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
5
Capital Territory (FCT) and recommended that the city’s waste disposal
apparatus should be improved on continuous basis so as to 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

5
 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 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.

5
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.

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

5
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 15th 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;

 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.
5
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.

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

5
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:

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.

5
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;

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.

5
 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

5
create a haphazard planning system and are missing the Master Plan
goals.

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.

5
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.

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.

5
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 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
5
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 Number of Number of

Population Neighbourh Residential
oods Plots

Area 1658 30, 000 - -

Garki (I & II) 865 50, 000 8 1754

Wuse (I & II) 1530 69, 000 15 1059

Asokoro 897 30, 000 4 416

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

5
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 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:

5
 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

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

5
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 LQRAs MQRAs HQRAs Total for 5

occupancy/N AMAC (No Surveyed
o of of H.H
persons/Live Surveyed
able Room

One Room 47.1 5.2 0.8 113 28

Two Rooms 30.5 41.2 1.7 130 43

Three 9.4 38.2 3.4 3 11

Rooms
7.1 13.4 42.0 15 5
Four Rooms
3.5 1.0 42.0 6 2
Five Rooms
3.4 1.0 10.1 4 1
Six Rooms
or more

TOTAL 100. 100 10 30 10

0 .0 0.0 1 0

Source: Field Survey, 2008

5
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 PERCENTAGE OCCUPANCY

SAMPLE SIZE RATIO
(%)

HQRAs 85 28.0 2.8

MQRAs 97 32.0 3.1

LQRAS 119 40.0 3.2

TOTAL 301 100.0 -

5
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 225m 2
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 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.
5
 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

5
 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.

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

LQRA MQRA HQRA

s s s

House Type No No No
% % %

Compound 67 - -
56.15
Row 31 3 21
28 23 1.9 24.7
Semi-Detached
.92
54 5 25
Detached/Dupl
13 10 5.7 29.4
ex
.96
13 39
11 13.4 45.9
8.96

TOTAL 119 98 85
100.00 100.00 100.0

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

5
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

AGE OF HOUSE ABSOLUTE % OF TOTAL

FREQUENCY

0–3 55 18.27

4–6 58 19.26

7 – 10 43 14.28

11 – 12 89 29.65

21 – 30 25 8.30

Above 30 31 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)

LQRA MQRA HQRA

s s s

Construction No No No
Materials of % % %

5
Dwelling

Sandcrete 13 12 100 100. 100

block wall, .87 0 100.0

G.I.S 32 31 - -
roof/asbestos .68 - -

Cement 37 - -
rendered mud 36.63 - -
walls/G.I.S roof
39
Makeshift 45.9
19 -
wooden
18.96 - -
wall/G.I.S roof
-

TOTAL 119 98 85
100.00 100.00 100.0

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 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.

5
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 LQRAs MQRAs HQRAs

Condition
No No No
% % %

Sound 13 49 65
10.9 50.50 76.5

Requires minor 30 25 11
repairs 25.2 25.50 12.5

Needs major 53 14 4
repairs 44.5 14.90 5.0

Deteriorating 13 4 3
10.9 3.98 4.0

Dilapidated 10 5 2
8.4 4.98 2.0

Total 199 97 85
100 100 100

Source: Field Survey, 2008

REFUSE COLLECTION TECHNIQUES

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).

5
Table 9: Refuse Collection Techniques in AMAC

Techniques Adopted No. (in sample) %

House to House 9.0 3.0

Community Collection 29.0 9.5

Points
283.0 87.5
Unauthorized
Collection Points

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 160 80

(unauthorised)
40 20
Public Collection Points

Total 300.0 100.0

Source: Field Survey, 2008

Frequency of Refuse Collection

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

5
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 10 05.0

Every two days 46 23.0

Weekly 85 42.5

Monthly 28 14.0

Infrequent 31 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

Amongst the problems identified are those associated with the following:

5
(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.

5
(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 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

5
 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 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

5
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 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.

5
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,

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
5
 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.

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).

5
 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.

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

5
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.

5
Consequently, our knowledge of housing conditions in Abuja has been
broadened through the humble discoveries and findings contained in this
research work. Thus stakeholders, 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?

5
These areas of further research will no doubt assist all interested
stakeholders in ensuring better housing conditions in Abuja.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

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 21St
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

5
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.

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.

5
5