7. Conclusion

Table 2 shows the take home of the no-income, low-income and medium low-income groups in Nigeria. It also illustrates the level of poverty and the severe burdens most households are subjected to in order to meet with its housing needs as well as the reason why there would be a continuous increase in the development of slums and unlawful settlements within the urban areas of the country if nothing is done to improve the delivery of housing. Thus, it is clear that these three income groups are under a 'severe burden' and incapable of meeting their housing needs as the cost of renting a 3-bedroom apartment in ranges from US\$5000 per annum and the average purchase price of US\$100,000 [24]. This has resulted in about 68 million i.e. about 36% of the population remaining homeless [50] or living in houses that

Table 2. An overview of the take home of the no-income, low-income and medium low-income groups in Nigeria

Actual annual income (N)

Actual annual income (US\$)

0–54,000 Less or = 150 0 – Approx. 45

54,001–216,000 150–600 Approx. 45.3 - Approx. 180

216,001–864,000 600–2400 Approx. 180 – Approx. 720

30% of annual income for

housing (US\$)

However, this policy, so far like the others, has been rendered ineffective. This is because of the persistent increase in the cost of building materials, stringent loan conditions from mortgage banks, deficiency of proper housing finance arrangement, high cost and lack of easy access to land, high cost and long processing duration of property registration amidst other problems [51]. All these imply that the policy has not been properly implemented, and until something is done to ensure the implementation of these policies, as brilliant as they might be, Nigeria will

Furthermore in 2014, the Federal Government inaugurated an independent company, Nigeria Mortgage Refinance Company (NMRC), with the intent of finally increasing the opportunities for Nigerians to 'own homes at affordable prices' through mass housing [52]. Mass housing is housing that is funded publicly and given out to low-income families. This is the latest programme of the Federal Government on housing towards the provision of affordable housing for the Nigerian population. There is a rapid emergence of housing development by the NMRC but majority are neither affordable nor accessible to the no-income/low-income/lowermedium families because of their exorbitant prices. Nonetheless, the urban rich, who could afford more than needed for their families purchase many of these housing units and in turn sublet them to the lower income group at high cost and those who cannot afford the rent have no other option but to go to the slums or remain homeless. This takes us back to the cycle of the negative impacts of urbanization within the country. It is evidently clear that it would end up like the others if nothing is done to ensure fairness in its implementation. For urbanization to deliver a socio-economic and environmental development in Nigeria, then the government

not be able to enjoy the positive impacts of urbanization.

are not affordable.

S/N Income group Annual income with

86 Housing

1. No income Less or equal to 25% of

2. Low income More than no-income but

3. Lower-medium More than NMW but does

(source: adapted from NHP 2012 [25]).

respect to NMW\*

not more than NMW

not exceed 4 NMW

N216,000

\*NMW – Annual National Minimum Wage in Nigeria = 216,000.

Nigeria, like other developing countries, is faced with increased rate of urbanization, with different urban centres emerging as a result. There are both positive and negative impacts of urbanization on the nation. Apparently, the negative ones outweigh those that are positive, and the former affect the urban populace than the positive variables. Nonetheless, most of them are hinged on the housing deficit which keeps increasing because it is not affordable to majority of the population. Hence, it has been identified that is pertinent to ensure the availability of affordable housing by giving a better commitment and attention to the delivery of housing facilities that are affordable and accessible to Nigerians, especially those within the no-income, low-income and lower medium-income groups. It has also been established that infrastructural development accompanies housing delivery; signifying the resolution of most of the negative impacts of urbanization. The authors believe that Nigeria does not need any new policy because the NHP 2012 is a brilliant instrument, with potentials for achieving success in housing delivery. We agree that the proposed outcomes of this policy are achievable, if effectively and fairly implemented by the successive governments of Nigeria. The chapter proposed that achieving affordable housing will raise home ownership to about 50%, improve the country's Human Development Index (HDI) Ranking and contribute over 20% to its GDP. It will also expand the construction sector and the mortgage market. Furthermore, poverty will be significantly reduced in households; and at the same time as well as increase the productivity and quality of lives of the citizenry. Consequently, there will be a remarkable impact on the society and communities as it stimulates economic growth and job creation. The benefits of urbanization can then be enjoyed, not only by the urban rich but the poor as well. Hence, the NHP 2012 should be critically explored towards the delivery of affordable housing, as it will certainly and subsequently go a long way in solving urbanization issues in Nigeria.

## Conflict of interest

There is no conflict of interest concerning this chapter.
