Journal of Engineering,

Computational & Applied Sciences

ISSN: 2795-3939
Received 04 November 2021; Accepted 07 December 2021; Available online 21 January 2022 Volume 1 Issue 01

Public Private Partnership Model for Affordable housing

Provision in Nigeria
Yahaya Ahmed *a, Musa Usman Dogara b , Adamu Salehc
a,b*Department
of Estate Management & Valuation, Federal Polytechnic, Nasarawa, Nasarawa, Nigeria
yahmednas1@gmail.com

Abstract
Nigeria has implemented several PPP housing projects since its official recognition in 2004. As a result, the path forward
for the PPP to provide affordable housing to urban dwellers with the most pressing housing needs in Nigeria is unclear.
The purpose of this study is to assess affordable housing models for urban residents in Nigeria, as well as to measure the
issues and key success factors of PPPs. To achieve the objectives, the paper relied on a systematic review of the research
literature and survey data from a survey of 256 respondents from various PPP specialties offered by Nigerian housing.
According to studies, the PPP problem is strongly related to the PPP's CSF, with loads within the acceptable load range of
>0.5. The PPP problem model and the PPP's CSF, on the other hand, show that PPP problems have a moderate impact on
the success of PPPs provided by affordable housing in Nigeria, with no critical issues, implying that the PPP problem CSF
model will be a determinant of affordable housing in Nigeria. As a result, the PPP problem model and the PPP CSF seek to
provide affordable housing for people of all income levels. To achieve the desired goal of providing affordable housing in
Nigeria, good design patterns are recommended.
Keywords: Public Private Partnership, Model, Affordable housing, Abuja, Nigeria

1. Introduction
According to the United Nations (2014), the urban population will reach 2.5 billion by 2050, with approximately
90% of the population living in the world's poorest regions in developing countries such as Sub-Saharan Africa
and Asia. As a result, since the country's independence in the 1960s, the Nigerian government has made several
efforts to address the country's housing supply challenges. Despite the adoption of several policies by the
government, the Nigerian government has failed to address the current challenge of providing citizens with
adequate and affordable housing (Awotona, 1990; Oruwari, 1990). (2006). Because they are unable to provide
housing for citizens, they have been entrusted to the private sector.

However, the United Nations (UN) has advised African countries to delegate more responsibility for housing
provision to the private sector through Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) (Ibem and Aduwo, 2012). According to
Miraftab (2004), Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) are recognized as the arrangement of alternative institutions
and approaches to civil service in developing-country cities. PPP is promoted in housing provision on the
assumption that it will increase interest in housing sector capabilities, as well as the expansion of housing
capabilities and facilities (Shelter Afrique, 2008). Based on this recommendation, the Nigerian government
adopted the PPP in the proposal to increase the housing supply in the country's two largest cities, Abuja and
Lagos, in 2004. (Owei, 2007). Citizens' housing. The government believes that PPP will improve public
administration and service delivery by editing private and professional sector funds (Lagos State Government,
2008).

As a result, Nigeria has established public-private partnerships to address current housing challenges and provide
affordable housing for people of all income levels (Ahmed and Sipan, 2019). Public-private partnerships (PPPs)
and other forms of collaboration between the private sector and local and national governments are widely used
around the world to achieve a variety of goals. PPP originated in the United Kingdom and is derived from various
types of UK government and commercial banks. Landmine use increased a few years ago (Jacoby 2000). In 2004,
the PPP was included in a proposal to increase housing supply in the country cities of Abuja and Lagos (Owei,
2007). Citizens' housing. Grimsey & Lewis (2002), confirmed this, claiming that PPP has been in use in the UK for
many years. In the 1960s, the term "PPP" was first used to describe urban development in the United States. A
plan involving private investors (Ahmed and Sipan, 2019). Since the 1960s, the concept of public-private
partnership has spread to a variety of programs all over the world. There are increasingly two options: public
procurement options and good investment opportunities for private sector investors (Ahmed and Sipan, 2019).
However, in the past, PPP was typically associated with infrastructure development rather than housing
development. PPP is used as an option to provide housing in most parts of the world due to the country's housing-
related economic, political, and cultural environment, taking into account the fact that the housing situation in
Nigeria has deteriorated, a number of factors are considered to be the main factors contributing to the increase in
urban housing in Sub-Saharan Africa, including strict land use and use policies and discriminatory public housing
agencies lack coordination; and (Ademiluyi and Raji, 2008). According to Rondinelli (1990), some cities in Nigeria
and Sub-Saharan Africa are failing to meet housing needs within their horizons. According to the African
Ministerial Conference on Housing and Urban Development (AMCHUD, 2005, p. 5), the African region cannot
respond to the housing crisis because organizations and values cannot be transformed into a positive and positive
situation.

There is no evidence that the services provided are more affordable than other options, because more evaluations
of PPP provision of affordable housing in this context are needed to conclude that PPP involves joint decision-
making, resource participation, responsibility sharing, risk and benefit, division of labor, and interdependence
among stakeholders. There are various theoretical perspectives on PPP research in terms of housing supply (UN-
HABITAT, 2006b). According to the findings of this study, the significance of purchasing power parity can be found
in the ratio of available housing to affordability, as well as the accessibility of the purchasing power parity method.
Because it is committed to the provision of other social services, PPP proposes to increase the productivity and
efficiency of the public housing sector by participating in multiple sectors within the framework of the market
strategy (Mukhija, 2004; UN-HABITAT, 2006b). Another issue of PPP, in addition to the amount of housing
provided, is how the amount of housing provided can improve affordable housing. According to the Australian
Housing and Research Institute (AHURI), housing affordability is defined as the range of housing expenses paid by
households while maintaining housing capacity to pay for other basic living expenses.

Affordable housing is defined as cost-effective protection, which means that families can "pay without
experiencing financial hardship" (Public Works Financing,2010). However, according to Linneman and
Megbolugbe (1992), "there are many discussions about affordable housing, but the exact definition of housing
capacity is ambiguous," leaving issues unresolved. Jin & Doloi (2007), according to research, household income
and expenditure differ depending on the socioeconomic background of the country, which has an impact on
affordable housing. However, the United Nations has advised African countries to take on more responsibility for
providing private housing through public-private partnerships (PPP) (English, 2006). IISD, (2012) discovered that
in developing countries, public-private partnerships (PPPs) are viewed as arrangements for alternative
institutions and methods of urban public services. In terms of housing provision, the assumption that PPPs are
promoted is that they will increase the sector's interests, capacity, and the expansion of housing capacity and
facilities (Shelter Afrique, 2008).

Satisfied with this obvious advantage, the Nigerian government adopted PPP in 2004 as part of a proposal to
increase the country's housing supply (Oladokun and Aluko, 2012). For example, in the cities of Abuja and Lagos,
the PPP method has transformed services, particularly in the areas of housing development, solid waste
management, and transportation. By editing funds in the private and professional sectors, the government
believes that PPP will improve the efficiency of public administration and service provision (Ibem, 2011).

In light of this, this study seeks to identify the PPP challenges of affordable housing in Abuja. The study also made
recommendations to improve the performance of PPP and thus provide affordable housing in Abuja, Nigeria.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW AND THE CONCEPTUAL ISSUES

Several studies on Nigerian housing affordability issues have been conducted in terms of affordable housing
supply. Among these studies is Ibem Research (2012), which investigates the role of public-private partnerships
(PPPs) in increasing low-income people's access to housing. Nigerian housing income earners (Ibem, 2012). He
discovered that, like most previous public housing delivery strategies, the public-private partnership approach did
not benefit low-income groups significantly. On the contrary, as a result of insufficient housing financing, a lack of
consistency and continuity in housing policy development, inconvenient implementation strategies, an
unfavorable political environment, and a decline in the number of construction workers, the housing market has
deteriorated, The main background challenge is that the policy tends to provide housing to people with high and
middle incomes. Limit public supply. Adnan and Morledge (2003) believe that determining the key criteria to be
met in each joint venture project is necessary if the future of such initiatives is to ensure the challenges and
opportunities of low-cost housing affordability parity. The most important Nigerians in demand are unknown.
Sanda (2016) discovered in his research that these houses far exceeded the affordability level of the target
beneficiaries due to a lack of political will, corruption of government agents and private sector developers, lack of

2
sincerity of contacts, and a lack of access to development funds. However, according to the study (Ibem, 2011), the
PPP method is essentially a formal joint venture partnership in which the government provides subsidized land,
service parcels, or houses built by private sector partners. Although this method provides parcels and affordable
housing units for some high-income elites, it only makes a minor contribution to the number of housing units
available in Nigeria for low-income people. Furthermore, Aduwo (2013) disclosed the Nigerian housing sector's
PPP experience, particularly in providing housing for high-income groups, but did not make a significant
contribution to providing housing for low-income groups in Nigeria. He also suggested that Nigeria study
affordable housing for low-income earners using purchasing power parity.
2.1 Concept of PPP

One of the most important developments in the twenty-first century has been the promotion of the concept of
partnership, particularly between the public and private sectors. The second United Nations Conference on
Human Settlements (known as Habitat II), held in Istanbul, Turkey in June 1996, was a significant turning point for
the strategy, particularly in terms of housing supply. According to the meeting's seventh principle and action goal,
partnership between all actors, including the state, public, private, voluntary and community organizations,
cooperative sectors, non-governmental organizations, and individuals, is necessary for achieving sustainable
human settlements development and providing basic services to all people. Asylum is critical. Partnerships can
integrate and support the goal of broad participation by forming alliances, pooling resources, sharing knowledge,
contributing skills, and capitalizing on collective action's comparative advantages. It is clear from the preceding
that the goal of sustainable housing development will be met through the collaboration of the public and private
sectors.

Partnerships, according to Warah (1997), should not be viewed as a panacea for all urban ills. Partnerships, as
experience has shown, frequently require sound government intervention, particularly when catering to the needs
of the poorest and least powerful groups. If the balance of public responsibilities and private liberties shifts too far
in favor of the latter, those with less'market power' (people living in poverty) may be penalized. For example, the
commercial private sector is rarely able to produce housing that is affordable to the poorest sections of society, as
the private sector's interests are frequently limited by low or negative financial returns on investment for low-
income housing. And, while community involvement can help to cut costs, there are many services that the poor
cannot develop on their own because the cost of installing the necessary infrastructure is prohibitively expensive.
In such cases, government resources and intervention are required. The website of the Canadian Council for
Public-Private Partnership Definitions (2005) defines a PPP as a cooperative venture between the public and
private sectors that best meets clearly defined public needs through the appropriate allocation of resources, risks,
and rewards. Furthermore, the EUROPA (2005) website Internal market on public procurement defines PPPs as
forms of cooperation between public authorities and the business world that aim to ensure the completion of
infrastructure projects or the provision of public-use services. According to the EUROPA (2005) website, these
forms of collaboration have been developed in several areas of the public sector, including transportation, public
health, education, public safety, waste management, and water distribution. The PPP, on the other hand, is defined
by the free encyclopedia Wikipedia (2005) as a variation of privatization in which elements of a service previously
run solely by the public sector are provided through a partnership between the government and one or more
private sector companies.

The above definitions have been significantly expanded in scope over the last two decades or so, particularly
among governments, the United Nations, and development agencies. According to Agbola (1998), partnership is
defined today, particularly in the context of human settlement development, as "a mechanism for ensuring that the
comparative advantages of different actors in the development process are exploited in a mutually supportive
way, i.e. that the strengths and weaknesses of the public, commercial, private, and non-governmental sectors are
aligned so that the strengths are maximized while the potential for inefficiency caused by the weaknesses is
minimized'. The Habitat Agenda (1996) states clearly in paragraph 213 of the Habitat II conference in Istanbul
that governments, as enabling partners, should create and strengthen effective partnerships with women, youth,
elderly people with disabilities, vulnerable and disadvantaged groups, indigenous people and communities, local
authorities, the private sector, and non-governmental organizations in each country. Warah (1997) emphasizes
that, in addition to forming (and nurturing) partnerships, implementation strategies firmly established within the
Habitat Agenda include adopting enabling approaches, activating participatory mechanisms, building capacities
among all partner groups, and monitoring and assessing progress through network and the application of modern
information technologies.
2.2 Government Efforts in Housing Provision in Nigeria Previously
Prominent academics have extensively addressed Nigeria's housing crisis (Onokorhoraye, 1976). These
demonstrate the magnitude of the country's housing problem as well as the importance that academics and
academics place on the subject. Concerns about domestic housing issues indicate that citizens living in urban
centres, particularly low-income people living in central areas, have extremely poor living conditions and
overcrowded housing.

3
2.3 Limitations to Affordable Housing Provision in Nigeria
Property ownership, particularly housing ownership, is an important aspect of Nigerian culture. Housing not only
provides shelter, but it also reflects a person's social standing and prestige. Although houses and property are very
important, only 10% of people who want to own a house can do so through purchase or personal construction,
compared to 72 percent in the United States, 78 percent in the United Kingdom, and 60% in the United Kingdom.
South Korea has 54%, while Singapore has 92%. In Nigeria, there are three types of restrictions that impede
housing delivery and ownership. Table 1 summarizes the constraints on housing supply in Nigeria (Ahmed and
Sipan 2019).

Table1: Constraints Militating Against Housing Provision in Nigeria

Macro economic and political environment 1. High inflation rate

2. High interest rates
3. Low per capital income
4. Low investment in housing over the years
5. Low priority given to housing by successive
governments
6. Land tenure and ownership
7. High population growth and increasing urbanization
8. Lack of adequate regulation and legislation for
housing
Building materials and costs 1. Lack of acceptability of new construction practices
2. Choice of technology
3. Resistance in accepting new materials
4. Preference for imported materials which are
expensive
5. 5. Lack of adequately qualified construction
managers and skill artisans
Finance 1. Lack of adequate and appropriate financial products
especially for low income households
2. Lack of adequate financial support from government,
banks and other financial institutions

2.3.1 Building Materials

Imports are used for building materials and components. They are very expensive when compared to the value of
the country's currency (Naira) and global inflation. They are unable to provide construction materials due to the
low income capacity of the majority of the country's citizens. It is unfortunate that some traditional alternative
construction materials, such as fired and/or vibrating bricks and roof / ceiling bricks produced locally in the
country, are not preferred by ordinary Nigerians, resulting in higher production costs. The situation has not been
widely publicized. Competitiveness is insufficient due to technological issues and economies of scale. Local
building materials that are readily available should be studied to improve their quality and make them suitable for
producing cost-effective, beautiful, and durable houses in order to solve the problems associated with the high
cost of building materials. This improved local material will significantly lower housing costs (Ahmed and Sipan
2020).
2.3.2 Land Tenure System
Fatefully, the National Land Policy, promulgated in 1978 to make it easy for all qualified Nigerians to obtain and
use land, eventually became an obstacle to the housing supply in the country. The purpose of promulgating the
"Land Use Law" is to simplify the state's land tenure system by making the ownership and ownership of all state
land by the governors of all federal states to the governors of the federal states so that those people can easily
manage and use them. Interested in acquiring land in the country. However, the controversial issue of the
governor ’s agreement to carry out any subsequent land transactions and the intractable government bureaucracy
and bottlenecks make the purchase of land problematic and unnecessary expensive transactions, which is
precisely what most Nigerian citizens cannot afford, especially In the city center country of Nigeria(Ahmed and
Sipan 2019) . For ordinary citizens of the country, the government is a distant phenomenon. To the extent that
they cannot reach, their inability to obtain land will automatically translate into the fact that people cannot see
them working hard to build or build their own houses. Even on a self-service basis.
2.3.3 Housing Finance

2. In many places of the world, especially in developed countries, the sources of housing finance come from the
government, personal savings, life insurance reserves, commercial banks, savings and loan institutions (main
mortgage agencies or housing associations), but in Nigeria, the main source of housing finance The source is the
government-through the loaner to build a house, the federal government's allocation to the Federal Housing

4
Administration and the state government's subsidies to various state housing companies and personal savings.
Private companies have played an important role in financing the country’s housing. Most of the country’s housing
stock is built through personal efforts (Ahmed et al 2020).

Commercial banks and insurance companies have not played an important role in the country’s housing supply.
Commercial bank business practices do not allow room for long-term loans needed for housing construction. In
the UK and most European countries, commercial banks and insurance companies can easily borrow money to
buy a house. In Nigeria, the loan policy of insurance companies is very conservative, and commercial banks are
difficult to provide loans for projects with a long pregnancy period, which is a sign of housing construction. If more
houses are to be built and the dependence on government resources is reduced, then new sources of funds need to
be found to build the houses. A comprehensive reform of the county’s mortgage system is needed to make it
relevant to the country’s housing industry. At present, the business of most major mortgage lenders in the country
is not much different from that of commercial banks. Moreover, their capital base is too weak to meet the
requirements of potential borrowers for housing construction. It is necessary to solve the problem of lower
mortgage interest rates, and encourage commercial banks to provide long-term loans to prospective homeowners,
which are some ways to solve the problem of shortage of housing supply in the country (Ahmed and Sipan 2019b).
2.4 Challenges of PPPs for affordable housing provision in Nigeria

Although some public-private partnership models are attractive and applied in the housing sector in many
countries. There seems to be little effort to study the success of materials. Although political leaders have
announced and concluded partnerships, which are full of hope for the provision of public services, the
investigation of their success is limited (Van Ham & Koppenjan (2010). As UN-HABITAT (UN-HABITAT 2011),
housing The PPP is planned to be sparsely populated in the country, and there are few empirical data to show the
trend of success. (Roberts, 2013; Ibem and Adovo 2012) found many obstacles to the implementation of
affordable housing PPP. Any regulations, such as:

1. Land acquisition and access. Although the government uses land as a major incentive to encourage private-
sector partnerships, the government does not own any land that can be developed. As a result, it has slowed the
growth of housing stocks in general (Ibem & Aduwo2012).

2. According to Aduwo (2012) and Ogu (2001), access to adequate housing finance is hampered by commercial
banks' high interest rates, which discourage short-term loans for long-term investment in housing projects,
reducing the amount of money available to finance PPP housing projects. As a result, concerted efforts should be
made.
2.5 Nature of Nigeria’s Housing Problems

The housing problem has been generally regarded as an increasing and complicated problem. Within the scope of
these problems, defects in quantity and quality can be identified. (Abiodun, 1985) cited by Olayawola et al. (2005).
Identify the major housing problems caused by unstable human demand for housing. This problem occurs
worldwide, and it happens again. In fact, it is doubtful whether any country in the world can satisfactorily meet its
housing needs. In Nigeria, most people live in inferior housing and clean environment. Rapid urbanization and
economic growth have exacerbated the problem of insufficient housing. For low-income groups, the housing
problem is more serious because of the rapid growth, rising real estate prices, speculative activities, poor
immigration and lack of planning, making the problem more complicated (Ibem 2011). From housing forms to
single-family homes, the housing design of forms and designs may also continue to grow and is the main reason
for the housing shortage of low-income groups (Okpala, 1985; Waziri and Roosli, 2013). Nigeria urban and rural
areas suffer from insufficient housing. For example, Niser found in a rural housing study conducted in nine
countries in southern Nigeria, "The average housing demand for a residential unit in nine states is predicted to be
six, 5.2 million in 1990, 7 million in 2000, and 9.5 million in 2010. And 12.7. M appeared in 2020. "Other
manifestations of the housing problem are high rents in the housing market, insufficient mortgage financing and
mortgage facilities. This problem has caused traffic congestion, inadequate social and social facilities,
unsustainable social and economic conditions, and urban poverty. The lack of open spaces has led to the
development of crowded land, insufficient facilities and building materials in residential areas (Onibokun
Olayiwola, O Adeleye (1985).

2.6 General View of Affordable Housing in Nigeria

Decent and affordable housing is an unmet need for millions of Nigerian families. Some studies have shown that
there is only sufficient supply to meet the demand for affordable housing (Awotona, 1990; Ikejiofor, 1999; Salau,
1992; Ndubueze, Finmark Trust, 2010). According to data from the Social Policy Research Center, for most
Nigerian families, the lack of affordable housing leads to high rents, unstable traffic congestion and housing, and
unreliable housing (CCSP, 2011). Affordable housing is vital to the country and its people. Violently slammed
communities, lost jobs, weak economy and environment (Disabled, 2007). The demand for affordable housing has
become a profound and major issue throughout Nigeria. The government needs to provide decent housing with

5
reasonable family income at reasonable prices, which is reflected in the national housing policy (NHP, 2012).
Many of these families have limited economic autonomy and cannot afford their own housing.
Their messengers seem to be the expansion of their current residence and shared residence with other family
units, usually close family relationships (UN-HABITAT, 2011). Despite the increase in demand for affordable
housing, such investments are not considered commercial investment in real estate developers, and investment in
the non-government housing sector is limited (Susilawati, 2009). However, private sector (formal and informal)
donations that provide more than 90% of Nigeria ’s housing stock have a firm attitude towards housing
development (Habitat, 2006; Ogbuozobe and Ogu, 2001). The main problems facing the private sector are lack of
funds to carry out meaningful housing delivery services (Gbadeyan, 2011), land acquisition barriers, high-cost
construction materials, planning rules and regulations, housing infrastructure issues (World Bank, 1993). In
addition, the lack of land supply, limited government subsidies, and rising housing costs cannot stimulate
investment in affordable housing (Susilawati, 2009).
In order to substantially increase the national housing stock, the United Nations (2006) emphasized that this
sector needs to be mobilized, organized and motivated according to the overall organizational structure of the
housing delivery system (UN-Habitat, 2006). In the current development trend of a country, private developers
provide affordable housing for some special people in the community, especially to make money rather than
benefit the public (Adedeji and Olotuah, 2012). Since the short-term loans used by most developers must be
restored in the short term, the cost of these houses is very high and cannot be paid by middle-income earners who
need them (Adedeji and Olotuah, 2012).
2.7 Need and Effective Demand of Affordable Housing
With increased population and inland urban migration in Nigeria, affordable housing issues are a basic necessity
for individuals to enjoy. Affordable housing is described as housing for rent or purchase that is affordable for all
income groups. Household constraints with the proportionate financial capacity to secure private housing
constrained (Milligan, 2009). The gap between housing demand and the ability to acquire. There is a gap between
affordable housing requirements and the ability to effectively acquire housing needs with the challenge of
affordable housing demand in the country (Woetzel et al, 2014).
2.7.1 Housing Demand
Whether people with housing and people without housing still need more, people who still need more rooms or
improve current conditions, there is no limit to claiming compensation. However, there is a challenging challenge
that will affect people's needs and needs and bring related financial issues. Nigeria housing demand is inconsistent
with housing supply, facing rapid population growth and rapid development of non-building financing systems in
towns (Walley, 2014). There are some economic factors that lead to demand, such as rural urban immigration and
increased economic activity, leading to increased demand for labor (Finmarktrust, 2010). During this period,
violations of the government efforts to provide housing and achievements were uncontrolled and worsened due to
a population growth of approximately 42 million in 1960 and a population growth of approximately 200 million in
2016.
The annual temporary housing expenditure is about 100,000 units, and about 700,000 units are required each
year, which increases the total housing deficit to about 23 million units (ACEC, 2015). In addition, in some major
urban areas (such as Abuja, Kano, Logos, and Kaduna), housing demand is increasing at a rate of about 20% per
year (Okonjo-Iweala, 2014). The vision development strategy aims to build 10,398,650 houses between 2012 and
2020 (Odia, 2010). However, between the 1930s, the number of Nigerians living in urban areas was 7% and 10%
in the 1950s, and between 20%, 27%, and 35% between the 1970s and 1990s (Ajibola & Sanmi, 2015). Today, the
number of Nigerians living in urban areas has risen to 50%, which has caused some problems and caused housing
shortages, which has crowded nearly 60% of the unmarried population in Niger (FGN, 2013).
2.7.2 Housing Supply
Nigeria views on housing supply can be based on the formal and informal sectors. Formally refers to the supply
from various sectors of the private and public sectors. Common problems prevent the world cities from losing
their prosperity. Despite the differences in size, the limitations of providing more affordable housing on a global
and regional scale are very similar. This can be classified as an obstacle that causes insufficient demand and limits
the ability of developers to produce sufficient quantities and prices for the mass market (Walley, 2014). There are
many supply-side challenges, especially the lack of housing industry to produce large amounts of affordable land
and property rights. Regulatory obstacles, such as the challenges of outdated building codes or registration of
building codes, and the time and cost of restricting home advertising restrictions (Olotuah and Aiyeta, 2015).
Developers find it difficult to obtain appropriate long-term financing and may need the lenders provide
documents based on the financial situation on the ground as a possible feasibility study. In fact, the real estate
industry has been hampered by borrowers' reluctance to bear the risks posed by new developments aimed at
social needs. Lack of public finances may also prevent state or local authorities from providing appropriate
infrastructure or equipment for housing projects (Walley, 2014). The main component of a successful housing
delivery plan for decentralized housing units built in Nigeria is the ability of housing units to target consumers.

6
Only when housing expenditure does not exceed 30% of household income, housing is reasonable (Muhammad &
Johar, 2018). Therefore, housing capacity is a function of housing and household income.
Therefore, this section attempts to determine the affordability of houses built in the study area by linking family
income to house prices. The question about housing prices is: What is the selling price of the house? There was a
voice response among key actors (government agencies and the private sector) that the sale price of the house
was higher than the price originally agreed. The farm manager representing Terraquest Development Company
Limited (ESM) said: "... the cost of the housing unit will be 3.4 million guilders including 2 bedrooms and N4.95
Millions of dollars for three bedrooms, but because the government cannot fund infrastructure the private sector
forced separate funding to finance infrastructure, resulting in an increase in coverage from 3.4 million guilders to
4.2 million guilders (semi-detached and semi-detached houses), from 4.95 million guilders to 5.9 million guilders
(three sets Semi-detached house). The cost of providing infrastructure. "
ADH said in the same tone: "The state government cannot provide infrastructure in the agreed manner, private
companies do. The government cannot pay the amount spent; it is recommended that the company provide the
basic factors of housing costs, and then the price of the three bedrooms from N340 Ten million to N4.2 million
(two and a half houses), and from 4.95 million to 4.9 million N390.% the ratio of 2 half bedrooms and 3 separate
bedrooms is 19%. In addition, due to the inability to perform the responsibilities specified in the contract
agreement, the government cannot control the project, so as soon as possible to arrange for the payee to pay 10%
and 20% of the prepayment (two semi-detached and 3 bedrooms), and FMBN will pass The target group of
mortgage installment deduction (ADH & MGO) cannot pay wages publicly due to the low wage structure; in order
to pay the remaining wages; as a result, houses were left vacant for some time, and some houses were demolished
because the state government bought and disposed of the houses. Therefore, private companies have designed
four methods to demolish open houses of public housing: 1) According to the deposit of 2 bedrooms and 3
bedrooms, pay 10% and 20% of the total cost of housing respectively. 2) Rent (two double independent rooms
between N60,000-N70,000 per year, three separate bedrooms between N80,000-N100,000 per year); 3) Open
sales for capable people. The cost of a two-bedroom semi-detached house is N4.2 million, which will be paid
within 30 years and is N140,000 per year; 30% of the annual income of the recipients who earn N420,000 will
reach N126,000, which is much lower than the annual The amount needed to repay the housing. In the interview,
the consignee’s representative agreed that the price of housing units cannot be used as the income level of civil
servants in the study area.
Therefore, this indicates that the housing units built according to this rule cannot be tested for capacity. A similar
study conducted by Ibem and Aduwo (2012) in Ogun State, Nigeria, reported that the cost of houses built through
PPP is much higher than those built through non-PPP arrangements. In addition to the cost of housing units,
beneficiaries often need to provide guarantees and meet other requirements to obtain a mortgage, which is always
difficult to find (PSAF, 2018). Contrary to the direct method, one of the reasons for using PPP to provide housing is
to enable the target group to afford housing. However, research shows that most low-income people cannot use
the housing provided.

2.8 Reason for PPP to be Effective Tools for Affordable Housing

The HM-treasury assessment of PPP shows that the existence of PPP elements can bring benefits. These include
project management skills, innovation and risk management, for example, ensuring the delivery of high-quality
buildings on time and budget, and maintaining these assets to a high standard throughout their life cycle (Ministry
of Finance, 2012) For the public sector dedicated to improving affordable housing, partnerships with private
sector organizations have the potential to increase the project ’s resources, funding, and expertise, and enable the
project to reach a wider range of target families. Although there is little research on this issue, there are several
reasons to believe that partnerships provide a way forward to provide and manage affordable housing (Moskalyk,
2008). Sharing is not necessarily the preferred solution, but it can help solve the worthwhile issues of affordable
housing needs. The following are the reasons for using PPP as a project delivery tool.
• Efficiency Gain
• Sources of Financing
• Better on-time construction performance
• Earlier delivery
• Protection of the Public Interest

3. Methodology

This study used a sequential mixed approach, which is a sequential design approach that involves first collecting
qualitative data to explore the phenomena explored through expert opinion, and then collecting quantitative data
to elucidate the relationships found in the qualitative data. This study employs focus group interviews with PPP
experts to identify relevant success factors identified in the literature for establishing public-private partnerships
for affordable housing in Nigeria. Respondents from the group interviews with professional backgrounds have
identified their understanding of the PPP project. To examine the validity of research tools, pioneering studies

7
were conducted using Cronbach Alpha and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin statistical methods. The tool was found to be
trustworthy and efficient in the preparation of the questionnaire.

According to Kumar (2005), before being used for comprehensive data collection, questionnaire items should be
derived from literature reviews, validated through focus group interviews, and tested. Questionnaires have been
distributed to stakeholders from public and private developers in the study area offering PPPs. A total of 350
questionnaires were distributed at random to the FCT's target audience (public and private sector officials) to
participate in PPP housing and real estate developers, with 254 returned. The questionnaire data was analyzed
with PPSS software for factor analysis and intelligent PLS for data analysis.

4. Results
a. Demographic of the respondent

Age Group Types of PPP project Participated

21.50% 13.30%
68% 72.30%
Less than 25 years 14.50% None 14.50%
0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00% 0.00% 20.00% 40.00% 60.00% 80.00%

(a) (b)

Figure1 Age group and types of PPP project Participated

Work Experience
Profession
over 20 years 9.80%
13% 78.90%
54% No experience
Government servant 32% 10.90%
0% 20% 40% 60% 0.00%20.00%40.00%60.00%80.00%
100.00%

(c) (d)

Figure 2 Profession and Work experience

The majority of respondents involved in PPP projects have been involved in PPP projects for many years. Figure
1(a) shows that the respondents have the necessary experience to conduct this survey, with 78.9 percent having at
least 1- With 20 years of work experience, 25.8 percent having more than 20 years of work experience, and 10.9
percent having no experience. Figure 1(b) depicts the different types of PPP projects in Nigeria, with 72.3 percent
of PPP housing projects, 13.3 percent of infrastructure construction, and the highest percentage of PPP staff not
involved in any projects. 14.5 percent have projects but no PPP experience.

Figure 2 depicts the roles of various professionals in Nigerian PPP housing projects (a). Financial institutions
accounted for 13% of respondents, while real estate developers accounted for 54% and 32%, respectively. This
indicates that the respondents are from the actual research field under consideration. This demonstrates the
dependability of the data used in this study.

Figure 2(b) depicts respondents' knowledge of PPP housing projects in Nigeria. According to the survey results,
78.9 percent of respondents are involved in PPP housing projects, 9.8 percent have more than 20 years of
experience in the industry, 10.9 percent are involved in PPP work, and 10.9 percent have knowledge but no
experience. Notably, approximately 88.7 percent of respondents were completely, familiar, or moderately familiar
with PPP housing projects in Nigeria.

8
 Figure 3. Focus Group Agreement Index

This diagram demonstrates that 73.5 percent of experts agree that the PPP CSF should provide affordable housing.
This demonstrates the significance of thirty-nine CSFs, according to experts. These 39 CSFs, on the other hand,
were used in a pilot study to determine their reliability and validity. Following the determination of the research
tools' reliability, validity, and sampling adequacy, this study conducted a comprehensive questionnaire survey in
subsequent chapters. PPP and PPP problem CSF measurement models The measurement model demonstrates a
strong relationship between the PPP's CSF and the PPP problem, with all loads falling within the acceptable load
range of >0.5.

Composite Reliability and Convergent Validity of Public-Private Partnership Problems Model and Critical Success
Factors of Public-Private Partnership Model.

First order Second order Items Measurement CR AVE

Construct Construct Model Type (>0.6) (>.5)

‘Public-Private ‘Public-Private SAP Reflective 0.880 0.514

Partnership and Partnership
Critical Success Problem’ IP 0.821 0.605
Factors of the FP 0.793 0.561
Public-Private (‘PPPP’)
Partnership LP 0.83 0.55
Mode’
PP 0.785 0.548

9
 ‘Critical Success ALF Reflective 0.881 0.514
Factors’
EPP 0.88 0.71

SFP 0.874 0.581

(CSFs)
PEV 0.874 0.634

JGC 0.901 0.503

SPS 0.878 0.592

Table: 2

Table 2 contains the PPP problem model as well as the PPP model's key success factors. The PPP issue is divided
into five sub-factors: skills acquisition, institutional issues, financial issues, legal framework, and political issues.
The CSFs model, on the other hand, is composed of six structures: an adequate legal framework (ALF), an effective
procurement process (EPP), a sound financial plan (SFP), project economic viability (PEV), judicial government
control (JGC), and a strong private sector (SPS).

The composite reliability and mean variance extraction for the PPP problem involving the skill acquisition
problem, on the other hand, had a CR rate (0.880) and an AVE rate (0.514), implying that convergent validity was
established due to the accepted rate of AVE (0.5). The AVE rate, the composite reliability rate (0.821), and the
composite reliability rate for institutional issues (0.605). The combined financial problem reliability rate (0.793)
and the AVE rate (0.561). This legal framework's combined reliability rate was (0.83), and the AVE rate was
(0.55), while the CR and AVE for political issues were (0.785) and (0.548), respectively. As a result, the results
show that composite reliability (CR) and AVE are significant and well determined, as this value is slightly higher
than the minimum value.

Furthermore, the CSF model includes an adequate legal framework with a composite reliability (CR) rate of
('0.881') and an AVE rate of ('0.514'), as well as a composite reliability value of (0.881 for an efficient procurement
process and an AVE rate of '0.514'. (0.514), The CR and AVE of the Sound Financial Package (SFP) rate, on the
other hand, are (0.874) and then (0.581). Furthermore, the CR of the Project Economic Feasibility (PEV) is (0.874),
the AVE is (0.634), and the AVE rate is (0.634). (0.592). This indicates that the construction within the PPP
model's CSF is important, and its values are within acceptable limits.

As a result, the PPP CSF has a positive correlation with PPP problems in Nigeria. As shown in Table 1, the PPP's
CSFs can address the PPP's problem of providing affordable housing in Abuja, Nigeria. As a result, a structural
model will be developed in Nigeria to ensure an adequate and affordable housing supply.

Table 3 Discriminant Validity of CSF and PPP Problem

ALF EPP FP IP JGC LP PEV PP SAP SFP SPS

ALF 0.717
EPP 0.574 0.843
FP 0.478 0.404 0.749
IP 0.356 0.283 0.356 0.778
JGC 0.618 0.651 0.469 0.313 0.71
LP 0.411 0.245 0.466 0.373 0.312 0.742
PEV 0.628 0.68 0.441 0.341 0.748 0.276 0.797
PP 0.363 0.332 0.467 0.418 0.377 0.457 0.331 0.741
SAP 0.425 0.26 0.36 0.39 0.305 0.495 0.334 0.347 0.717
SFP 0.594 0.677 0.418 0.351 0.667 0.219 0.69 0.391 0.224 0.762
SPS 0.643 0.494 0.368 0.213 0.675 0.233 0.564 0.24 0.28 0.535 0.769
CSF of PPP PPP Problems

The goal of discriminant validity in Table 3 is to estimate the degree of difference between underlying constructs.
When it was shown whether the latent variables were correlated, the difference was significant. The validity of
discrimination ensures that a single-point measurement item is not related to a single item. When the various

10
forms of discrimination are not strongly correlated with each other, the legitimacy of discrimination is established
(Zait & Bertea, 2011). As a result, the table demonstrates that all constructs are closely related to one another, as
there are no negative issues. However, the reflection structure in Table 3 determined that the discriminant validity
value was less than 0.90.

The model of PPP problems and critical success factors of PPP

2. The purpose of this study's assessment of the CSF and PPP problems of PPPs is to investigate the
relationship between the CSF model and the PPP problem model for housing delivery in Abuja, Nigeria.
The PPP CSF for affordable housing supply in Abuja, Nigeria proved to be an important factor in
determining affordable housing delivery in Abuja, Nigeria. Validating these two (2) models to determine
whether the PPP CSF is positively correlated with the PPP problem of affordable housing in Nigeria,
however, the results show a progressive association between the PPP CSF and the PPP problem. Abuja,
Nigeria, Affordable Housing Project This could lead to the development of a public-private partnership
(PPP) structural model for affordable housing supply in Nigeria.

Figure 5
Structural Model of CSFs of PPP and PPP Problems
Figure 5 depicts normalized coefficient paths with path weights and R2 values via Smart PLS. The PLS-SEM
algorithm approximates structural model associations (path coefficients), which represent assumed relationships
between constructs. According to Vinzi et al. (2010), the path coefficients have the same value between -1 and +1,
and measuring the path coefficients near +1 indicates a strong absolute relationship (and another way of
undesired .values). The path coefficient illustrating the relationship between the public-private partnership
problem and the PPP's key success factors is used in this model (0.552). This demonstrates the positive
relationship that exists between the issue of public-private partnerships and the key success factors of PPPs.
Significance tests were used to determine the importance of these relationships. According to Hair et al. (2011), if
one path coefficient is greater than the other, the impact on the endogenous latent variable is greater.

First, there are formative measurement models, structural models, and anything else that needs to be measured in
order to discover multicollinearity between underlying constructs. This is addressed by running a multiple
regression for each member, using the latent variable scores to predict the success factor construct scores. As
previously stated, variance inflation factor (VIF) values greater than 5 indicate that the construct is multicollinear.
Starting with the dataset's properties, the largest average VIF value is from one of the two predictors of the PPP
problem, and it is less than the maximum allowed value, indicating that the structural model has no
multicollinearity issues.

Table 4 Multicollinearity

Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) (<5)

Public Private Partnership Problem
Model 1

The variance inflation factor (VIF) and acceptance, which is the correlation of VIFs, can be used to calculate the
degree of multicollinearity. A variance inflation factor of (5.0) and, more specifically, the expected collinearity
difficulty (Hair, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2011). Hair et al. (201), arguing that VIF 5 indicates that there is no critical
collinearity level, implying that it is acceptable. As a result, the maximum VIF value detected in the indicator is 1,
according to Table 6.1 on the PPP success factor formation structure. As a result, no collinearity or
multicollinearity problems were discovered for either of the two (2) metrics for this structure.

11
Table 4 shows that there is a positive relationship between PPP issues and the CFS of PPPs for housing supply in
Nigeria. However, even with this evidence, the PPP cannot provide adequate and affordable housing in Nigeria
unless the PPP issue is addressed.

Table 4 Bootstrapping (T test) and Effect Size (F2 Test) of the Model

T Statistics
Path Coefficient (O/STDEV) P Values
Effect Size (F2)
(-1 & +1) (>1.96) < 0.05 (>.02)

SF Model > PPPP

Model 0.552 11.291 0.000 0.438

Note 1: S = Statistically Significant, NS = Not Statistically Significant.

Note 2: P < 0.05*, P<0.01**

The significance test (T test) and effect size test (2 test) for the path coefficients are shown in Table 5. Hair et al.
(2014) state that when the empirical T value is greater than the critical value, the coefficient is said to be
significant under a certain error probability (ie, significance level), and a critical value of 1 is commonly used for
two-tailed tests. 65 (significance level = 10%), 1.96 (significance level = 5%), and 2.57 (significance level = 1%). As
a result, in this study, an error probability of 5% was used, yielding a significance level of 1.96. Looking at the T-
values in Table 6.2, it was discovered that existing factors definitely influenced success factors (auxiliary = 0.552,
T-value 11.291 > 1.96, p 0.05, and = 0.01). Thus, effect size tests show that existing factors and procurement
practices have a large impact on success factors, 2 = 0.438, whereas success factors have no critical impact on PPP
issues, which is consistent with Wong (2013); Hair et al. (2014), effective sizes of 0.02, 0.15, and 0.35, respectively,
indicate small, medium, and large effects.

Table 6 R square

R Square (0-1) R Square Adjusted

Success Factors Model 0.305 0.302

The R2 statistic, also known as the coefficient of determination, is used by structural models to assess the amount
of variance in the data explained by the model. The squared value for the endogenous variable Success factor is
0.305, as shown in Figure 6.1, implying that the model's exogenous variables explain 30.5 percent of the variance
in Success Factor (that is, the public and private partnership problems). Cutoff values above 0.67, 0.33, and 0.19
are described as "substantial," "moderate," and "weak," respectively, by Chin (1998) and Hock et al. (2006). As a
result, the R grid in this case would be considered to have a moderate intensity or effect.

5. Conclusions

This study demonstrates that the PPP problem predicts the success of PPP for affordable housing in Nigeria, as
demonstrated by comparing the two models (PPP problem model and CSFs model). The study demonstrates that
the PPP problem has a moderate effect on the success of PPP for affordable housing provision in Nigeria, with no
critical issue. As a result, the success of PPP is determined by the PPP problem. According to the study findings, the
existing PPP in Nigeria is primarily affected by PPP problems such as skill and acquisition problems, institutional
problems, financial problems, legal framework problems, and political problems. The study also discovered that
project economic viability, an adequate legal framework, an effective procurement process, a strong private
sector, a sound financial package, and judicial government control are all important factors. Furthermore, the
study recommended that the government use a PPP model for affordable housing to end Nigeria's affordable
housing crisis.

Reference
Ademiluyi, A.I. & Raji, B.A. (2008) Public and Private Developers as Agents in Urban Housing Delivery in Sub-
Saharan Africa: the situation in Lagos State. Humanity & Social Sciences Journal, 3(2), pp.143–150.

Aduwo E. (2013). Satisfaction with Neighbourhood Environments in Public Housing: Evidence from Ogun State,
Nigeria.

12
African Ministerial Conference on Housing and Urban Development (AMCHUD) (2005) Communiqu´e on
‘financing housing and urban development: with special reference to Africa’ issued at the end of the conference
31 January–4 February, Abuja, Nigeria.

Agbola, T. (1998). The Housing of Nigeria: a review of policy Development and Implementation. Research report,
14, Ibadan, Development Policy Centre.

Ahmed Y. and Sipan I.A. (2019a). Critical Factors for Implementation of Public-Private Partnership for Affordable
Housing in Nigeria. International Journal of Scientific & Technology Research Volume 8, Pp 1125-1131, ISSUE
ISSN 2277-8616.

Ahmed Y. and Sipan I.A. (2019b). Public Private Partnership as a Determinant Factors of Affordable Housing in
Abuja Nigeria. The International Archives of the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information
Sciences, Volume XLII-4/W16, Pp 71-78, 2019.

Ahmed Y. and Sipan I.A. (2020).Critical Success Factors of Public Private Partnership for Affordable Housing in
Nigeria. . International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering. ISSN: 2277-3878, Volume-8 Issue-2S9.

Awotona, A. (1990). Nigerian government participation in housing: 1970–1980. Habitat International, 14 (10), 17–
40.

English, L. M. (2006) 'Public private partnerships in Australia: an overview of their nature, purpose, incidence and
oversight', UNSW Law Journal, 29(3), pp. 250-262.

Grimsey, D. & Lewis, M. K. (2002) 'Evaluating the risks of public private partnerships for infrastructure projects',
International Journal of Project Management, 20(2), pp.107-118.

Ibem, E.O. (2011). Public Private Partnership (PPP) in Housing Provision in Lagos Megacity Region, Nigeria.
International Journal of Housing Policy (IJHP). 11(2) 133-154.

Ibem, E.O. (2011a). The Contribution of Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) to Improving Accessibility of Low-
Income Earner to Housing in Southern Nigeria. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment. 26(2)201-217.

Ibem, E. O. & Aduwo, E. B. (2012). Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) in Urban Housing in Nigeria: Evidence from
Ogun State. International Journal of Architecture and Urban Development, 2.

International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) (2012) Harnessing the power of public private
partnerships: the role of hybrid financing strategies in sustainable development[Online]. Available at:
http://www.iisd.org/2012/harnessing (Accessed: 05/07/2018).

Jacoby, W. (2000) Imitation and Politics: Redesigning Modern Germany. London: Cornell University Press.

Jin, X. H. & Doloi, H. (2007) Risks allocation in public private partnership projects-an innovative model with an
intelligent approach. Proceedings of the Construction and Building Research Conference of the Royal
Institution of Chartered Surveyor, Georgia Tech., Atlanta, USA.

Kumar, R.A. 2005. Research Methodology: A Step-by-Step Guide for Beginners, French forest, Australia: Pearson
Education Australia.

Kuye (2006) Mortgage Financing in Developing Countries, in Agbola, T.,

Egunjobi, L. & Olatubara, C. (eds) Housing Development and Management: A Book of Readings, Ibadan, DURP,
University of Ibadan. p.627-694.

Lagos State Government (2008) Lagos State Government PPP initiatives, PPP Brochure (Ikeja: Ministry Of
Finance). Available at http://www.lagostate.gov.ng (accessed 14 May 2018).

Miraftab, F. (2004) Public–Private Partnerships: Trojan horse of neoliberal development? Journal of Planning
Education and Research, 24(1), 89–101.

Ministry of Finance, 2012. Public-Private Partnership: A Guide for Local

Government, Available at:
http://www.lexmundi.com/images/lexmundi/PracticeGroups/GovtAffairs/Public Private Partnerships
_Web.pdf [Accessed October 9, 2018].

13
Muhammad Z. and Johar F. (2018). Coping with Challenges of Public for Housing Delivery in Nigeria. International
Journal of Engineering & Technology. 7 (2.29) 1097, 1101

NHP 2012. National Housing Policy. Abuja

Oladokun, T.T. and Aluko, B.T. (2012). Public-Private Partnership in Housing Delivery in Lagos State, Nigeria.
Proceeding of 2012 International Conference on Construction and Real Estate Management, Kansas City, USA.
1-2 October, pp 246-250.

Olotuah A. O., and Aiyeta O. S., (2012) “Housing Poverty, Slum Formation and Deviant Behaviour” [Online]
Available at: www.york.ac.uk/inst/chp/hsa/autumn05/papers/OLOTUAH1. Doc [Accessed 07 July 2018].

Owei, O. (2007) Distortions of the urban land markets in Nigerian cities and the implications for urbangrowth
patterns; the case of Abuja and Port Harcourt. Paper presented at the Fourth Urban Research Symposium.
Available at: http://www.Worldbank.org (accessed 22 June 2018).

Public Works Financing (2010) International survey of public private partnerships[Online]. Available at:
http://www.pwfinance.net/pwf_major_project.pdf (Accessed: 10 October 2012).

Sanda et al., (2016). Managing Risks in Public Private Partnerships (PPP) in Housing in Nigeria: Methodological
Perspective. Journal of Sustainable Development; Vol. 9, No. 5; 2016 ISSN 1913-9063.

UN-HABITAT (2006a) Shelter for all: The potential of housing policy in the implementation of the
habitat agenda, Nairobi: UN-HABITAT Information Services Section. Online http://www.unhabitat.org/.

UN-HABITAT (2006b). Public–Private Partnerships in enabling shelter strategies. Nairobi: United

Un-habitat, (2011). Public-private partnerships in housing and urban development, Nairobi: un-habitat

United Nations, (2006). World Statistics Pocketbook 2013 editi., New York.

United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UNESCAP), (2014). A Guidebook on
Public-Private Partnership in Infrastructure. Unescap Bangkok,

Walley, S. (2014). Housing the world: leveraging private sector resources for the public good. Private Sector
Development, Proparco's Magazine.

Zait, P.A. and P.E. Bertea, 2011. Methods for Testing Discriminant Validity. Management and Marketing Journal, 9
(2): 217-224.

14