Toward a Framework for the Sustainable Management of Social ...

Journal of US-China Public Administration, ISSN 1548-6591 September 2013, Vol. 10, No. 9, 901-913

D

DAVID

PUBLISHING

Toward a Framework for the Sustainable Management of Social (Public) Housing Estates in Nigeria Paulinus W. Ihuah, Christopher J. Fortune University of Salford, Salford, UK

Housing is a centre for many socio-economic activities and often provides a mark of prosperity, social acceptance, and an element of urban development and growth in a country. However, it is suspected that the significance of housing to people in the Niger Delta of Nigeria is lacking because of poor post-construction management practice that is currently in place. At the same time, there are housing shortages, uncompleted, vandalized and abandoned social housing stock in the Nigeria Delta. This has been a continuing challenge facing people in this region as reported in previous studies. Therefore, the overall aim of the study is to develop a framework for the sustainable management of social (public) housing estates in the Niger Delta of Nigeria. This paper aims to set out the context for the research, identify its overall aim and objectives and thereafter considers issues related to the determination of an appropriate scope for the study. It argues that the management of social housing estates in a sustainable manner needs to adopt the principles of sustainability in combination with effective people-centred management and building maintenance practices. It further asserts that the development of such a framework would be a panacea approach in meeting the social housing challenges faced in the Niger Delta and in Nigeria at large. Keywords: building maintenance, estate management methods, social housing, sustainable development, sustainable framework

Housing is the centre for socio-economic activities and stands as a mark of prosperity, social acceptance, and an element of urban development and growth (Oyebanji, Akintoye, & Liyanage, 2011; Wapwera, Parsa, & Egbu, 2011). The availability of decent housing for each family defines the level of development which a country has reached. Therefore, housing is fundamentally an important issue for people in all corners of the world, since their well-being is enhanced by their total level of enjoyment of certain standards of living condition. This indicates that housing is an important factor in the recognition of a society’s success among nations. Similarly, housing provides a link between the physical development of a city, and its social and economic outcomes. However, it is difficult to talk about the success of a nation, or a society within a nation without analyzing its housing situation. This is because the social and economic wealth of the country can only co-exist with good housing. This study is not concerned with the design of a specific housing unit, but concerned with the design of a whole housing environment which includes accommodation, jobs, education, and health services in a context that must be accessible, safe, hygienic, aesthetically pleasing and also Corresponding author: Paulinus W. Ihuah, M.Sc., The School of the Built Environment, University of Salford; research fields: real estate development and management. E-mail: [email protected]. Christopher J. Fortune, Ph.D., professor, The School of the Built Environment, University of Salford; research fields: construction economics and project management.

902

TOWARD A FRAMEWORK FOR THE SUSTAINABLE MANAGEMENT

sustainable to the Niger Delta people. However, such features of housing to people in the Niger Delta of Nigeria are lacking because of inadequate, shortage, vandalized, uncompleted and abandoned social housing estates (Oladapo, 2002; Wapwera et al., 2011). In addition, 60%-80% of the estimated population of developing countries live in shanty towns, slum and uncontrolled environments (Wapwera et al., 2011; UN-HABITAT, 2006). The social housing shortage has been linked to improper project implementation (Wapwera et al., 2011), lack of a post-construction management framework, improper land allocation, lack of funding, and mortgage institution efficacy (Okoroafor, 2007; Alaghbari, Salim, Dola, & Ali, 2011). In the developing countries, the expanding urban areas and population are faced with a shortage of social (public) housing estates stock and this situation is getting worse yearly (Ha, 2008). Jiboye’s (2004) and UN-HABITAT’s (2006) studies suggested that there was no evidence of improvement in the social housing conditions of the low-income groups in terms of affordability, tenure, standard and access to services. Though, there are some structural policies, which are opinioned as urban based policies (Agbola, Egunjobi, & Olatubara, 2007; Adeniji, 2004), such as the structural adjustment programme formulated to address the problems on social housing in the developing countries but it has never helped to resolve the issues (Aribigbola, 2008). In Nigeria, several “provider-oriented” public driven strategies have been adopted, such as federal and state government housing schemes, slum clearance and resettlement projects (Aribigbola, 2008); but these have not had any remarkable impact on social housing challenges faced in the country as about 70% of Nigerians are living in slum and squatter areas where situation has not changed till today (Wapwera et al., 2011). In fact, the problematic thing is that most of the social housing provisions are abandoned either half way to completion or after completion as a result of no framework for the management and maintenance of the social housing provided (Fatoye & Odusami, 2009; Fatoye, 2009). As a result, the study seeks to explore why social housing is in short supply, vandalized, uncompleted, abandoned and unoccupied. In addition, the study seeks to explore why the social housing projects have become “white elephants” within the very poor communities that desperately need them (Ihuah, 2007). However, equally significant is the post-construction management strategy of such estates which is suspected as being non-proactive and in some circumstances is never believed to exist (Nwaka, 2005; Aribigbola, 2008; Ihuah, 2007; Babalakin, 2004). Though, Harvey and Reed (2004) had argued that such situations were caused by wider institutional issues that were not put in place or properly implemented and there was a lack of regular planned preventive maintenance practices. Therefore, a gap has been established from the literature that shows there is no post-construction management framework for the social housing estates particularly in the Niger Delta. This study is to focus attention on developing a framework for the sustainable management of social housing estates in Niger Delta. However, this paper sets out the context for the research, identifies its overall aim and objectives, and thereafter considers issues related to the determination of an appropriate scope for the study.

Problem Statement In the Niger Delta, constructed, commissioned and on-going social housing units are provided by either the federal or the state government. However, there are shortages of social housing units and obtaining appropriate housing has remained a major challenge facing people in this region. This situation is tied to the exploration and exploitation of crude oil activities which characterize the region and continue to lead to the unprecedented urbanization and uncontrolled population increase in the Niger Delta which increases the social housing challenges. The federal and state governments in the last decade placed emphasis on its social housing


903

provision throughout the country and in particular Niger Delta. However, it is obvious that there are no signs of that their policies are averting the housing challenges prominent in the region (Wapwara et al., 2011). At the same time, the numbers of uncompleted, vandalized, abandoned, and unoccupied social housing units in the region is significant (Kadiri, 2004). Also, there is evidence of corrupt practices, lack of good governance and decentralization of powers, and lack of proper integration of the community, and end-users into social housing decision-making can be said to be ineffective (Ihuah, 2007; Kadiri, 2004). In addition, Wapwara et al. (2011), Oladapo (2002), and Kadiri (2004) asserted that there were infrastructural services and amenities inability in the social housing provided to cope with the demand of the people. Another severe issue is the suspected lack of an existing maintenance management strategy for the existing social housing units. Similarly, Olotuah and Bobadoye (2009) and Kadiri (2004) asserted that the triple principles of sustainability namely social, economic, environment which were imperative were not being considered. Finally, all the literature reviewed as indicated above have emphasised on how social housing could be provided without any consideration on how to manage the existing and forthcoming housing units in a sustainable manner. Therefore, the development of a framework for social housing estates management which incorporates the principles of sustainability becomes a priority in meeting the challenge of the Niger Delta.

Research Aim and Objectives A central aim of the study is to develop a framework for the sustainable management of the social housing estates in the Niger Delta of Nigeria. The objectives for the study are to: (1) Conceptualize social housing maintenance management; (2) Determine the theoretical estate management principles for the management of social (public) housing estates; (3) Evaluate the theoretical concepts of building maintenance management; (4) Conceptualize the underpinning concepts in sustainability, its factors, assessment, evaluation and monitoring; (5) Develop a framework for the sustainable maintenance management of social housing in the Niger Delta of Nigeria.

Research Scope The Niger Delta of Nigeria is the third largest wetland in area in the world and highest in Africa (Omeje, 2006). The area is found in the southern part of Nigeria with a wetland of about 70,000 sq kilometres with 7.5% of the total land mass of Nigeria. The areas are potentially dominated with an abundance of crude oil reserves, currently making it popular and famous in terms of natural resources in the country and in the world at large (Omeje, 2006; Evuleocha, 2005; SPDC, 2002). It is an area characterised by different ecological zones such as sandy coastal ridge barriers, brackish/saline mangroves, freshwater swamp forest and lowland forest. Niger Delta is one of the highest floodplain in Africa with many tributaries that drain into river Niger and into the Atlantic Ocean along the Gulf of Guinea with high rainfall, poorly drained soil, flooding and erosion, with 80% of the area flooded annually. It is an area rich in biodiversity and it received several intimidations as a result of crude oil exploration and exploitation (UNDP, 2006; Evuleocha, 2005). The area is also associated with high temperatures as a result of the unusual greenhouse gas flared and pumped into the environment (13,000-14,000 degrees Celsius) whilst the effect of acid rain makes communities living conditions a depressive one (Omeje,

904


2006; Evuleocha, 2005). In terms of socio-demographic composition, the area is a difficult one with 40 ethnic groups and 26 language groups scattered in the politically defined nine states of Akwa-Ibom, Abia, Bayelsa, Cross-Rivers, Delta, Edo, Imo, Ondo, and Rivers (Omeji, 2006). In reality, the Niger Delta has only six states within the coastal area of Nigeria, which includes Akwa-Ibom, Bayelsa, Cross-Rivers, Delta, Edo and Rivers. However, in term of history and catastrophe, it consists of only Bayelsa, Delta and Rivers states. The area has a total population of more than 31 million people with Rivers and Delta states dominating with an estimated population of 6.7 million people, producing 80% of the Nigerian crude oil which account for 50%-60% of federal government’s revenue (NNPC, 2006). It is argued that virtually all the communities in the Niger Delta are typically rural (SPDC, 2002). Unemployment levels have remained at 30% and about 75% of the area lack access to housing, safe water, infrastructural facilities, education, hospital, health care, etc. (Omeji, 2006; Evuleocha, 2005). Fishing and peasant farming are the main occupations in this region. Finally, the Niger Delta is generally poor and the poverty level is high. In fact, GNP per capita in the area is below the national average of US$ 260 (Evuleocha, 2005).

Originality The study takes the debate on meeting the social housing challenges faced in Niger Delta further from being focused only housing provision as the review of other studies has revealed. This study will emphasise that there are needs to beyond the provision of the social housings that need to be resolved so as to solve the acknowledged housing problems. In particular this study will explore how to manage the created assets in a sustainable manner after they have been provided. This will be through the development of a strategic framework that would act as a multi-dimensional tool to aid social housing management decision-making.

Literature Review: Theoretical Concept Sustainability or Sustainable Development In the developed and developing countries, urban and rural areas are faced with rapid urbanization and as a result there are a series of environmental, socio-cultural and economic issues that need to be addressed. This problem emerged because of the continually increasing population, the consumption and depletion of the natural resources and the consequent regeneration of waste and pollutions in the built environment. Therefore, the need to abate these issues raises means that the work is concerned with the concept of sustainability or sustainable development as it was developed with the intent to provide solutions to the problems and challenges faced by the developing and developed countries. Sustainable development or sustainability is conceived in different ways and particularly in the context of environmental issues, economic, social and political developments, and sustaining development benefits (Worika, 2002). This contention depends on the interest, the assessment, and evaluation strategies for sustainability; at the same time, on the varied cultural differences, ideological inclinations and the development goal between individuals, groups or nations (Worika, 2002). However, there are today over 300 definitions published of sustainable development which represent the product of diverse world view and competing vested interest in the field (De Vries & Peterson, 2008). Therefore, the question to ask now is: What meaning does sustainability have? Is the application of social housing sustainability different from the goal and objectives? Also, what resulted in the sustainable development concept of which it has received a popular acceptance?


905

Franks (2006) asserted that sustainability meant anything the writer required and that the understanding of the constituents of sustainable and unsustainable development was crucial in any project management and post-construction management system. Similarly, it would be a sustainable development if it reduces the disparities between the poor and the rich. In addition, Porritt (2000) in Lutzkendorf and Lorenz (2005, p. 213) argued that for the achievement of sustainability, it was necessary to measure it against a set of four “system conditions” such as: (1) Finite material (including fossil fuels) should not be extracted at faster rate than they can be redeposited in the earth’s crust; (2) Artificial materials (including plastics) should not be produced at a faster rate than they can be broken down by natural processes; (3) Biodiversity of the ecosystem should be maintained; whilst renewable resources should only be consumed at a slower rate than they can be naturally replenished; (4) Human needs must be met in an equitable and efficient manner. In contrast, however, Cooper and Jones (2008) in their study on social housing argued that development would be sustainable when attention was given more to greater community engagement; deliberative forums to help people live more sustainable lifestyles; investigating ways in which stakeholders can influence decision-making; new commitment to support education and training in sustainable development; and response to key environmental issues. Fundamentally, sustainable development tackles three major areas which ensure that: (1) People living today are entitled to justice and equal rights; (2) Environmental degradation must be alleviated or eliminated; (3) Future generations must not be impoverished as a result of current actions. However, the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) which later was named after the chairman of the commission “the Bruntland Commission” produced the first ever report entitled Our Common Future, which defined sustainable development as development which “meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Bruntland Report, 1987, p. 8). The Commission emphasised that addressing these problems required global economic growth whilst representing ecological constraints. The Commission did not only consider that environmental problems needed to be addressed but also that the social and economic problems were equally significant and needed to be tackled. The concept of sustainability at first relied on environmental phenomenon, but currently, it has gone beyond the boundaries of environmental issues to include social, economic, political, and development issues (Edum-Fotwe & Price, 2009; Brandon & Lombardi, 2011). Therefore, Brandon and Lombardi (2011, p. 21) contended that sustainable development was concerned with smoothing the progress of improvement without endangering what already existed. They defined sustainable development as: A process which aims to provide a physical, social and psychological environment in which the behaviour of human beings is harmoniously adjusted to address the integration with, and dependence upon, nature in order to improve, and not to impact adversely, on present or future generations. (Brandon & Lombardi, 2011, p. 21)

Similarly, Ding (2008) argued that sustainable development was the development concerned with attitudes and judgement to help ensure long-term ecological, social, and economic growth in society. This means that sustainability is the simple idea of ensuring a better quality of life for everyone now and for generations to

906


come. Therefore, sustainability could be described in terms of social, economic and environmental states which are required in order for overall sustainability to be achieved. In all the work as indicated above, it is clear that while the concept of sustainable development from literatures is well-known and widely used, it is also evident that there is no common understanding of it. For instance, in consideration of what “needs” are regarded as being important, sustainability varies from nation to nation. In fact, it is different in time, economic, social and cultural backgrounds. Therefore, what constitutes sustainable development is very much context-specific and the condition and practices of same may not be applicable everywhere. It is in this light that Lutzkendorf and Lorenz (2005, p. 213) argued that sustainable development was a journey toward a destination: “sustainability” and its “triple-bottom line” concept involving balancing economic, social and environmental issues. Therefore, society, economy and environment as in Figure 1 are the dimensions of sustainable development which are equal, but, it is the environment that is the dominant dimension which sets the preconditions for the other dimensions.

Figure 1. The interactions of the three dimensions with sustainability at the centre of intersection. Source: Lutzkendorf and Lorenz (2005).

In summary, it is clearly shown that research on sustainable development or sustainability centres around the definition given by the WCED. This has remained the acceptable definition and underpins the concept of sustainability/sustainable development in the built environment and the world. Social Housing Housing is not only the building block of the sustainable communities, it is all about the transformation of communities and creating places where people should continually live and work for present and future generations. In this perspective, it is significant to consider what is suspected to be sustainable social housing or building, relating it to the sustainable development objectives. Lutzkendorf and Lorenz (2005, p. 214) asserted that in order to classify sustainable social housing or building, it was possible to start with the general area of


907

protection, which is part of the three dimensions of sustainable development and such includes: (1) Protection of the natural environment; (2) Protection of the basic natural resources; (3) Protection of human health and well-being; (4) Protection of social values and of public goods; (5) Protection and preservation of capital and material goods. Consequently, the classification of sustainable social housing or building is based on fulfilment of certain requirements. Lutzkendorf and Lorenz’s (2005, p. 214) study indicated as being the following: minimization of life cycle costs; reduction of land use and use of hard surfaces; reduction of raw material; and the closing of material flows. It would equally consider avoidance of hazardous substances; reduction of CO2 emissions and other pollutants; reduction of impacts on the environment; protection of health and comfort of building occupants; and preservation of buildings’ cultural values. Therefore, the above requirements can be aligned to the economic, social and environmental requirements for sustainable development of social housing or building and any other construction projects. Brandon and Lombardi (2011) similarly stressed that for a building to be sustainable, its ecological footprint should closely match or be smaller than its physical footprint. They stated further that sustainability can be achieved through using the minimum resources which are obtainable locally and also minimising the amount of the resulting pollution and waste to a level capable of being disposed of safely within the confines of the built environment. However, linking this concept to social housing, several various definitions existed; the EU defined sustainable social housing in terms relative to quality construction, social and economic factors as regard to affordability and psychological impacts, and eco-efficiency such as efficient use of non-renewable resources in the built environment (VROM, 2005; as cited in Cooper & Jones, 2008). Sustainable social housing would be one with coefficient over time, comfortable, cheap to maintain and should complement our exclusive environment. In addition, sustainable social housing should be a housing practice, which strives for integral quality, including social, economic and environmental preference in a broad way. Consequently, Cooper and Jones (2008) argued that there was a need to incorporate the principles of sustainability if social housing was to provide a good standard of living. Therefore, sustainable social housing would be one characterised by the minimization of the environmental impacts of material use, energy consumption and water consumption during the whole service life-cycle of the social houses. Finally, applying the sustainable development concept to social housing, a distinction usually needs to be made between serviceable and ecological sustainability. Therefore, for social housing projects to be sustainable the issue of natural resource depletion should not be normally a key factor, rather functioning and serviceable sustainability should be a priority or should be considered as being more relevant. In this context, the concept of sustainable development is applicable to housing or building since serviceability and functionality are an integral part of housings or buildings and contribute to sustainable development (Lutzkendorf & Lorenz, 2005). Using this in the context of this study, sustainable social (public) housing estate management is the planning, co-ordinating, directing, organising, forecasting, supervising and communicating of an interest in the housing estate with a purpose of continually optimising benefits, and without affecting the next successor in occupation from meeting their own benefits; these benefits may not only be financial, but such other benefits as: social status; prestige; political power; and/or a group of these benefits as a result of their mere possession of the housing estate.

908


Building Maintenance Management In simple terms, a building can be described as walled roofed structure used for many economic activities that ages and deteriorates throughout its lifespan. Therefore, it undergoes physical, functional and economic obsolescence. At the same time, good building maintenance practice will increase its value with respect to functionality, physical appearance and economic returns (Olanrewaju, Khamidi, & Idrus, 2011). Building maintenance is perhaps one of the functions of an estate manager and entails the planning, forecasting, controlling, directing and co-ordinating maintenance activities with the aim of optimizing returns (Baharum, Nawaawi, & Saat, 2009). It is a significant process as it is aimed to preserve buildings for its continual uses in the built environment. Also, it is necessary to consider issues related to value for money, investment and good appearance in any integrated maintenance plan (Olanrewaju et al., 2011). However, “building maintenance” has several definitions but the British Standard Institution (1993) defined it as works undertaken in order to keep or restore every facility including the site, building and to an acceptable standard/condition. Although, it could be argued that the definition was narrow because it did not consider the improving of any facility, that is, the building, its services and surrounds to a currently acceptable standard and to sustain the utility and value of the facility. However, Olanrewaju et al. (2011, p. 263) asserted that building maintenance was: A processes and services to preserve, repair, protect and care for a building’s fabric and engineering services after completion, repair, refurbishment or replacement to current standards to enable it to serve its intended functions throughout its entire life span without drastically upsetting its basic features and use.

Therefore, it has now included the word “maintain”, “repair”, and “alter” to reflect the requirements of the clients, end-users and the community. But, all the meanings revolve around and within the phrase restoring, maintaining, or repairing a building to improve the value of the built assets. Building maintenance’s objectives, policy and types. Building maintenance is not all about the property per se; rather, it includes the property itself, the purpose for its existence, and its occupants or users. Though, the objectives of building maintenance remain the same and as enlisted: (1) To ensure that buildings and their associated services are in a safe condition; (2) To ensure that building are fit for use; (3) To ensure that the condition of the building meets all statutory requirements; (4) To maintain the value of the building stock; (5) To maintain or improve the quality of the building. Consequently, for the building (housing) maintenance’s objectives to be accomplished, a housing maintenance policy is necessary as it is a tool for the proper planning for any maintenance strategy to use in a maintenance work. Therefore, the building maintenance policy consists of: (1) The length of time for maintaining the properties for their present uses; (2) The life requirement of the building and their fittings and services; (3) The standard to which the house and its services are to be maintained; (4) The reaction time required between a defect occurring and a repair being undertaken; (5) The legal and statutory requirements needed for successful maintenance operations (Lee & Wordworth, 2001). Similarly, Lee and Scott (2009) asserted in a study of the overview of maintenance strategy that the order of formulating housing maintenance policy should be as thus (see Figure 2).


909

However, in literature related to housing maintenance, different types and approaches have surfaced such as “planned” and “unplanned” maintenance as in Figure 3. The appropriate strategy to use is the decision of the estate manager, the nature of the estate and the type and nature of the maintenance work required.

Figure 2. Sequences for formulating building maintenance policy and strategy. Source: Lee and Scott (2009).

Figure 3. Building maintenance types. Source: Baharum et al. (2009).

Proposed Research Methodology According to Sapsford and Jupp (2006), research methodology was defined as a philosophical stance of worldview that underlay and informed the style of research. In this sense, it is the research methodology that informs on an appropriate world reasoning, approaches, designs, methods and analytical instruments available in research process. For this study, as in Figure 2, pragmatic reasoning will be used which allows the use of qualitative and quantitative strategy of inquiry and better answer a real world issue practically, such as the case of this proposed study topic. This informed the use of case study design which conveniently enhances the use of mixed methods of data collection sources and analytical techniques. The study extracted opinion and perceptions of sustainable development, social housing, and building maintenance management in the literatures

910


as a starting point in this ongoing Ph.D. work. The study will later extract opinions amongst housing estate management officers, resident/tenant, professionals and housing estate community representatives in the management of state government and federal government social (public) housing estates in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria. The paper’s analyses are based on data from literature and direct participant observations on social (public) housing estates and its environment using content analysis tool and document scrutiny techniques. The emphasis was on determining a way that will foster to develop a framework that will be used in managing the social (public) housing estate in a sustainable manner, which will ensure that lack of housing access to the people in the region due to housing abandonment, inoccupation, incompletion and vandalised is reduced. In addition, the study will uses semi-structured interview to assess the current practice in managing this sector, the relevance and level of involvement of the stakeholders of the federal and state housing estates in the management, and to ascertain whether the sustainable principles inclusion in the management is necessary. Figure 4 presents the methodology framework design of the study.

Figure 4. Proposed methodology framework design of the study. Source: Inspired by Yin (2009).

Results Regarding this paper and from literature, observations and digital photographs (see Figure 5) data, which were scrutinised and conceptualised using content analysis techniques, the following results emerged. The review shows that some of the social (public) housing estates provided in the Niger Delta were incomplete,


911

unoccupied, abandoned and in some cases vandalised by hoodlums from the community where the housing estate is located. It further proves that all the housing estates conducted with a preliminary “condition survey” examination were lacking seriously on maintenance culture as a result of no policy and regulation currently in place that spells out the minimum maintenance requirements and standards in Nigeria and in particular the Niger Delta.

Figure 5. Social (public) housing estates situation in Niger Delta (preliminary survey, 2012).

Again, the stakeholders who have the legitimate and moral right to access to benefits in the housing estate are completely ignored in terms of capacity development and involvement/engagement starting from the project planning stage down to the post-construction management of the housing estates; and this constitute a major reason why some of the estates are vandalised. Another conceptual finding is that the critical sustainable development issues such as strong policy and institutional/organisation support, economic/financial support, environmental consideration through Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), and a guideline to use as to manage social (public) housing estates in a sustainable manner in their post-construction era are lacking. This question is on the housing estate management practice used for the estates which have left the housing estates in this region in a deplorable condition, therefore increasing the housing estate stock challenges; and how the sustainable principles would be merged with building maintenance management, stakeholder engagement and appropriate estate management approach to the post-construction management of social (public) housing estates. In this sense, a pragmatic reasoning is found to be the best philosophical view to address the situation since it is a real world problem requiring a practical solution. The literature review and the preliminary study indicated that the housing estates (see Figure 5) were own by the federal and state government, so that it would be used for the unit of analysis in the further study.

Conclusions The literature review on developing countries and their social housing estates (public estates) and that of Nigeria in particular, shows that mass housing provisions were seen as a means to overturn the housing problems in the developing countries and in Nigeria. However, Kadiri (2004), Olotuah and Bobadoye (2009) argued for sustainability in housing provision, but there was no framework or strategy developed or adopted for

912


the sustainable management of the social housing stock after its completion which incorporated the principles of sustainability. Therefore, this study seeks to develop a framework which incorporates the sustainability principles (social, economic and environment) for the management of both existing and future social housing stocks in a sustainable manner in Niger Delta of Nigeria. When developed, it is suspected that such a framework would be a better approach to meeting the social housing challenges faced in the Niger Delta. The paper recommends that further study is undertaken in this area so as to ensure that the framework is developed, and to manage social housing estates in Niger Delta.

References Adeniji, K. (2004). Transportation planning. Readings in urban and regional. Yaba: Macmillan Nigeria Publishers. Agbola, T., Egunjobi, L., & Olatubara, C. (2007). Housing development and management: A book of readings. Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Ibadan, Nigeria. Alaghbari, W., Salim, A., Dola, K., & Ali, A. A. A. (2011). Developing affordable housing design for low-income in Sana’a Yemen. International Journal of Housing Markets and Analysis, 4(1), 84-98. Aribigbola, A. (2008). Improving urban land use planning and management in Nigeria: The case of Akure. Theoretical and Empirical Researches in Urban Management, 3(9), 1-14. Babalakin, W. (2004). Key constraints to real estate development in Nigeria. Retrieved from http://www.babalkinandco.com Baharum, Z. A., Nawaawi, A. H., & Saat, Z. M. (2009). Assessment of property management service quality of purpose built office buildings. International Journal of Business Research, 2(1), 1-10. Brandon, S., & Lombardi, P. (2011). Evaluating sustainable development in the built environment (2nd ed.). UK: Wiley-Blackwell Publication. British Standard Institutes. (1993). BS 3811 Glossary of maintenance management terms in terotechnology. BSI Publishing Limited. Bruntland Report. (1987). Our common future. Report for the World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford University Press. Cooper, J., & Jones, K. (2008). Routine maintenance and sustainability of existing social housing. Proceedings from CIB W070 Conference in Facilities Management, Heriot Watt University, Edinburgh, UK. De Vries, B. J. M., & Peterson, A. C. (2008). Conceptualizing sustainable development: An assessment methodology connecting values, knowledge, worldviews and scenarios. Journal of Ecological Economics, 68, 1006-1019. Ding, G. K. C. (2008). Sustainable construction—The role of environmental assessment tools. Journal of Environmental Management, 86, 451-464. Edum-Fotwe, F. T., & Price, A. D. F. (2009). A social ontology for appraising sustainability of construction projects and development. International Journal of Project Management, 27, 313-322. Evuleocha, S. U. (2005). Managing indigenous relations, corporate social responsibility in a new age of activism. Corporate Communications: International Journal, 10(4), 328-340. Fatoye, E. O. (2009). A comparative analysis of residential satisfaction in three income levels public housing estates in Nigeria. Proceedings from RICS COBRA Research Conference, University of Cape Town. Fatoye, E. O., & Odusami, K. T. (2009). Occupants satisfaction approach to housing performance evaluation: The case of Nigeria. Proceedings from RICS COBRA Research Conference, University of Cape Town. Franks, T. R. (2006). Sustaining projects benefits: Masters course manual. Centre for International Development, University of Bradford, UK. Ha, S-K. (2008). Social housing estates and sustainable community development in South Korea. Habitat International, 32, 349-363. Harvey, P. A., & Reed, B. (2004). Rural water supply in Africa: Building blocks for hand pump sustainability. WEDC, Loughborough University, UK. Ihuah, P. W. (2007). Sustainable community water project and the benefits in Niger Delta, Nigeria. Unpublished Masters Dissertation, Centre for International Development, University of Bradford, UK. Jiboye, A. D. (2004). The socio-cultural responseness of household size in housing quality in Osogbo, Nigeria. Anthropologist, 6(3), 169-174.


913

Kadiri, K. O. (2004). Low cost technology and mass housing system in Nigeria housing. Journal of Applied sciences, 4(4), 565-567. Lee, H. H. Y., & Scott, D. (2009). Overview of maintenance strategy, acceptable maintenance standard and resources from a building maintenance operation perspective. Journal of building Appraisal, 4, 269-278. Lee, R., & Wordworth, P. (2001). Lee’s building maintenance management. London, UK: Blackwell Publishing. Lutzkendorf, T., & Lorenz, D. (2005). Sustainable property investment: Valuing sustainable buildings through property performance assessment. Journal of Building Research and Information, 33(3), 212-234. NNPC (Nigeria National Population Commission). (2006). A final result of the population census. Port Harcourt, Nigeria. Nwaka, G. I. (2005). The urban informal sector in Nigeria: Towards economic development, environmental health and harmony. Journal of Global Urban Development, 1(1), 1-11. Okoroafor, P. (2007). Critical issues in the development of viable housing finance industries in Nigeria. Proceedings from 2nd Emerging Urban African International Conference and Exhibition on Housing Finance, Nigeria. Oladapo, M. A. (2002). Procurement systems and project organisation model for low cost housing. Housing Today, 1(6), 32-36. Olanrewaju, A. A., Khamidi, M. F., & Idrus, A. (2011). Appraisal of the building maintenance management practices of Malaysian Universities. Journal of Building Appraisal, 6, 261-275. Olotuah, A. O., & Bobadoye, S. A. (2009). Sustainable housing provision for the urban poor: A review of public sector intervention in Nigeria. Journal of Built and Human Environment, 2, 51-62. Omeje, K. (2006). The state, conflict and evolving politics in the Niger Delta, Nigeria. Journal of the African Political Economy, 31(101), 425-440. Oyebanji, A. O., Akintoye, A., & Liyanage, C. (2011). Public-private partnerships approach: A panacea to urban housing inequalities in developing countries. A case of Nigeria. III Proceedings of the CIB TG72/ARCOM Doctorial Research Workshop. Preston, UK: University of Lancashire, School of Built and Natural Environment. Porritt, J. (2000). Playing safe: Science and the environment. London, UK: Themes and Hudson Publishing. Sapsford, R., & Jupp, V. (2006). Data collection and analysis (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publication. SPDC (Shell Petroleum Development Company). (2002). 2001 people and the environment annual report. SPDC Nigeria Ltd. UNDP (United Nation Development Programme). (2006). Final report on Niger Delta human development. Retrieved from http://web.ng.undp.org/documents/nigeria-delta-hdr.pdf UN-HABITAT. (2006). Shelter for all: The potential of housing policy in the implementation of the habitat agenda. Nairobi: UN-HABITAT Information Services. Wapwera, S. D., Parsa, A., & Egbu, C. (2011). Financing low income housing in Nigeria. Journal of Financial Management of Property and Construction, 16(3), 283-301. Worika, I. L. (2002). Environmental law and policy of petroleum development, strategies and mechanism for sustainable management in Africa. Gift-Prints Associates, Benin City, Nigeria. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). London: Sage Publication.