A RESEARCH ON

INCREMENTAL SELF-HELP HOUSING IN THE NIGERIAN CONTEXT

SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE

FEDERAL UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY AKURE

BY

YAKUB ABDULHAMEED ARC/16/8389

BIENIMIGHAN PENUEL ARC/16/8352

ADEBAYO OLUWAFIKAYOMI ARC/16/8340

KOLAWOLE JULIUS ARC/16/8363

SOBARA MARK ARC/17/3688

OLOGBESE BABAJIDE ARC/16/8376

1
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................... 4
1.1 AIM & OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY ............................................................................... 4
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW ......................................................................................................... 6
2.1 HOUSING IN NIGERIA ...................................................................................................... 7
2.2 THE ORIGINS OF INCREMENTAL HOUSING IN SELF-HELP HOUSING
CONCEPTS ................................................................................................................................ 7
2.3 FORMS OF SELF-HELP HOUSING ................................................................................ 10
2.3.1 Unaided Self-Help Housing ......................................................................................... 11
2.3.2 State Supported Self-Help (settlements upgrading) ..................................................... 11
2.3.3 State Initiated Self-Help Housing ................................................................................ 12
2.4 INCREMENTAL SELF-HELP HOUSING IN NIGERIA................................................. 17
2.5 CRITERIA FOR INCREMENTAL HOUSING DESIGN ................................................. 19
2.7 STAGES OF INCREMENTAL HOUSING ....................................................................... 20
2.8 CHALLENGES TO INCREMENTAL SELF-HELP HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ....... 21
2.9 CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................... 22
3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY............................................................................................ 24
3.1 Data Collection Methods and Research Sample ................................................................. 25
3.2 Research Validity and Reliability ....................................................................................... 25
3.3 Research Scope and Limitations ......................................................................................... 26
3.4 Operationalization of the Research ..................................................................................... 26
4.0 RESEARCH FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS.......................................................................... 28
4.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 28
4.2 Low Income Housing Conditions in Nigeria ...................................................................... 28
4.3 Government Responses to Addressing Low Income Housing ........................................... 28
4.4 Household Characteristics of the Respondents ................................................................... 29
4.5 Typical Incremental Housing Development Patterns ......................................................... 30
4.6.1 Trend 1: Informal Land Acquisition ............................................................................. 30
4.6.2 Thread 2: Typical System of Incremental Construction .............................................. 31
4.6.3 Thread 3: Shift in Building Materials towards permanent- Conventional Materials... 31
4.6.4 Trend 4: Use of Small Scale Local Builders for Construction Skills ......................... 32
4.6.4 Trend 4: Progressive Financing Mechanism............................................................ 33
4.7 Triggers/Motivations for Incremental Development .......................................................... 34

2
 1. Availability of Finances ................................................................................................ 34
2. Need to Improve Quality of ones Dwelling ................................................................... 34
3. Need for Additional Space ............................................................................................... 34
5.0 RESEARCH CONCLUSION ................................................................................................. 36
5.1 The Need to Support Self-Help Incremental Housing Processes ....................................... 36
5.2 Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 36
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 38
APPENDIX ................................................................................................................................... 41
Interview Guides ....................................................................................................................... 41

3
1.0 INTRODUCTION
One of the fundamental necessities of humans is housing. It comes in third, after only clothing and

food, and is seen as necessary for human survival. Housing has a significant impact on the

community’s general welfare as well as its health, effectiveness, and social behavior. Despite the

widely acknowledged significance of housing, the majority of urban residents in many developing

nations live in dehumanizing housing conditions, and those who do have access to average housing

must pay exorbitant prices for it. Therefore, the majority of low- and moderate-income households

respond to their housing requirement by building their homes as limited financial means steadily

increase. “Progressive housing” or “spontaneous housing” refers to this process of gradual

development or improvement of housing conditions, which is common among low and middle

class people.

In order to realize their constitutional right to appropriate housing, citizens can use incremental

housing, which has been referred to as “a phased approach” . It takes a longer period of time for

many low- and middle-income households to amass enough money to swiftly construct a whole

house. The majority of households make little, gradual improvements to their housing situation. It

is frequently carried out wall by wall and block by block. Frequently, the area around the house

continues to stockpile building supplies for future renovations. It’s a continuous process.

1.1 AIM & OBJECTIVE OF THE STUDY

Realizing that there is little to no intervention for low income housing in Nigeria, This study is

aimed at understanding the growing phenomenon of incremental self-help housing process in the

Nigerian context. With the understanding that incremental housing takes several forms, this study

looks at the informal increasing housing processes as practiced by most low income groups.

4
The research objectives are:

1. To find out how the incremental housing process is done by low income households.

2. To gain an understanding of the factors that triggers the incremental process.

3. To investigate any external factors that lead low income households to opt for the informal

incremental housing

4. To find out possible interventions that would support self-help incremental housing process

as a strategy for low income groups.

5
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW

Various definitions of housing exist in varous literature. One convergence point however is that

housing is basic necessity for man, a dwelling place for his kind. Housing embraces all the social

services and utilities that make a community or neighborhood a livable environment. According

to Olotuah (2009), housing caters for man's biological (clean air, Adeyeni et al.; ARJASS, 1(4): 1-

10, 2016; Article no.ARJASS .28871 3 water.), psychological needs (satisfaction, contentment,

prestige, privacy, choice, freedom, security and social interaction with others, human development,

cultural activities) among others.

Homeownership is rarely a significant issue for high-income workers, but for individuals in the

middle- and low-income brackets, it might present difficulties. The majority of Nigeria's

population belongs to these middle- and low-income classes. According to Udechukwu (2008),

homeownership accounts for up to 60% of the entire monthly household income and is the largest

single investment for these households. To become a homeowner in Nigeria, one either buys a

completed house/dwelling unit or builds for oneself, that is, self-help/selfbuild (Alagbe and Opoko,

2013). The former is generally expensive while the latter has a lower entry cost. Based on the

understanding that housing is a verb, self-help historically (and still) focuses on the participatory

process that encourages residents to actively engage in the design, finance and construction of their

own house (Turner, 1972; 1976). Although self-help is as old as humans, its derivative – aided

self-help – was initially developed in the 1940s, advocated for and made popular in literature in

the 1960s through the work of British architect John Turner, and became a notable policy feature

in the 1970s through its adoption by the World Bank (Harris, 1998).

6
2.1 HOUSING IN NIGERIA

Housing is more than mere shelter. It is one of man's most precious possessions. It offers man both

physical and psychological protection. It is also a symbol of man's conquest of the earth, a

monument to his power and glory. Housing can be summarized as the process and substance by

which the earth has been transformed from the primordial jungle into what it is today, a living and

ever-growing testimony of man’s relentless quest to make the earth a more comfortable place to

live in. Housing represents one of the most basic human needs. As a unit of the environment,

housing has a profound influence on the health, efficiency, social behavior, satisfaction and the

general welfare of the community. It is one of the best indicators of a person's standard of living

and of his or her place in the society.

No matter their income level, most households, whether they are low, middle, or high income,

place a high priority on owning a home. It has a significant role in the development of social classes

in both emerging and industrialized nations (Saunders, 1990). Owning a home is something to be

proud of in Nigeria. In terms of culture, it refers to more than just a place of habitation. It is

regarded as one of the most beloved tangible items that can be left to future generations (Ilesanmi,

2011; Ogunaike, 2016).

2.2 THE ORIGINS OF INCREMENTAL HOUSING IN SELF-HELP HOUSING

CONCEPTS

The 1970s-1980s saw the rise in the incremental housing concepts. These started being recognised

as a logical way in which low income households’ access housing. Particularly, John F. C. Turner

(1976) and William Mangin (1967) analysed the informal urban housing strategies practiced by

7
low income households in Peru. Turner observed what he called ‘progressive development’ in

Lima, Peru. His observation was that there was a correlation between the social process of

households and the gradual improvement and expansion of the shelters (i.e. 'consolidation') which

people built by themselves. Since this period, there has been theoretical development of the

concepts of self-help. Several developing countries developed housing programmes that employed

the self-housing concept as advanced by Turner (1976). Turner was arguing that as much choice

and freedom should be granted to the occupants of urban housing both in formal and informal

housing development as this would make housing provision affordable and responsive. The rise of

Turner’s ideas in the 1960s and 1970s however, did not mark the beginning of self-help housing

as Harris notes that the aided self-help housing was practiced, long before (Harris, 1998, 1999,

2003). This thesis, borrows the concepts of self-help housing from the works of John .F.C Turner

as developed from his observations in Peru. The theoretical concept of incremental housing is also

based on Turners (1976) observations that low income household were able to consolidate their

dwellings over a period of time. Turner’s arguments for self-help housing was that the provision

of mass housing by governments had limitations especially for low income groups and such the

low income had no option but to find their own housing solutions (Turner, 1976). The low income

households are not able to afford the institutional housing because of the standards and planning

regulations (Turner and Fichter, 1972). Therefore, Turner advocates that the household’s should

be given the freedom to be able to control the investments in housing. He says that this requires

that minimum standards and the bureaucracy associated with planning be lowered to meet the

affordability of the low income households. Turner’s arguments for dweller control means that the

low households should be part of the housing actors in providing their own housing. He suggests

that if households are given the ‘freedom to control their dwellings’ they would be able to provide

8
housing according to their needs and also contribute to the reduction in cost of investment in

housing. He further claims that the enforcement of the minimum standards worsens housing

conditions for the poor who are not able to make an investment for the whole house at once (Turner

and Fichter, 1972). In support of this argument, Gilbert and Gurgler (1992), in their observation

associates the failure by governments to provide housing for low income groups to the spontaneous

development of unregulated informal settlements in most urban areas of developing countries

(Gilbert and Gugler, 1992). They indicate that the development of informal settlements is because

the low income groups lack options that they can afford. Further, cardinal to the development of

the incremental housing concept is Turners concept of ‘housing as a verb’. According to Turner in

his concept of ‘housing as a verb’ housing means more than just ‘a house’ especially for the low

income groups (Turner and Fichter, 1972). He argues that “housing is more than a just a

commodity but rather a process or an activity” (Turner, 1972, p.151) through which families meet

their other human ends. From this concept Turner defines incremental housing as “an integral

urban development process”...He says “it is not quick, immediate or complete, but choice remains

with the owner” (Turner, 1986, p.20). Often, the process of incremental housing starts with a starter

wet core shelter unit or a bare lot with provision for utility for consolidation and utility connection.

Often recommended is a multipurpose room with basic kitchen/bath facilities. Turner says if the

owners are given the mandate to control the development of their housing they would control the

consolidation process depending on the household needs and resource priorities (Turner, 1976).

His argument is that as families grow, the households would be able to consolidate their dwellings.

Wakely, and Rely (2010) further show that incremental housing is responsive, flexible to the needs

of the urban poor and can be controlled by the end users themselves. Additionally, Napier (2002)

contributes to the theory and defines incremental housing as a form which takes a step-by-step

9
approach. Meanwhile, the Global University Consortium Exploring Incremental Housing (2010),

says that it goes by different names; “starter house, phased-development house, owner-driven

house.

2.3 FORMS OF SELF-HELP HOUSING

Since the 1970 and 1980s, self-help housing as a solution for low income groups has been a seen

as a controversial issue by different interest groups (Harms, 1992). The concept was promoted and

supported by many practitioners and academics mostly following the works of Charles Abrams

(1964), William Mangin (1967) and Turner (1967, 1972). Harms (1992) indicate that the

conceptual definition of self-help housing varies in two aspects. Firstly, selfhelp is narrowly

defined as “an individual household or group providing they own housing and relates more to the

technical aspects of the house construction” (Harms, 1992, p.34). A wider definition of self-help

relates to “the collective actions around housing, organisational and political actions to improve

living conditions beyond housing” (ibid, p.34). However, in practice these distinctions in the

conceptualisation are not clear cut as the approaches for implementing self-help housing often

overlap. The concept of incremental housing has been used widely in three different forms such as

site and service schemes, self-help settlements upgrading and core-housing. During the 1970s and

1980s this was seen as a mechanism for providing housing for low income groups in developing

countries and hence was supported by several international organisations (IHC, 2008). Notably the

World Bank launched a series of site and service projects in most developing countries and later

shifted to squatter-settlement-upgrading programmes. The Inter-American Development Bank

(IDB) and other multilateral lenders and donors also funded site and service projects in Central

America. In Asia, the programmes were supported and funded by Asian Development Bank

(ADB). Also, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) was heavily

10
involved in funding site and service and later slum-upgrading projects in Africa and the Middle

East (IHC, 2008). Broadly, the selfhelp housing approaches are distinguished in three forms

including; users initiated (without state aid), state supported (settlements upgrading) and state

initiated housing programmes (Harms, 1992). These three main distinctions are looked at in detail.

2.3.1 Unaided Self-Help Housing

This form of self-help usually starts with the household acquiring a piece of land legally or through

illegally squatting of land or un-registered sub subdivisions (Harms, 1992). In this form of self-

help process, the users who are mostly low income households initiate the process and slowly

consolidate their dwellings outside any government programmes. Often this form is associated

with low quality housing and illegality in both land acquisition procedures and building outside

the building regulations and permit (Harms, 1992). This form of self-help housing is the most

prominent in Zambia and this research seeks to look at the aspects of informal incremental housing

processes and how it would be supported to improve housing quality and resources for both the

households and for sustainable settlement development.

2.3.2 State Supported Self-Help (settlements upgrading)

The process starts spontaneously by the end users and the local municipality or state offers support

to upgrade the settlements to minimum standards. Aid is usually in form of infrastructure

provision, technical assistance, and finance for upgrading (Harms, 1992). This form of self-help

requires a community participation mechanism and as such, the initiatives may be from

Community Based Organisations (CBOs) and Non-Governmental organisations (NGO’s).

According to Harms (1992), this method requires special working relations between professional

and non-professionals. Support may also be through policy that supports secure land tenure

11
systems for low income household. Recently there has been a ‘resurrection’ of state supported self-

help housing with the UN-Habitat arguing that assisted self-help housing is the most affordable

and intelligent way of providing sustainable shelter for low income groups This is because;

 it is based on minimum standards

 It incorporates a substantive amount of ‘sweat equity’

 It is useful because individuals and communities engaged in it acquire skills-building skills

 It responds to people's actual need and levels of affordability.

 It is flexible because dwelling units are often designed to be able to expand over time.

 However, incremental housing requires a suitable supply of building materials, components and

fittings (UN-Habitat 2005b, p.166)

Although this approach is supported for the positive aspects that it improves the living conditions

of settlements, it is seen as an adaptive measure and does not have much to offer for proactive

solutions of low income housing.

2.3.3 State Initiated Self-Help Housing

This form is normally initiated at the local, national government or even international agencies

.The mechanism of implementation of the programmes requires participation of the beneficiaries.

Notably of these is the concept of core housing and site and service housing promoted by the World

Bank and other international organisations during the 1970s and 1980s (Harms, 1992). The

programmes of this nature are often initiated, planned and regulated by the implementing

organisations or even the multilateral organisations (Napier, 2005). This section looks at the

12
concepts of core housing and site and service in detail to draw lessons from the states initiatives in

supporting self-help housing approaches.

1. The Concept of Core Housing’

Important to mention is that in this thesis, the concept of core housing is used as part of the broader

concept of incremental housing processes. Considering the advantages and limitations of self-help

housing and informal housing, Abrams and Koenigsberger developed the practical way of

implementing incremental self-help housing solutions by developing the core housing concept

(Napier, 2002). Napier observes that the original intentions of the core housing concept as

advanced by Abrams intended to take the strengths of formal mass housing and integrate with self–

help concept. From this concept, Abrams (1964) suggested that the informal processes can be

improved upon with support from both the public and private sectors. As written by Mark Napier

(2002), in the origins of core housing, Abrams refers to core housing as ‘instalment construction’

or ‘building serially’ (Abrams, 1964). Abrams argument is that the majority poor lacked access to

finance and as such opted to instalment construction. Abrams observes that most low income

households would start the process of building sections of their houses as they could afford

building materials after the acquisition of land either legally or illegally (Abrams 1964, cited in

Napier, 2002). He however observes that the process of incremental housing construction was not

confined to developing countries only-“simple shelters have been built in all parts of the world and

then expanded room by room or floor by floor until the house met the families' ultimate needs”.

His observation is that “squatters alike have put up ‘shacks’ and later extended them over time”

(Abrams1964, p, .175). Napier (2002) indicates that Abrams interpretation for this mode of

construction was the lack of access to sufficient amounts of funds to sponsor construction of the

whole house. This is so because low income families often lack regular personal savings or lack

13
access to appropriate finance to be able to build at once. According to Abram (1964), incremental

housing may take the form of starter houses with one or two rooms which can later be extended

horizontally or vertically. He indicates several options of ‘starter houses’ such as “...the one room

core for small families in very poor countries; the two room core to be expanded horizontally for

the growing family; the core that can be added to vertically; the row house core, the front and rear

of which is expandable; and the core built as part of a compound” (Abrams, 1964, p., 177) Some

of the principles of core housing as advanced by Abrams are indicated in Table 6. Following these

principles several developing countries developed core housing projects mostly with financial

support from multilateral organisation. A good example in the sub Saharan Africa is South Africa.

2. Concept of Site and Service

The concepts of site and service schemes come about from the realization that governments were

not able to provide ‘complete’ serviced house and that most of government-led housing

programmes tended to be relatively expensive and not affordable for most low-income families

(Srinivas, no date, Van der Linden, 1986). This caused the change in focusing from supplying

complete fully serviced house to providing serviced land. This approach was supported by most

international donor organisations as indicated earlier. The approach also required that beneficiaries

contribute in the housing development through ‘sweat equity’ (Srinivas, no date). Many countries

in South America, Asia and Africa took up this concept, and with the World Bank strongly

supported the approach through financing a number of projects. The beneficiaries were also to

contribute in the actual construction and through contribution of resources-(community, financial

and so on…) (Rakodi, 1989). Site and service were seen as a way of solving the problem of squatter

settlements that were mushrooming at the time. With this concept of site and service households

were supported to construct their own houses through making serviced land available (Gattoni,

14
2009).The key components of a housing scheme was that governments were to provide a plot of

land, infrastructure (like roads, water supply, drainage, electricity or a sanitary network), while the

households contributed in building the houses. These approaches were implemented in various

forms of schemes from mere subdivision of plots to providing serviced plots with a ‘core house’-

case of South Africa (Landman & Napier, 2009). Though financed by donor organisations, the

financial mechanisms employed for most of these projects required beneficiaries to repay the

money in terms of service charges. In this approach the key players were the implementing

agencies either local governments or housing boards and the intended beneficiaries. Notably, a

positive aspect of this approach is that it recognised the ability of low income households to

contribute to providing their own housing in the face of little support (Srinivas, no date). With this,

governments were able to share the responsibility of providing housing with the beneficiaries and

therefore changed the role of government from being ‘provider’ to ‘enabler’. The approach was

also recommended for using the community structures and support in the implementation

mechanism. However, these were mainly developed on cheap land on the periphery of cities

making it inefficient for local governments to provide infrastructure and services while at the same

time away from the employment opportunities for most low income. This is seen by most scholars

as the major setback for site and services.

Critics of the Self-Help Approaches Worth to note is that the concepts of self-help housing has

received criticisms by other scholars e.g. Burgess (1982), Ward (1982) and Mathéy (1992). These

scholars claim that selfhelp housing is often associated with low quality housing as the household

do not have the skills to build quality housing by themselves and others are very poor to finance

the housing construction. Burgess Rod in “Self-Help Housing; a Critique” (1982), argues that that

the self-help approaches looks at “a one-sided identification of the housing process without the

15
use-value activity” (Burgess, 1982, p.86).The argument is that, the informal housing development

processes, do not indicate that housing problems happen in a market environment. In a capitalist

market environment, commodities are produced not merely for own consumption but in search for

profits (Burgess, 1982).Therefore, Burgess sees the “problem of housing more as a political and

economic problem” (Burgess, 1982, p.86), than that of technical and organisational systems as

Turner puts it in advocating for self-help housing. Also, Burgess indicates that the housing problem

cannot be done in isolation; therefore as long as the interventions such as finance, land tenure,

building materials and building standards provided … “do not go beyond the capitalistic interests

of profits” (Burgess, 1982, p.86) then the systems would not provide a solution for lower income

groups. Another critique of Turners ideas of owner built housing is what Burgess calls the “petty

commodity housing” (Burgess, 1982, p.86). He sees the use of self-help construction as the

duplication of the capitalist mode of production at the informal level (Burgess, 1982, p.86).

Another author, Marcuse Peter in his article “Why Conventional Self-Help Projects Won’t Work”,

(Marcuse, 1992), says the problems of self-help housing concept is that it cannot substitute

resources in the housing sector. Generally “land, materials, expertise, infrastructure must all still

be provided” (Marcuse, 1992, p.16). He further points out that, self-help housing as advocated for

by Turner “violates sound and necessary planning principals” and can only produce “temporary

solutions to immediate housing problems” (ibid, p.16). He further argues that, the call for

communities and households to manage their own housing development without professional

involvement, usually results in lowering of standards and informality. According to Bredenoord

and Lindert, (2010), the problem is not whether it is self-help or government-led mass housing but

that governments have limitations in resources for purchasing and develop land to satisfy the

massive demand of low income housing. However, Napier (2002) indicates that the benefits of

16
incremental housing are often overshadowed by the stigma of illegality associated with it. He

however sees the earlier implementation of core housing to have been “highly managed and a

limited form of assisted self-help” (Napier 2002, p.11). Greene and Rojas (2008, p.91) observe

that “many politicians and technicians associate self-help and incrementally built housing units

with illegal land settlement”. This is because they often view incrementally built houses as units

that are built on “land that is inadequate for residential use, located in unauthorised land sub-

divisions, also lacking any form of secure tenure and fail to meet the construction standards that

ensure safely and sanitation in the dwellings and settlements” (ibid, p.91). Greene and Rojas (2008)

argue for a shift towards integration the informal housing processes which also imply overcoming

the stigma that has overshadowed incremental housing construction (ibid). Finally Soliman (2011)

conclusively identifies the concept of self-housing in three main perspectives - (the Marxist view,

the Non-Marxist and the ‘Positive Views’).

2.4 INCREMENTAL SELF-HELP HOUSING IN NIGERIA

Agbola (2000) expressed the crises situation of housing condition in Nigeria when he opined that

it is conspicuously glaring that most of the urban population live in dehumanizing housing

environment while those that have access to average housing do so at abnormal cost. According

to Onibokun and Agbola, rent in major cities of Nigeria constitute about 60% of an average

workers disposable income. This is far higher than between 20 and 30% recommended by United

Nations. Many developers have difficulty obtaining capital for their projects even in normal times.

This has been attributed to a number of problems. Two of these problems are the high interest rates

that contribute to the high cost of housing, and the difficulty in obtaining capital for home

construction are noteworthy. In a tight money market, housing is the first area to suffer Roberto,

since neither the builder nor the consumer can readily obtain finance for housing. Most

17
low/moderate income households therefore responds to their housing need by building as little

financial resources flow in gradually. This process of gradual development/improvement of

housing condition predominant among the low and middle income people is termed ‘progressive

housing’, ‘spontaneous housing’ and most commonly ‘incremental housing’. It is estimated that

80% of housing in the developing world are built in this manner – a phenomenon that has made

incremental housing a recognized housing development mechanism among housing scholars.

According to Smets (1999), incremental building is the process by which shelter is constructed

step by step and improved over a period of time in terms of quality and size. Smets argue that, this

type of building process depends much on the individual household priorities and available

income, and changes in accordance to the family cycle. CHF (2004) defines incremental building

as a household-driven building process for acquiring, extending, improving or servicing a dwelling

or group of dwellings over time, and thereby improving the quality of the household members‟

and maximising their choices of housing design and housing needs. The incremental/progressive

building or development is also seen as the process by which low-income households make

incremental investments in housing as their income permit. What is apparent in these three

definitions of incremental building is the issue of limited capacity or incomes and hence the only

possibility of home ownership for the low-income household is to invest in shelter in several

stages. Aravena (2011) notes that incremental housing becomes a viable low income development

strategy when there is provision of basic infrastructure and services; empowerment and interactive

supervision through community organizations; and proper site planning, assurance of tenure

security and provision of technical support.

Studies have reported that incremental housing developers take to various dwelling forms

depending on the opportunities and challenges surrounding the progressive building process.

18
Minimum housing standards and legislation are usually outside the social contexts of the low

income class. A major obstacle for housing experts is how to situate housing standards in different

social contexts. Also, the real estate market rarely produces sub-divided and serviced land for low-

income families. Consequently, they must access land through alternative means, such as illegal

land occupation, purchases of illegal subdivisions, and government programmes, and they must be

prepared to accept different levels of security in land tenure. Walker (2001) noted that a major

challenge against the progressive building process is the lack of financial resources on the part of

housing developers. Aravena (2011), Farvacque and McAuslin (1992) and Greene and Duran

(1990) posits that while the public sector favours access to sanitation services as the most crucial

need, households mostly value maximum protection against weather elements (relative to their

previous situation of squatting on illegal land that might be overly susceptible to natural risks),

and some privacy (relative to their previously overcrowded circumstances). These will continually

raise questions against the integrity of incremental housing development if the current

development process is not attended to.

2.5 CRITERIA FOR INCREMENTAL HOUSING DESIGN

Design Criteria According to Wainer (2016), incremental house is not the same as build a

complete small house. Incremental House provide some homes that can be developed by the

residents themselves. The main purpose of this approach is to ease the burden of development

costs at the earliest. So that the dwelling can be built in a location that is really desirable. Aravena

(2016) on an Elemental project, said that in planning a dwelling with the concept of an incremental

house must pay attention to some ideal conditions, including:

 Good location: dense enough projects able to pay for expensive well located sites.

19
  Harmonious growth in time: build strategically the first half (partition structure and

firewalls, bathroom, kitchen, stairs, roof) so that expansion happens thanks to design and

not despite it.

 Urban layout: introduce in between private space (lot) and public space (street), the

collective space, not bigger than 25 families, so that social agreements can be maintained.

 Provide structure for a final plan growth.

 Middle-class DNA: plan for a final scenario at least 72m2 or 4 bedrooms.

2.7 STAGES OF INCREMENTAL HOUSING

According to Greene& Rojas (2008), incremental house process is divided into 3 stages. Each

stage has an opportunity for the residents to create an efficient and equitable adjusting to

their character. These three stages are:

 Search for location; Residents are given the opportunity to choose a site that suits their

needs. So they can have an opportunity to work in the city.

 Basic building construction; From the residents’ point of view, the primary

function of the house is to provide protection against cold, rain, sun, wind. This is a

priority after getting a land or location.

 Residential development; After having a house, the occupants begin to develop their

dwellings with potluck material, especially if the need is very urgent such as the

need for space for family members. Based on literature study, it can be concluded that

design criteria for incremental housing is location, core house, expansion possibilities,

building type and allotment of residents

20
2.8 CHALLENGES TO INCREMENTAL SELF-HELP HOUSING DEVELOPMENT

In Nigeria, the private sector is mostly responsible for housing provision. Here, 90% of the homes

delivered are individual homes (self-built), indicating a high percentage of housing units made by

private individuals.

On the other hand, 80% of households in Nigeria reside in private rental homes, which are divided

into public and private categories of housing. Numerous problems with this form of housing,

including financial difficulties, subpar building materials, requests for expensive levies,

bureaucratic roadblocks, and substantial building material importation, are to blame for the

housing shortages in Nigeria. Thus, despite attempts to provide housing through both the formal

and informal sectors, Nigeria still has a significant housing deficit, with a shortage of over 16

million homes.

While private initiatives increased the number of houses that could be built, they were limited by

regional customs that made it harder for some Nigerians to participate in the construction of

housing, which reduced the amount of housing that could be built there. As a result, there are

typically more housing needs than supply in Nigeria, where there is a shortage of about 16 million

housing units.

Challenges facing incremental housing development process in most developing countries are

enormous. These problems transcend inadequate finance arrangements available for incremental

housing, lack of policy support, poor level of housing infrastructure development, poor land

accessibility most especially for the low and middle income households among others. Aside the

problem of finance, incremental housing development has suffered neglect on the path of

stakeholders (including policy makers) in the housing sector. Housing policy and programmes in

21
many developing countries therefore do not recognize the abilities and motivation of the low and

middle income classes of the society. The net result is the very slow pace of the incremental

housing process and the resultant inadequate housing for low/moderate income class of the society

in developing countries. As families grow and as resources permit, low and middle income

households build their homes step-by-step. Resources dedicated to incremental housing have to

compete with other needs of the household. Not surprisingly, the incremental home building

process can take low and middle income families decades - a median of 16 years was estimated in

a study conducted in Mexico. Stakeholders in the housing sector have often neglected institutional

arrangements concerning incremental housing development that can vastly increase the speed and

performance of the progressive building process. Such institutional arrangements play an

important role in incremental housing practice. This neglect has resulted in a myriad of challenges

facing incremental housing development in the developing countries of the world.

2.9 CONCLUSION

The study revealed that developers perceived lack of accessibility to finance as the most important

difficulty against the incremental housing development process. Cost of building materials, land

accessibility for house construction and approval of building plans were also highly rated as

challenges. It is however noteworthy that the motivation of the low and middle income households

to have a roof of their own over their head has led to the development of various structures which

households improve as resources permits. Dispersion of respondents’ responses for all the

difficulties was considerably low. Thus, it can be concluded that nonavailability of proper finance

arrangements and policy support for the low and middle income housing needs are the major

challenges confronting incremental housing development in the study area.

22
It is beyond doubt that most incremental housing developers would benefit enormously from

technical and legal assistance provided by governmental bodies, NGOs or the private sector. The

workability of microfinance for incremental housing developments can be investigated and its

prospects harnessed as it has been proven to adapt to the evolving housing needs of the low and

middle income groups in developing countries of Asia and the Caribbean. Incremental housing,

including its mutual forms, should be better monitored and, in due course, better ‘assisted’ by

governments and housing institutions, thus securing that it will become a basic part of formal

housing policies. Government should develop an effective and efficient support system by

involving in its participation through production of necessary housing facilities along with the

environmental and infrastructural facilities.

23
3.0 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The chapter presents the methodology and process for conducting this research. The start of this

study gives the background and rationale for conducting the research. The research goal, the aim

and objectives have been clearly stipulated in the previous text In the process of understanding the

incremental housing processes the study begins with drawing in-depth knowledge in literature.

This has been done through an extensive literature review and study of concepts that have emerged

over the years. This will form the basis for shaping the data that will be retrieved through the

qualitative research methodology. The research generally seeks to understand the phenomenon of

incremental housing and this is a detailed descriptive analysis of the incremental housing patterns.

It however, will also include basic quantitative data such as household income, household’s sizes,

and other data relevant to the research. From the literature review and study, it is clear that a lot

has been written about self-help housing and incremental solutions by several authors and

researchers. As such, this research is building on the knowledge and giving in-depth knowledge of

the experiences of the low income households in the Nigerian context.

Figure 1: Figurative Summary of the Research Framework

Research questions Data collection Method Results

Q. How is incremental housing Concepts and

1. Secondary data
coconstruction typically done by collected from theoretical
low income households in framework
settlements in Nigeria? literature

2. Primary data collected from Research conclusion and

Q. What factors trigger the household surveys and semi- recommendations
incremental housing process
structured household interviews
for low income?
and observations

3. Focus group discussions with

Qualitative and
some beneficiaries of NGO
Q. What external factors have led supported incremental housing quantitative data
income households to opt for
project
informal incremental housing?

24
3.1 Data Collection Methods and Research Sample

Having drawn knowledge from literature, the second of this research entails going out into the

field to carry out data collection. The case study data collection is undertaken in Nigeria as the aim

of the research is to understand incremental self help housing in the Nigerian context. The data

were gotten from correspondents in Osun and Ondo state. This study used several key data

collection methods including: Observation, semi-structured interviews with head of households.

The respondents for the semi structured interviews were purposively selected to include only the

ones that owned the plots and not renters/loggers as owner were more expected to consolidate than

renter or loggers. Since the objective of the research is to understand the incremental self-help

housing processes from the experiences of the households and also find out the possible

interventions that would support the processes as such a comparative study between the

consolidators and none consolidators was essential. The interviews were semi-structured as this is

more relevant in explanatory qualitative research if both facts and perceptions are to be captured.

3.2 Research Validity and Reliability

This research started with establishing a clear research design. From this research design variables

and indicators that are clear and unambiguous were developed. This was to make the research

more reliable. Further, data was collected from different sources i.e. semi-structured interviews

with households, the household interviews were the key informants in providing data regarding

the process of incremental housing. With the use of semi structured interviews, the research

questions were asked in order to obtain facts as well as the perceptions of the low income people

in Nigeria in their quest to access adequate housing.

25
3.3 Research Scope and Limitations

This research acknowledges the inability to be comprehensive as a lot has been researched on the

subject of self-help housing. Also the research acknowledges that housing is a multidimensional

process that involves several actors making it impossible to capture all of them in this research.

Also the research acknowledges that housing is a multidimensional process that involves several

actors making it impossible to capture all of them in this research. Also, the phenomenon of

building incrementally is not only practiced by low income groups in Zambia, it is a common

phenomenon across income groups. Because of this, the focus for this research was on the self-

help incremental housing processes in the informal settlements. This is because the main aim of

this research is to understand these informal housing processes and how best they can be supported

in order to meet the housing needs of the low income groups more efficiently and adequately.

A major limitation is most correspondents’ find the questions somewhat sensitive and feel like

they are being vulnerable or revealing information they’d rather not have go on record.

3.4 Operationalization of the Research

From literature review in chapter 2 key variables were identified that form the basis for this

research. The table below is the operationalisation of the research indicating these variables and

indicators to guide the research in answering each sub-research question. The indicators form the

basis for the questions in the household semi structured interviews

26
Research question Variables Indicators Method of data Source

collection

How is incremental Time -Period of consolidation -Household survey -Primary data from
housing construction –phases of consolidation Observations households
typically done by low -Costs for land acquisition Household
income households in Resources
-Construction costs
Nigeria -Sources of finance
-Type of labour
Quality of houses
-Type of building materials -Semi-structured
-Construction costs interviews
-Sources of finance
-Type of labour
-Improvement of building materials
What triggers the incremental Need to improve -Improvement of services - Household semi- -Primary data from
house quality structured interviews households
improvements of the houses
for low income households? Household incomes -Changes in household income
–Sources of incomes

spatial needs for -Changes in household size

households -Number of new households
formation
-Backyard houses and home
enterprises

Government attitudes - Legality and tenure

- Provision of services and amenities
What external factors have
led income households to -Semi-structured -Primary data from
opt for informal Land tenure and - Household land ownership household interviews households
security - Type of tenure
incremental housing?
- Land acquisition procedures
- Prices for land acquisition
Community - Community efforts in mobilising
participation services
- NGO Supported efforts

What possible Financial -Forms of support

interventions would -Ways of administering -In-depth household -Primary data from
support informal interview households
incremental housing
Community -Form of community support
processes as a strategy for
low income groups?

Technical -Type of technical support

- Period of support

27
4.0 RESEARCH FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS

4.1 Introduction

This chapter discusses the data analysis and findings. It is a detailed descriptive analysis of the

single embedded case study of the incremental housing processes in Nigeria, particular,

settlements in the southwest region. Findings on the socio-economic characteristics of incremental

housing developers revealed that all of the interviewed correspondents were male. The minimum

age of the incremental housing developer was around 50 years and the maximum was around 66.

It was also recorded that 60% of the correspondents were civil servants and 30% consisted of other

professions. The descriptive statistics on income of incremental housing developers could not be

acquired from all correspondents as they found the enquiry sensitive and weren’t enthusiast to

reply.

4.2 Low Income Housing Conditions in Nigeria

At the time of independence in 1960, the county experienced rapid rural-urban migration and most

of the migrants lacked housing in the formal sector. The majority of these immigrants settled on

unoccupied land on the periphery of the city and these have grown to form the main informal

settlements. As the main goal of this research is learn from these informal incremental processes,

the research was done in settlements in the southwest region as the settlements have greater levels

of incremental consolidation. It is evident that there are a high number of people who have

continued to access housing through informal self-help and this is the niche for this research.

4.3 Government Responses to Addressing Low Income Housing

28
The Nigerian Government recognises the need for providing shelter for all income groups through

the National housing policy. Especially at the state levels, efforts have been made to embark on

mass housing projects catering to different income levels of citizens through corporations like

LSDPC (Lagos state development and planning corporation) , Lagos state where “Lagoshoms”

projects have been constructed at various locations. These projects under the theme of affordable

housing have unfortunately not catered to especially the low and middle income groups in the

country.

4.4 Household Characteristics of the Respondents

As explained in Chapter 3 of the research methodology, the field work research involved surveys

and observation, and most importantly, semi-structured interviews with heads of households.

Firstly, a basic survey was done with six (6) randomly selected households where basic

information such as; type of households, household sizes, period of occupation, and whether they

had improved the dwelling before was captured. These were generally informative surveys from

which six households were purposely selected for semi structured interviews. The six sampled

household’s had various household characteristics; however the research only included households

that owned the houses and not renters.

Looking at the household characteristics the findings revealed that the majority of the households

lived as Nuclear family households with others living as extended family households staying in

the same house. Out of the six sampled, two were extended family households, with the other four

being nuclear family households. The largest household had 8 members while the mean household

size was 5.6 members per household.

29
4.5 Typical Incremental Housing Development Patterns

Having looked at the general characteristics of the settlement and respondents included in the

research, this section looks at the description of the self-help and incremental process from the

perspective of the respondents. The analysis follows a sequential description of the different

aspects and trends in the incremental process. The descriptive sequence follows the informal order

of development as articulated by Baross (1987), Mcleod and Mullard (2006), that in informal

housing development, the sequence is; occupy-build-service-plan.

4.6.1 Trend 1: Informal Land Acquisition

The beginning of the life time incremental housing process starts with acquiring a piece of land.

From the findings, it was clear that while it is essential for governments to provide affordable

serviced land for housing development yet there exist informal land markets that are mostly

affordable to the low income households. From the responses of all the respondents, the

households acquired plots of land through local informal processes such as buying from the local

politicians who subdivided the plots while others bought from individual households who were

the initial owners of the plots in the informal settlement. Some of the households built temporal

houses immediately after land acquisition while others took more time before the commencement

of construction. All six respondents claimed having bought the piece of land/plot in one way or

the other, even though this was not the real value for land as the whole process happens in the

informal unregistered way. Others further claimed that during this process of the buying land there

were given a title.

30
4.6.2 Thread 2: Typical System of Incremental Construction

From the findings and the observations in the various households. All the households started

building a permanent structure from the beginning of the process. The households agreed to have

started building the whole house structure from foundation, they proceeded to erect the walls then

the roofs and all needed fittings. All these stages were done at irregular intervals due to financial

irregularities.

Another notable feature was that some of the households embarked on two different construction

on the acquired land with the intention of having another building for the purpose of renting out

for profit earnings. This further extended construction period as some of the household’s project

are still ongoing as at time of interview.

4.6.3 Thread 3: Shift in Building Materials towards permanent- Conventional Materials

Typically, building materials constitute the largest inputs into housing construction after the land

acquisition related costs. From the interviews, it was confirmed that building materials was the

single most factor that constrained most households in improving their dwelling conditions. At

initial stages, households built with materials that were to be finished with much better materials

with time and increased level of security and finances.

Building with conventional building materials was seen as the goal for most households. These

are usually deemed to be expensive to acquire at once and as such households could only manage

to buy them in stages following the phases of the house development. Availability of finance to

purchase these building materials was the most determining factor in the phased-development of

the dwellings for most of the respondents. One of the respondents indicated having gotten a project

31
to the roofing stage and it unfortunately collapsed. This was due to use of materials of lesser

quality. Normally, the cost of building materials doubles in relation to the household consumable

goods. This means therefore that the years that households have to work in order for them to afford

the building materials also increases resulting in the years of not building for some households.

This was the single most response given by the respondents delaying their home improvements.

In as much as the development in informal settlements is not regulated by the local governments

building codes and regulations, it was clear from the responses that households deemed

conventional building materials to be more superior than the local traditional building materials

such as mud. The households with better incomes opted to even plaster the outer walls of their

dwellings and also with iron or asbestos roofing sheets. With the phased way of construction, the

local building suppliers were the main sources of building materials according to the responses of

all the households surveyed. The households were also the major contributors of the locally

available building materials such as sand and stone.

4.6.4 Trend 4: Use of Small Scale Local Builders for Construction Skills

By now a lot of research has been done in terms of self-help housing. Most commonly, when used

in relation to housing, self-help is often considered synonymous with self-build, i.e. low-income

households building their own houses by themselves. In this case the households are both the total

producers and the consumers of housing. However, this assumption that self-help housing equals

self-build, has been increasingly challenged by several research. By now, the debates around the

subject agree that the main principle that defines self-help is the fact that the households are the

‘main actor’ involved in construction of the dwelling and not necessary self-builders. The majority

of households in self-help engage hired skilled labour during the construction process of their

dwellings. The findings of this research are not showing any different trends as all respondents

32
included in the sample confirmed this principle. From the research findings, all the six households

interviewed hired labour from local builders for most parts of the house construction process.

During the construction however, the local builders worked jointly with some members of the

household or employed their own team of workers commonly referred to as ‘helpers’ locally. This

showed a dependency of the local informal contactors for the labour force in the consolidation

processes. Interestingly, One of the respondents happened to be a Civil engineer by professional

and was therefore involved in the process of the construction on a technical level. The other

interesting aspect of the incremental construction is that the 47 Understanding the Self-Help

Incremental Housing Processes in Informal Settlements as a Strategy for Providing LowIncome

Housing - a Case of Ipusukilo, Kitwe-Zambia ‘construction finance’ is also spread over a longer

period as the local builders are equally paid in piece-meal (in relation to the increments done to

the dwelling). This seemed to be because of affordability issues as most of the low income

households did not have enough funds for one off payment as is the case in formal developers

housing or mortgages.

4.6.4 Trend 4: Progressive Financing Mechanism

Affordability is the critical factor in accessing housing i.e. affordability is not just the price of the

house but the cost of housing finance as well. Housing finance being one of the most important

inputs in housing production is equally cardinal in the incremental developments of informal

settlements. From the responses of the sampled households, financing of the dwellings is one of

the major challenges they faced. Household savings was the main source of financing for all the

respondents. Mostly this finance was needed at several stages; for acquiring of plot for the

improvement of the dwelling, for paying hired labour and also for accessing services such as water

33
and electricity. The most important aspect indicated by these respondents that needed housing

finance during the actual dwelling improvement was for building materials and also for payment

of labour. Although these processes happens in the informal sector there is no much difference

with the financing needs when compared to formal developer housing. The difference is that in the

informal sector, the financing mechanisms follow the people’s logical needs. From the findings,

some of the respondents used solely the household incomes for the consolidation process except

some who indicated getting a loan while others life savings.

4.7 Triggers/Motivations for Incremental Development

1. Availability of Finances

In all this processes, the availability of income seemed to be the ‘pull factor’ and main trigger for

improving. Generally, it was evident that household with better incomes or financing mechanisms

were able to improve their dwellings unlike the others.

2. Need to Improve Quality of ones Dwelling

From the findings of this research, the need to improve the quality of the dwelling was the most

prominent ‘pull factor’ and response given by respondents. They revealed that the need to improve

the quality of their houses was the primary motivation for the process. It suffices to mention that

some of these households had sometimes changed location of their dwellings more than once. It

was clearly seen that although there are different factors at play in incremental housing, households

tend to make changes to their dwellings in their life time as they desire to reach their preferred

quality in housing.

3. Need for Additional Space

34
Thirdly, the other well elaborated trigger for improvement from the respondent is the change in

household sizes. These households generally, started with fewer members at the time of moving

into the settlement and with the course of time the members increased and the household felt the

need for additional space. It must be noted that even if this is usually a ‘push factor’ the amount

of space that is added does not grow in relation to the growth in the family size.

35
5.0 RESEARCH CONCLUSION

5.1 The Need to Support Self-Help Incremental Housing Processes

In the introduction to this study, the housing need at global level has been highlighted. At

international level, growing concern has been the need to provide ‘enabling approaches’ that

promotes the provision of shelter for all income groups. Nonetheless, meeting the housing needs

for low income groups has been highlighted as still challenging. Shelter remains a basic need

after food and clothing. It also remains the single most important and biggest investment

households make in their life time. Also, because of the many benefits that the housing sector

accrues at household, local and national level, it is equally regarded as a ‘merit good’.

Informal housing sector has increasingly become significant in providing housing for the

majority low income through self-help and incremental efforts. In-as-much as the benefits of

developing ‘enabling approaches’ that promote private sector as the main actors in the delivery

of housing are not over looked, the reality revealed through this research is that there is a

prominent informal housing sector which has been the ‘solution’ for majority low income

households.

5.2 Conclusion

Having analysed the key findings, it is imperative to conclude that self-help housing requires

support through multi-actors.

Programmes that promote gradual development, ‘phased house development’-would much of it

take the advantages of the potential displayed by the low household households and mutual

community efforts in the self-help approaches. Looking at the scale of the housing problem

36
revealed through this research, it is expected that such creative solutions would not only help with

the current housing stock but in meeting future needs for low income groups.

In conclusion, this study provides valuable insights into the experience of incremental self-help

housing from the perspective of those who have participated in such projects. Through the use of

interviews, we were able to gather rich and detailed information about the benefits, challenges,

and strategies for success in these projects. To maximize the benefits of incremental self-help

housing, it is important to provide adequate support and resources to participants throughout the

process. This includes access to training and technical assistance as well as financial and logistical

support.

Overall, this study highlights the potential of incremental self-help housing as a means of

addressing housing challenges and promoting community development. By understanding the

experiences of those who have participated in these projects, we can identify strategies for success

and work to ensure that these approaches are accessible and effective for communities in the

country.

37
REFERENCES

 Smets P. Housing finance trapped in a dilemma of perceptions: Affordability criteria for

the urban poor in India Questioned. Housing Stud. 1999;14(6).

 Agbola T. Housing, poverty and environment – The Nigerian situation. A seminar paper

presented at a workshop on Effective approach to Housing delivery In Nigeria. Organised

by The Nigerian Institute of Building. Ibadan, Nigeria; 2000.

 Olotuah OA. Demystifying the Nigerian urban housing question. Inaugural Lecture Series

53, Federal University of Technology, Akure, Nigeria; 2009.

 CHF. Strategic Assessment of the Affordable Housing Sector in Ghana. CHF International,

Silver Spring, MD; 2004.

 Aravena A. Elemental: A do tank. In Latin America at the crossroads: Architectural Design,

edited by Mariana Leguía. London, United Kingdom: John Wiley & Sons. 2011; 32–37.

 Walker A. The social context of built form: The case of informal housing production in

MexicoCity. Working paper No 114, development and planning unit, University College,

London; 2001.

 Abrams, C., (1964), Mans Struggle for shelter in an urbanising world, MIT press,

Cambridge Massachusetts, USA

 Burgess, R. (1982), Self-help housing advocacy: a curious form of radicalism. A critique

of the work of John F.C. Turner, in Ward, P. (Ed.), Self-help housing, A critique (pp. 55-

97) London: Mansell

 Turner, F.C., (1972), ‘Housing as a Verb’, Turner F.C & Ficher, R., in Freedom to Build;

Dweller Control of the Housing Process. The Macmillan Company, New York (USA) and

Collier-Macmillan Limited London (UK)

38
 Turner F.C., (1976), Housing by People; Toward Autonomy in Building Environments,

Marion Boyards publishers ltd, London (UK)

 Gilbert, A.G., & Gugler, J. (1992), Cities, poverty and development: Urbanization in the

Third World (2nd edn.) Oxford: Oxford University Press

 Harms, H, (1992), Self -Help Housing in Developed and Third world countries, in Beyond

Self-help housing, Mathéy, K. (ed.), London, Mansell

 IHC (International Housing Coalition), (2008), Multilateral and Bilateral Funding for

Housing and Slum Upgrading Development in Developing Countries, Washington, D.C.:

IHC

 Napier, M., (2005), Core housing and subsidies in South Africa: addressing the unintended

outcomes.In: Core housing and subsidies in South Africa: addressing the unintended

outcomes

 Rakodi, C. (1989), Self-Help Housing: The Debate and Examples; Upgrading in Lusaka,

Zambia and Hyderabad, India. Habitat International, Vol. 13, No.4.

 Gattoni, G. 2009, “A Case for the Incremental Housing in Sites-and-Services Programs.”

Paper presented at the IDB conference, Washington D.C

 Landman, K & Napier, M (2009), Waiting for a house or building your own? Reconsidering

state provision, aided and unaided self-help in South Africa, Habitat International 34 (2010)

299-305

 Burgess, R. (1982), Self-help housing advocacy: a curious form of radicalism. A critique

of the work of John F.C. Turner, in Ward, P. (Ed.), Self-help housing, A critique (pp. 55-

97) London: Mansell

 Mathéy, K. (ed.), (1992), Beyond Self-Help Housing, London, Mansell

39
 Ward, P. (Ed.), (1982), Self-help housing. A critique. London: Mansell

 Marcuse, P., (1992), Why Conventional Self-Help Projects Won’t Work”, in Beyond Self-

Help Housing Mathéy, K. (ed.), London, Mansell

 Bredenoord, J., & Lindert, P, (2010), Pro-poor housing policies: rethinking the potential of

assisted self-help housing, Habitat International, 34, 278-287

 Soliman, A. M. (2011), The Egyptian Episode of Self-Build Housing, Habitat International,

36, (2012), 226-236

40
 APPENDIX

Interview Guides

Did build incrementally?

Did you employ the services of an Architect or any other industry professionals?

Were you involved in the labour process during the construction?

What triggered the decision to build incrementally?

What is the average household income in relation to incremental process?

What was your original family size when you came…..

What is the current family size……

Description of House Incremental Patterns

How did you acquire this piece/plot of land

How long did the incremental process take? , (Year started)

How did you finance the incremental process?

What type of building materials did you use and did you get them?

What was your sequence or priority in access to services?

a. Water b. Sanitation c. Electricity d. Others

Why did you prioritize these services? ..............................................

41
Quality of the services provided? E.g.is water supplied constantly or just certain days of the week?

a. Water b. Electricity c. Solid waste d. Any other

What are some of the constraints/problems you encountered during construction/improvement

process? (Describe here).

a. Funds b. Labour c. Technical d. Others specify……

Do you have titles of ownership to the land?

If yes what type of titles and how did you get them? Describe…………………

What social amenities/services are within this settlement?

Any suggestions for support in incremental house construction/improvement (describe here)

Who do you think would best offer this support?

a. Local Authority/council

b. Community based organisation

c. Non Governmental organisations

d. Others (specify)…………... …………………

42
43