Monday, 3 August 2015

Poverty on Affordability of Housing in Nigeria by Olusegun Ariyo

                                                                              
Going by the manner to which the urban rich live on the toil and patronage of the urban poor, one is tempted to jump to this conclusion that poverty is of complimentary essence in the urban centers of the developing nations. For instance, the numbers of the affluent-owned organizations engaged in supply of table water in small polythene sachets to the urban poor increases as few public faucets supply potable water. Secondly, the new pocket of slums of predominantly tenament houses, for the urban poor as targeted tenant rapidly proliferate. 


 Thus the governments, at the three tiers of Nigeria’s federalism, and the private individual in the urban centers, play peculiar role in the birth, nature, demise, effects and resuscitation of poverty in the urban environment. That said, one sagacious saying of Yoruba’s is that an individual, who is non-poor in the midst of two poor individual makes the number to become a minimum of three. This demonstrates the all pervasive nature of poverty particularly in the developing countries of the world, including Nigeria were we all feel the effect equally but  bear the costs differently; and that the poor are almost indifferent to it while non poor pay dearly for it.



Therefore the incidence of poverty is not only the poor that are usually unconscious of it, the affluence also bear it perhaps the reason that the non-poor do apparently not feel the pressure of poverty is that they directly or indirectly pass most of it to the majority of the poor who are, without options, dependent upon such non-poor means of existence rather than living. But in any event  of social riots, labour protests  and political crises, for example, the non-poor had often been at the receiving ends of the pressure of poverty born all along by the poor; although with a reversal of the source on the long run. Given the sector of the economy of a developing nation such as Nigeria, one is most likely prone to experiencing a seemingly virtuous but really vicious cycle of the effect on component of several sections of the society. In that connection, numerous scholars including  the World Bank considered poverty in terms of capital for food requirement, communal  infrastructural facilities with only a few, such as  making cursory remark about poverty in the context of  housing and Building upon the great foundation of their works. Society can be apparently affluent, as Nigeria currently is, yet the citizen is poor in respect of access to basic needs, including housing.



The mirage of the affluence of Nigeria in relation to poverty amidst plenty is demonstrated by the age-long experience of being in a sub-region so abundantly endowed by nature. All studies define poverty according to a poverty line, although the definition of line varies. In most cases, poverty lines are based on local cost of a basket of minimum food and non-food requirement. Standard are often obtained from local sources. In some, the poverty line is expressed in terms of physical indicator representing minimum acceptable level of well-being.


 Housing as a socio-physical environment and shelter can be said to be mere physical structures with characteristics of inadequacy for human living. Of course, most of the tenements in our urban centers are characterized by inadequacy of infrastructural facilities. The revealed preference of the urban for this sort of housing’ is therefore not a surprise, going by its low rental value dictated by deficiency in infrastructural facilities, utilities and amenities. In a manner reminiscent of a realization that non-food requirement, and many indicators had not considered urban poverty in the context of quality housing. The second realization might be that housing provision is so capital intensive as to always requires a combination of huge wage and huge loan.


 This income based poverty has never been considered with little regard for affordability of basic quantum of adequate housing by the urban poor. This indeed remains the ability and capacity of households to meet with their periodic mortgage obligations without jeopardizing their health and reducing family nutrition, was some of their crucial factors include capacity to pay, income level, employment need and purchasing power. Similarly, report indicate  that housing affordability has being the rate of population turnover, relatively high rate of defaults, speed of housing consolidation and difference in income and expenditure pattern.

The situation of mass Nigeria’s urban poor is that, with low wage and no loan, the society expects them to become housing owner-occupiers. Appreciating the gravity of their predicament, tiers of government rose to the urban poor’s challenge by dolling out programmes, rather than money to the urban poor for alleviating the housing aspect of the policy thrust.


 A report also reveals that actions and expectations of the programmes have no resultant effect on the targeted poor. it is not out of volition that the poor Nigerians are involved in the re-building the built environment of the nation cities rather,  it is out of exploitation and frustration of the urban poor by the Nigeria’s non-poor who have housing investments at the urban centers. Expectedly, since it is glaring in the levels of exploitation of the poor, in future, the policy thrust on national housing should address among other issues, an encouragement of the affluent to invest in the tenement housing of improved standard for rental use of the poor. Thus the cycle of degeneration of the physical environment continues as the socio-economic exploitation of the urban poor accelerates.

No comments:

Post a Comment