Effect of Public-Private Partnership Policy on Affordability of Housing in Federal Capital Territory

Cite this article as: Akpanenang, N.P. & James, A.O. (2023). Effect of Public-Private Partnership Policy on Affordability of Housing in Federal Capital Territory. Zamfara International Journal of Humanities, (2)3, 8-18. www.doi.org/10.36349/zamijoh.2023.v02i03.002.

Effect of Public-Private Partnership Policy on Affordability of Housing in Federal Capital Territory

By:

AKPANENANG Ndudi Precious
Department of Public Administration,
Nasarawa State University, Keffi
Oz_b2001@yahoo.com
08034537208

And

Prof. JAMES A. Ojobo,
Department of Public Administration,
Nasarawa State University, Keffi
Email: johbrass@yahoo.com
Tel: 08068319132

Abstract

The study investigated the effect of public-private partnership policy on the delivery of affordable housing in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja-Nigeria. Also, other objectives include examining the impact of management contracts on the delivery of affordable housing in Nigeria and identifying the effect of joint ventures on the delivery of affordable housing in Nigeria. The study adopted a survey research design, and a structured questionnaire was used as an instrument for data collection. Data were analysed using descriptive statistics of percentages as well as chi-square analysis. The results showed that there is a significant effect of management on the delivery of affordable housing in FCT, and there is a positive effect of joint ventures on the delivery of affordable housing in FCT. The study concludes that for public-private partnership policy to prosper and achieve these objectives, any partnership must establish metrics for success, be able to quantify and track their accomplishments and be able to identify and address emerging problems. It was recommended that given the positive impact of management contracts and joint ventures on the delivery of affordable housing in FCT, housing developers and policymakers should encourage their use in future projects, as this could be done through incentives such as tax breaks or streamlined approval processes.

Keywords: Affordable Housing, Delivery, Joint Venture, Management Contract, Public–Private Partnership

Introduction

Practically, it has been demonstrated that the use of public-private partnership models may result in the effective supply of socioeconomic services to the inhabitants of a nation. This would greatly help in attaining macro-level objectives in any country, such as an increase in economic growth, faster development, poverty reduction, and so on. Developed nations are generally using this technique to improve their socioeconomic infrastructure, but developing countries are also paying close attention (Kadiri, 2018).

Housing, as a basic human necessity, is one of the services that governments throughout the world have struggled to provide. On this note, Nigeria's housing shortage highlights the need to involve private finance efforts in addressing the country's housing difficulties. Housing, according to the United Nations and the World Bank (2019), is a fundamental need that assists individuals in achieving self-actualization according to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. Housing is prominently included among essential requirements such as food and clothes, and as such, its significance cannot be overstated. Housing evolution as a strategic invention and tool also marks humankind's evolution in management, social stratification, and the creation of value, as evidenced by the progression of leaving rudimentary dwellings before learning to build an improved shelter for protection from the vagaries of socio-environmental conditions, including the desire for solitude.

According to Izuwah (2019) and Woetzel et al. (2018), these shelters evolved from basic wood and brick structures into standalone houses and eventually into the modern-day architectural wonders of today. The Centre for Affordable Housing Finance (2019) and Oosterveer (2019) have noted that the shortage of housing is a global problem that only differs in population and jurisdiction. As far as housing and infrastructure provision goes, Nigeria has two main levels of intervention: the private sector, which is driven by economic indices, and the public sector, which is driven by government interventions targeted at providing mass housing for low- and middle-income families that are typically unable to afford housing based on their income.

Given the backdrop of Nigeria’s challenging macroeconomic environment, UNCTAD (2019) has noted that Nigeria’s administrative experience in recent times has consisted of overdependence on government earnings from oil and foreign borrowings as the major source of finance (evident in the growing fiscal deficit, interest rate volatility, and social instability that ensue occasionally, with implications for poor infrastructural development and slow economic growth and development).

 Dominic et al. (2016), public-private partnership as a practice is making its impact on the Nigerian landscape. The growth of public-private partnerships is linked to the insufficient funds available to the government for financing numerous development projects (including housing) as well as the government's poor risk management capacity. The noted challenges to government financing and its impact on the nation’s development have increased the prospects of public-private partnership policy as an alternative to the delivery of infrastructure and housing.

Statement of the Study

 The push for public-private partnerships implies a willingness of private resources to be spent in addressing fundamental socioeconomic concerns such as housing. As a result, the Federal Capital Territory has been unable to deliver and implement Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs). This study therefore examined the effect of public-private partnership policy on the affordability of housing in the Federal Capital Territory, Nigeria.

Objectives of the Study

a.        Ascertain the effect of management contracts on the delivery of affordable housing in the Federal Capital Territory

b.       Identify the effect of joint ventures on the delivery of affordable housing in the Federal Capital Territory

Research Questions

a.      What are the effects of management contacts on the delivery of affordable housing in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja-Nigeria?

b.      How do we identify the effect of joint ventures on the delivery of affordable housing in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja-Nigeria?

Literature Review and Conceptual Clarifications

Concept of Public-Private Partnership

Dominic (2016) defines a public-private partnership as “a long-term contract, to which a private sector party often agrees with a public entity to design and build, expand, or upgrade the public sector facilities; take up significant monetary, technical, and operational risks; receive a monetary benefit during the life of the contract from users or the public sector, or a combination of the two; and usually return the facility to public ownership at contract closure”.

Kadiri (2018) viewed PPP as long-term contracts for the support and organisation of all stakeholder interests and project processes throughout the lifespan of a developmental project. This implies that effective collaborations cannot take place in short-term contracts, and PPP interventions would only flourish in environments with synchronised operations and well-governed organisational structures.

Consequently, effective PPP policy enables accessibility to key resources that may be practically unavailable or inadequate for certain partners to deliver a public service mandate (Alinaitwe and Ayesiga, 2013). However, critics of PPP argue that, though governments recognise the need for mutual commitment and cooperation in their PPP policy documents, in practice, PPPs are always transformed into ‘contracting out schemes’ since private partners are rarely allowed to innovate beyond the explicit contract provisions (Alinaitwe and Ayesiga 2013).

The main goal of the supportive approach via government is to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the housing sector by allowing the public sector to focus on providing legal, regulatory, and funding frameworks and support to ensure that private sector organisations participate effectively in actual construction and management. This approach aims to address the housing needs of the formal and informal sectors, as research shows that previous PPP endeavours were concentrated in the formal sector, while key needs remain in the informal sector.

Management Contract

Akintoye and Kumaraswamy (2016) defined a management contract as a contract governing a public-private partnership (PPP) agreement. The management contract extends the services to be outsourced to include part or all of the management and operation of public services (i.e., utilities, hospitals, port authorities, etc.). Mostly, private sector participation is obtained through this method to get the services. Under this method, the government institutions undertake their responsibility in providing the relevant service by continuously investing in it, and the private sector gets involved by way of short-term or long-term contractual agreements only for the implementation of providing and maintaining such services. (Infrastructure Concession Regulatory Commission, 2012)

Although the ultimate obligation to provide services is still in the public sector, daily management control and authority are still assigned to private partners or contractors. In most cases, the private partner provides working capital but not investment capital. Management contracts are often for specific tasks and inputs rather than output-oriented (World Bank, 2018).

A predetermined rate of payment is made to the private sector for labour and other anticipated operating costs. To incentivize performance improvement, additional costs were paid to contractors to achieve pre-specified goals. Alternatively, a portion of the profit can be paid to the management contractor. The public sector must retain major capital investments, especially those related to the expansion or substantial improvement of the system, Contracts can specify discrete activities funded by the private sector, and they usually interact with customers. The public sector is, however, responsible for determining tariffs. Management contracts usually upgrade the company's financial systems, while management decisions about schedules may be made on purely commercial terms, as per the World Bank (2018).

Joint Ventures

Akintoye and Kumaraswamy (2016) defined a joint venture as a partnership in which public and private sector partners pool their resources, finances, and expertise under joint management to incentivize long-term growth and mutual benefits. The level of ownership of the shares will vary depending on whether the public sector is trying to get the project off the balance sheet or whether the public sector wants to retain management control of the utility company.

However, even if the government transfers most of the shares in the entity to the private sector, there are ways to allow the government to control and even have veto power over certain management issues. For strategic reasons, the public sector will usually (at least initially) maintain control of the entity, especially if the joint venture company owns assets. However, the private sector will want to ensure that it can manage entities and will therefore need to have veto power or weighted voting power on sensitive matters (World Bank, 2019).

In a joint venture, the public sector takes on the position of the regulator as well as being a shareholder in the PPP operating company (Akintoye and Kumaraswamy, 2016). From this position, it may share the profits of the operating company and help ensure broad political acceptance from stakeholders in the project. Private sector partners are usually mainly responsible for performing daily management operations.

The government must assume the responsibility to ensure that appropriate and affordable infrastructure services are provided to all citizens. Whether they assume the responsibilities of providers, partners, or regulators depends on government needs, constraints, and capabilities. Owolabi et al. (2019) and Akintoye & Kumaraswamy (2016)

Why PPP Could Be an Effective Tool for Affordable Housing

Housing affordability refers to the ease with which individuals or families can access and maintain suitable housing without incurring excessive financial burden. The relationship between housing costs (such as rent or mortgage payments) and household income typically determines it.

For the public sector seeking to increase the supply of affordable housing, partnerships with private sector organisations have the potential to increase the resources, funding, and expertise available to the project and enable the project to reach more target families. Although research on this topic is limited, there are many reasons to believe that partnerships provide a way forward for the provision and management of affordable housing (Bielenberg et al., 2016; Chan, 2018). Partnerships may not always be the solution of choice, but alternatives worth considering can help address affordable housing needs. The following explains the basic principles of using PPP as a project delivery mechanism.

Increase in Efficiency Gains

Efficiency improvement is the main source of sustainable public savings and therefore the main goal and reason for PPP (Clegg, 2018). PPP can improve the efficiency of affordable housing by bundling maintenance and operation with the construction of housing projects.

Since private partners are responsible for the construction, operation, and maintenance of the project, the incentives for sustainable construction, efficient maintenance, and operation are consistent.

PPP can also provide a strong incentive to complete the project as soon as possible because if users can be charged early, profits will increase. Under traditional public supply conditions, there are usually no (or weaker) incentives, according to the International Monetary Fund (2019). Most governments make PPP decisions based on higher efficiency.

In addition, competition among bidders (including feedback) and negotiation in the procurement process, innovation and management skills in the private sector, and reduction of administrative costs are discussed by Kadiri (2018) and Kavishe and Chileshe (2020). By integrating operations into partnerships, design, material, and construction costs and operational considerations can be further optimised, which can often greatly reduce procurement and life cycle costs.

PPP as a means of Protecting the Public Interest

Under public-private partnership structures, the public sector retains asset ownership and can implement the provision of affordable housing by utilising contracts to control prices as well as other variables. According to Olugbenga et al. (2019), this provides a single point of contact for public partners to solve the problem of affordable housing delivery and strengthen control of the delivery process, as well as reduce risk and complexity. Sheppard & Beck (2016)

Public partners do not have to make multiple decisions and coordinate multiple aspects of management (labour, technology, budget, etc.) to solve problems; public partners only need to inform the private partner of the problem and then monitor the behaviour of the private partner to ensure compliance or resolution (Oosterveer, 2019).

Vallee (2018), to conduct due diligence, a detailed PPP contract will contain provisions for regular monitoring of the compliance of private partners. By providing a feedback loop between goals and performance that is not shrouded in conflicts of interest, the monitoring and evaluation mechanism helps to improve control.

This mechanism is not necessarily established in the public housing system, under the erroneous assumption that public authorities have the expertise to monitor themselves. As a final choice and proof of final control, if the private sector partner fails to fulfil its contractual obligations and breaches the contract, the contract can be terminated, and the old service provider will be replaced by a new service provider, Oshodi (2018) and Sheppard & Beck (2016).

Empirical Review of the Previous Studies

In Owotemu, Daniel, and Abubakar's (2022) study, the researchers evaluated the management of public-private partnerships (PPP) for affordable housing in Nigeria. They investigated the impact of these partnerships on affordable housing and examined the effects of management contracts and joint ventures on housing provision. The study used a survey research approach with structured questionnaires for data collection and employed various data analysis methods, including descriptive statistics, correlation, and regression analysis. The findings indicated that the build-own-operate-transfer policy had a significant positive impact on affordable housing, while lease contracts also had a positive effect. The study concluded that successful PPPs for affordable housing require clear success metrics, performance monitoring, and addressing emerging issues. Recommendations included the government's role in providing infrastructure, creating an enabling environment, and establishing a viability gap funding framework to attract private sector participation for effective affordable housing PPPs in Nigeria.

Ahmed, Sipan, and Hashim (2020) conducted a study to evaluate the measurement model of the PPP problem and success factors for public-private partnerships in affordable housing provision in Abuja. They used interviews and questionnaires to gather information from experts and respondents. Their analysis revealed that project economic viability, an adequate legal framework, an effective procurement process, a strong private sector, a sound financial package, and government control are critical success factors for housing projects in Abuja. They recommend government policies and subsidies to support PPPs for affordable housing.

Udoka (2022) assessed the effectiveness of public-private partnerships in housing delivery in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria. The study aimed to determine the extent of PPP adoption and its effectiveness in addressing the housing delivery deficit. The research found that PPP schemes were not very effective in delivering housing units to urban residents in Akwa Ibom State, and the extent of PPP development was low. The study concluded that the effectiveness of PPP schemes in tackling housing delivery in the state was minimal.

Oshodi (2018) evaluated the effectiveness of the PPP model on housing delivery using three selected housing agencies in Lagos State. The study included a survey of agency staff and found that there is a difference in staff perceptions of the government's intention to adopt the PPP model. The results also indicated a significant impact of effective PPP model usage on housing delivery. The study recommended the promotion of other PPP models and innovative processes for private sector involvement in housing projects in Lagos State. It also suggested improving housing project delivery processes using less commonly used PPP models.

The literature reviewed highlights a notable research gap concerning the impact of public-private partnership (PPP) policies on housing affordability in Nigeria's Federal Capital Territory (FCT). While previous studies have explored the effectiveness of PPPs in housing delivery across different Nigerian states, there is a lack of research that specifically investigates how PPP policies influence housing affordability in the FCT

Theoretical Framework: New Public Service Theory

The new public service theory postulated by Denhardt Janet Vinzant (1980) is considered most suitable for the study because the theory has relevance to public service provision in terms of complying with public interests through collaborative relationships, shared responsibilities, a common understanding of public issues, and the active involvement of citizens in government activities (Robinson, 2015). New public service practices ensure that PPPs meet the collective public interests since public servants are given the mandate to develop innovative ways of consolidating civilian participation in providing solutions to community challenges.

The bureaucrats are expected to pursue the implementation of the PPP policy through brokering, negotiation, and resolving complex service delivery problems in partnership with the citizens. Furthermore, the accountability of public servants extends beyond elected officials to incorporate other public sector stakeholders (Robinson, 2015). There is transparency in the New Public Service (NPS) Theory, as the key role of government is to provide an environment in which PPPs can address society’s service delivery needs through dialogue, open, flexible, accountable, accessible, and transparent means and structures.

The basic assumptions of New Public Service Theory include:

i.        The assumption that governance is not solely the responsibility of government but involves a network of actors, including public, private, and nonprofit organisations, working together to achieve common goals

ii.      The goal of public governance is to create public value, which may include economic, social, and environmental outcomes.

iii.   There is an emphasis on involving citizens in decision-making processes and public service delivery, as well as the recognition that citizens are co-producers of public value.

Applying the principles of the New Public Service Theory to the study, enhanced a comprehensive understanding of how the public-private partnership policy affects the affordability of housing in the Federal Capital Territory, with a focus on collaboration, citizen-centred outcomes, ethical considerations, and capacity-building. This approach helped identify areas for improvement and develop recommendations for more effective and inclusive housing policies.

Methodology

In this study, the researchers employ a cross-sectional design. Izuwah (2019) the cross-sectional design is suitable since there are no real experiments carried out with human beings, who are the study subjects in this case. The suitability of the design is also seen in the fact that it involved taking a sample of elements from a population of interest that was measured at a single point in time. The survey instruments, such as the questionnaire and interview, were designed in such a way that meaningful results could be achieved.

The population of this study consists of management staff of the Federal Capital Territory Administration; Statelite Towns Development Agency; and the Abuja Metropolitan Management Council (AMMC) as well as the occupants of five selected low- and medium-income housing estates in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja. The sample frame for the housing units consists of 1443 completed and occupied housing units in five public housing estates developed between 2010 and 2020, which were constructed through the PPP arrangement. The research instrument used for this study is a structured questionnaire. In the design of the questionnaire, a five-point Likert scale format was used. The questionnaire was distributed to the respondents from the selected sample.

Data Presentations and Analysis

S/N	Selected Housing Estates	No of Houses
1.	EFAB Housing Estate, Gwarinpa I	242
2.	River Park Housing Estate, Lugbe	323
3.	Mbora Housing Estate, Airport Road	268
4.	ADKAN Housing Estate, Galadimawa	338
5.	Bentell Villa Housing Estate, Gaduwa	222
6.	Staff of FCTA	50
	Total	1443

Source: Field Survey, 2023

The population consisted of 1443 housing units, selected from occupied housing units in the five estates. To determine the sample size of the study, the researcher will employ the use of Yamani (1967) sample size determination formula as given below;

Results and Discussions

What is the effect of management contracts on the provision of affordable housing in the Federal Capital Territory?

Table 1: Responses on whether management contracts have positively influenced the delivery of affordable housing in the Federal Capital Territory

Responses/ Opinion	Frequency	Percentage (%)
Strongly Agree Agree Strongly Disagree Disagree Undecided Total	68 105 46 63 31 313	21.7 33.5 14.7 20.1 10 100

Sources: Field Survey, 2023

Responses on whether management contracts have positively influenced the delivery of affordable housing in the Federal Capital Territory revealed 68(21.7%) of the respondents strongly agreed, 105(33.5%) indicated agreed while 46(14.7%) of the respondents strongly disagreed and 63(20.1%) indicates disagreed also 31(10%) of the respondents were undecided as regard whether management contracts have positively influenced the delivery of affordable housing in the Federal Capital Territory.

Table 2: Responses on advantages of using management contracts for affordable housing projects in the Federal Capital Territory

Responses/opinion	Frequency	Percentage (%)
Cost-effectiveness Efficient project management Access to specialized expertise Improved maintenance and service delivery I have no idea Total	58 118 50 67 20 313	18.5 37.7 16 21.4 6.3 100

Sources: Field Survey, 2023

Responses on the advantages of using management contracts for affordable housing projects in the Federal Capital Territory revealed 58(18.5%) of the respondents indicated cost-effectiveness, 118(37.7%) indicate Efficient project management while 50(16%) of the respondents Access to specialized expertise also 67(21.4%) indicates Improved maintenance and service delivery and 20(6.3%) of the respondents indicated they have no idea as regard advantages of using management contracts for affordable housing projects in the Federal Capital Territory.

How do joint ventures influence the delivery of affordable housing in the Federal Capital Territory?

Table 3: responses on whether in a joint venture, the public sector takes on the position of regulator as well as being a shareholder in the PPP housing affordability.

Responses/ Opinion	Frequency	Percentage (%)
Strongly Agree Agree Strongly Disagree Disagree Undecided Total	52 131 48 65 17 313	16.6 41.8 15.3 20.7 5.4 100

Sources: Field Survey, 2023

Responses on whether in a joint venture, the public sector takes on the position of regulator as well as being a shareholder in the PPP housing affordability revealed 52(16.6%) of the respondents strongly agreed, 131(41.8%) indicate agreed while 48(15.3%) of the respondents strongly disagreed and 65(20.7%) indicates disagreed also 17(5.4%) of the respondents were undecided as whether in a joint venture, the public sector takes on the position of regulator as well as being a shareholder in the PPP housing affordability.

Table 4: Responses on the main advantages of using joint ventures for affordable housing projects in the Federal Capital Territory

Responses/opinion	Frequency	Percentage (%)
Access to additional funding sources Shared risk and reward Access to specialized expertise Improved project management Undecided Total	81 113 39 53 27 313	25.8 36.1 12.5 16.9 8.6 100

Sources: Field Survey, 2023

Responses on the main advantages of using joint ventures for affordable housing projects in the Federal Capital Territory revealed 81(25.8%) of the respondents indicated Access to additional funding sources, 113(36.1%) indicated Shared risk and reward while 39(12.5%) of the respondents indicated Access to specialized expertise and 53(16.9%) indicates Improved project management also 27(8.6%) of the respondents were undecided on the main advantages of using joint ventures for affordable housing projects in the Federal Capital Territory.

Test of Hypothesis

Table 5: H0₁: There is no significant effect of management contracts on the delivery of affordable housing in the Federal Capital Territory

Responses	O	E	O – E	(O – E)2	(O – E)2/E
Strongly Agreed Agreed Strongly Disagreed Disagreed Undecided Total	68 105 46 63 31 313	62.6 62.6 62.6 62.6 62.6 313	5.4 42.4 -16.6 0.4 -31.6	29.16 1,797.76 - 275.56 0.16 -998.56	0.47 28.72 - 4.40 0.00 - 15.95 8.84

 

Decision Rule

From the computation above it is seen that the X² calculated is greater than the X² tabulated (8.84 > 5.991) the null Hypothesis (H0) is therefore rejected and the alternative Hypothesis (Hi) is accepted which states that there is a significant effect of management contracts on the delivery of affordable housing in Federal Capital Territory.

Table 6: H0₂:  There is no significant effect of Joint venture on the delivery of affordable housing in the Federal Capital Territory

Responses	O	E	O – E	(O – E)2	(O – E)2/E
Strongly Agreed Agreed Strongly Disagreed Disagreed Undecided Total	52 131 48 65 17 313	62.6 62.6 62.6 62.6 62.6 313	-10.6 68.4 -14.6 2.4 -45.6	-112.36 4678.56 -213.16 5.76 -2079.36	-1.79 74.74 -0.34 0.00 - 33.21 39.4

 

Decision Rule

From the computation above it is seen that the X² calculated is greater than the X² tabulated (39.4 > 5.991) the null Hypothesis (H0) is therefore rejected and the alternative Hypothesis (Hi) is accepted which states that there is a significant effect of Joint venture on the delivery of affordable housing in Federal Capital Territory.

Summary of the findings

The finding revealed there is a significant effect of management contracts on the delivery of affordable housing in the Federal Capital Territory; also there is a significant effect of Joint ventures on the delivery of affordable housing in the Federal Capital Territory.

Discussion of Findings

Based on the findings that a significant effect of management contracts existed on the delivery of affordable housing in the Federal Capital Territory, we can discuss the implications of this result:

The use of management contracts has been shown to have a significant positive effect on the delivery of affordable housing in the Federal Capital Territory. This could be attributed to factors such as efficient project management, access to specialised expertise, and improved maintenance and service delivery.

The finding revealed that using management contracts for affordable housing projects is cost-effective. By outsourcing certain tasks to a management company, housing developers can focus on their core competencies while still ensuring the timely and efficient delivery of affordable housing units.

Management contracts allow for better project management, as the responsibilities and tasks are clearly defined in the contract. This can help in streamlining the construction process, ensuring that the project stays on schedule and within budget.

By partnering with a management company, housing developers can gain access to specialised expertise in areas such as construction, finance, and marketing. This can help in overcoming challenges and ensuring the successful delivery of affordable housing units.

While management contracts have shown significant benefits, there are also challenges and drawbacks associated with their use. These may include potential conflicts of interest, a lack of transparency in contract selection, and limited community involvement in decision-making.

Similarly, if there is a significant effect of joint ventures on the delivery of affordable housing in the Federal Capital Territory, we can again discuss the following findings:

Positive impact on delivery: The use of joint ventures has been shown to have a significant positive effect on the delivery of affordable housing in the Federal Capital Territory. This could be attributed to factors such as access to additional funding sources, shared risk and reward, and improved project management.

One of the main advantages of using joint ventures for affordable housing projects is access to additional funding sources. This can help in overcoming financial constraints and ensuring the successful delivery of affordable housing units.

Joint ventures allow for the sharing of risks and rewards between the participating parties. This can help in incentivizing all parties to work towards the successful delivery of affordable housing units. By pooling resources and expertise, joint ventures can lead to improved project management. This can help in streamlining the construction process, ensuring that the project stays on schedule and within budget. While joint ventures have shown significant benefits, there are also challenges and drawbacks associated with their use. These may include potential conflicts of interest, difficulty managing multiple stakeholders, and limited community involvement in decision-making.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Many developed and developing countries, as well as international organisations like the World Bank and UN-Habitat, believe that public-private partnership (PPP) policies hold promise in addressing infrastructure and housing inadequacies. However, the effective design and implementation of such policies remain challenging. Research indicates the importance of evaluating these partnerships based on specific criteria to enhance the collaborative delivery of affordable housing. Organisations enter partnerships for various reasons, including improving efficiency, increasing stability, or gaining control over other entities. To ensure the success of these partnerships, they must establish measurable success metrics, track their progress, and address emerging issues. The study suggests that there is potential for successful PPP in providing affordable housing in the FCT (Federal Capital Territory), but local constraints limit its effectiveness. To reduce the affordable housing deficit in the FCT, addressing these constraints, focusing on monitoring, ensuring good governance and coordination among relevant institutions and sectors, and involving relevant stakeholders at appropriate levels are crucial.

Based on the significant effect of management contracts and joint ventures on the delivery of affordable housing in the Federal Capital Territory, the following are recommended:

i.        Housing developers and policymakers should encourage the use of management contracts and joint ventures. Given the positive effect of management contracts and joint ventures on the delivery of affordable housing, it is recommended that housing developers and policymakers encourage their use in future projects. This could be done through incentives such as tax breaks or streamlined approval processes.

ii.      They should ensure transparency and community involvement. To address the challenges and drawbacks associated with the use of management contracts and joint ventures, it is recommended that housing developers and policymakers ensure transparency in contract selection and involve the community in decision-making. This could be done through public consultations, community engagement sessions, and regular progress updates.

References

Akintoye, A, Kumaraswamy M. (2016. Public-private partnerships, research roadmap-report for consultation. The Netherlands: CIB General Secretariat.

Alinaitwe, H. & Ayesiga, R. (2013). Success factors for the implementation of public-private partnerships in the construction industry in Uganda. J Constr Develop Countries.

Berawi, M.A. (2019). Public-private partnership: generating mutual benefits for stakeholders, International Journal of Technology, 10(1), pp. 1-4.

Bielenberg, A. (2016). Financing change: How to mobilize private sector financing for sustainable infrastructure. McKinsey Center for Business and Environment.

Central Bank of Nigeria (2019). Economic and Financial Review. Vol. 2 (24) pp 21 - 28

Chan, A.P., Tetteh, M.O. & Nani, G. (2020). Drivers for international construction joint ventures adoption: a systematic literature review, International Journal of Construction Management, 2 (7) pp. 1-13

Dominic, C.M. (2016): A review of public-private partnership on some development projects in Nigeria. International Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering & Management (IJAIEM) 4, (3), pp 2319 – 4847

Federal Ministry of Finance (2019). Overview of the Nigerian Mortgage Refinance Company (NMRC).

Global Reporting Initiative (2018). Facts and figures: Global reporting initiative. Archived from the original on 12 February 2018. Retrieved 11 January 2023.

Izuwah, C.K., (2019). Unlocking the potential in the housing market through public public-private partnerships (PPP) investment model. Central Bank of Nigeria Economic & Financial Review 57(4)

Kadiri, S. (2018). Nigeria and the lack of affordable housing. Stears Business Research https://www.stearsng.com/article/nigeria-and-the-lack-of-affordable-housing

Kavishe, N. (2018). Critical success factors in public-private partnerships (PPPs) on affordable housing schemes delivery in Tanzania: A qualitative study. Journal of Facilities Management.5(4) pp 21 - 33

Li, Y. & Wang, X. (2018). Risk assessment for Public–Private Partnership projects: Using a fuzzy analytic hierarchical process method and expert opinion in China”, Journal of Risk Research, 21 (8), pp. 952-973.

McNelis, S. (2016). Researching housing in a global context: new directions in some critical issues housing, theory and society): doi:10.1080/14036096.2016.1167121.

Muhammad, Z., & Johar, F., (2019). Coping with Challenges of Public-Private Partnership (PPP) for Housing Delivery in Nigeria. International Journal of Engineering & Technology

Olugbenga, T.D., et al. (2019) Unleashing the potentials of the housing sector in Nigeria as perceived by users. International Journal of Built Environment and Sustainability. IJBES 4(3) 21 - 29

Oosterveer, P. (2019). Is co-living an answer to the affordable housing crisis? www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/05/co-living-answer-affordable-housing-crisis/ (Accessed online on 25th November)

Shi, J. (2019). Investment valuation model of public rental housing up project for the private sector: A real options perspective. Sustainability Journal, 11, 1857; doi:10.3390/su11071857.

Woetzel, J. (2018). Tackling the world's affordable housing challenge, Mckinsey Global Institute https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/urbanization/tackling-the-worlds-affordable-housing-challenge (Accessed online 25th September 2019).

World Bank (2019). World development report. development and climate change. Washington, DC: World Bank. Accessed June 14, 2020

World Bank PPI Database (2018). Private participation in infrastructure database. Available from: https://ppi.worldbank.org/customer query.

World Bank Institute (2013). Disclosure of project and contract information in public-private partnerships Washington DC: World Bank Institute.

World Economic Forum (2013). Strategic infrastructure: Steps to prepare and accelerate public-private partnerships, Boston Consulting Group

World Bank. (2019). Nigeria digital economy diagnostic report. The World Bank Group, Washington, DC.

Download the article: