ii) Government in line with the above must not remain silent when slums start to develop. Efforts should be made to dislodge new squatters in unauthorised places before they settle down.

iii) It is obsolete for government to think that it alone can adequately meet the accommodation needs of residents in the study area. Government should therefore provide site and services and allocate land to the individuals to build. Care must be taken to ensure that land speculators do not hijack the lands and sell at exorbitant rate. Private co-operative groups should be encouraged and land provided for them to build affordable houses.

iv) Government should speed up the infrastructural developmental of phase II. Phase III infrastructure development should also start immediately to reduce land cost and improve the environment.

v) Effective funding and restructuring of AEPB: this is necessary for them to be goal driven. Environmental protection is capital intensive but if effectively managed may fund itself in the long run. AEPB should be restructured with more relevant professionals employed by the Board. Postings to AEPB, apart from the Administrative Department, should deviate from the civil service norm. Those who have no business there should be re-deployed while process of training and re-training should be continuous.

5

vi) Environmental monitoring, compliance and enforcement department should be empowered to perform their task of fishing out and sanctioning of environmental offenders.

vii) Privatization and commercialization of waste management is very crucial. Since this will allow AEPB to be confined basically to supervisory, regulatory and monitoring roles. Companies with proven track record, executive capacity and equipment should be engaged in the process of wastes management. Landfills and refuse incinerators should be built at strategic locations using Public Private Partnerships (PPP).

viii) Development Control: government should show more than a passing interest in the activities of development control department. Professional environmentalists should be posted there at a higher level. Moreover, process of relationship and cooperation between them and AEPB should be streamlined.

ix) Developers/Investors should ensure that houses are provided based on planning standards, rules and regulations.

x) A variety of local building materials such as mud bricks, compressed bricks etc., known to housing development are available within the study area, and have been neglected by modern developers. This should be improved upon, modernised and used by developers in housing construction, especially for the low-income group.

CONCLUSIONS

The gross distortion and unprincipled alterations of Abuja Master Plan have ultimately affected the housing conditions and environmental quality of the residential areas. The Ministerial Committee on Plots of land allocated within FCT in 1998 reported 100 worst cases of contravention of open spaces and violations of the Master Plan. When such violations occur there is no doubt that the housing sector would be affected in one-way or the other. The committee reported that houses were erected in areas where they were not supposed to be.

In situations where houses have been put in green areas, which are supposed to be either for recreational purposes or reserved land, indications are that there is gross inadequacy of houses. This situation leads to the sporadic development of houses where they were originally not expected to be.

Such situations, as widely occurred in parts of the city lead to pressure on infrastructural facilities, leading to overuse and consequent breakdown of such facilities. With the breakdown of infrastructural facilities, the environment becomes degraded. The quality of the houses deteriorates and the standards begin to diminish and eventually fall below expectation and below the planned and approved requirements. All these are already happening in Abuja city.

5

As a result increase in houses more than the number planned for, the sewage systems are under severe pressure and has even broken down in some places. It is not uncommon in some districts such as Wuse Zone 2 to see burst sewers emptying its smelly and offensive odours into the road. Another adverse effect of increase number of houses more than what was planned is that situation of waste and refuses generally. Refuse has become a serious problem facing Abuja City.

The condition of housing in Abuja can be better appreciated by the disclosure of former FCT Minister, Engineer Mohammed Abba-Gana to President Olusegun Obansanjo during the latter’s two-day official tour of the FCT that while he had only 7, 000 plots to distribute, he had no fewer than 80, 000 application forms for land allocation. Such developments in the past have been responsible for the distortion of the original Abuja Master Plan.

The satellite towns that absorb majority of the “homeless” of the city are being threatened with demolition even without compensation as the government claims they contain illegal or unapproved structures. One of the solutions to these problems is perhaps the development of phases II, III and IV of Abuja, which have lagged behind. With the development of the remaining phases, one after the other, the housing conditions would definitely improve as well as the quality of the residential environments.

It is quite important to note that despite all these myriads of problems that face housing conditions in Abuja, emanating from the Master Plan distortions, all hope is not lost. Recent development has provided the optimism. The Ministry of Federal Capital Territory (MFCT) called a conference of experts in December 2000 to review Abuja Master Plan. The findings and recommendations of the conference of experts on review of Abuja Master Plan should be considered and accepted by government. If this is done, it would go a long way to improve the situation with regards to housing conditions in Abuja.

CONTRIBUTION TO KNOWLEGDE

This research study has made a humble contribution to knowledge of the existing situation in Abuja. It has helped to throw light on how Abuja was originally planned to be and how the implementation of the plan has fallen short of the original plan due to various distortions and alterations.

To a casual visitor to Abuja, all is well based on the variety of beautiful houses one sees from the outside. This study has however revealed “not all that glitters is gold”. It was found that three distinct types of housing qualities based clearly spelt out and identifies as; Low Quality Residential Area (LQRA), Medium Quality Residential Area (MQRA), High Quality Residential Area (HQRA). This was certainly not the purpose of the Master Plan for Abuja, but in reality thos is what happened over the 25 years of plan implementation.

Consequently, our knowledge of housing conditions in Abuja has been broadened through the humble discoveries and findings contained in this research work. Thus stakeholders,

5

including the Abuja City residents, the authorities in charge (MFCT, FCDA, AEPB, AMAC), the private developers, researchers and the public at large will no doubt benefit from the findings contained in this research work.

AREA OF FURTHER RESEARCH

This research work does not pretend full converge of the relevant issues with regards to housing conditions in Abuja. There are other angles from which the housing conditions could be tackled.

Some pertinent areas of further research stemming from this work include;

(a) How can the three agencies involved with Abuja City management namely, FCDA, AEPB, AMAC co-ordinate their activities so that Abuja city can be better managed and housing conditions improved?

(b) In what ways can efforts be jointly mobilise in areas pollution control and development control so as improve the quality houses in the city.

(c) Another area for further research is how to manage the distortions inland use pattern so as to mitigate their effects on housing conditions in Abuja City.

(d) Who to manage what in Abuja City, who is to be in charge of what in the city? This will no doubt help improve the situation with the housing conditions and quality residential environments.

(e) How to make Abuja a “people – friendly city” where urban base social amenities and infrastructure are not found wanting or not allowed to decay to the extent that it will affect housing conditions.

(f) How to maintain the three principles that underpin Abuja and the idea of Ebenezer Howard’s garden city making Abuja functional, devoid of traffic congestion, garbage all over and a city or ornamental parks and gardens.

(g) How to put in place clear-cut policies, proper and clear division of responsibilities and specialization of tasks between FCDA, AEPB and AMAC so that housing conditions can be improved.

(h) What policies are to be adopted to improve both housing quantity and quality in Abuja?

These areas of further research will no doubt assist all interested stakeholders in ensuring better housing conditions in Abuja.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

5

ABRAMS C. (1986), Housing in the year 2000: Environment and policy in the next fifty years, edited by Williams R. Ewald (Jr), Indiana University Press.

ABIODUN J. O. (1985),The provision of Housing and Urban Environmental problems in Nigeria. In Urban and Regional Planning Problems in Nigeria edited by J.O. Abiodun, University of Ife Press Ltd.

ACGUAYE E. (1987), A Teleogical Review of Housing Problems in Developing Countries: in Housing in Nigeria edited by Onibokun, P.

ADENIYI E. O. (1972), Housing in Nigerian National Development, the Nigerian Journal of Economic and Social Science, Vol. Xiv, No. 3.

ARIGBIBOLA A. (2002), Conceptual Issues in Housing and Housing Provision in Nigeria: In Effective Housing in the 21 St Century . The Environmental Forum, School of Environmental Technology, Federal University of Technology, Akure, Nigeria.

EGUNJOBI L. (1994), The Chequered History of Nigerian Housing policies, in Isaac O. Albert et al, Urban management and Urban violence in Africa Vol.1 IFRA –Ibadan.

ELDREDGE H. W. (1967), Housing and Community: In Taming Megapolis, Vol. 1 Anchor Books Edition

EZENAGU V. C. (2000),Fundamentals of Housing, Fountain Publishers, Akwa, Nigeria.

F.C.D.A. (1979), The Master Plan For Abuja.

Federal Ministry of Economic Planning (1975), Third National Development Plan, 1975 – 80, the Central Planning Office, Lagos.

Federal Ministry of Works and Housing (1991), New housing policy for Nigeria.

Gibert A. and Gugler J. (1982), Cities Poverty and Development, Oxford University Press, London

MABOGUNJE, A. L. (1990), Urban Planning and the Post – Colonial State in Africa, A Research Overview, African Studies review Vol. 33, No. 2, Sept, 1990.

McNulty, J. A. (1999), Location of Social Infrastructure in the Context of the Abuja Master Plan, Review of Abuja master plan.

ONEKERHORAYE A.G (1995), Urbanization and Environment in Nigeria, The Benin Social Science Series for Africa, Benin, Nigeria.

5

ONEKERHORAYE A.G (1988), Case studies of Urban Slums and Environmental Problems in Nigerian Cities, Environmental Issues and Management, Evans Brothers Ltd.

NEST (1991), Nigeria’s Threatened Environment, Ibadan, Nigeria.

ONIBOKUN P. (1983), Issues in Nigerian Housing: A Bibliographic Review, NISER, Ibadan.

OZO A.O. (1987), Housing Conditions of the Poor in Benin City Nigeria, The Urban Poor in Nigeria, Edited by Makinwa, F. K. and Ozo a.

SADA, P.O and ODEMERHO F. O (1988), Environmental Issues and Management in Nigeria: Nigeria Development, Ibadan, Evans Brothers, Nigeria Publishers.

UKWU U. (1999), Location of Marketers and other commercial facilities in Abuja: Considerations for Master Plan Review: The Review of Abuja Master Plan.

VAGALE L.R. (1983), Environmental Pollution and Management in Nigeria: Environmental Focus Vol. 1, Nos 1 and 2, College of Environmental Studies, Ramat Polytechnic, Maiduguri, Nigeria.

SANUSI Y.A (1997), The 1991 National Housing Policy of Nigeria: An Analysis, Theo Printers, Kaduna.

ROA, B. B. (1979), Housing and Habitat in Developing Countries, Newman Group of Publishers, New Delhi

UNCED (1992), The Rio Declaration, United Nations, New York.