Chapter Two
Student Housing: A survey of the literature
p. 7-30
Texte intégral
2.1 Introduction
1In broad terms, housing is defined by Bourne (1981) as a bundle of services, a view which recognizes that housing involves the consumption of neighbourhood services ie, parks and schools, a location (accessibility to jobs and amenities), and the proximity of certain types of neighbours (a social environment). Housing is a highly complex product as well as a facilitator of economic and social processes. With reference to the former, the PRC Report (1980) observes that it comprises shelter (for protection and privacy), environmental services (water supply, waste disposal, etc), access to employment opportunities (such as commercial activities), personal security (for safety), special services (such as health care and education) and living space (for recreation and domestic activities). In line with the latter conception of housing, Turner (1976) describes housing as the ways and means by which housing goods and services are provided by human actions through housing construction or investment in order for housing to confer the various benefits and provide different facilities for users – the individual, households and the nation.
2Student on-campus housing, can equally be described as a process in the sense that it involves the construction of new dwellings and the various associated activities such as land acquisition, finance, building materials, etc. It also seeks to know who builds (state, civil society, private sector), the types of student housing (dormitories, halls of residence, other forms of quarters, off-campus accommodation, etc.), at what location (eg, on campus or off campus), and the relationship between academic performance and congenial living conditions. As an asset, student on-campus housing ‘forms the bulk of the universities built enviromnent thereby representing the largest facility asset that an institution may have’ (Amole, 1997). Thus, student on-campus housing is not only shelter, but comprises the immediate environment and other economic and social activities that are sympathetic to academic work. Many educators hold the belief that there should be close proximity between the living and learning environment in order to produce intellectuals that are socially integrated (Amole, 1997).
2.2 Philosophy of Student On-Campus Housing
3This literature review is primarily focused on the British university system because Nigeria was a colony of Britain and the educational system in Nigeria was modelled after the British system. The review, however, acknowledges student housing systems in other countries, which have their intrinsic peculiarities and advantages.
4The philosophy of student on-campus housing in Nigeria could be linked to the collegiate system of Oxford and Cambridge (Oxbridge) universities. The Oxbridge philosophy was that students and the faculty should share a common life. Bullock et al. (1969) argue that these traditional English universities considered it ‘dehumanizing and defrauding’ to attend to teaching and research only and neglect the atmosphere in which the student lived and worked. In addition, it was believed that the inequalities arising from different home backgrounds could be compensated for in the fusion of living and learning through which common standards of culture and citizenship could be transmitted (Amole, 1997).
2.3 Classification of Student On-Campus Housing
5Student on-campus housing or residences can be classified into four. These are:
Collegiate system
Dormitories
Halls of residence
Off-campus residence, private lodgings and the home
2.3.1 Collegiate system
6The collegiate system was based on the basic assumption that students and faculty should share a common life. Staff and students were expected to live in the same environment. The collegiate system was appropriate in the past in the United Kingdom (especially in Oxbridge institutions) because it was common to have some professors or members of the academic staff living in the colleges. This was so because, unlike his American counterpart, the typical English professor of that period was pledged to celibacy (Amole, 1997).
7The accommodation provided for students by the Oxbridge institutions included a place to eat and socialize with fellow students as well as individual academic supervisors. These residences were described as being similar to ‘monasteries’, (hey had a chapel, a kitchen, and a dining hall in addition to a students’ common room. Scholars such as Allen (1965) and Crease (1970) have contended that the collegiate system of residence is closest to the home in terms of its social structure. Crease has also observed that participation in social and intellectual activities was higher in this form of residence.
8The collegiate system was later abandoned due to certain factors. Faber (1962) enumerated the factors and opined that some private colleges and universities approximated the ideal of a community of scholars, but due to limited funds, a widely dispersed population and difficult transportation made clusters of residential colleges became impractical. In addition, a shortage of bachelor professors to ‘live in’, combined to worsen the favourable student faculty relationship in a common residential setting. In the United States and even in the UK, economic and demographic forces hindered the continuation of this ‘ideal’.
9An unsatisfied demand for higher education among the local population of the United Kingdom led to the rapid growth of a number of higher institutions. The emergence of non-residential universities followed. Non-residential universities were relevant during this period because a large proportion of the students lived within a thirty-mile radius of their place of study. As the population of home-based students fell, and the transportation systems became more accessible and efficient, it became imperative to accommodate the rapidly increasing population of students who were studying at centres far away from their respective homes. This situation led to the emergence of another form of student on-campus housing known as dormitories.
2.3.2 Dormitories
10Dormitories consist of certain components: administrative offices (including a resident dean’s apartment), reading rooms, bedrooms, libraries, and cooking as well as dining facilities. Allocation to these dormitories, unlike traditional British universities (the collegiate residences) cut across academic disciplines (Amole, 1997).
11Within the entire university, tutors and students were expected to live in the same building, while academic facilities were provided in the remaining buildings. Students received academic instruction in the academic areas of the institution and house tutors (members of staff) sometimes gave tutorials in the house or dormitories.
2.3.3 Halls of residence
12The establishment of Nigeria’s first university, the University of Ibadan in 1948, witnessed the importation of the Oxbridge residential system into the country. This model evolved into the present halls of residence, otherwise known as hostels. Each hall is made up of bedrooms, a common room, a television room, common dining facilities, group cooking facilities and recreational facilities. Allocation to the halls of residence, as in the case of dormitories, cuts across race, social class and academic specialization (Amole, 1997).
13Like dormitories, provision is made for the housing of a small number of college tutors. No teaching facilities are, however, provided in the halls. This was because ‘these halls were intended to be centres of student social life’ (Ade-Ajayi and Tamuno, 1973).
2.3.4. Off-campus accommodation
14Between the 1960s and 1990s the number of universities in Nigeria increased from one in 1948 to thirteen in 1977, to twenty-four in 1985 and thirty-seven in 1998. Coupled with the increasing number of Nigerian universities was the ever-increasing volume of university students. While the federal universities tried to maintain a residential university system, the number of students being admitted far outstripped the number of bedspaces available on campus.
15If the federal universities have failed to keep pace with student housing needs, the state universities have not even tried. None of the state universities in the country has on-campus accommodation. This is because from inception, state-established universities have relegated the idea of student housing to the background. It was the belief of the state governments concerned that the enormous amounts of money that would be used in the provision of student housing, could be better utilized in providing academic facilities. Student on-campus housing was not seen as a major need, when compared with the all-important provision of academic facilities. This was because most of the state universities were established with the sole aim of serving the educational needs of their respective states. With the influx of students from other states however, and the burgeoning student population, accommodation problems have become glaring in almost all state universities.
16The off-campus system: of residence is, however, no longer peculiar to the state-owned universities; it also applies to the federal universities which had hitherto tried as much as possible to maintain the residential system.
17During the oil boom era, the federal government, under the leadership of General Yakubu Gowon, saw the establishment of new universities as a means of spreading the national cake. Even though the older universities were already suffering from underfunding, the Gowon regime went ahead and created new universities. It was later realized by the succeeding military regime of Murtala/Obasanjo that this was likely to further jeopardize the adequate financing of the whole system in the near future. Consequently, the National Universities Commission (NUC) was directed in 1977 to set up the Ogundeko Commission, with specific terms of reference. One of these was for the commission to look for ways of reducing the cost of general services provided by the universities. Adesina (1988) observed that the commission noted a great disparity between student population and available student accommodation. Based on this observation, the commission decided against building any more student hostels in any university where one-third or more of the students were already accommodated. The commission favoured the provision of student and staff accommodation by private individuals.
18The student housing policies of the succeeding civilian regime also favoured the development of off-campus accommodation in both the state and federal universities. In an attempt to curb or reduce student accommodation problems in Nigeria’s institutions of higher learning, the federal government, during the Second Republic, supported off-campus accommodation. President Shehu Shagari in his 1980 budget stated that one of the policy commitments of his administration was the building of thousands of housing units as a means of improving the living standard of people and reducing the high rents paid by tenants in urban areas. In pursuance of this policy and in co-operation with the state governments, the government was to evolve a scheme to provide off-campus accommodation for students by establishing satellite villages near existing universities where low-cost houses would be built and rented to students at very low rates.
19With a view to achieving this broad goal, the federal government gave directives to all Nigerian universities to acquire 200 hectares of land on which they were expected to construct 200 low cost Housing units. However, the dream of the federal government was never realized because the civilian government of Alhaji Shagari was toppled by a military junta led by Major General Muhammadu Buhari.
20Buhari’s regime, although short-lived, was particularly concerned about the restructuring of the battered Nigerian economy, as well as the problem of indiscipline, which had become endemic in Nigeria. Most of the projects as well as policies and programmes put in place by the civilian administration were abandoned. Since Buhari’s era and up till the present time, student housing has become the responsibility of every individual institution Unlike national housing policies or policies about education, student accommodation is the function of restricted financial budgets, student demographic characteristics and attitudes of the governing bodies of the institutions (Amole, 1997: 15).
21As a result of tight financial budgets and student demographic characteristics, the attitudes of the governing bodies in higher institutions towards the provision of adequate housing for all students have changed. It is now glaring that the majority of institutions of higher learning, both in the developed and developing worlds, cannot accommodate their entire student populations. In order to accommodate a fair percentage of an ever-increasing population of students, many institutions in the United Kingdom and West Africa have resolved to increase the number of students sharing the same residential facilities, through the introduction of a third bedspace in double rooms (Amole, 1997). While in the United States of America students can opt to live on or off campus, in Nigeria and other developing countries, there are firm policies as to which category of students are entitled to on-campus accommodation. In most Nigerian institutions only the first year and final year students are given the option of living in the university halls of residence. It is the expectation of the school authorities that the remaining students would find suitable private lodgings for themselves. This is particularly applicable to institutions of higher learning, which lack an effective on-campus accommodation system. The problems of obtaining suitable accommodation at a reasonable price and distance from the institution, according to Hensher and Taylor (1983), are usually cited as the major problems of off-campus residence. Transportation constraints in the form of distance is another prominent problem of off-campus residence. To alleviate these problems, some higher institutions of learning in the United States and the United Kingdom have had to institutionalize an effective off-campus accommodation system (Amole, 1997).
22In addition to the off-campus system, private boarding houses are another form of off-campus accommodation. Some students live at home if they cannot afford to live in private lodgings or school-organized off-campus accommodation.
23Studies of off-campus students or students residing in private lodgings have shown that these students consider themselves as marginal members of their institutions, having little or no participation in social and recreational activities (Prusok and Walsh, 1964). Heilwel (1973) also argues that private lodgers tend to be socially isolated.
2.4 Shortcomings of Student On-Campus Housing
24Like off-campus accommodation, student on-campus housing is not free of criticism. Some studies have suggested that student housing is uneconomical. For example, Slessor (1990) posited that halls of residence are a relatively uneconomical building type, fitting out a large number of small spaces with furniture, fittings and ironmongery, which inevitably pushes up the cost. If space and financial constraints are determined from the onset, this does not leave much room to maneuver and buildings tend to design themselves into cell-like study/bedrooms linked by a long corridor.
25The cube-like nature of student housing deprives the students of the right to choose the type of accommodation that suits them. This does not take into consideration the different preferences of the students, and the ability of some students to pay for a little more space and luxury (see Amole, 1997 and Birks, 1972).
26Some scholars have argued that laying too much emphasis on student accommodation has made some universities deviate from the goals for which the university was set up in the first place. Such unconscious deviations have turned Nigerian universities into welfare management systems rather than centres for the pursuit of knowledge (Adesina, 1988).
27Student housing has also been viewed as a means of encouraging fiscal extravagance in residential universities. However, the advantages of on-campus student residence as an integral part of university education outweighs the arguments in favour of students seeking their own accommodation, including arguments based on the financial extravagance of residential colleges (Dober, 1963).
2.5 An Overview of the Significance of Student On-Campus Housing
28Amole (1997) argued that despite the long-standing debate about the significance of educational goals and objectives, the tradition of student on-campus housing still continues and the argument is still much in favour of on-campus residence and university approved off-campus lodging. The advantages of student on-campus housing, which are numerous and interwoven, could be viewed from at least three perspectives. These are the economic, social and academic.
2.5.1 Economic significance
29In economic terms, student on-campus housing serves as a hedge against inflation, which allows the investor to protect the purchasing power of the equity investment (Epley and Rabiaski, 1981), and utilize banks’ idle funds. When writing about the correlation between student housing and its general economic return, Amole (1997) observed that another trend in student housing abroad is its finance through long-term mortgage loans. More recently, student residential facilities have become loan financed-buildings circumscribed by interest rates, affordable rent and cost of construction. Student residential facilities are, therefore, being designed attractively in order to make a good return on the investment.
30Student on-campus housing, especially in the advanced countries of the world, can be seen at present as a profitable economic venture. It has been argued that unlike lecture rooms and laboratories which cannot be expected to produce any fair return on investment, university administrators (especially in the United Kingdom and in the United States) have attempted to operate student halls of residence as a source of finance for future projects for the institution.
31Economic returns on real estate investments undertaken by universities, especially in the developed countries, have been on the increase in recent times. The rationale behind this is the recent privatization and commercialization of student housing. This has resulted in higher quality student on-campus housing. Amole (1997) succinctly put the relationship between privatization/commercializalion of student housing and general economic returns as well as quality of the housing in proper perspective when she observed that only recently, some institutions in the United Kingdom began to use student hostels to accommodate non students attending conferences during holidays especially during summer vacations. With student residences now being used for commercial ventures, the quality of accommodation has become an important issue for consideration. Thus, there is a positive correlation between privatization/commercializalion of student housing on one hand and as well as student housing quality on the other.
2.5.2 Social significance
32In addition to economic advantages, student housing also has a social function. Students from various backgrounds are brought together to interact and live in the same physical environment. Student on-campus housing has significant impact on the social life and the social organizations of resident students. This is not unexpected because by the nature of their socio-physical structure and location with respect to communal, teaching, social and recreational facilities, different social structures and organizations are likely to emerge (Amole, 1997).
33Several scholars such as Festinger, Schatcher and Back (1950), Vander Ryn and Silverstein (1967), Wilcox and Holahan (1976), have identified the social significance of student on-campus housing. The work of Festinger, Schatcher and Back showed that the physical form of a housing project explained the emerging social structure of a group of Harvard postgraduate students. The study conducted by Vander Ryn and Silverstein also indicated that the formation of social groups coincided with floor level. Furthermore, Wilcox and Holahan concluded that the physical form of the student housing significantly affected the emerging degree of commitment toward each other, the pattern of interaction, emotional support and the level of involvement in organizational functioning.
34Student housing also enables students to have access to college recreational facilities. Resident students also have ready access to the library and study rooms which may help instil academic discipline. Those living in off-campus lodgings also have access to various college facilities however, the relative distance of these amenities from their bed space made them less accessible. While Bullock et al. (1969) have posited that the majority of student social life occurs in on-campus residences, they also recognized that the overall social life and relationships are determined by other factors such as the location of the city, the quality of the academic environment as well as personal contacts outside the university.
2.5.3 Academic significance
35The current state of research neither affirms nor negates the supposition that a positive correlation exists between student accommodation and academic performance. Dober (1963), and Prusok and Walsh (1964) questioned the assertion that student on-campus housing aids excellent academic performance. They observed that there is little or no evidence to suggest that there is any relationship between academic performance (with respect to grade point) and where students live (off-campus or on-campus) or specific design features of the study facilities provided in student halls of residence.
36The works of Faber (1962), Greenleaf and Lied (1962), Sommer (1970) and Amole (1997) have, however, countered the observation made by some researchers. Faber for examp, observed that the students living on-campus have a potenti forum for intensifying (extending) the classroom instructior. thereby contributing to overall educational objectives. He further suggested that, student residences that integrate living and learning facilities create informal environments for continuous learning, as well as encouraging staff and student contact.
37While Greenleaf and Lied (1967) opined that the halls of residence or dormitories are the most suitable environment for achieving informal education, Sommer (1970) observed that more than 50 per cent of the students study in their bedrooms. In her study on Nigerian student accommodation, Amole revealed that although studying took place within many facilities on the campus, the bedroom was second to the cafeteria in order of preference. Amole, however, pointed out that the percentage of students that studied in their bedrooms was less than 20 per cent. Thus, student on-campus housing plays a decisive role in aiding individual students in the pursuance of their studies, as well as in the attainment of academic excellence.
38Students and low-income earners often compete for accommodation in the housing market as both have a limited amount to spend. Chippendale (1976) highlighted the fact that students prefer to live in inexpensive, shared, self-catering accommodation, however, such units are not provided on any significant scale by private landlords. In the advanced countries of the world, such as in the United Kingdom and the United States of America, students and young professionals often compete with low-income families for the less expensive housing units in the market.
39Morgan and McDowell (1979), as well as Sugden and Williams (1973) share Chippendale’s views. They argue that student demand is but a part of the growing demand for housing from young, single persons in general. They also point out that accommodation, particularly student flats, is similarly desired by other young people.
40What should be noted is that students and young workers cannot be regarded as transient consumers of housing simply because they usually look for accommodation which will serve them for a few years. Rather, they should be taken as a group, because they tend to constitute a permanent feature of the demand for housing.
41If the theory of consumer behaviour is taken into consideration, we can describe the demand for student housing as a function of certain variables. These include the price of residential accommodation, the prices of other goods and services (especially the ones that are of vital importance to the students), the socio-economic background of the students, housing preferences, taste and demographic considerations. Other important factors include location, ie, proximity to lecture halls and the library, access to basic amenities such as electricity and water; availability of adequate sewage disposal systems and the institution’s student housing policy.
42The supply of student housing is an important factor. The supply of student on-campus housing in the short run can be regarded as a function of the existing student housing stock – the price of resource inputs, such as residential land, skilled manpower; infrastructure capital and construction materials; the price of other goods and services; demographic patterns; and the demolition of student housing. Others include availability of finance, which has to do with interest rates, mortgage terms and credit rationing, projected future economic returns; organization of the construction industry, state of the economy and institutional regulations and policy environment.
43The supply and demand of student housing is functionally related to the housing market in general. Thus, the interaction of supply and demand for student housing is of vital importance in the housing market.
44The housing needs of students were succinctly described by Hands (1971). He itemized the various housing characteristics which attract students:
inexpensive
accessible to public transport
individual privacy easy
proximity to school
access to shops, laundry services, etc
landlord toleration of student lifestyle
45In recent years, great disparity exists between demand and the actual stock. The implication of this is that students far outnumber the available units of housing, and competition for housing has caused an increase in the bid and the asset prices. To increase the supply of housing for students takes time, therefore, the supply of student residences is bound to continue to lag behind the demand for such housing. This disequilibrium in the student housing market has manifested a number of problems.
2.6 Student Housing Problems: An overview
46One of the major factors behind student accommodation problems all over the world is the ever-increasing number of students. In London, for instance, Tabet (1971) reported that traditional halls of residence have been provided in considerable numbers but they have not kept pace with the growth of the student population. The situation was not different in the rest of England and Wales. According to Morgan and McDowell (1979), it would appear that the provision of accommodation in all sectors of higher education in England and Wales has barely kept pace with the expansion of the student population. This is because majority of students study far away from home. For most students, going away to university or college is their first real introduction to adult social life, free from the constraints of parental control, neighbourhood and family ties. It was, therefore, the opinion of these scholars that the significance and educational benefits attached to on-campus residence have reinforced the increasing common practice among students to study away from home.
47In Nigeria, a prototype of a developing country, the case is not different. The work of Ohiagbunem (1984) indicated that the problem of student accommodation could be attributed to the rising student population and shortage of funds – the student population continues to grow without a corresponding growth in hostel facilities, The National Universities Commission (NUC) makes no provision for the construction of new hostels in the annual allocation of funds to universities.
48During the past decade and a half, the university system in Nigeria has been starved of funds. Capital grants given to universities in Nigeria in recent times were very meagre. In 1990, for example, a total of N88,888,197 was given to all the universities in Nigeria. Adesina (1988), however, posited that these universities were not really underfunded. He believes that the universities appear to be underfunded because in the past decade they have expanded beyond the financial resources available to them. Thus, his position is not that the universities are underfunded per se but that the resources available have not been limited to services that the universities should provide. The universities themselves have deviated from the goals for which they were originally established. Non-availability of finance from other sources is another factor that has contributed to the great disparity between the supply and demand for student housing. Unlike the United States and the United Kingdom, where loan finance schemes for student housing are attractive in Nigeria the sharp increases in building costs and the high interest rates make such undertakings (Amole, 1997).
49Student housing policies and practices in Nigeria also compound the problem of student housing. Amole (1997) argued that no firm policies exist with respect to student housing at the level of the National Universities Commission. Suggestions and recommendations have, however, been made by the NUC and each institution is left to implement and adopt these recommendations as it deems suitable. For example, the National Universities Commission has recommended that residential universities should provide accommodation for at least one third of its student population. This recommendation does not however outline the categories of students that ought to benefit from university accommodation.
50In most Nigerian universities, freshmen, final year students, foreign students, medical students, sportsmen and women, and the disabled are usually considered for accommodation. After accommodating a large proportion of these categories of students, balloting is usually introduced as a means of preventing student crises that may emanate from partiality in allocating bedspaces to individual students on-campus.
51The federal and state governments do not see student on-campus accommodation as a housing need (but rather an educational need). Each university was, however, mandated to cover a wide catchment area. This implied that more students living far away from their homes were admitted yearly (Amole, 1997). The implication of this policy, Amole has argued, is the further exacerbation of student housing problems.
2.7 Problems of On-Campus Accommodation
52Students living on campus are also faced with various problems. The first is the high occupancy ratio. The works of Adegbile (1987) and Adelaja (1992) indicate that, on the average, the occupancy ratio has increased by 300 per cent, that is, fourteen persons are occupying rooms designed for four persons. Adelaja stated further that some of the existing furniture has been removed in order to provide space for additional double beds. Most of the few facilities that presently exist in Nigerian university hostels are the built-in-type. Consequently, most students have to study somewhere else, due to the uncomfortable nature of their residences.
53In addition to the problem of overcrowding, overpopulation has taken its toll on the existing facilities. Most of the universities’ halls of residence, open spaces, and facilities, have been converted to other uses and are overused. Rooms originally meant for cooking, laundry, reading, and relaxation have been converted to bedrooms. Amole (1997) rightly observed that studies show that most of the facilities provided for these activities such as gas or electric cookers, refrigerators, electric outlets, workshops and sinks are beyond repair and in most cases they do not exist any more. The open spaces have also been used for other purposes, such as the construction of new dwellings for the students. This causes an imbalance in the halls’ ecosystem.
54Communal dining and cooking facilities are no longer functioning in many institutions halls of residence. Majority of the students now cook in their respective bedrooms or at best, on the balconies, which is a fire hazard, and which causes smoke pollution and creates an unhygienic environment. Sanitary facilities are also unhygienic and poorly maintained. One of the most frequent complaints students make about their residential facilities is the poor state of the few usable sanitary facilities.
2.8 Problems of Off-Campus Accommodation
55Off-campus students also face serious housing and other related problems. Osifuwa (1986) observed that most of them live in houses which are barely suitable for human habitation. In addition, the rent is very high and the houses are often far from the campus. How they live, how they eat, and how they get to school and cope with academic and extra curricular activities is solely their business.
56With reference to the socio-economic effects of off-campus accommodation, Olomola (1996) revealed that students in non-residential institutions do not enjoy some of the social activities which residential students enjoy. Off-campus students also have to pay their fares to and from school. Akindele (1996) viewed off-campus student housing problems from the perspective of different sorts of disturbances. According to him, off-campus students are victims of all sorts of disturbances ranging from undue interference to gossip from their co-tenants. Often, they are victims of unbearable loud noises and deafening music from endless street parties organized by co-tenants and neighbours, beer parlours or music stores.
57Certain features characterize off-campus accommodation. Using state polytechnics as a case study, Adeyemi (1997) identified the following:
Shortage of accommodation
High and increasing rent
Inadequate facilities
Transportation/community problems
Inadequate insecurity
Non-conducive learning environment
2.9 Student Housing Problems: Coping mechanisms
58The student housing problems emanating from the factors enumerated above are not new. Many of these problems have been anticipated in the reports of some committees both in Europe and Africa. In the United Kingdom in 1962, for example, the Robins Committee sounded a note of warning when it stated that the gravest of all the problems of the universities in the years ahead would be the shortage of residential accommodation. Also, in the United Kingdom, the University Grants Committee, in its annual survey for 1970-71, seriously warned that the shortage of residential accommodation could be the biggest bottleneck to the expansion of higher education in the years ahead.
59What was envisaged in Europe was also anticipated in Africa. In Nigeria, for instance, the commission of enquiry set up by the Federal Government to look into the student crises of 1978, popularly known as ‘Ali Must Go’, highlighted in its report that the issue of inadequate accommodation was one of the major causes of student agitation which predisposed them to take to the streets. In order to prevent future occurrences of student unrest, which is sometimes associated with urban violence, several options have been put in place by the university authorities as a means of alleviating student housing problems. In coping with tight budgets, Amole (1997) argued that decisions are made about the percentage of students to be given accommodation; the design and construction of more facilities through donations and gifts; package deal schemes; student cooperation in addition to public funds; acquisition and conversion of property within the city into hostels; the role of the university in administering off-campus residential systems.
60Initially, the university authorities tried to cope with the shortage of student housing by constructing new hostel blocks or halls of residence. It later became glaring that most institutions of higher learning could not accommodate their entire student population. Consequently, many institutions of higher learning ceased to give the greatest priority to student on-campus accommodation. In order to accommodate a fair percentage of an ever-increasing population of students, many institutions in the United Kingdom and West Africa resolved to increase the number of students sharing the same residential facilities.
61The construction of more student residences (which could be regarded as insignificant when compared to the student population) and increasing the number of students per room were unable to solve the problem of student housing. Universities around the world, therefore, resorted to the acquisition and conversion of property within the city into hostels. While this worked in the advanced countries, it failed woefully in the Third World countries. Amole (1997) stated the reason why the system of private lodging acquired by the universities failed in Nigeria.
62She observed that some institutions such as the universities of Ibadan and Ife initially acquired and maintained off-campus university residences in addition to the on-campus residences during the mid-70s to solve some of these housing problems. These were, however, later abandoned, probably due to inadequate operating policies. It is, however, more likely that the failure in operating such a system was due to lack of an informed basis on which to manage both the users and the facilities acquired. Virtually all the universities in Nigeria later abandoned this idea. Hence, students that are unable to find accommodation within the campus have to find accommodation for themselves outside the campus. This legalized the principle of off-campus accommodation in Nigerian universities. In Nigeria, apart from the conventional halls of residence within the campuses of federal government institutions, there has been no concerted effort on the part of the government to plan and make provision for the accommodation of students living off-campus (Adeyemi, 1997).
63Another coping mechanism is squatting. Since students are bent on staying within the campus for obvious reasons, they resorted to squatting, a term evolved for the illegal occupation of rooms by students. Squatting is a carefully evolved strategy in which a room officially allocated to four or five students may end up being occupied by eight to ten students. This is because each of the legal occupants may take on a squatter. Since on-campus accommodation at the University of Ibadan is officially for first and final year students, a legal occupant this session may be next session’s squatter.
2.10 Conclusion
64In terms of quality and quantity, most halls of residence in Nigerian universities are deficient. In addition, most off-campus accommodation lacks adequate supply of water, electricity, solid waste and drainage systems, and are poorly ventilated. To combat these problems, therefore, student accommodation should be viewed as a housing need rather than an educational need. As observed by Dixon (1971), in Newcastle, ‘students housing is not an educational issue. Students are part of the community of Newcastle and it is up to us to fit them into the community’. This view needs to be adopted by government and the universities in Nigeria in order to find lasting solutions to the perennial housing problems of university students in Nigeria.
Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence Licence OpenEdition Books. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.
The Frontier States of Western Yorubaland
State Formation and Political Growth in an Ethnic Frontier Zone
Biodun Adediran
1994
The Architecture of Fear
Urban Design and Construction Response to Urban Violence in Lagos, Nigeria
Tunde Agbola
1997
Nigeria during the Abacha Years (1993-1998)
The Domestic and International Politics of Democratization
‘Kunle Amuwo, Daniel C. Bach et Yann Lebeau (dir.)
2001
Informal Channels for Conflict Resolution in Ibadan, Nigeria
Isaac Olawale Albert, Tinu Awe, Georges Hérault et al.
1995
Urban Violence in Africa
Pilot Studies (South Africa, Côte-d’Ivoire, Nigeria)
Eghosa E. Osaghae, Ismaila Touré, N’Guessan Kouamé et al.
1994