Thesis Abstract

Thesis Overview

<p><b>1.0 INTRODUCTION</b><br></p><p><b>1.1 BACKGROUND OF STUDY</b></p><p>Public policy emerges from decision-making, which is the most deliberate aspect of social conduct. Policy deals with a variety of sectored issues ranging from defence, health and agriculture to education, among others. One of its components is housing policy. In the past, in Nigeria, the provision of housing has traditionally been the responsibility of the private sector. Public housing has for a considerable period been limited to the provision of housing for the senior staff in the secluded area called Government Reservation Area (GRA), provision of barracks for soldiers, police and quarters for clerks usually called clerks quarter. Public involvement in housing became only noticeable in the late 1950 <br></p><p> Nigeria is a rapidly developing country with enormous need for the provision of housing for the teeming populace. It is therefore not surprising to find in the world today, that government in order to become popular and be acceptable among their citizenry usually places as top priority housing development in their National Development Plan. The United Nations Organisations “such as United Nation Conference on Human Settlements (UNCHS) otherwise called Habitat 11 have over the years pursued a variety of programmes and policies aimed at resolving the issue of inadequacy and shortfall of housing stock” (Oyejide, 2001). The need for housing policy in Nigeria became an important issue only when the country achieved independence in 1960. An attempt will be made to understand the policy by studying various governments’ actions and public pronouncements on housing. As governments and individuals struggle to improve the economic, educational and social condition of their communities, households find the need to recondition their family affairs, and to readjust their living situations. These circumstances would under conditions of accelerating economic growth for all, dictate a steady pattern of shift either from the occupation of single rooms to flats or from older and dilapidated flats to more modern ones, or to even modern bungalows. It is perhaps in full recognition of this crucial role of the human habitat in individual and national development that part of the economic objectives under the Fundamental Objectives and Directive Principles of State Policy, entrenched in Chapter II of the Nigerian Constitution required the State to direct its policy towards ensuring that suitable and adequate shelter is provided for ALL citizens, (FMI, 1979:9). <br></p><p> The Federal Government, aware of the importance of housing, has encouraged the establishment of Housing Authorities, Institutions and Agencies charged with the responsibility of housing the citizens of this nation. Such institutions and agencies set up by the Federal Government are “the Federal Ministry of Housing, Urban Development and Environment, the Federal Housing Authority, the Nigerian Building and Road Research Institute (NBRRI), and the Federal Mortgage Bank of Nigeria, among others” (Bamai, 1988), The Housing Policy in Nigeria became necessary in order to provide housing accommodation affordable to the general public. It was formulated and enunciated in 1980 after a Ministry of Housing and Environment was set up and it was to accord priority for those in the low-income groups. An adequate understanding of the Housing Policy therefore depends on the prior mastery of the concept of policy itself. Policy, characterized as instrument for the use of some form of centralized planning which government protects its attributes is significant for development. It is a proposed course of action of a person, group or government within a given environment, providing obstacles and opportunities which the policy was proposed to utilize and overcome in an effort to reach a goal or realize an objective or a purpose”, <br></p><p> (Friedrich, 1963). It is the official actions or course of actions that are goal-oriented, taken with the aim of solving problems that led to its initiation, adoption and implementation. In the formulation of policy, all relevant information and recommendations are usually passed upwards, and even after a given policy has been promulgated, there should be a regular feedback of results to confirm that policy as being right or suggest a need for revised policy. The second democratic experiment in Nigeria began on October 1,1979 as an earlier experiment failed on January 15, 1966, following the seizure of power by the Army after five years of chaotic civil political administration. In September 1978, the military government lifted the ban on partisan politics imposed since August 31,1966. The pre-election resulted in the formation of five political parties, namely: the National Party of Nigeria (N.P.N.), the Unity Party of Nigeria (U.P.N.), the Nigeria People’s Party (N.P.P.), the Great Nigeria People’s Party (G.N.P.P.) and the People’s Redemption Party (P.R.P.). “The election resulted in the N.P.N. as the Fulani party winning an overall plurality of votes in nineteen (19) States. The U.P.N. as the Yoruba party came second, the N.P.P. as the Igbo party came third, the P.R.P. and the G.N.P.P. represented the Kanuri and Hausa parties respectively trailed behind” (Njoku, 2004). It was on that note that Alhaji Shehu Shagari of the National Party of Nigeria assumed office on October 1, 1979 as the President and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Nigeria. This was a democratic regime. Powell Jnr listing the features of democracy states that “the legitimacy of the government rests on a claim to represent the desires of its citizens, that is, the claim of government’s obedience to its laws is based on the government’s assertion to do what the people want; and that citizens and leaders enjoy basic freedom of speech, press, assembly and organization” (Encyclopaedia of Social Sciences, (1829). The desire of the federal and state governments in Nigeria to “improve housing conditions and ownership is now well orchestrated by their public announcement. Provision of ‘shelter for all’ has also become a cardinal point of the NPN federal government” (Mohammed, 1980). In April, 1980, following the National Council on Housing and Environment Conference in Port Harcourt, the government of Shehu Shagari embarked on a ‘housing for all’ programme for the country. Imo State, my case study, is one of the then nineteen States of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, (see Appendices I and II – maps of Nigeria and Imo State). “The State was created when the former East Central State of Nigeria was split into Anambra and Imo State on 3 rd February, 1976 by the Murtala/Obasanjo regime. It has a population density of 590 persons per square kilometer” (MOF, 2000). Its population at the end of 2006 National Census was 3.9 million. With the inception of the Second Republic in 1979, the Federal Government of Alhaji Shehu Shagari decided to construct low cost houses throughout the federation. According to the President, the goal of his administration in the area of housing was to, as much as possible, “make sure that every Nigerian had access to a decent and affordable accommodation in a clean environment” (Imo, 1985). The decision was borne out of the desire to provide affordable houses to low-income earners in various parts of the country. In Imo State, the Federal Low-Cost Housing Scheme was located at Egbu and Umuguma in Owerri Local Government and the eleven other Local Governments in Imo State (excluding nine local Governments that are now part of Abia State). Out of the 8,000 housing units slated for Imo State by the Shagari Administration, a total of seven hundred and eighty-one (781) houses were constructed. Those in the rural areas were one bedroom bungalows while those at Owerri – the capital of Imo State consisted essentially of three housing types – one-bedroom, two bedroom and three-bedroom, all semi-detached bungalows. “The Estate covered about 25 hectares and each house was designed to accommodate two families separated by a party wall “(Igbozuruike, 1988). A total of twelve contractors were employed to execute this housing programme while the Federal Ministry of Housing and Environment engaged the services of two firms of architects to supervise the project on its behalf. The form of tender adopted was ostensibly open tender but in reality, the contractors were awarded to members of the defunct National Party of Nigeria. <br></p><p> <b>PROBLEM STATEMENT</b></p><p>Rapid urbanization due to high economic growth rate appears to generate a range of problems, usually of national significance for most developing countries like Nigeria. The recognition of this problems as well as strategies to cope with them has, in the case of some countries, led to the formation of a cluster of development policies which as a group form some sort of national urbanization policies. Nigeria currently seems to lack an established tradition on how to formulate housing policy#&nbsp; under civilian dispensations. No serious study has been conducted to establish how housing policy was made during the First and Second Republics. This might be due to the high degree of political instability that has besieged the country since it achieved independence. For example, “between 1960-1985, Nigeria witnessed nine regimes; five of them were military regimes. Consequently, housing policy formulation had been dominated by the&nbsp; military and their political appointees. When the country witnessed the first military coup, elected civilians were carefully eliminated from public policy formulation, the exception being the short interlude of civilian regime during the Second Republic (1979- 1983)”, (Haruna, 1987:31-32). </p><p> To own a comfortable home as a reward for hard work and self sacrifice has long been “an unattainable goal for the majority of workers, particularly the low-income group and the peasants in the rural areas” (Gana, 1988:14). A review of past policies and programmes of both public and private sectors reveals that overall national housing delivery appears to be inadequate. Effective solution to housing delivery is yet to be found. This becomes more critical when viewed against the background of both urban and rural areas, where housing need is dominated by the poor and low-income group, who constitute an estimated 70% of the population. Nigeria appears to be in the throes of shelter crises. A large number of the population live in slums and squatter settlement while sizeable segment of both urban and rural population live in poor shelter, in unhealthy, ill-maintained houses. The situation is graphic enough.<br></p><p> A look at the housing Policy of Nigeria’s Second Republic reveals deep-rooted constraints. These include lack of sound leadership as well as competent personnel, inadequate mortgage institutions, duplication of responsibilities, lack of autonomy, acute housing shortage and lack of affordability, corruption, lack of due process mechanism, lack of easy access to land with infrastructure, high cost of building materials, high cost of funds for housing, lack of sustained research into raw materials used in the housing industry, weak enforcement of contracts, government laws and policies, uncontrolled population explosion and its resultant uncontrolled housing demands with illegal construction of shanties, economic recession , etc. <br></p><p>The urgency and necessity of this housing problems call for concern by all. The government is supposed “to harness the political, social and economic resources in Nigeria to improve the standard of living of her people as enjoyed in the more advanced countries of Europe, Asia and America" (Hanson, 1990:76). The housing policies in Nigeria were supposed to have provided accommodation services to the masses at cheap and affordable prices, but from what is available or obtainable, or judging from the plethora of commentaries from many scholars, like Nwosu (1981:44), Abrams (1964), Riggs (1963:18), Dale (1941:46), Blitz (1956:82), Oyediran (1980), Marris (1970:19), it appears that this dream is not realizable. Consequently, the questions that will guide this study are: <br></p><p> What is the link between formulation and Implementation?&nbsp;</p><p>2. What were the contributions of the Legislature, the Executive, the interest groups, the mass media and the people towards housing policy iplementation during the Second Republic?&nbsp;</p><p>3. What led to the promulgation of the low-cost housing policy during Nigeria’s Second Republic?&nbsp;</p><p>4. Did the Second Republic housing policy implementation improve the housing situation in Imo State?</p><p>&nbsp;5. What factors militated against housing policy implementation in Imo State?&nbsp;</p><p>6. What are the lessons learnt from the Second Republic housing policy in Imo State?&nbsp;</p><p>What are the measures for improving housing delivery in Nigeria, with particular reference to Imo State?</p><p> <b>OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY</b>&nbsp;</p><p>As a result of the identified problems, the general objective of this study is to evaluate how housing policy was made in concrete term by the Federal Government and how it was implemented, especially in Imo State. To achieve this aim, the researcher has adopted the Housing Programme of Ahaji Shehu Shagari who was a &nbsp; the helm of affairs during this period (1979-1983) and how and how it was implemented in Imo State. The specific objectives are: </p><p>1. To link Formulation and Implementation.&nbsp;</p><p>2. To examine the roles played by the Legislature, the Executive and pressure groups and the mass media in policy formulation during Nigeria’s Second Republic.&nbsp;</p><p>3. To find out what led to the promulgation of the low-cost housing policy during Nigeria’s Second Republic?&nbsp;</p><p>4. To ascertain whether the implementation of this Federal Government Housing Policy improved the housing situation in Imo State.&nbsp;</p><p>5. To find out the factors that militated against successful implementation of the Federal Government Housing Policy in Imo State.&nbsp;</p><p>6. To highlight the lessons learnt from the Second Republic Housing Policy in Imo State.&nbsp;</p><p>7. To suggest measures for improving housing delivery in Nigeria with particular reference to Imo State <br></p>