By Oyetunde M. Ajayi
Housing is universally acknowledged as a basic human need, yet in Nigeria, it has increasingly become a luxury beyond the reach of the majority.
Across cities and towns, from Lagos and Abuja to Port Harcourt, Abeokuta, Ibadan and Onitsha, the signs of a deepening housing crisis are unmistakable: soaring rents, overcrowded dwellings, the expansion of informal settlements, and a growing population of urban poor struggling to secure decent shelter.
While many factors contribute to this crisis, rapid urbanisation, population growth, rising construction costs, and weak mortgage systems, one policy framework stands out for urgent reconsideration: The Land Use Act of 1978. The Land Use Act was promulgated with laudable objectives. It sought to unify land tenure systems, curb land speculation, make land accessible for development, and ensure equitable distribution of land for all Nigerians.
By vesting land in each state in the hands of the Governor, to be held in trust for the people, the Act aimed to simplify land administration and promote orderly development. Nearly five decades later, however, the realities on ground suggest that the Act has fallen short of these intentions and, in many respects, has become a structural bottleneck in housing delivery.
One of the most critical challenges posed by the Land Use Act is the over-centralisation of land control. By concentrating decision-making power in the offices of state governors, access to land has become highly bureaucratic, slow, and often politicised. Ordinary Nigerians seeking land for housing must navigate a maze of approvals, consent requirements, and administrative delays. The process of obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy (C of O), which is essential for secure tenure and access to mortgage finance, is notoriously cumbersome, expensive, and time-consuming. In some states, it can take years, discouraging formal housing development and pushing many citizens toward informal land markets.
This bureaucratic rigidity has direct implications for housing affordability. When access to land is constrained, land prices rise. Developers transfer these costs to homebuyers and tenants, resulting in exorbitant house prices and rents. For low- and middle-income earners, the majority of Nigeria’s urban population, formal housing becomes unattainable.
Consequently, informal settlements proliferate, often without basic services, proper planning, or security of tenure, further deepening urban inequality and environmental vulnerability.
The Land Use Act has also weakened the functioning of land as collateral for housing finance. Because land rights are not fully alienable without gubernatorial consent, financial institutions are often reluctant to accept land titles as reliable security. This undermines mortgage development and limits long-term housing finance.
In a country where housing delivery requires massive private sector participation, a legal framework that discourages investment and increases risk is counterproductive. Moreover, the Act has failed to adequately recognise Nigeria’s socio-cultural diversity in land tenure systems. Customary landholding arrangements, particularly in rural and peri-urban areas, continue to operate alongside statutory systems, creating legal ambiguities and frequent conflicts. Rather than harmonising these systems effectively, the Act has often widened the gap between formal law and lived realities, leaving many Nigerians with insecure and undocumented land rights.
Given the scale of today’s housing crisis, a fundamental rethink of the Land Use Act is no longer optional, it is imperative. This does not necessarily mean discarding the Act in its entirety, but rather undertaking comprehensive reforms that align land administration with contemporary housing and urban development needs.
First, there is an urgent need to decentralise and streamline land administration processes. Greater roles should be assigned to local governments and professional land agencies, with clear timelines, transparency, and digital systems to reduce delays and corruption. Second, the consent provisions should be reviewed to make land transactions simpler, faster, and less costly, while still safeguarding public interest.
Third, land titling and registration processes must be made affordable and accessible, especially for low-income households, to enhance tenure security and unlock housing finance. Importantly, land reform must be integrated into a broader national housing strategy that links land access with infrastructure provision, mortgage finance, and inclusive urban planning. Without such integration, reforms will yield limited results.
In conclusion, Nigeria’s housing crisis is not merely a consequence of market forces or population growth; it is deeply rooted in institutional and legal frameworks that shape access to land. The Land Use Act, though well-intentioned, has become misaligned with present-day realities.
As Nigeria confronts rapid urbanisation and an ever-growing housing deficit, the time has come for bold, people-centred land reforms. Rethinking the Land Use Act is not just a legal exercise, it is a crucial step toward making decent, affordable housing a reality for millions of Nigerians.
