Enabling Private Investment in Affordable Housing in Nigeria: Lessons from the Experience of the Millard Fuller Foundation Projects in Nasarawa State
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the shift to private sector-driven affordable housing in Nigeria for decades, the housing deficit has continued to increase to the disadvantage of low-income families. This paper explores the enabling strategies for stimulating private-driven affordable housing in Nigeria. A case study of the Millard Fuller Foundation projects was undertaken, and semi-structured interviews were administered to 12 residents of the estates and the developer to explore their experience and highlight the considerations for designing appropriate strategies. The data generated were analysed using thematic analysis with the support of Nvivo. This study identifies four major components of construction costs—land, design, materials, and finance—that policy improvement can target to stimulate private investment. It shows that developers are likely to adopt practices that will reduce these costs with repercussions for end-users. Mindful of this, and the concern to make returns on investment, strategies should aim to harmonise both developers’ interest and that of the end-users through widespread infrastructural development to make land available in all locations, and an incremental owner-building approach so that end-users can take decisions for their housing. Furthermore, access to National Housing Fund (NHF) mortgages should be enhanced by recognising supplementary incomes in the loan origination procedures.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".