The housing affordability crisis confronting Nigeria and many African countries cannot be solved merely by increasing the number of houses constructed.

Housing becomes affordable when the entire financial architecture supporting its production, purchase and rental is deliberately structured for affordability.
Experience from the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Singapore and Malaysia demonstrates that governments rarely expect low- and middle-income households to purchase homes produced entirely with expensive commercial land, commercial infrastructure, commercial development finance and commercial mortgages.

Instead, governments intervene at different points in the housing value chain.
They subsidise land.
They provide capital grants.
They supply infrastructure.
They offer low-interest development finance.
They guarantee mortgages.
They provide tax incentives to private investors.
They support social and affordable rental housing.
They give direct assistance to qualifying households.
They leverage government resources to attract much larger volumes of private and institutional capital.
The central finding of this report is therefore:
Affordable housing is created by affordable finance.
The United States relies heavily on tax credits, federal housing programmes, rental assistance and a sophisticated private housing-finance market.

The United Kingdom combines large-scale government grants with housing associations, local authorities, borrowing and private institutional capital.
Canada uses federal funding, concessional finance and partnerships with provinces, territories and municipalities.

Singapore integrates public land management, public housing development, household grants, compulsory savings and specialised housing loans.
Malaysia combines direct public housing programmes, construction subsidies, government-backed housing credit guarantees and public-private delivery mechanisms.
Nigeria does not need to copy any single country.

The stronger strategy would be to combine suitable elements from each model into a Nigeria Affordable Housing Finance Framework adapted to the country’s income structure, federal system, large informal economy and housing deficit.

1. INTRODUCTION: WHY AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS REALLY A FINANCE QUESTION
Governments frequently announce affordable housing programmes by stating the number of houses they intend to construct.
But the more important questions are:
Who finances the land?
Who pays for infrastructure?
At what interest rate does the developer obtain construction finance?
How much equity must the developer contribute?
At what interest rate does the eventual purchaser borrow?
What happens to households that cannot qualify for conventional mortgages?
How are low-income households that should rent rather than purchase supported?
If these questions are not addressed, calling a development “affordable housing” does not make it affordable.

A developer who:
* purchases land commercially;
* finances infrastructure;
* borrows construction money at high interest;
* purchases expensive building materials;
* pays taxes and development charges;
* bears approval delays; and
* must recover capital and earn a reasonable return
cannot simply reduce the selling price because government labels the project affordable.
The countries examined in this report demonstrate a different approach.
They intervene before the house reaches the household.

2. UNITED STATES: USING TAX POLICY AND PRIVATE CAPITAL
The United States provides an important example of how government can stimulate affordable housing without directly constructing every home.
One of the country’s most significant affordable rental housing instruments is the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit, or LIHTC.
HUD describes LIHTC as the most important resource for creating affordable rental housing in the United States. State and local allocating agencies currently receive the equivalent of approximately US$12 billion in annual budget authority to issue credits supporting the acquisition, rehabilitation or construction of rental housing targeted at lower-income households. (HUD User⁠)
How the tax-credit mechanism works
Instead of government paying the entire construction cost:
Government creates a tax credit.
The credit is allocated to an eligible affordable housing project.
Investors provide equity to the project in return for the tax benefits.
The developer therefore needs less conventional debt.
Lower debt reduces the amount of rental income required to service financing.
That makes lower rents more financially feasible.
The important lesson is:
Government can finance affordable housing through the tax system, not only through direct budget expenditure.
This is particularly relevant to Nigeria.
Rather than depending entirely on annual housing appropriations, government could provide carefully designed tax incentives to pension-backed investment vehicles, banks, insurance companies, REITs and other qualified investors financing certified affordable rental projects.

3. THE AMERICAN MODEL ALSO SUPPORTS THE HOUSEHOLD
The United States demonstrates another important distinction in housing policy:
Supply subsidy versus demand subsidy.
A supply-side subsidy makes housing cheaper to produce.
A demand-side subsidy increases the household’s ability to pay.
America uses both.
Rental assistance programmes help eligible households meet rental costs, meaning government does not assume that every low-income household should immediately become a homeowner.
This is a critical lesson for Nigeria.
An effective national housing policy needs:
homeownership housing;
affordable rental housing;
social rental housing;
student and youth housing;
elderly housing;
worker housing;
and other tenure options.
Homeownership cannot be the only measure of housing success.

4. UNITED KINGDOM: CAPITAL GRANTS PLUS HOUSING PROVIDERS
The United Kingdom provides a strong example of using public money to reduce the capital cost of affordable housing.
Housing policy is devolved, so arrangements differ among England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. This report focuses principally on England.
The government’s Social and Affordable Homes Programme 2026–2036 is a ten-year programme valued at £39 billion. (GOV.UK⁠)
Homes England is responsible for at least £27 billion of this funding outside London. (GOV.UK⁠)
The programme provides grant funding to support the capital cost of developing affordable housing for rent or sale. (GOV.UK⁠)
Why capital grants matter
Consider an illustrative affordable housing development costing £100 million.
If government provides £35 million as capital grant, the housing provider does not need to finance the entire £100 million through commercial borrowing.
It may finance the balance through:
* its own capital;
* bank borrowing;
* bonds;
* institutional investment;
* rental income; and
* other funding.
Reducing debt requirements makes lower rents economically sustainable.
This represents a fundamental principle:
Affordable rent often begins with lower-cost capital, not rent control.

5. HOUSING ASSOCIATIONS: AN IMPORTANT INSTITUTIONAL LESSON
The British system also demonstrates the importance of specialised housing providers.
Government does not necessarily have to become:
the developer,
the contractor,
the property manager,
the landlord,
the mortgage lender,
and the maintenance company.
Instead, government can create policy, provide subsidy, regulate affordability and work through qualified delivery institutions.
Nigeria could significantly expand the role of:
* housing cooperatives;
* nonprofit housing organisations;
* state housing corporations;
* private affordable housing providers;
* pension-backed rental housing companies; and
* professionally governed housing associations.
The objective should be to develop institutions capable of holding affordable housing assets for decades, not merely developers interested in selling units immediately after construction.

6. CANADA: FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, PROVINCES AND MUNICIPALITIES WORKING TOGETHER
Canada’s approach is particularly important for Nigeria because both countries operate federal systems.
Canada’s National Housing Strategy is currently a 10-plus-year programme exceeding C$115 billion . (Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation⁠)
By July 2026, official CMHC reporting indicated that more than C$82 billion had been committed toward supporting the creation, acquisition or repair of hundreds of thousands of housing units. (Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation⁠)
A major feature of the Canadian model is the participation of different levels of government.
The federal government provides financing.
Provinces and territories participate through bilateral agreements and matching arrangements.
Municipalities influence:
* land use;
* planning;
* permitting;
* density;
* development charges;
* infrastructure; and
* housing approvals.
The lesson for Nigeria is significant.
Affordable housing should not be treated as the responsibility of the Federal Ministry of Housing alone.
The Federal Government cannot solve Nigeria’s housing challenge if states control important land and planning functions but affordable housing policy is not integrated across levels of government.

7. A NIGERIAN VERSION OF FEDERAL-STATE COST SHARING
Nigeria could establish a framework in which access to federal affordable housing funds is conditional upon state participation.
For example:
Federal Government provides:
* affordable housing capital grant;
* long-term financing;
* mortgage guarantee;
* tax incentives.
State Government provides:
* land;
* title;
* planning approval;
* reduction or waiver of development charges;
* part of infrastructure.
Local Government provides:
* local infrastructure coordination;
* community integration;
* local planning support.
Private developer or housing provider provides:
* equity;
* technical delivery;
* construction;
* project management.
Financial institutions provide:
* development debt;
* mortgage finance;
* rental housing finance.
This allows government money to leverage other people’s money rather than becoming the only source of housing finance.

8. SINGAPORE: INTERVENING ACROSS THE ENTIRE HOUSING VALUE CHAIN
Singapore provides perhaps the most integrated example among the countries examined.
Its housing system is not based simply on subsidising mortgage interest.
Government intervention extends across:
* land;
* planning;
* development;
* pricing;
* household grants;
* housing finance;
* retirement savings; and
* resale conditions.
The Housing & Development Board plays a central role in public housing development.
Eligible first-time families may currently receive an Enhanced CPF Housing Grant of up to S$120,000 toward qualifying new or resale flat purchases. (HDB⁠)
Additional CPF housing grants exist for eligible resale purchases, including grants of up to S$80,000 under relevant family arrangements. (HDB⁠)
The lesson is not simply that Singapore gives people money.
The more important lesson is that Singapore addresses affordability systemically.

9. WHY LAND POLICY MATTERS
Housing affordability begins with land.
Where land prices become highly speculative, the cost ultimately appears in the selling price or rent.
Singapore demonstrates how strategic public control of land can support long-term housing objectives.
Nigeria’s public land should similarly be treated as an economic development instrument, not merely a revenue-generating commodity.
When government contributes land to an affordable housing project, that contribution should be valued transparently.
If land worth ₦5 billion is contributed, government has effectively invested ₦5 billion.
The public should receive a measurable affordability benefit in exchange.
That benefit could be:
* reduced selling prices;
* controlled rents;
* permanent affordable housing;
* shared ownership;
* rent-to-own housing;
* worker housing.
Public land should never be transferred cheaply for “affordable housing” and subsequently converted into luxury housing without the public recovering the value of its subsidy.

10. SINGAPORE’S SECOND LESSON: LINKING SAVINGS AND HOUSING
Singapore’s housing framework also demonstrates the power of connecting long-term household savings with housing finance.
This raises an important question for Nigeria:
Can the country’s enormous pools of long-term institutional savings play a greater role in housing without compromising the safety of contributors?
The answer should not be reckless withdrawal of retirement savings.
Instead, Nigeria should explore secure structures through which long-term capital can finance:
* mortgage-backed assets;
* affordable rental portfolios;
* infrastructure;
* housing bonds; and
* professionally managed residential investment.
The key requirement is strong regulation and appropriate risk management.

11. MALAYSIA: DIRECT SUBSIDY AND GOVERNMENT GUARANTEES
Malaysia offers highly relevant lessons for Nigeria because it combines support for low-income households with mechanisms to extend housing finance to people who may struggle to qualify under conventional banking rules.
Under Malaysia’s Program Perumahan Rakyat — PPR, qualifying low-income households can access public rental housing, with official information indicating rents as low as RM124 per month, excluding maintenance. (KPKT⁠)
This demonstrates that governments must sometimes accept that the poorest households cannot pay the full economic cost of housing.
Trying to solve extreme low-income housing solely through mortgages is unrealistic.

12. MALAYSIA’S RUMAH MESRA RAKYAT MODEL
Malaysia’s Rumah Mesra Rakyat programme is designed for qualifying households with low incomes who have suitable land but lack adequate housing.
The official programme currently lists a RM20,000 construction subsidy, with repayment arrangements extending over 16 to 25 years and estimated payments around RM300 monthly under the programme structure. (SPNB⁠)
This concept has considerable potential for rural Nigeria and smaller cities.
Millions of Nigerians may have access to family land or community land but lack sufficient capital to complete a decent home.
Rather than constructing entirely new estates everywhere, Nigeria could consider a properly controlled programme of:
Serviced Plot + Core Housing + Incremental Expansion Finance
Households could receive a structurally sound starter home that can be expanded as income improves.

13. MALAYSIA’S MORTGAGE GUARANTEE MODEL
Perhaps one of Malaysia’s most relevant innovations for Nigeria is the housing credit guarantee system.
SJKP explicitly aims to help Malaysians—including people without fixed incomes or conventional payslips—obtain housing finance from participating financial institutions. (SJKP⁠)
Under the SJKP MADANI scheme, mortgage financing can reach RM360,000, with financing periods of up to 35 years. The guarantee may cover financing up to a maximum of 120% of the residential property’s purchase price when specified ancillary costs are included. (SJKP⁠)
This addresses one of Nigeria’s biggest housing finance problems:
Millions of Nigerians have income, but they do not have payslips.
An entrepreneur may earn ₦800,000 monthly.
A trader may turn over millions of naira annually.
A driver may have reliable daily income.
A consultant may earn irregular but substantial income.
Yet conventional mortgage underwriting may reject them because their income does not resemble a traditional monthly salary.
Nigeria therefore needs to move from:
Salary-based mortgage assessment
toward:
Verified-income mortgage assessment.
Evidence could include:
* bank statements;
* verified business transactions;
* tax filings;
* rent-payment history;
* cooperative savings;
* digital payment records;
* audited business cash flow;
* verified contracts.
Government guarantees could absorb part of the lender’s credit risk while maintaining prudent underwriting.

14. COMPARING THE FIVE MODELS
Financing Instrument United States United Kingdom Canada Singapore Malaysia
Direct capital subsidy Yes Strong Strong Strong Strong
Tax incentives Very strong Used Used Less central Used
Government-supported loans Yes Strong Strong Very strong Yes
Mortgage guarantees Strong system Available through wider system Important Public finance structure Very relevant
Rental assistance/social housing Strong Strong Strong Strong Strong
Public/strategic land intervention Local/state Important Provincial/local Very strong Important
Household purchase grants Various Various Various Very strong Various
Private capital mobilisation Very strong Very strong Strong Complementary Strong
Dedicated affordable housing providers Yes Very strong Strong HDB Government agencies/PR1MA
Informal-income mortgage support Limited applicability Conventional market Conventional market Structured system Particularly relevant

TEN LESSONS FOR NIGERIA
Lesson One: Stop Measuring Housing Policy Only by Units Built
Government should measure:
* affordability;
* household income-to-housing-cost ratios;
* mortgage accessibility;
* rental burden;
* land cost;
* infrastructure cost;
* financing cost;
* occupancy;
* beneficiary income.
A million houses that intended beneficiaries cannot afford do not represent successful affordable housing policy.

Lesson Two: Establish a National Affordable Housing Finance Framework
Nigeria needs a coordinated financing architecture connecting:
Federal Government
State Governments
FMBN
FHA
NMRC
commercial banks
mortgage banks
pension funds
insurance companies
developers
housing cooperatives
institutional investors
development finance institutions
and households.

Lesson Three: Create a Nigerian Affordable Housing Tax Credit
Drawing inspiration from the American model, qualifying investors in approved affordable rental housing could receive tax incentives linked to:
* number of units delivered;
* duration of affordability;
* household income served;
* rents charged;
* location;
* energy performance.
The incentive should be performance-based.
No affordable unit delivered should mean no affordable housing tax benefit.

15. CREATE AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING CAPITAL GRANT
Nigeria could adopt elements of the British model.
Instead of government constructing everything itself, qualifying projects could compete for capital grants.
The grant could be calculated according to affordability.
For illustration:
Market housing
No grant.
Workforce housing
Limited incentive.
Affordable housing
Moderate grant.
Social housing
Larger grant.
Housing for extremely vulnerable households
Highest subsidy.
The lower the household’s ability to pay, the larger the subsidy required.
This is more economically rational than pretending that every household can pay the same price.

16. CREATE A NATIONAL HOUSING CREDIT GUARANTEE CORPORATION
Nigeria should strongly consider a large-scale housing credit guarantee mechanism.
It should target:
* informal-sector workers;
* SMEs;
* self-employed professionals;
* young entrepreneurs;
* first-time homeowners;
* household

The post How Leading Countries Finance Affordable Housing appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

The Nigerian Institution of Surveyors (NIS) has called on the Federal Government to implement a nationwide digital land mapping programme across Nigeria’s 774 local government areas, saying the initiative could modernise land administration, improve investment inflows, and support economic development.

Speaking at the institution’s 60th Annual General Meeting and Conference in Kano, NIS President, Pius Chukwuemeka Eze, said Nigeria needs a comprehensive and unified digital cadastral system to unlock its full economic potential. He proposed a “one local government, one digital parcel map” initiative covering all parts of the country.

According to Eze, accurate geospatial information is essential for infrastructure development, agriculture, urban planning, environmental management, and national security. He noted that reliable mapping systems would help resolve land disputes, strengthen property registration processes, and improve revenue generation at all levels of government.

The surveyors’ body also stated that geospatial information has become increasingly important in today’s digital economy because development planning and investment decisions depend heavily on accurate spatial data. The institution maintained that surveyors possess the technical expertise required to execute the proposed digital mapping programme and called for stronger political support and funding to drive implementation.

Eze further urged governments to integrate surveying professionals more effectively into infrastructure planning and execution, arguing that better use of geospatial intelligence could improve decision-making and address several developmental challenges. He also advocated the completion of the National Cadastral Infrastructure and increased investment in surveying technology and capacity development.

The institution proposed the establishment of a zonal geospatial institute in Kano to train professionals in emerging technologies and strengthen the country’s geospatial capabilities. Stakeholders believe a nationwide digital land mapping system could significantly improve land governance, support economic planning, and attract greater investment into Nigeria’s property and infrastructure sectors.

The post Surveyors Propose Digital Land Mapping in All 774 LGAs appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

A Premier Executive Platform for Africa’s Housing Future

The Africa International Housing Show (AIHS) proudly presents the AIHS Housing CEOs Forum, a high-level executive platform bringing together Africa’s most influential leaders across housing, finance, infrastructure, investment, and urban development sectors.

As Africa experiences rapid urbanization and increasing housing demand, the need for innovative financing structures, strategic partnerships, and sustainable urban development solutions has become more urgent than ever.

The Forum creates a powerful environment where policymakers, investors, developers, financial institutions, development partners, and industry stakeholders can collaborate, exchange ideas, and drive practical solutions for housing transformation across the continent.

Hosted as part of the 20th Anniversary Edition of AIHS, the Forum seeks to reposition housing as a catalyst for economic growth, job creation, infrastructure expansion, and sustainable city development across Africa.

Why the Forum Matters

Africa faces a significant and growing housing deficit driven by several challenges:

• Rapid population growth
• Limited access to affordable mortgage systems
• Rising construction costs
• Inadequate infrastructure financing
• Weak housing delivery systems

The AIHS Housing CEOs Forum was created to bridge these gaps by establishing a strategic platform where:

• Policy meets investment
• Innovation drives transformation
• Partnerships unlock opportunities
• Finance supports sustainable urban growth

The Forum serves as a meeting point for governments, private sector leaders, development finance institutions, and global investors committed to shaping the future of housing in Africa.

Forum Objectives

Promote Strategic Housing Investments

Facilitate high-level engagement among governments, investors, developers, financial institutions, and development partners to unlock large-scale housing and infrastructure financing opportunities.

Strengthen Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs)

Encourage partnerships that accelerate affordable housing delivery and urban transformation across Africa.

Advance Housing Finance Innovation

Promote innovative financing mechanisms, including:

• Mortgage systems
• Blended finance models
• Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs)
• Infrastructure bonds
• Housing funds
• Fintech-driven housing solutions

Foster Policy Dialogue

Create a platform for policymakers and industry leaders to address key issues surrounding:

• Land administration
• Housing finance
• Regulatory reforms
• Urban governance

Position AIHS as Africa’s Leading Housing Investment Platform

Strengthen AIHS as a globally recognized platform for housing investment, policy engagement, innovation, and sustainable urban development.

Who Will Attend?

The Forum is expected to convene over 500 high-level delegates from Africa and beyond. Participants include:

Government Leaders

• Presidents and Heads of State
• Ministers of Housing
• Ministers of Finance
• Governors
• Mayors and City Leaders
• Housing Agencies and Regulators

Private Sector Executives

• Bank CEOs
• Mortgage Bank Executives
• Real Estate Developers
• Construction Company Executives
• Infrastructure Investors
• Pension Fund Administrators
• PropTech Founders

Development Partners

• Development Finance Institutions (DFIs)
• Multilateral Organizations
• Bilateral Agencies
• Sovereign Wealth Funds

Industry Stakeholders

• Architects
• Urban Planners
• Housing Cooperatives
• Manufacturers
• Professional Associations

Key Discussion Areas

Housing Finance & Mortgage Expansion

• Affordable mortgage systems
• Long-term housing finance
• Pension-backed housing finance
• Mortgage refinancing models
• MREIF and related initiatives

Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs)

• Structuring bankable housing PPPs
• Government incentives
• Risk-sharing frameworks

Affordable Housing Delivery

• Mass housing strategies
• Cost-reduction innovations
• Alternative building technologies

Smart Cities & Urban Development

• Integrated urban planning
• Smart infrastructure
• Climate-resilient cities

Infrastructure & Construction Financing

• Infrastructure investment models
• Blended finance solutions
• Infrastructure bonds

Green & Sustainable Housing

• Energy-efficient housing
• Green finance
• Climate-smart construction

Technology & Innovation

• PropTech solutions
• Digital land systems
• Artificial Intelligence in construction
• Smart building technologies

Forum Highlights

Ministerial & CEOs Roundtable

An exclusive high-level dialogue featuring ministers, commissioners, CEOs, investors, and global housing leaders.

Housing Investment Marketplace

A dedicated platform for project presentations, investment matchmaking, and partnership opportunities connecting governments, developers, financiers, and investors.

DFI & Investors Session

Dedicated engagement with leading development finance and investment institutions, including:

• World Bank Group
• International Finance Corporation (IFC)
• African Development Bank (AfDB)
• Shelter Afrique
• Africa Finance Corporation (AFC)

CEO Fireside Chats

Strategic conversations with industry leaders and global experts shaping the future of housing and urban development.

Policy & Reform Dialogue

Focused discussions on:

• Land reforms
• Mortgage regulations
• Housing finance reforms
• Urban governance

Innovation & PropTech Showcase

Presentation of emerging technologies and digital solutions transforming Africa’s housing ecosystem.

AIHS Housing Leadership Awards

Recognition of excellence in:

• Affordable housing delivery
• Housing finance
• Innovation
• Public service leadership
• Urban transformation

Expected Outcomes

The Forum is expected to generate:

• Strategic housing investment commitments
• New public-private partnership agreements
• Increased DFI participation in housing projects
• Cross-border housing collaborations
• Enhanced policy dialogue and reforms
• Greater access to housing finance
• Increased visibility for African housing opportunities
• Stronger collaboration among stakeholders

Event Information

Event: AIHS Housing CEOs Forum

Hosted By: Africa International Housing Show (AIHS)

Special Edition: 20th Anniversary Edition

Strategic Partner: World Expo

Venue: Abuja, Nigeria

Expected Participation:

• 20,000+ AIHS attendees
• 500+ exhibitors
• 20+ participating countries
• 500+ CEOs, policymakers, and investors

Partnership & Sponsorship Opportunities

Organizations can participate as:

• Strategic Partners
• Lead Sponsors
• Session Sponsors
• Knowledge Partners
• Investment Partners
• Exhibitors

Benefits Include:

• High-level visibility
• Executive networking opportunities
• Premium brand positioning
• Access to policymakers and investors
• Media exposure
• Thought leadership opportunities

Join Africa’s Housing Transformation

The AIHS Housing CEOs Forum represents a major step toward building Africa’s leading housing investment and policy platform. By convening leaders from government, finance, development institutions, and the private sector, the Forum will catalyze practical solutions capable of transforming Africa’s housing and urban development landscape for generations.

AIHS invites stakeholders across Africa and the global community to participate in this landmark initiative and help shape the future of housing across the continent.

The post AIHS Housing CEOs Forum 2026: Financing Africa’s Housing Transformation Through Partnerships and Innovation appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

As housing demand rises across Africa, the Africa International Housing Show (AIHS) is fast becoming a major business platform for real estate developers, building materials manufacturers and home interior companies.

Ahead of its 20th anniversary “Legacy Edition,” stakeholders say the annual event has evolved beyond a traditional exhibition into a marketplace for deals, partnerships and industry-wide transformation.

Boosting Sales, Expanding Markets

Participants say AIHS offers a direct route to market by connecting exhibitors with thousands of prospective buyers, real estate investors, and key government agencies.

Many companies have reported securing bulk product orders, closing property sales and establishing distribution partnerships during the event.

For several industry players, AIHS is increasingly seen as a place where business transactions are executed rather than merely showcased.

Gateway to International Opportunities

With participants drawn from more than 25 countries, the platform is also opening doors to cross-border partnerships and export opportunities.

Local manufacturers of building materials and home interior brands benefit from increased visibility, enabling them to access new markets across Africa.

Access to Decision Makers

Industry stakeholders highlight access as one of AIHS’ strongest advantages. The event convenes top-level decision makers, including government officials, chief executives of real estate firms, and representatives of financial institutions.

This convergence creates opportunities for policy engagement, strategic alliances and large-scale project deals that are often difficult to secure elsewhere.

Platform for Innovation

AIHS also provides a stage for companies to unveil new products and solutions. Exhibitors showcase innovative building materials, modern interior designs, and smart, environmentally sustainable housing technologies.

Through initiatives such as the AIHS Innovation Arena, participants can pitch ideas to investors, attract distributors and gain media exposure.

Enhancing Brand Visibility

Exhibitors benefit from extensive exposure through exhibition stands, traditional media coverage and digital amplification.

Stakeholders say this visibility helps companies build credibility, strengthen brand reputation and position themselves as leaders within the housing sector.

For building materials and interior brands, such exposure often translates into increased customer trust and higher sales.

Supporting Developers

For property developers, AIHS offers access to ready buyers and platforms to showcase ongoing and upcoming projects, including off-plan developments.

Many developers leverage the event to close deals, attract investors and secure financing for projects.

Strengthening Industry Value Chain

By bringing together developers, contractors, manufacturers, designers and financiers, AIHS promotes collaboration across the housing ecosystem.

Observers say this integrated approach contributes to cost efficiency, improved coordination and faster project delivery.

Driving Housing Solutions

Stakeholders note that AIHS is playing a role in bridging the gap between housing supply and demand, while also promoting local manufacturing and encouraging innovation in construction and interior design.

Outlook

As Africa continues efforts to address its housing deficit, AIHS is emerging as a critical driver of growth, enabling industry players to scale operations, build networks and unlock new opportunities.

With its 20th edition approaching, participants say the event remains central to shaping the future of housing on the continent.

The post AIHS Drives Growth for Developers, Building Materials, Interior Brands appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

Africa’s housing crisis has deepened, with the continent now facing an estimated $1.4 trillion housing finance shortfall, according to the International Finance Corporation (IFC).

The report highlights a widening gap between capital inflows and rising housing demand across Africa, as urbanisation and population growth continue to outpace supply. Analysts warn that the deficit could worsen if urgent structural reforms are not implemented.

The IFC estimates that Africa’s housing deficit could surge to 130 million units by 2030, up from about 50 million units currently, underscoring the rapid pace at which demand is growing beyond available supply.

Globally, housing finance markets are experiencing strong expansion, driven by digital lending innovations, supportive government policies, and increasing urban migration. Projections indicate that the global residential mortgage market could grow from $15 trillion in 2025 to nearly $23 trillion by 2033.

However, Africa continues to lag behind due to weak mortgage systems, limited access to long-term financing, and rising public debt burdens that constrain government investment in housing infrastructure.

The UN-Habitat has also warned that developing regions, particularly in Africa, are not keeping pace with global housing finance growth, raising concerns over affordability and access.

Speaking at the 19th Africa International Housing Show in Abuja, Minister of Housing and Urban Development, Ahmed Musa Dangiwa, stressed the urgency of addressing both supply and financing challenges.

He said millions of Africans remain unable to afford decent housing, even when units are available, noting that the Federal Government is focused on fixing structural and macroeconomic barriers to affordability.

Within the continent, Nigeria and South Africa dominate the housing finance market, accounting for approximately 45 per cent and 40 per cent respectively. Despite this, Nigeria’s mortgage penetration remains below 0.5 per cent of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), one of the lowest globally.

The country’s mortgage portfolio is estimated at between N500 billion and N700 billion between 2023 and 2025, reflecting limited access to structured housing finance.

To address the gap, the Federal Government has introduced the Renewed Hope Housing Programme, aimed at boosting supply through a mix of cities, estates, and social housing initiatives. Authorities say over N70 billion in private sector funding has already been mobilised through public-private partnerships.

Dangiwa also highlighted efforts by the Federal Mortgage Bank of Nigeria to expand access through schemes such as Rent-to-Own and rental assistance programmes targeting low- and middle-income earners.

He added that the proposed MOFI Real Estate Investment Fund is expected to unlock long-term financing and improve mortgage accessibility across the country.

Industry stakeholders believe Nigeria’s housing finance market could grow to between $1 billion and $2 billion by 2030 if ongoing reforms are sustained. However, this remains significantly below the estimated N20 trillion to N30 trillion required annually to bridge the housing deficit.

President of the Nigerian Institution of Estate Surveyors and Valuers, Kunle Alonge, called for stronger government incentives and regulatory frameworks to encourage private sector participation.

He noted that successful housing systems in developed economies rely on structured collaboration between government and private investors, urging Nigeria to adopt a similar model.

As global housing finance continues to expand, experts say Africa must align policy frameworks, financing systems, and land administration processes to unlock scale and improve affordability.

Dangiwa reiterated that housing remains a fundamental human need, stressing that investments in the sector would drive job creation, economic growth, and urban development across the continent.

The post Housing Finance Shortfall in Africa Reaches $1.4 Trillion — IFC Report appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

Pro­vi­sion of infra­struc­ture is a major require­ment for adequate hous­ing. It is well known that one of the major pre­vail­ing pre­dic­a­ments in the FCT Admin­is­tra­tion is the absence of funds for the pro­vi­sion of infra­struc­ture to the many planned dis­tricts in the city, in which land alloc­a­tions were fully made. Presently, only primary infra­struc­tures are provided in some of the dis­tricts, without the sec­ond­ary. In many oth­ers, none at all. Ideally, this con­tra­dicts stand­ard prac­tice.

Pro­vi­sion of infra­struc­ture is a major require­ment for adequate hous­ing. It is well known that one of the major pre­vail­ing pre­dic­a­ments in the FCT Admin­is­tra­tion is the absence of funds for the pro­vi­sion of infra­struc­ture to the many planned dis­tricts in the city, in which land alloc­a­tions were fully made. Presently, only primary infra­struc­tures are provided in some of the dis­tricts, without the sec­ond­ary. In many oth­ers, none at all. Ideally, this con­tra­dicts stand­ard prac­tice.

Thus to intro­duce a new policy that would lead to massive hous­ing devel­op­ment without any arrange­ment for the pro­vi­sion of infra­struc­ture would be akin to provid­ing tea without sugar. Accord­ingly, the author­it­ies would provide the primary infra­struc­ture that leads to the indi­vidual mass hous­ing estates, while the developers would provide the sec­ond­ary infra­struc­ture which includes the net­works of roads, elec­tri­city, water and oth­ers to serve the vari­ous hous­ing units in their hous­ing estates. That was made part of the con­di­tion for the alloc­a­tion.

Thus to intro­duce a new policy that would lead to massive hous­ing devel­op­ment without any arrange­ment for the pro­vi­sion of infra­struc­ture would be akin to provid­ing tea without sugar. Accord­ingly, the author­it­ies would provide the primary infra­struc­ture that leads to the indi­vidual mass hous­ing estates, while the developers would provide the sec­ond­ary infra­struc­ture which includes the net­works of roads, elec­tri­city, water and oth­ers to serve the vari­ous hous­ing units in their hous­ing estates. That was made part of the con­di­tion for the alloc­a­tion.

Also, it is illegal for any mass hous­ing developer to engage in the prac­tice of selling the land. What is required is for the selling of the built houses as a product of the alloc­a­tion. Unfor­tu­nately, some unscru­pu­lous developers, who applied and secured the mass hous­ing alloc­a­tions, and with the full know­ledge of their inca­pa­city to meet up with the con­di­tions, would illeg­ally par­cel the big land into smal­ler plots, even without the pro­vi­sion of the infra­struc­ture and com­mence selling to indi­vidu­als.

Also, it is illegal for any mass hous­ing developer to engage in the prac­tice of selling the land. What is required is for the selling of the built houses as a product of the alloc­a­tion. Unfor­tu­nately, some unscru­pu­lous developers, who applied and secured the mass hous­ing alloc­a­tions, and with the full know­ledge of their inca­pa­city to meet up with the con­di­tions, would illeg­ally par­cel the big land into smal­ler plots, even without the pro­vi­sion of the infra­struc­ture and com­mence selling to indi­vidu­als.

There are oth­ers that would secure the alloc­a­tions and later com­mence the pro­cess of con­ver­sion to obtain the Right of Occu­pancy. They were fully aware abin­itio, that such con­ver­sion would not be allowed.

There are oth­ers that would secure the alloc­a­tions and later com­mence the pro­cess of con­ver­sion to obtain the Right of Occu­pancy. They were fully aware abin­itio, that such con­ver­sion would not be allowed.

The actu­al­isa­tion of the issu­ance of the Cer­ti­fic­ates of Occu­pancy to the end users is sub­ject to com­pli­ance with the neces­sary pro­ced­ures by the developers. These include the evid­ence of obtain­ing build­ing plan approval from the author­ity prior to the com­mence­ment of the project and ensur­ing the imple­ment­a­tion without any viol­a­tion.

All off-takers or sub­scribers to mass hous­ing units must ensure that this con­di­tion is met by the developer before they start depos­it­ing their hard-earned funds. This inform­a­tion becomes very neces­sary, because many informal vendors are now parad­ing hous­ing products for sale along the traffic, on many major junc­tions around the city.

All off-takers or sub­scribers to mass hous­ing units must ensure that this con­di­tion is met by the developer before they start depos­it­ing their hard-earned funds. This inform­a­tion becomes very neces­sary, because many informal vendors are now parad­ing hous­ing products for sale along the traffic, on many major junc­tions around the city.

Cer­tainly, many developers would have obtained the neces­sary approvals before the project com­mence­ment, but most of the mass hous­ing sub­scribers are not aware that the developer’s respons­ib­il­ity does not end with the hand­ing over their houses at the end of the con­struc­tion. The developer would sub­sequently sub­mit the list of the indi­vidual house own­ers to the author­ity for the issu­ance of Cer­ti­fic­ate of Occu­pancy to them. It is the right of the house own­ers to ensure that the developer makes the sub­mis­sion of the list to the author­ity for the com­mence­ment of the pro­cess.

Cer­tainly, many developers would have obtained the neces­sary approvals before the project com­mence­ment, but most of the mass hous­ing sub­scribers are not aware that the developer’s respons­ib­il­ity does not end with the hand­ing over their houses at the end of the con­struc­tion. The developer would sub­sequently sub­mit the list of the indi­vidual house own­ers to the author­ity for the issu­ance of Cer­ti­fic­ate of Occu­pancy to them. It is the right of the house own­ers to ensure that the developer makes the sub­mis­sion of the list to the author­ity for the com­mence­ment of the pro­cess.

As earlier stated, the trans­ac­tion for buy­ing a mass hous­ing plot, not the built house is illegal. But, if made any­how, the cost should be much less than that of a stat­utory alloc­a­tion. This is for the bene­fit of genu­ine developers, who would like to buy from some char­ac­ters that applied and got the alloc­a­tions for spec­u­la­tion, des­pite the illeg­al­ity.

As earlier stated, the trans­ac­tion for buy­ing a mass hous­ing plot, not the built house is illegal. But, if made any­how, the cost should be much less than that of a stat­utory alloc­a­tion. This is for the bene­fit of genu­ine developers, who would like to buy from some char­ac­ters that applied and got the alloc­a­tions for spec­u­la­tion, des­pite the illeg­al­ity.

In the absence of the desir­able, the avail­able becomes desir­able. The genu­ine developers should be guided against any deceit that would extort heavy amount from them, instead of much less.

Some­time in March 2012, we brought up instances of viol­a­tions of many land uses, such as Dis­trict Parks, Mar­kets and Sec­ond­ary Schools that were wrongly alloc­ated for mass hous­ing devel­op­ments. Also, instances abound, where the developers sub­divided the mass hous­ing alloc­a­tions, and sold to sub­scribers to build the houses them­selves. Yet, the developer would con­tinue to claim own­er­ship of the estate, with fur­ther impos­i­tion of pur­por­ted levies for the pro­vi­sion of infra­struc­ture and the estate man­age­ment.

Some­time in March 2012, we brought up instances of viol­a­tions of many land uses, such as Dis­trict Parks, Mar­kets and Sec­ond­ary Schools that were wrongly alloc­ated for mass hous­ing devel­op­ments. Also, instances abound, where the developers sub­divided the mass hous­ing alloc­a­tions, and sold to sub­scribers to build the houses them­selves. Yet, the developer would con­tinue to claim own­er­ship of the estate, with fur­ther impos­i­tion of pur­por­ted levies for the pro­vi­sion of infra­struc­ture and the estate man­age­ment.

Threats of revoc­a­tion would be made to the sub­scribers upon refusal to com­ply with such illegal impos­i­tions. Due to the des­per­a­tion in own­ing houses, the glut­ton­ous developer would sur­repti­tiously sell the sub­divided land to another anxious sub­scriber. Thus, double or triple interest would be mali­ciously cre­ated on a single piece of land. It is import­ant to know that there are aven­ues for lay­ing com­plaints, and neces­sary sanc­tions would be imposed by the Met­ro­pol­itan Man­age­ment Coun­cil against the developers that have the habit of extort­ing money from their sub­scribers or off-takers.

Threats of revoc­a­tion would be made to the sub­scribers upon refusal to com­ply with such illegal impos­i­tions. Due to the des­per­a­tion in own­ing houses, the glut­ton­ous developer would sur­repti­tiously sell the sub­divided land to another anxious sub­scriber. Thus, double or triple interest would be mali­ciously cre­ated on a single piece of land. It is import­ant to know that there are aven­ues for lay­ing com­plaints, and neces­sary sanc­tions would be imposed by the Met­ro­pol­itan Man­age­ment Coun­cil against the developers that have the habit of extort­ing money from their sub­scribers or off-takers.

As with any type of land alloc­a­tion any­where, con­di­tions are attached for the alloc­a­tion, for the pur­poses of attain­ment of the desired object­ives. In order to be back on track what is required is strict com­pli­ance with the mass hous­ing policy as con­tained in the FCT Mass Hous­ing Devel­op­ment Guidelines.

Also, there should be com­pli­ance with the Abuja City Land Use, dens­ity of plots with their required fam­ily sizes and build­ing design require­ments as stip­u­lated in the devel­op­ment con­trol manual, which clearly spells out the actual rules and reg­u­la­tions of plot devel­op­ment.

In the absence of the desir­able, the avail­able becomes desir­able. The genu­ine developers should be guided against any deceit that would extort heavy amount from them, instead of much less

The post The FCT mass hous­ing policy and chal­lenges (II) appeared first on Housing TV Africa.

With skyrocketing prices and varying levels of infrastructure development, it’s crucial for buyers to be aware of the risks involved. In this report, we highlight the top 10 risky areas in Lekki where caution is advised before making a property investment.

READ ALSO: Lagos Court to Probe Alleged Conspiracy and Forgery in Property Dispute Case

1. Orchid Road Caution: Buyers should be wary of properties on Orchid Road, where many homes lack proper titles and are pending the Governor’s consent. Additionally, many of these properties are without approved building plans, with some constructed on canals & government easements, leading to ongoing demolitions.
2. Ikota Axis Warning: The Ikota area is notorious for estates filled with homes that have incomplete title documents and lack building plan approvals. Properties obstructing canals due to developer sand-filling and lacking the Governor’s consent are common, marking this area as another potential demolition zone.
3. Lekky Palm City Badore Risks: In Lekky Palm City Badore, numerous homes with incomplete documentation are a concern. Properties falsely claimed by owners with counterfeit C of O and dubious Governor’s consents are prevalent, especially those built near canals, hinting at impending demolitions.
4. Monastery Road Red Flags: Prospective buyers should be cautious of Monastery Road, where lands are often sold with questionable title documents, fraudulent gazettes, and governor’s consents. Many of these lands are reportedly owned by the Oba of Lagos, and unauthorized sales by developers could lead to serious legal troubles.
5. Chevron Extension Issues: Chevron Extension is rife with properties featuring fraudulent governor’s consents and incomplete title documents. The area is also affected by cloned Ojomu Deeds of Assignment, indicating widespread property-related problems.
6. Lekky County Extension Disputes: The Lekky County Extension is embroiled in controversies over disputed C of O and ongoing land-related court cases. Buyers often find themselves with unallocated lands & houses with documents that cannot be perfected, leading to excessive complications.
7. Behind LBS Sangotedo Dangers: The area behind Lagos Business School in Sangotedo is fraught with land sales scams, including fake gazettes and lands sold by Omoniles under false pretences as part of government schemes. The extent of documentation fraud in this area is alarming.
8. Okun Mopo and Mopo Ibeju Cautions: Dubious land sales are rampant in Okun Mopo and Mopo Ibeju, with unsuspecting buyers acquiring lands outside approved gazettes or without proper C of O.
9. Ogombo Community Scrutiny: In Ogombo, lands are sold to unsuspecting buyers outside the approved gazettes or without C of O. The community is currently reassessing documents due to the prevalence of houses sold by developers without proper title documents or approved plans.
10. Alpha Beach Road Risks: Alpha Beach Road is notorious for lands sold without title documents. Buyers risk purchasing properties outside the official gazette, which could lead to regrettable outcomes.

I hope this helps you stay safe and avoid scams in Lekki.

The post 10 Risky Areas in Lekki to Buy a Property appeared first on Housing TV Africa.