ABSTRACT
Governments all over
the evaluation of public housing world are taking steps to address the problem
of providing adequate and affordable housing to their people. Ogun State
Government in Southwest Nigeria is not
left out in this drive, and thus initiated an integrated public housing
programme in 2003 with the assumption that the use of different strategies by
different organizations will
result in the provision of adequate housing
and improved quality of life for different categories of people in the State.
In view of the fact that the validity of this assumption has not been
formally examined, this research therefore aimed at evaluating public housing
in Ogun State, Nigeria, with a view to examining the extent to which the different housing delivery strategies
have provided adequate and satisfactory housing and influenced the quality of
life of residents of public housing in the State.
Survey and qualitative research strategies as well
as proportionate and purposive sampling
techniques were
used in selecting respondents. Primary data
was obtained through the
administration of
questionnaire to 90 purposely selected
staff members, and oral interviews with
four senior management staff in four key
public housing agencies. In addition, questionnaire and observation schedule
were used in obtaining data from 517
housing units selected from four
different housing delivery strategies based on the proportion of their occurrence in nine newly constructed public
housing estates. The quantitative
data was analysed using
frequencies, percentages, cross tabulations,
discriminant, principal component
and categorical regression analyses; while the qualitative data was analysed
using content analysis. Findings
show that the
four public housing agencies
sampled were rated as having adequate
organizational capacity in public housing provision. However, housing provided
by the agencies was rated affordable, inadequate and not satisfactory by the
residents. Although, public housing estates
sampled lacked basic
socio-economic infrastructure,
majority of the respondents felt satisfied with life in their current
residences. The study found significant
differences in socio-economic characteristics of residents
and levels of housing adequacy and
satisfaction across the four strategies. Whereas the Core housing strategy provided housing for low-income earners
and was rated as having provided the
most adequate and satisfactory housing, the Turnkey and Public-Private
Partnership (PPP) strategies
provided the least adequate and
satisfactory housing
respectively for middle-income
earners. The Shell strategy which provided housing for
high-income class had the highest
proportion of those who felt satisfied
with life. Satisfaction with management of housing
estates and housing unit attributes among other attributes discriminated
between the residents who were satisfied with life and those who were not. Housing
unit attributes were rated the most adequate and satisfactory while socio-economic infrastructure and
neighbourhood facilities were rated the least adequate and least satisfactory
housing attributes.
Findings also show
that housing delivery strategies, additional space requirement in the housing
units, organizational capacity as well as age, income and
tenure status of respondents among others were significant predicators of housing adequacy and residential satisfaction in the study area. Residential satisfaction, tenure status,
housing adequacy, housing delivery strategies, length of residency, income and
age of respondents were factors that influenced satisfaction with life in
the housing estates.
Although findings of the
study are consistent with the findings of prior
research; the categorical regression analysis (R2 = 1.000, F=718909256;
P=0.000) however shows that adequate housing
(Beta=1.000, F=528886811; P=0.000) was
the strongest predictor of, and closely related to, residential satisfaction; and that housing
adequacy and residential satisfaction have significant influence on
satisfaction with life. The
findings imply that
the different housing delivery strategies used in public housing perform
differently in terms of residents perceived adequacy and satisfaction; the
levels of housing adequacy and satisfaction
as well as quality of life in public housing can be enhanced through adequate provision and maintenance of basic housing
infrastructure and neighbour hood facilities;
housing adequacy and satisfaction can be used as synonymous concept in the evaluation of
housings; and the underlying assumption
in public housing in Ogun State is valid.
TABLE
OF CONTENTS
Title Page —————— – i
Dedication
————————– ii
Certification
———————— iii
Dedication
————————– iv
Acknowledgement
——————–v
Abstract ———————- vi
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION
1.0 Background of Study—————-1
1.1 Statement of the Problem ——————–3
1.2 Aim of Study—————–6
1.3 Objectives of Study——————-6
1.4 Justification——————-6
1.5 Scope of Study————–8
1.6 Summary———————8
Chapter 2 THE CONTEXT OF STUDY—————10
2.0.0
Introduction——————10
2.1.0 Basic
Information on the study area———-10
2.1.1 Location and
Size of Ogun State————–10
2.1.2 Administrative
Setting—————-12
2.1.3 Demographics
and Socio-economic Characteristics of Ogun State———-12
2.2.0 Public Housing
in Ogun State —————-14
2.2.1 Public Housing
in Ogun State: Historical Perspective ———14
2.2.2 The 2003 Ogun
State Housing Policy———-16
2.2.3 The Public
Housing Programme in Ogun State and its Objectives—-18
2.2.4 Housing
Delivery Strategies in the Public Housing Programme——18
(i) Government Aided
Core Housing Strategy ——–19
(ii) Turnkey Housing
Delivery Strategy—————-21
(iii)Public-Private
Partnership Housing Delivery Strategy—-24
(iv) Shell Stage Housing Delivery Strategy———–26
2.3.0 Public Housing
Agencies in Ogun State————28
2.3.1 Ogun State
Housing Corporation————–29
2.3.2 Ogun State
Property and Investment Corporation————30
2.3.3 Gateway City
Development Company Limited——32
2.3.4 Ogun State
Ministry of Housing ————-33
2.4 Summary———————–35
Chapter 3 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE—————36
3.0.
Introduction——————-36
3.1.0 Evaluation
Research —————-39
3.1.1 Programme
Theory in Evaluation of Social Programmes ————40
3.2.0 Studies in
Public Housing——————43
3.3.0 Evaluation of
Public Housing ———— 46
3.3.1 Dimensions of
Evaluation of Public Housing——-47
3.3.2 Levels of
Evaluation of public Housing ———–48
3.4.0 Approaches to
Evaluation of Public Housing ———- —- ——–50
3.4.1 Post Occupancy Evaluations—————–51
3.4.2 Satisfaction Studies —–
——-55
3.4.3 Evaluation of Quality—————–60
3.4.4 Evaluation of Housing Adequacy————66
(i)Decent
Housing——————–69
(ii) Safe
Housing————-70
(iii)Healthy
Housing——————71
(iv)Accessible
Housing—————–74
(v) Affordable
Housing—————-74
3.5.0 Methods of
Evaluating Public Housing Schemes ———76
3.6.0 Factors
Influencing the Evaluation of Public Housing ————-78
3.7. 0 Housing and
Quality of Life—————-80
3.8.0
Summary———————–83
Chapter 4 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK ——————85
4.0.0
Introduction—————-85
4.1.0 Programme
Theory and Conceptual Approaches to Evaluation———–86
4.2 The Conceptual
Framework of the Study————88
4.3 Summary———————-89
Chapter 5 RESEARCH
METHODOLOGY————-91
5.0
Introduction——————–91
5.1.0 Research
Strategy——————–91
5.2.0 Sample Frame of Housing Units and Public
Housing Organisations—-92
5.3.0 Sampling
Techniques—————92
5.4.0 Sample Size of
Housing Units and Staff Members of Organisations——92
5.5.0 Design of Data
Collection Instruments————–94
5.6.0 Data Collection
and Data Treatment—————-95
5.6.1 Objective
1———————95
5.6.2 Objective
2——————–97
5.6.3 Objective
3———————98
5.6.4 Objective
4——————-98
5.6.5 Objective
5——————-100
5.7. Data Processing
———————-102
5.8. Reliability and Validity Tests—————103
5.9
Summary———————–104
Chapter 6 THE ORGANIZATIONAL CAPACITY OF PUBLIC
HOUSING
AGENCIES———————-106
6.0.0 Introduction—————–106
6.1.0 Socio-economic
Characteristics of the Respondents (Staff)——106
6.2.0 Organizational
Characteristics of the Public Housing Agencies ———-110
6.3.0 Organizational
Capacity of the Public Housing Agencies———118
6.3.1 Individual
Adequacy Scores on Overall Organizational Capacity—119
6.3.2 Contributing
Factors to Overall Organisational Capacity—-119
6.3.3 Overall
Adequacy of Management Component ————–121
6.3.4 Overall
Adequacy of Resource Component ———–122
6.4.0. Adequacy of
Organisational Capacity of the Different Organizations——- —–123
6.4.1 Contributing
Attributes to Adequacy of organizational Capacity of the
different
Organizations———– ————–124
6.4.2 Contributing
Attributes to Adequacy of Management Capacity across the
Organisations——-
——–125
6.4.3 Comparison of
Organizational Capacity across the Agencies—–127
6.5
Summary———————–129
Chapter 7
CHARACTERISTICS OF HOUSING PROVIDED BY THE PUBLIC
HOUSING AGENCIES——————131
7.0.0
Introduction—————- 131
7.1.0 Overall Housing
Attributes ————– —— —–131
7.1.1 Additional
Requirements in the Housing Units——-133
7.2.0 Housing
Characteristics across the different Delivery Strategies —134
7.2.1 Housing Unit
Attributes——————134
7.2.2 Housing
Services and Infrastructure————–140
7.2.3 Housing Estate
Characteristics and Neighbourhood Facilities–143
7.3.0 Comparative
Analysis of Housing Characteristics in the four Delivery
Strategies——————–146
7.4.0
Summary——————–147
Chapter 8 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF
RESIDENTS OF
PUBLIC HOUSING
ESTATES ——————149
8.0.0 Introduction
—————–149
8.1.0 Socio-economic
Characteristics of the Respondents in all the Housing Units–149
8.1.1 Socio-economic
Characteristics of Residents across different Housing
Delivery
Strategies————-153
8.2
Summary———————–160
Chapter 9 ASSESSMENT OF THE ADEQUACY OF PUBLIC
HOUSING——-161
9.0.
Introduction——————161
9.1.0 Overall Housing
Adequacy—————-161
9.1.2 Contributing
Attributes to Overall Housing Adequacy—-162
9.1.3 Adequacy of
Housing sub-Components————–163
(i) Adequacy of
Housing Unit Attributes————–163
(ii) Adequacy of
Housing Services and Infrastructure——–165
(iii) Adequacy of
Neighbourhood Facilities———–166
(iv) Adequacy of
Management of Facilities in the Housing Estates–166
9.2.0 Housing
Adequacy across the different Delivery Strategies——–168
9.2.1 Contributing
Attributes to Housing Adequacy across the different Strategies-
————————169
9.3.0 Adequacy Index
Housing sub-Components——— 173
9.4.0 Variation in
Housing Adequacy————– 176
9.4.1 Factors
Influencing Overall Housing Adequacy——-177
9.5.0 Dimensions of
Evaluation of Overall Housing Adequacy————-179
9.5.1 Dimensions of
Evaluation of Housing Adequacy across the different Strategies
————————–180
(i) The Core Housing
Strategy———–180
(ii) The Turnkey
Housing Delivery Strategy————-182
(iii) PPP Housing
Delivery Strategy————–183
(iv)The Shell Housing
Delivery Strategy—————- 185
9.5.2: Comparison of Dimensions of Housing Adequacy
Evaluation across the
Different
Strategies————187
9.6 Summary——————-189
Chapter 10 RESIDENTIAL SATISFACTION IN PUBLIC HOUSING
———–192
10.0.0
Introduction—————192
10.1.0 Evaluation of
Residential Satisfaction———–192
10.1.1 Overall
Residential Satisfaction————193
10.1.2 Contribution
of Housing Attributes to Overall Residential Satisfaction—
—————194
10.1.3 Satisfaction
with Housing Sub-Components——195
(i) Satisfaction with
Housing Unit Attributes ————–196
(ii) Satisfaction with Housing Services————197
(iii) Satisfaction
with location of Neighbourhood Facilities——-197
(iv) Satisfaction
with Socio-economic Environment of housing Estates
——————-198
(v) Satisfaction with
Management of Housing Estates——–199
10.2.0 Residential
Satisfaction across the different Housing Delivery Strategies–201
10.2.1: Contribution
of Housing Attributes to Residential Satisfaction across the
Delivery
Strategies——————–202
10.3: Satisfaction
with Housing sub-Components in all the Strategies—-209
10.3.1 Satisfaction
with Housing sub-components across the Different Strategies
—————–211
10.4 Variation in
Satisfaction with housing sub-components——214
10.4.1 Variation in
Satisfaction across Socio-economic characteristics of
Respondents———————-214
10.4.2 Factors
affecting Residential Satisfaction in all the Housing Estates——-215
10.5 Dimensions of
Evaluation of Residential Satisfaction in all the Housing Estates——–219
10.5 .1: Dimensions
of Evaluation of Residential Satisfaction across the different
Strategies.———————-220
(i)Core Housing
Delivery Strategy———— ———-220
(ii) The Turnkey
Housing Delivery Strategy———–222
(iii) The
Public-Private Partnership Housing Delivery Strategy—— 224
(iv)The Shell Housing
Delivery Strategy——– —— 226
10.5.2 Comparison of
Dimensions of Residential Satisfaction Evaluation across the
Different
Strategies————- ——228
10.6 Summary——————–230
Chapter 11
SATISFACTION WITH LIFE IN PUBLIC HOUSING ………………….233
11.1.1 Satisfaction
with Life in all the Housing Estates——-
233
11.1.2: Satisfaction
with Life across the different housing Delivery Strategies—234
11.2.0 Variation in
Satisfaction with Life in all the Housing Estates——- —–237
11.2.1: Factors
Affecting Satisfaction with Life in all the Housing Estates——-237
11.2.2 Discriminants
of Satisfaction with life in all the Housing Estates———-243
11.3. Summary———————243
Chapter 12 SYNTHESIS,
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS——-245
12.0.
Introduction——————–245
12.1. Overview of
Research —————245
12.2: Summary of Key
Findings——————-247
12.3 Synthesis of Key
Issues Arising from the Study————250
12.4 Implications of
Study Findings ————-257
12.5 Areas for
further Study————–260
12.6 Concluding
Remarks——————261
REFERENCES———————262
APPENDICES———————288
Appendix 1: Ogun State in Context of Nigeria ———-288
Appendix 2: Floor
Plans of Core Housing Units———-289
Appendix 3: Floor Plan of Turnkey Housing Unit in OLokota
Housing Estate ——–289
Appendix 4: Floor
Plan of Typical Housing Unit in the PPP Strategy———–290
Appendix 5: Floor
Plan of Typical Housing Unit in the Shell Strategy———-290
Appendix 6: Variables for Assessing Organizational
Capacity ———291
Appendix 7: Housing
Attributes——————-292
Appendix 8: Housing
Adequacy Variables—————-293
Appendix 9:
Residential Satisfaction and Satisfaction with Life Variables——295
Appendix 10: Survey
Questionnaire (Staff of Public Housing Agencies) ——-297
Appendix 11:
Interview Guide———————300
Appendix12: Housing
Unit Survey Questionnaire—————-301
Appendix 13:
Observation Schedule————–307
Appendix 14:
Reliability Test of Scale of Measurement of Staff Survey Questionnaire——–309
Appendix 15:
Reliability Test of Scale for Measurement for Housing Adequacy——-310
Appendix 16:
Reliability Test of Scale for Measurement for Residential Satisfaction and
Satisfaction with
life—————-311
Appendix 17: Number
of Persons per Room————–312
Appendix 18: Layouts
of Media Village and OGD Housing Estates Asero, Abeokuta ———-313
Appendix 19:
Categorical Principal Component Analysis of Dimensions of Housing Adequacy Evaluation in All the Housing Estates (Model
Summary)——–314
Appendix 20:
Categorical Principal Component Analysis of Dimensions of Housing Adequacy
Evaluation in the
Core Housing Estates (Model Summary)——–315
Appendix 21:
Categorical Principal Component Analysis of dimensions of housing adequacy
evaluation in the
Turnkey housing estates (Model Summary)————316
Appendix 22:
Categorical Principal Component Analysis of dimensions of housing adequacy
evaluation in
the PPP housing estate (Model Summary)
——317
Appendix 23:
Categorical Principal Component Analysis of dimensions of housing adequacy
evaluation in the
Shell housing estates (Model Summary)——318
Appendix 24: Categorical Principal Component Analysis of
dimensions of Residential
Satisfaction in all
the housing estates (Model Summary) ——–319
Appendix 25:
Categorical Principal Component Analysis of Residential Satisfaction evaluation
in
the Shell housing
estates (Model Summary)————–320
Appendix 26: Categorical Principal Component Analysis of
dimensions of Residential
Satisfaction
evaluation in the Turnkey housing estates (Model Summary) ——–321
Appendix 27: Categorical Principal Component Analysis of
dimensions of residential
Satisfaction
evaluation in the PPP housing estates (Model Summary) –322
Appendix 28:
Categorical Principal Component Analysis of dimensions of Residential
Satisfaction evaluation
in the Shell housing estates (Model Summary)———-323
Appendix 29: Discriminant Analysis of Satisfaction with
Life in Housings Estates– 324
LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1: The
Population Distribution across Local Government Areas in Ogun State——–14
Table 2.2: Planned and Completed Housing Units by the
OSHC ——–30
Table 2.3: Planned
and Completed Housing Units by OPIC. ————–32
Table 2.4: Planned
and Completed Housing Units by the GCDCL——–33
Table 2.5: Planned
and Completed Housing Schemes by the MOH——-34
Table 5.1: Sample
Size of Housing Units for Each Housing Delivery Strategy———–93
Table 5.2:
Distribution of Questionnaires to Residents of Housing units according to
Housing Delivery
Strategies ——————102
Table 6.1: Average
Monthly Income of Respondents————-107
Table 6.2: Highest Educational Qualification of
Respondents——- —107
Table 6.3: Areas of
Specialization of Respondents—————-108
Table 6.4:
Designation of Respondents——————–109
Table 6.5:
Organizational Characteristics—————–118
Table 6.6: Individual
Score on Overall Organizational Capacity——–119
Table 6.7:
Contributing Components to Overall Organizational Capacity——120
Table 6.8: Individual
Scores on Adequacy of Management Capacity————122
Table 6.9:
Individuals’ Scores on Adequacy of Resources Capacity ————122
Table 6.10:
Contributing Attributes to Organizational Capacity across the
Organizations—–125
Table 6.11: Adequacy
Indices of Organizational Capacity of the four
Organizations——————127
Table 7.1: Additional
Requirements in the Housing Units —————134
Table 7.2: Housing
Typology————–134
Table 7.3: Sizes of
Housing Units—————–135
Table: 7.4 Additional
Spatial Requirements in the Housing Units across the Strategies———136
Table 7.5: Mode of
Acquisition of Housing Units—————–136
Table 7.6: Evaluation
of Housing Acquisition Process————137
Table 7.7 Evaluation
of Cost of Housing—————–138
Table 7.8:
Descriptive Statistics of Occupancy Ratio ———–139
Table 7.9: Mode of
Water Supply in Housing Units ————-141
Table 7.10: Source of
Power Supply to Housing Units ———142
Tables 7.11: Refuse
Collection and Disposal from Housing Units——143
Table 7.12: Housing
Estate Characteristics and Facilities across the Housing Delivery
Strategies———————–145
Table 8.1:
Respondents’ Sex————–153
Table 8.2 Age
Grouping of Respondents——————153
Table 8.3: Marital
Status of Respondents——————154
Table 8.4:
Educational Attainment of Respondents—————155
Table 8.5: Employment
Sector of Respondents———-155
Table 8.6: Personal
Average Monthly Income of Respondents———-156
Table 8.7: Length of
Residency in the Housing Estate———–157
Table 8.8: Type of
Tenure—————–157
Table 8.9: Household
Sizes of Respondents————–158
Table 9.1: Overall
Housing Adequacy ——————–162
Table 9.2:
Contribution of Housing Attributes to
Housing Adequacy ———163
Table 9.3: Adequacy of Housing Unit Attributes—————-164
Table 9.4: Adequacy of Housing Services and
Infrastructure———–165
Table 9.5: Adequacy
of Neighbourhood Facilities—————166
Table 9.6: Adequacy
of Management of Facilities —————167
Table 9.7:
Contributing Attributes to Housing adequacy across the Delivery
Strategies——-170
Table 9.8:-
Sub-Components Adequacy Indices——————174
Table 9.9: Adequacy
Indices Housing Sub-components across the different Housing Delivery
Strategies
———————–174
Table 9.10:
Regression Coefficients of Predictors of Overall Housing Adequacy——-178
Table 9.11:
Dimensions of Housing Adequacy Description in all the Housing Estates–180
Table 9.12:
Dimensions of Housing Adequacy Description in the Core Housing Strategy——181
Table 9.13:
Dimensions of Housing Adequacy Description in the Turnkey Strategy—-183
Table 9.14:
Dimensions of Housing Adequacy Description in the PPP Strategy———184
Table 9.15:
Dimensions of Housing Adequacy Description in the Shell Strategy ——-186
Table 9.16: Summary
of Result of Factor Analysis on Housing Adequacy across the Strategies
——————–188
Table 10.1 Overall
Residential Satisfaction in all the housing estates————193
Table 10.2:
Contribution of Housing Attributes to overall Residential Satisfaction—–195
Table 10.3:
Satisfaction with Housing Unit Attribute————-196
Table 10.4:
Satisfaction with Housing Unit Services————-197
Table 10.5:
Satisfaction with location of Neighbourhood Facilities – ———–198
Table 10.6:
Satisfaction with Socio-Economic Environment of Housing Estates——-199
Table 10.7:
Satisfaction with Management of Housing Estates– ——-200
Table 10.8:
Contribution of Housing Attributes to Residential Satisfaction—–204
Table 10.9:
Satisfaction Indices of Housing sub-Components———–210
Table 10.10:
Satisfaction Indices across Housing Delivery Strategies———–212
Table 10.11: Regression Coefficients of Predictors of
Residential Satisfaction in all the Housing
Estates————————216
Table 10.12:
Alternative Regression Coefficients of Predictors of Residential Satisfaction
in all the Housing Estates without
housing adequacy as a predictor————218
Table 10.13:
Dimensions of Residential Satisfaction Description in all the Housing Estates-
-220
Table 10.14:
Dimensions of Residential Satisfaction Description in the Core housing Estates
221
Table 10.15:
Dimensions of Residential Satisfaction Description in all Turnkey Housing
Estates—————-223
Table 10.16:
Dimensions of Residential Satisfaction Description in the PPP Housing
Estate–225
Table10.17:
Dimensions of Residential Satisfaction Description in the Shell Housing
Estate-227
Table 10.18: Summary
of Result of Factor Analysis on Residential Satisfaction across the
Strategies
———————-229
Table 11.1:
Regression Coefficients of Predictors of Satisfaction with Life in all the
Housing
Estate——————239
Table 11.2:
Discriminant Analysis of Satisfaction with life in all the Housing Estates
——–241
Table 11.3: Structure
Matrix of Discriminant Analysis of Satisfaction with Life——–242
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1: Map of
Ogun State Showing the Local Government Areas———–11
Figure 3.1: Components of a typical Programme Impact
Theory——- 42
Figure 3.2 Basic
Logic Model————–42
Figure 3.3: Quality
Of Life: A System Model————-81
Figure 4.1: The
Theoretical and Conceptual Framework of the study ————90
Figure 6.1: Age Group
of Respondents————107
Figure 6.2: Years of
Experience of Respondents———-110
Figure 6.3:
Organizational Structure of the Ogun State Housing Corporation————111
Figure 6.4:
Organizational Structure of the Ogun State Property and Investment Company
(OPIC) and Gateway
City Development Company Limited (GCDCL)——–112
Figure 6.5:
Organizational Structure of the Ogun Sate Ministry of Housing—–113
Figure 6.6 Adequacy
of Organizational Capacity across the Organizations——124
Figure 7.1: Housing
Typology———————-132
Figure 7.2: Sizes of
Dwelling Units—————-132
Figure 8.1: Age
Groups of Respondents——————–150
Figure 8.2: Personal
Average Monthly Income (Naira) ———–151
Figure 8.3: Household
Sizes—————-152
Figure 8.4: Tenure
Types——————-152
Figure 9.1:
Individual Housing Adequacy Rating across the Delivery Strategies——–169
Figure 10.1:
Residential Satisfaction Across Housing Delivery Strategies——-202
Figure 11.1:
Residents’ Satisfaction with Life In public Housing——–234
Figure: 11.2:
Satisfaction with life across the different housing delivery Strategies—–235
LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS
Plat 1: View of the Core Housing Estate—————–21
Plate 2: View of the
Media Village, Abeokuta at Commissioning——-23
Plate 3: Typical
two-bed room semi-detached house in the Media Village, Abeokuta ———-23
Plate 4: Three Bed
room Bungalow in the Presidential Mandate Housing Scheme constructed
with burnt bricks——————–24
Plate 5: Typical
Detached 3-bed room bungalow in the OGD-Sparklight Estate, Ibafo———26
Plate 6: View of
unoccupied housing units in the OGD-Sparklight Estate, Ibafo——–26
Plate 7: View of
unoccupied housing units in the OGD-Sparklight Estate, Ibafo——–27
Plate 8: Occupied
Housing Units in the OSHC Estate, Ota—————-28