Cooperative Pathways to Housing Equity through Community Led Land Access and Urban Inclusion in Karu Nigeria

Cooperative Pathways to Housing Equity through Community Led Land Access and Urban Inclusion in Karu Nigeria | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Cooperative Pathways to Housing Equity through Community Led Land Access and Urban Inclusion in Karu Nigeria Daniel Adamu, Fundi Zacharia, Austine Audu Danladi, Anil Palakodeti This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-7936612/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Rapid urbanization in sub-Saharan Africa has intensified challenges around equitable access to land and housing, particularly for low- and medium-income earners. In Nigeria’s Karu Urban Area (KUA), adjacent to the Federal Capital Territory of Abuja, cooperative societies have emerged as grassroots mechanisms for navigating the complexities of land acquisition and housing development. This study investigates the role of housing cooperatives in facilitating access to land and incremental housing construction, highlighting their contribution to inclusive urban development and the realization of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 11. Drawing on spatial and quantitative methods, the research analyzes the organizational structures, operational strategies, and spatial distribution of 20 cooperative societies in KUA. Findings reveal that mutual housing cooperatives dominate the landscape, enabling members to collectively negotiate land prices, manage documentation, and support housing development. Despite limited government involvement, these cooperatives function as informal governance systems, bridging gaps in formal land delivery and promoting resilience, equity, and community empowerment. The study underscores the potential of cooperative-led models to transform informal urban settlements into more habitable and sustainable environments. cooperative societies low- and medium-income earners housing SDG Agenda 11 sub-Sahara Africa Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 1.0 Introduction Access to land remains paramount in efforts to address the growing shortage of housing supply not only among low-income earners but also among high-income earners in many developing countries of the world, including Nigeria. This is because it remains the first step in the process of house ownership. Apart from the issue of accessibility, potential house owners also face the challenge of inadequate land tenure security (Eziyi, 2010). Lombard and Rakodi (2016) highlight the intense competition for well-located land that is relatively easy to service and adaptable for diverse urban functions, particularly affordable housing. They point out that both governmental institutions and market mechanisms often fall short in supplying adequate serviced land in appropriate locations to keep pace with rapid urban expansion and reduce inequality, especially regarding housing access. Additionally, existing legal and regulatory frameworks are frequently insufficient. As Ezivi (2010) notes, land plays a fundamental role in the property development process, and its acquisition is essential for promoting efficient and sustainable housing development in urban areas. However, as crucial as land is in determining access to housing, the complexity involved in, as well as the high cost of accessing land through the formal system in most nations of sub-Sahara Africa, has necessitated the shift to other options for accessing land by low-income households. Rakodi (2005) found that the complexity of formal access to land has led urban residents to organise and combine resources with an objective to providing shelter for themselves. Such arrangements come in different forms, one of which is the idea of cooperative societies. Informal property markets—encompassing land and housing—have increasingly become widespread and rapidly expanding in many developing nations, including those in sub-Saharan Africa. These markets have emerged largely due to the significant shortcomings and inefficiencies of formal systems, such as official tenure arrangements and land administration, in meeting the housing needs of the majority of urban low- and middle-income earners (Rakodi, 2007). Research conducted in countries like Tanzania, Vietnam, Ecuador, Ghana, and Nigeria indicates that informal land delivery systems often outperform formal mechanisms in providing housing. This is largely attributed to their accessibility, user-friendly processes, and strong social acceptance (Rakodi, 2005; Adamu et al., 2019; Danladi et al., 2019) Over the years, cooperative societies have been instrumental in making land accessible to their members by easing the bottlenecks and lowering the cost involved in accessing land by low- and medium-income earners through an individual-based approach. The process allows for a self-help and incremental approach that also saves the individual from the stress of having to go through the rigorous process of regularizing their land title since the entire process can be handled holistically by the cooperative societies (Adamu, et all 2019). In separate studies, Eziyi and Chuba (2011) and Olayede (2009) explored the involvement of cooperatives in facilitating land access for housing in Nigeria. Their findings suggest that cooperatives hold significant potential in tackling key housing supply challenges, such as limited land accessibility and difficulties with documentation—issues commonly faced by prospective homeowners in many developing countries. In Nigeria, this cooperative-driven approach has recently gained traction, particularly in the Karu Urban Area (KUA) of Nasarawa State (Adamu et al., 2019). The proximity of KUA to Abuja (Nigeria’s Federal Capital Territory) provides the shortest working distance route for workers and also holds strong potential for business owners owing to its growing population. This incentive has made it the epicenter of the activities for cooperative societies. This study examines the forms and organisational structures of cooperative societies, with a focus on how they incentivize access to land for low- and medium-income families and the extent to which they have made land available to their target population. The current study thus seeks to provide an understanding of the operations pertaining to cooperative societies as effective and sustainable access options to land for all, irrespective of social and economic status. 1.1 Study Area The Karu Urban Area (KUA) falls within the jurisdiction of the Karu Local Government Area in Nasarawa State, Nigeria. Designated as a Planning Area, it spans an estimated geographic area of approximately 40,000 hectares (Nasarawa Urban Development Board [NUDB], 2009). The study area is bordered by the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Abuja to the west, by Keffi and Nasarawa Local Government Areas to the east and south, and by Jaba Local Government Area of Kaduna State to the north (see Figures 1 and 2). The study focuses on key urban settlements within KUA, including Mararaba, Kuruduma, New Karu, Nyanya Gwandara, Masaka, Kodape, Karshi, and Mararaban Gurku. 2.0 Cooperative (Thrift and Saving) Society To discuss the forms and structures of cooperative societies, it is important to first describe what cooperative societies entail in general terms and within the context of this study. In the literature, cooperative societies have often been described in subjective terms. In other words, they have mostly been understood in terms of the goals and objectives for which they were established (Eziyi & Chuba, 2011). Generally, cooperative societies are formed by people who seek to provide benefits to a group of members. Cooperatives have been characterised as organizations that tackle economic challenges by mobilizing local savings, managing credit distribution, and fostering thrift and entrepreneurial activities among members (Adekunle & Henson, 2007). Another viewpoint describes cooperatives as supportive organizations with diverse goals, including promoting members' welfare and safeguarding their shared interests (Adinya et al., 2008). According to the International Cooperative Alliance (2011), cooperative societies are autonomous associations of individuals who voluntarily unite to address shared economic, social, and cultural needs and aspirations through jointly owned and democratically managed enterprises. Based on the foregoing, two key paradigms that define housing cooperatives are that they are formed by members pursuing economic benefits and they are organisations of individuals whose capabilities (social capital) are limited but require collective efforts to achieve. These are the people who are probably victims of distributive inequality and whose individual purchasing power has limited their access to housing land in cities. In the context of this study, a housing cooperative (thrift and savings) society is defined as a voluntary association of individuals with limited financial means who pool their resources, sharing both the risks and benefits, in pursuit of a common economic objective—namely, improving access to land for housing among members. It is an organisation wherein individuals of meagre resources voluntarily associate on the basis of equality and, by consolidating their resources, aim for the promotion of their own economic interests, especially in terms of delivering housing land. As previously mentioned, a key feature of thrift and savings cooperatives is their role in promoting capital mobilization and wealth accumulation among members (Musa, 2005; Enete, 2008). This aligns with the understanding that capital accumulation is essential for economic development, which is why cooperatives emphasize savings and investments to serve the collective interests of their members (Adeyemo & Bamire, 2005). In this context, cooperatives are seen as mechanisms that provide disadvantaged groups with access to essential resources while fostering social integration and cohesion, particularly in many developing countries in Africa (Lemanski, 2008; Develtere et al., 2008). The above definitions clearly illustrate that cooperatives are self-regulated socio-economic enterprises established, owned, and managed by voluntary associations of individuals with shared interests operating under democratic principles. Kaswan (2007) highlights that cooperative principles are rooted in core values such as self-help, democracy, equality, equity, solidarity, fairness, and concern for others. Historical records indicate that cooperative principles trace their origins to the Rochdale Pioneers' principles established in 1844. However, in Nigeria, traditional forms of cooperatives, such as esusu (contribution clubs) and age-based groups, existed long before colonial rule and operated based on cooperative principles (Madu & Umebali, 1993). This suggests that cooperative principles have long been adopted in the country. The introduction of the modern cooperative movement in Nigeria followed the global economic downturn of 1929–1930. As documented by Ukaga (1992) and Musa (2005), cooperatives were officially established in Nigeria in 1935 after the colonial government implemented the recommendations of Mr. C. F. Strickland ’ s report on their potential in the country. According to Adinya et al. (2008) and Agbo (2009), the initial cooperative societies were predominantly formed by farmers, including cocoa farmers in the western region, palm produce farmers in the east, and groundnut farmers in the north. This suggests that cooperatives during the colonial period were strategically developed to support the extraction and supply of agricultural resources for industries in Britain and Europe. Following Nigeria's independence, the establishment and functioning of cooperatives have remained aligned with Strickland ’ s report and the International Labour Organization's (ILO) Recommendation 193 of 2000. Agbo (2009) highlights that the Nigerian government considers cooperatives as the primary vehicle for citizens to access agricultural and poverty alleviation initiatives, including Operation Feed the Nation (OFN), Better Life for Rural Women (BLFRW), the Family Support Programme (FSP), the Family Economic Advancement Programme (FEAP), and Government-Assisted Mass Transport Schemes. The government has consistently provided the necessary legal framework and policy support to facilitate the growth of cooperatives in Nigeria (Onuoha, 2002). Enete (2008) notes that the primary legislation governing the registration and operation of cooperatives in the country is the Nigerian Co-operative Societies Decree 90 of 1993. This law established the position of Director of Co-operatives at both federal and state levels, along with the Department of Co-operatives under various state ministries. Enete (2008) further explains that to encourage the establishment and expansion of cooperatives, the legislation does not restrict them to specific activities, provided their primary objective is to enhance the socio-economic well-being of their members. Consequently, it can be inferred that cooperatives in Nigeria ’ s post-independence period serve as a means for individuals to access and participate in government initiatives. As a result, cooperative activities are prevalent across rural and urban areas, involving workers from both the public and private sectors, as well as those in the informal economy. 2.1. Forms and Structures of Cooperative Societies A review of the literature indicates that cooperatives vary in name, structure, and objectives across different countries (Adeyemo & Bamire, 2005; Agbo, 2009; Oyewole, 2010). In Nigeria, farmers' cooperatives are the most prevalent, which aligns with the country's agriculture-driven economy. However, cooperative thrift and savings societies are becoming increasingly popular among traders, artisans, and both public- and private-sector workers in urban and rural areas. This growth is attributed to the role of cooperatives as essential mechanisms that provide low-income individuals with access to resources necessary for improving their socio-economic conditions and benefiting from government initiatives (Agbo, 2009; Enete, 2010). Ukaga (1992) categorized cooperative associations in Nigeria into three main types: production, marketing, and multi-purpose cooperatives. According to Ukaga, these cooperatives are typically overseen by patrons, committees, and executive officers, while members periodically convene to assess the associations ’ activities, financial status, and progress toward their objectives. Regarding thrift and savings cooperatives, Adeyemo and Bamire (2005), along with Adekunle and Henson (2007), observed that these cooperatives primarily focus on mobilizing savings and providing credit facilities to support members in various entrepreneurial ventures. Their research also highlighted that the primary aim of thrift and savings societies is to promote financial prudence among members while protecting them from exploitative lenders and high-interest loan providers. Regarding housing, Oyewole (2010) identified various housing cooperatives operating in the UK, the United States, Kenya, Malawi, and South Africa. His findings indicate that these cooperatives play a crucial role in providing members with credit facilities to meet their housing needs. Additionally, he noted that the structure and operations of housing cooperatives in these countries differ significantly from the investment and credit societies that are more prevalent in Nigeria. The study showed that cooperative investment and credit societies founded in the past few years in Ogbomosho, Nigeria, which were formed mainly by low- and medium-income earners, provided members with credit facilities for housing construction. This finding reinforces the perspective that cooperatives can serve as effective agents for delivering affordable mass housing in Nigeria (Mabogunje, 2005). From the reviewed literature, it is clear that, despite variations in name and structure across different regions, cooperatives are globally recognized as powerful tools for socio-economic development, poverty reduction, and social inclusion, particularly in developing countries. Furthermore, cooperatives are not restricted to specific sectors or activities and operate across both urban and rural areas. However, in Nigeria, the role of cooperatives in tackling the growing challenges of inadequate housing and insecure land tenure among low-income earners remains a relatively recent development. This concept is gradually gaining traction, especially among low- and middle-income groups. 2.1. Forms of Housing Cooperatives The following short definitions are given for forms of housing cooperatives: Housing Cooperative: A cooperative society established to meet the housing needs of its members. Members contribute equity, which funds from governments, financial markets, or other sources can supplement. Short-Life Housing Cooperatives: Designed as temporary housing solutions for the homeless, these cooperatives use collapsible structures or mobile homes placed on vacant institutional land. Community Housing Cooperative: Formed by a network of individual cooperatives within a neighborhood, this type of cooperative allows members to support each other and collectively acquire or lease new buildings based on shared experience and membership. Mutual Housing Cooperative: A non-profit cooperative corporation that develops, owns, and manages housing. The corporation is collectively owned and governed by the housing project's residents. Subsidized Housing Cooperative: This type of cooperative benefits from financial support provided by government or non-profit organizations, reducing housing costs for resident shareholders. Building Cooperative: A cooperative model where members collaboratively construct housing units. Once construction is complete, the cooperative dissolves, and ownership is transferred to individual members. Communal Housing Cooperatives: A cooperative society where residents share resources such as food and communal activities. Decisions are typically made through a consensus-based approach. Variations of this model include greenhouse cooperatives. 3.0. Informal Land Delivery Informal land delivery refers to the process by which land transactions are governed through mutual understanding, traditional authority, or power relations, with rules being enforced internally rather than by formal legal systems. These transactions typically occur outside the control and registration of official institutions. The formation of informal land markets often reflects local cultural and traditional practices, with specific conditions varying by local government areas. For example, traditional authorities such as chiefs and heads of landowning families often hold the customary power to determine how land under their stewardship is allocated (Oloyede, 2011). Gore ( 1993 ) characterizes informal institutions as socially accepted moral norms that form an alternative ‘moral economy.’ These institutions operate at various levels of society, employing explicit rules to guide behavior and interacting dynamically with broader social systems. 4.0. SDG Agenda 11: Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable The pursuit of sustainable development stems from the tension between the rapid transformation of human settlements and the slower regeneration of environmental resources. This tension is particularly pronounced in urban areas, where the majority of these changes are taking place, making cities both challenging and critical arenas for achieving sustainability (Abastante, 2021 ). This conflict in most developing countries has led to widening inequality between the rich and the poor who constitute the larger chunk of the urban population and who are at the mercy of the rich. The goal of SDG 2030 Agenda Target 11 is to guarantee that all individuals, especially the poor and vulnerable, have equitable access to economic resources. This includes access to essential services, land ownership and control, property rights, inheritance, natural resources, modern technology, and financial services. Nevertheless, cities and regions still face significant challenges in delivering adequate housing, infrastructure, and essential services—challenges that are further intensified by the growing global frequency of natural disasters (High-Level Forum on SDG, 2018). Secure land tenure rights for housing and natural resources are essential for impoverished populations to access fundamental resources necessary for sustaining and improving their livelihoods (UN-HABITAT, 2020 ). Without these rights, families and communities remain vulnerable to expropriation and encounter significant obstacles in obtaining financial resources, market opportunities, and essential services. Consequently, land tenure security is widely acknowledged as a critical factor in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), as it contributes to eradicating poverty and hunger, ensuring food security, promoting gender equality, developing sustainable cities and human settlements, and preserving terrestrial ecosystems. In line with this, the 2030 Agenda—particularly through SDG 11, which seeks to make cities inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable—acknowledges the critical role of urban areas as central hubs where social, economic, and environmental inequalities are most visible, especially in relation to resource exploitation. This makes cities essential players in the pursuit of sustainable development. Since 2015, SDG 11 has fostered collaboration and partnerships among a wide range of stakeholders at the local level, as well as across local, regional, and national governments. Furthermore, the lack of adequate housing has been recognized as a major factor undermining urban equity, inclusion, safety, and livelihood opportunities, often resulting in adverse health outcomes. 5.0. Methodology The current study seeks to provide an understanding of the operations pertaining to cooperative societies as effective and sustainable access options to land for all, irrespective of social and economic status. In this paper, they are also perceived as the alternative governance mechanism organically working behind the scene in pursuit of the core objectives of SDG 11 in Nigeria. This study employed spatial and quantitative research methods, utilizing data from both primary and secondary sources. To achieve the research objectives, purposive sampling was used to select respondents for the questionnaire administration. This approach focused on a specific group of executives who were well-positioned to provide reliable data. Primary data collection was carried out through questionnaires distributed to these carefully chosen respondents. The questionnaires were specifically directed to five (5) representatives of each of the 20 co-operative societies in KUA. It is important to note that these representatives were the elected executive members running the daily affairs of the cooperative societies. The questionnaires included a combination of semi-structured and open-ended questions, focusing on various aspects of cooperative operations. These questions explored the cooperative’s role in acquiring and securing land for housing, title registration, subdivision, and the allocation of plots for member development. Secondary data were gathered from documented land transactions between cooperatives and landowners, as well as from official records such as the cooperative's Constitution, by-laws, meeting minutes, and membership records. 6.0. Results and Discussion i. Spatial Analysis of the Distribution of various Forms of Housing Cooperatives in Karu Urban Area (KUA) We identified four forms of housing cooperatives and their spatial spread in the five districts of KUA. Fourteen (14) of the 20 cooperatives adopted the mutual housing approach, thus accounting for about 70% of the identified housing cooperatives in the study area. These mutual housing cooperatives were not-for-profit organisations promoting new mutuals for mutuals. They were organisations owned by and run for the benefit of current and future members. In essence, they were formed to outlive the need for housing. As such, housing is just one of such basic deliverables targeted by the cooperatives which if achieved would free them to proceed to other endeavour that would benefit members. The cooperatives were involved in different investment endeavour and declared yearly dividends to their members. As Figure 2 shows, the mutual housing cooperatives are spatially spread across all the districts of KUA but retain a significant presence in Karshi District. Community housing cooperatives were the next to be identified. These cooperatives are established through an umbrella association comprising individual cooperatives within a neighborhood. They typically unite to provide mutual support and have the capacity to purchase or lease new buildings, leveraging their collective experience and membership strength. This is represented by four housing projects located along the major corridor, i.e., the Abuja-Keffi Highway in Mararaba and the New Nyanya and Masaka districts of KUA. The least represented form of cooperatives was the subsidised and building cooperatives, either of which was represented by one cooperative found only in the New Karu district of KUA. ii. Role of Cooperative Societies in Securing Land for Housing As earlier observed, cooperatives, like other actors in the informal land delivery system, play an important role in securing land, especially for low-income earners. Among the things they do are scouting for land, securing land, documentation of land acquisition and allocation of land to members. It goes without saying that before they can secure land, cooperatives first have to scout for it. This process involves engaging selected members (land purchase committee [LPC]) of the cooperative societies to interact with stakeholders in locations where there is a high possibility of securing land that will meet the economic and social needs of members. When this step is completed and the LPC has found a suitable location based on the terms of reference, the LPC will then brief the house on its findings. After identifying a location of interest and a purchasable land, the intention of the cooperative will be disclosed to the land agent or landowners. The cooperative will then start negotiating the price of land with the landowners or land agent. After confirming the status of such land, the cooperative will then pay for the land. Regarding regularisation, the cooperative will provide the needed funds. This process includes local government change of ownership, traditional signing and processing of State Government Certificate of Occupancy. Moreover, the cooperative society will engage the services of professionals such as planners and surveyors in parceling out the land to members. Cooperatives actively participate in all stages of land acquisition, from purchasing to title documentation. They also protect their members from land speculators, dishonest land agents, and fraudulent land title vendors, whose activities hinder the efficient functioning of the land and housing market in the study area. The involvement of a cooperative in the acquisition of land protects its members, who, if they were to act on their own, may fall into the hands of fake land speculators; as such, cooperatives help to reduce cases of litigation. Cooperative societies also help in the physical development of land. As the study found, cooperatives engage the services of professionals such as Urban Planners, Land Surveyors and Architects in the development of acquired land. This process goes a long way in reducing uncontrolled development since cooperative lands are planned, and developments are based on approved plans. Another benefit of the activities of cooperative society in land supply is that their lands are cheaper and the modalities for payment are flexible. As such, members are provided the opportunity to make payments based on their financial strengths. The above chart (Figure 3) depicts the roles played by cooperative societies in housing delivery to society members. The process starts with a landowner who indicates interest in sale through an agent in most cases. The land agent, being an intermediary between the seller (landowner) and the buyers, will intimate the prospective buyer (a cooperative society) of the landowner’s willingness to sell. After purchasing the land, the cooperative society will do the land documentation starting from the endorsement of the seller through to the local government for customary right and finally to the Nasarawa Geographic and Information Service (NAGIS) for issuance of statutory right. When this is done, the cooperative society will engage the services of town planners to produce a layout (subdivide the land) plan for onward allocation to the members for housing construction. iii. Forms of housing cooperative societies There are four forms of housing cooperative societies in the study area. Table 1: Forms of housing cooperatives Forms Frequency Percent 1 Short-life housing Cooperatives 0 0.00 2 Community housing cooperative 20 20.00 3 Mutual housing cooperative 70 70.00 4 Subsidised housing cooperative 5 5.00 5 Building cooperative 5 5.00 6 Communal housing cooperative 0 0.00 Total 100 100 Source: Author’s analysis, 2021 Table 1 shows that 70% of the cooperative societies are mutual housing cooperatives, while 20% are community housing cooperative societies. The remaining 10% exhibit variables and indicators of subsidized housing and building cooperative societies. These categorizations are defined by the mode of operations of the 20 identified housing cooperative projects in the study area. iv. Level of involvement of cooperatives in housing delivery to members The study identified five basic roles that cooperative societies perform in the bid to deliver low-income housing for members, viz: land acquisition, land documentation, land parceling, land allocation and development of housing units. Table 2 shows that only four of the housing cooperatives were involved in the four stages leading to the delivery of housing through collective efforts. The sixteen (16) other societies were only involved to the extent that individuals had access to land and could proceed on individual bases to build their houses independently. In the study area, only these four cooperatives have successfully achieved full delivery of housing to their society members. For the remaining categories, their estates were dotted with pockets of individual housing at various stages of development. In essence, those who did individual housing construction had challenges finding funds to speed up their housing construction, as they solely depended on their income and scarcely available alternative income sources. Another dimension to this is that the incremental housing approach is significantly predominant for those cooperatives which engage only in land delivery compared to those which target deliveries of housing stock. Also important is the spatial concentration of housing cooperatives that adopted full delivery on corporate grounds in the Karshi District of KUA. It will be interesting to further understand factors that potentially motivate this nature of delivery and its spatial significance. v. Strategies adopted for land procurement Table 3 indicates that 50% and 35% of the cooperatives made lump-sum payments for their land, except that the former had accessed their funds via direct loans from the cooperatives or indirect loans collectively arranged with commercial and mortgage banks by these cooperatives for their members. Table 3 : Strategies adopted for land purchase Response Frequency Percent Outright payment via saving 35 35.00 Outright payment via loan 50 50.00 Installment payment 15 15.00 Total 100 100 Source : Author’s analysis, 2021 The latter case involves those whose personal savings are potentially significant, a situation which allows them to pay for their land outright from their savings. In essence, since the predominant formation of most cooperatives is a mutual status, it is evident that they are equally engaged in other forms of investment since they are also thrift societies. Another crucial role that cooperatives perform on behalf of their members is the negotiation of prices and collective procuring of land. This gives the advantage of incurring marginal cost since the scale of land acquired is often large, thus reducing costs for individual members. Added advantages include cost-sharing in documentation including cost for planning, survey, design and infrastructure. Equally important is the flexibility of the cooperatives, as they allow members to also take the instalment payment options (15%), thereby allowing members to go at their own pace. vi. Sources of funding for residential buildings The sources of funding for residential building projects by members of cooperative societies are shown in Table 4. This reveals the accumulation of funds through personal savings (40%), loans from cooperative societies (50%) and bank loans (10%). Consequently, assistance from friends and relatives was 0%, as reported by the 100 executive members of the cooperative societies who provided primary data for the study. Table 4 : Sources of funding for residential building Response Frequency Percent Personal Savings 40 40.00 Cooperative Societies 50 50.00 Bank Loan 10 10.00 Friends and Relatives 0 0.00 Total 100 100.00 Source : Author’s field survey, 2021 Essentially, these sources indicate that there is no sufficient formal support system backing housing needs for low- and medium-income earners. These variables, as outlined in Table 4, further substantiate the proliferation of the mutual housing cooperative form as the most predominant cooperative society in the study area. As the name implies the mutuality is the classical ‘do-it-by-yourself’ response strategy adopted by low-income earners in response to the housing accessibility and affordability crisis prevalent in Nigerian cities and, by extension, urban areas in sub-Saharan Africa. 6.1 Discussion: Spatial inequality, low- and medium-income earners’ response and SDG Agenda 11 in Karu Urban Area (KUA) This study documents, analyses and maps low- and medium-income earners’ response mechanisms to inequality, especially in accessing land and housing. In response to increasing income disparity, urban residents on the lower rung of the socio-economic ladder are opting to deploy their collective energy to face the raging storm through the formation of housing cooperatives. Thus, they are contributing to achievement of Agenda 11 of the SDGs (making cities inclusive, sustainable and equitable for all by the year 2030). However, the results of the study indicate government absence and near-zero attempts in pursuing SDG Agenda 11 in the capital city (Abuja) as well as KUA. Importantly, shelter is a key priority area for urban and local governments, being one of the most significant variables that determine inclusiveness and equity as viable means of reducing spatial inequality in cities. Essentially, these responses potentially indicate spatial segregation and social classification of Nigeria’s urban system. KUA is the hub of spatially displaced low- and medium-income groups, especially those whose occupations and income-generating activities are domiciled in Abuja (Federal Capital City). In essence, KUA is by and large an urban agglomeration populated by this class of residents owing to its lower production and living cost compared to the capital city. It is therefore obvious that several international donor agencies, e.g. the World Bank, UN-Habitat, Cities Alliance and several country’s aid organisations, have identified KUA for various intervention programmes, such as the UN-Habitat’s WASH (Water, Sanitation and Hygiene) campaign and Karu Development Strategy by Cities Alliance, etc. The federal, state and local governments need to ramp up their interventions in this regard. 7.0. Conclusion This study found that the selected cooperative societies focus on mutually based services, with an interest in land and housing development schemes. As shown by their mode of operation, they only facilitate land acquisition and or housing development for their members and not for profit. Equally important is the fact that despite the forms these cooperatives take, they are increasingly becoming popular vehicles with a motive for actualizing house ownership for most of the low- and medium-income families. Despite the clear targets and deliverables outlined in the SDG programme of which Nigeria is a key partnering country and has domesticated the agendas, Agenda 11 is not so clearly pursued concerning the target group. Furthermore, while the government (federal, state and local) is to coordinate and facilitate the activities of stakeholders whose primary role will be to achieve the key objective of Agenda 11 of the SDGs, residents have risen to the task of organizing themselves to resolve their challenges. As the saying goes, necessity is the mother of invention. However, the consequence is that without considering the holistic impact of these projects on the urban transportation system, essential urban services and the provision of necessary urban infrastructure to sustain the rising population in the Karu Urban Area (KUA), the study area will grow into another socially and spatially disoriented city. The development of the study area will be in disparity and despair unless the government agencies institutionalize the services of the cooperative societies and make them inclusive in the overall city and community development procedures. There should be a collaborative and inclusive approach to meet the SDG agenda 11. Declarations Funding : No funding was received for conducting this study. Data Availability Statement (DAS) : All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article or/ and its supplementary information files. Ethics Approval and Accordance : The study protocol was reviewed by the Nasarawa State University, Keffi Ethics Committee, in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations of the committee. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants in the form of surveys/ interviews/ questionnaires were in accordance with the ethical standards of the committee. Ethical approval was waived by the Ethics Committee of Nasarawa State University, Keffi, as the study involved minimal risk and did not collect sensitive personal data, in accordance with the guidelines and regulations of the committee. Consent to Participate : Informed consent to participate in the study was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. Consent to Publish: Not Applicable, as the manuscript does not contain identifiable personal data. Author Contribution D.A. and A.A.D. conceptualized the study and led the fieldwork. D.A. wrote the initial draft of the manuscript. F.Z. contributed to the literature review and data analysis. A.P. provided policy context, refined the discussion, and edited the final manuscript. All authors reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript. References Abastante F. (2021). Pursuing the SDG11 Targets: The role of the sustainability protocols. Accelerating SDG 11 Achievement: Policy Brief in Support of The First SDG 11 Review at the UN High-Level Political Forum 2018. Adamu, D and Danladi A. A 2019. Triggers of informal land supply dominance in Nigerian cities: International Journal of Innovative Research and Development. 8(7) pp.346-352 Adamu, D and Danladi A. A 2019. A Karu based experience about the effect of informal land delivery channels on housing supply. International Journal of Innovative Research and Development. 8(7) pp.332-338 Agbo, F, U. (2009). Farmers’ Perception of Cooperative Societies in Enugu State, Nigeria. African Journal Online . Vol. 8 No. 3. Adeboyejo, A., Oderinde, J. (2013). Housing cooperative societies and social housing delivery in Oyo state, Nigeria. International Journal of Cooperative Management, 16 (2), 61-75. Adeokun, C., Adewale, B., Oloke, O. (2014). Reworking traditional fund-raising institutions for affordable housing provision: a review of Nigerian and Kenyan case studies . Proceedings of the Eighth Construction Industry Development Board Postgraduate Conference (pp.1-7). Johannesburg, South Africa. Aderounmu, R., Oyedemi, O., Adeleke, M. (2014). The experience and responsibility of cooperative societies to poverty alleviation in Eruwa, Ibarapa region of southwestern Nigeria. Developing Country Studies, 4 (2), 1-8. Ajayi, C.A (1998). Property investment valuation and analysis. Ibadan, Nigeria: De-Ayo Publications. Aksoy, M., and Aydogus, S. (2012). Housing co-operatives in Turkey. In J.T. Cameron & D. Wood (Eds.). Profiles of a movement: cooperative housing around the world. (pp. 76-79). Adekunle, B. and Henson, S, J. (2007). The Effect of Cooperative Thrift and Credit Societies on Personal Agency. Adeyemo, R. and Bamire, A, S. (2005). Saving and Investment Patterns of Cooperative Farmers in Southern Nigeria. Journal of Social Science . 11(3)183-192. Adinya, I, B., Odey, S, O., Oniah, M, O., Umeh, G, N., Agiopu, B, F., and Ogbonna, K, I. (2008). Analysis of the Role of Agricultural Cooperatives in Funding Processing Mills in Cross River State, Nigeria. Continental Journal of Agricultural Science. 2:25-34. Bamire, A, S. (2005). Saving and Investment Patterns of Cooperatives Farmers in Southwestern Nigeria. Journal of Social Sciences . 11 (3):183. Danladi A. A. and Adamu, D 2019. Strategies for recuperating the competence of informal land delivery channels. International Journal of Innovative Research and Development. 8(8) pp. 350-356 Develtere, P., I, Pollet., and F, Wanyama. (2008). Cooperating out of poverty: The renaissance of the African cooperative movement . Geneva: ILO. Enete, A, A. (2008). Political and Genuine Cooperatives in Enugu State, Nigeria. In Develtere, P, Pollet, I and Wanyama, F (eds) Cooperating Out of Poverty- The Renaissance of the African Cooperative Movement . International Labour Office, World Bank Institute, pp. 208-224. Eziyi, O, Ibem., and Chuba, O, Odum. (2011). The role of cooperatives in securing land for urban housing in Nigeria. A Case study of NEPA District Cooperative thrift and Loan saving association Enugu. Gore, A. (1993). The Gore Report on Reinventing Government: Creating a Government That Works Better and Costs Less. Report of the National Performance Review, Times Books, New York. Kaswan, M. (2007). Happiness, Politics and Co-operative Principles. Journal of Co-operative Studies, 40 (1) 30-40. Lemanski, Charlotte. (2008). House without Community: Problems of community (in) Capacity in Cape Town, South Africa. Environment and Urbanization , 20 (2): 393-410. Mabogunje, A. (2005). Cooperative Societies as Agents of Affordable Mass Housing Delivery. Housing Today, 1(9): 11-12. Madu, E, N., and Umebali, E. (1993). Self-Help Approach to Rural Transformation in Nigeria. Community Development Journal , 28:141-53. Odum, C, O., and Ibem, E, O. (2011). Securing urban land for housing among low‐income earners in Sub‐Saharan Africa: A case study of workers co‐operative society, Enugu, Nigeria. Journal of Studies and Research in Human Geography, 5(1): 61‐75 . Onuoha, E. (2002). A critique of the draft Cooperative Policy for Nigeria. Nigeria Journal of Cooperative Studies , 2(1): 10-17. Rakodi, Carole, (2007). Land for Housing in Africa Cities: Are Informal Delivery Systems Institutionally Robust and Pro-Poor. Global Urban Development Magazine, 3(1). Ukaga, O, M. (1992). Farmers’ Cooperatives in Nigeria: A vehicle for Mutual Help and Education. Paper Presented at the Eight African Educational Research Symposium, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio, December 5-7. UNCHS. (1996). The Habitat Agenda: Goals and Principles, Commitments and Global Plan for Actions . UNCHS (Habitat II), UNCHS, Nairobi. UN-HABITAT. (2006). National Trends in Housing – Production Practices Volume 4. Nigeria, Kenya: United Nations Centre for Human Settlements Journal. UN-HABITAT. (2020). Monitoring Human Settlements Indicators: A Short Guide to Human Settlements Indicators Goal 11. Accessed on 15/11/2022, URL: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/18785E_HLPF_2018_2_Add.4_ECAadvanceduneditedversion.pdf Table Table 2 is available in the Supplementary Files section. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Supplementary Files Table2.docx Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-7936612","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":557886500,"identity":"343a8b2c-374e-4022-a428-a8f481053ebd","order_by":0,"name":"Daniel Adamu","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Nasarawa State University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Daniel","middleName":"","lastName":"Adamu","suffix":""},{"id":557886501,"identity":"34653d79-25d5-47b3-b5a8-ac61bd640616","order_by":1,"name":"Fundi Zacharia","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Nasarawa State University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Fundi","middleName":"","lastName":"Zacharia","suffix":""},{"id":557886502,"identity":"30b51db8-fce6-44b3-ab76-c83557f667db","order_by":2,"name":"Austine Audu Danladi","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Nasarawa State University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Austine","middleName":"Audu","lastName":"Danladi","suffix":""},{"id":557886503,"identity":"cbed16d4-57fa-4e9a-9b70-408bbe0d76b8","order_by":3,"name":"Anil Palakodeti","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Erasmus University Rotterdam","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Anil","middleName":"","lastName":"Palakodeti","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2025-10-24 04:23:25","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7936612/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7936612/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":97907597,"identity":"d7eb5e9e-8f59-4541-9597-e8a509578c32","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 16:03:09","extension":"docx","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":356183,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"HousingCooperatives11182025.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7936612/v1/997aa08761dd248ee052cf6f.docx"},{"id":97907591,"identity":"521876fd-0b26-4135-a65b-d5a54467e0b3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 16:03:07","extension":"json","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":5786,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"3f5259c8428346fc9409d26fb6f2dc5c.json","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7936612/v1/7ab3b8363c2c557ba372ce5f.json"},{"id":97907572,"identity":"02a3fe16-841f-491b-a3cc-dc1e5aa771a7","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 16:03:02","extension":"xml","order_by":2,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":100501,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"3f5259c8428346fc9409d26fb6f2dc5c1enriched.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7936612/v1/2da6e41dac1670675f99a2ac.xml"},{"id":97907630,"identity":"ccad1d80-087b-4da4-8f44-97038843ca86","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 16:03:15","extension":"eps","order_by":3,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":569,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"drawingimage1.eps","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7936612/v1/5422bb2914a51b5aca7e95ca.eps"},{"id":98421029,"identity":"67ef3f99-03c0-451f-b47d-e71bfd70697f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-17 16:22:32","extension":"jpeg","order_by":4,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":199109,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage1.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7936612/v1/6273a66f5f7c0fbb5a48c9e3.jpeg"},{"id":97907609,"identity":"93fd35f0-0820-4a9a-acb9-2f4e19bab205","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 16:03:13","extension":"png","order_by":5,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":90732,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7936612/v1/825b1d63b91052fc2a8f3202.png"},{"id":97907598,"identity":"8a045142-b2b2-4b29-9695-ab5b25a3f3b5","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 16:03:09","extension":"jpeg","order_by":6,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":1074,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"floatimage3.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7936612/v1/62f326ade581ecbb84d2c7f6.jpeg"},{"id":97907546,"identity":"6f06b772-f908-4ecc-a93a-ea134cd1a66d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 16:03:00","extension":"jpeg","order_by":7,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":16223,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"groupimage1.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7936612/v1/2e4dace8dec9b3f9633a041c.jpeg"},{"id":97907599,"identity":"154afbf2-7e08-47ac-a126-953c1be0a18e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 16:03:10","extension":"png","order_by":8,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":101789,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7936612/v1/56283e67ae5668c1b9fcf7c9.png"},{"id":97907595,"identity":"9443e7ed-74ca-44f4-8d62-a47f528e9b3f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 16:03:08","extension":"png","order_by":9,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":28200,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7936612/v1/f032020ae393d960bb878187.png"},{"id":97907593,"identity":"0c0511f6-62d4-46f5-b2c6-f027bceb3c7d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 16:03:08","extension":"png","order_by":10,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":935,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinefloatimage3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7936612/v1/94758ce181ca38f0230172bf.png"},{"id":97907575,"identity":"c9911b7f-bb85-4284-94c5-35c33b262576","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 16:03:03","extension":"png","order_by":11,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":9214,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Onlinegroupimage1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7936612/v1/b2694a879c9b5e7a12feda6a.png"},{"id":97907633,"identity":"fe3e5314-e6f3-422b-b59c-27abc9a7fc97","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 16:03:17","extension":"xml","order_by":12,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":97468,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"3f5259c8428346fc9409d26fb6f2dc5c1structuring.xml","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7936612/v1/7f2c6ac786d903747f4c9522.xml"},{"id":97907592,"identity":"0a404687-2b03-4028-9ecd-81a1ec62960d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 16:03:08","extension":"html","order_by":13,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"acdc-reference","size":107614,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"earlyproof.html","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7936612/v1/305cc716319bc9bda5260c40.html"},{"id":97907600,"identity":"d830f7d5-689e-4de7-a86e-7e1f843611f6","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 16:03:10","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":850056,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eMap of Nigeria showing Nasarawa State in the national setting\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7936612/v1/ae0a6798eafa4a2040b1d1e6.png"},{"id":97907631,"identity":"b3f80ea3-d16e-4848-b173-b2c81a3d41fd","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 16:03:15","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":179568,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eDistribution of forms of housing cooperatives in KUA\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7936612/v1/670625867a8eff313352d3a2.png"},{"id":97907606,"identity":"e9d35fdb-5741-4639-adfd-df03acf2ac7f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 16:03:12","extension":"png","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":25623,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003eRoles of cooperatives in land supply for housin\u003cstrong\u003eg\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"3.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7936612/v1/4c2213b478d1125ca9d5fbae.png"},{"id":106608457,"identity":"f7dbfa7c-cf51-48b3-839a-9a6879b16e1b","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-10 11:42:02","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1840859,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7936612/v1/727aa126-1b53-4fa0-a23e-0671fc30a1cc.pdf"},{"id":97907608,"identity":"45caafe1-a8d1-40e2-8cd2-4cd2a2ec537d","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-12-10 16:03:13","extension":"docx","order_by":1,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"supplement","size":19022,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"Table2.docx","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-7936612/v1/2b9f1cd5b9f5809d1c6f8535.docx"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Cooperative Pathways to Housing Equity through Community Led Land Access and Urban Inclusion in Karu Nigeria","fulltext":[{"header":"1.0 Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eAccess to land remains paramount in efforts to address the growing shortage of housing supply not only among low-income earners but also among high-income earners in many developing countries of the world, including Nigeria. This is because it remains the first step in the process of house ownership. Apart from the issue of accessibility, potential house owners also face the challenge of inadequate land tenure security (Eziyi, 2010). Lombard and Rakodi (2016) highlight the intense competition for well-located land that is relatively easy to service and adaptable for diverse urban functions, particularly affordable housing. They point out that both governmental institutions and market mechanisms often fall short in supplying adequate serviced land in appropriate locations to keep pace with rapid urban expansion and reduce inequality, especially regarding housing access. Additionally, existing legal and regulatory frameworks are frequently insufficient. As Ezivi (2010) notes, land plays a fundamental role in the property development process, and its acquisition is essential for promoting efficient and sustainable housing development in urban areas. However, as crucial as land is in determining access to housing, the complexity involved in, as well as the high cost of accessing land through the formal system in most nations of sub-Sahara Africa, has necessitated the shift to other options for accessing land by low-income households. Rakodi (2005) found that the complexity of formal access to land has led urban residents to organise and combine resources with an objective to providing shelter for themselves. Such arrangements come in different forms, one of which is the idea of cooperative societies.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInformal property markets\u0026mdash;encompassing land and housing\u0026mdash;have increasingly become widespread and rapidly expanding in many developing nations, including those in sub-Saharan Africa. These markets have emerged largely due to the significant shortcomings and inefficiencies of formal systems, such as official tenure arrangements and land administration, in meeting the housing needs of the majority of urban low- and middle-income earners (Rakodi, 2007). Research conducted in countries like Tanzania, Vietnam, Ecuador, Ghana, and Nigeria indicates that informal land delivery systems often outperform formal mechanisms in providing housing. This is largely attributed to their accessibility, user-friendly processes, and strong social acceptance (Rakodi, 2005; Adamu et al., 2019; Danladi et al., 2019)\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOver the years, cooperative societies have been instrumental in making land accessible to their members by easing the bottlenecks and lowering the cost involved in accessing land by low- and medium-income earners through an individual-based approach. The process allows for a self-help and incremental approach that also saves the individual from the stress of having to go through the rigorous process of regularizing their land title since the entire process can be handled holistically by the cooperative societies (Adamu, et all 2019).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn separate studies, Eziyi and Chuba (2011) and Olayede (2009) explored the involvement of cooperatives in facilitating land access for housing in Nigeria. Their findings suggest that cooperatives hold significant potential in tackling key housing supply challenges, such as limited land accessibility and difficulties with documentation\u0026mdash;issues commonly faced by prospective homeowners in many developing countries. In Nigeria, this cooperative-driven approach has recently gained traction, particularly in the Karu Urban Area (KUA) of Nasarawa State (Adamu et al., 2019). The proximity of KUA to Abuja (Nigeria\u0026rsquo;s Federal Capital Territory) provides the shortest working distance route for workers and also holds strong potential for business owners owing to its growing population. This incentive has made it the epicenter of the activities for cooperative societies. This study examines the forms and organisational structures of cooperative societies, with a focus on how they incentivize access to land for low- and medium-income families and the extent to which they have made land available to their target population. The current study thus seeks to provide an understanding of the operations pertaining to cooperative societies as effective and sustainable access options to land for all, irrespective of social and economic status.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e1.1 Study Area\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe Karu Urban Area (KUA) falls within the jurisdiction of the Karu Local Government Area in Nasarawa State, Nigeria. Designated as a Planning Area, it spans an estimated geographic area of approximately 40,000 hectares (Nasarawa Urban Development Board [NUDB], 2009). The study area is bordered by the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) Abuja to the west, by Keffi and Nasarawa Local Government Areas to the east and south, and by Jaba Local Government Area of Kaduna State to the north (see Figures 1 and 2). The study focuses on key urban settlements within KUA, including Mararaba, Kuruduma, New Karu, Nyanya Gwandara, Masaka, Kodape, Karshi, and Mararaban Gurku.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2.0 Cooperative (Thrift and Saving) Society","content":"\u003cp\u003eTo discuss the forms and structures of cooperative societies, it is important to first describe what cooperative societies entail in general terms and within the context of this study. In the literature, cooperative societies have often been described in subjective terms. In other words, they have mostly been understood in terms of the goals and objectives for which they were established (Eziyi \u0026amp; Chuba, 2011). Generally, cooperative societies are formed by people who seek to provide benefits to a group of members. Cooperatives have been characterised as organizations that tackle economic challenges by mobilizing local savings, managing credit distribution, and fostering thrift and entrepreneurial activities among members (Adekunle \u0026amp; Henson, 2007). Another viewpoint describes cooperatives as supportive organizations with diverse goals, including promoting members\u0026apos; welfare and safeguarding their shared interests (Adinya et al., 2008). According to the International Cooperative Alliance (2011), cooperative societies are autonomous associations of individuals who voluntarily unite to address shared economic, social, and cultural needs and aspirations through jointly owned and democratically managed enterprises.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBased on the foregoing, two key paradigms that define housing cooperatives are that they are formed by members pursuing economic benefits and they are organisations of individuals whose capabilities (social capital) are limited but require collective efforts to achieve. These are the people who are probably victims of distributive inequality and whose individual purchasing power has limited their access to housing land in cities. In the context of this study, a housing cooperative (thrift and savings) society is defined as a voluntary association of individuals with limited financial means who pool their resources, sharing both the risks and benefits, in pursuit of a common economic objective\u0026mdash;namely, improving access to land for housing among members. It is an organisation wherein individuals of meagre resources voluntarily associate on the basis of equality and, by consolidating their resources, aim for the promotion of their own economic interests, especially in terms of delivering housing land.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs previously mentioned, a key feature of thrift and savings cooperatives is their role in promoting capital mobilization and wealth accumulation among members (Musa, 2005; Enete, 2008). This aligns with the understanding that capital accumulation is essential for economic development, which is why cooperatives emphasize savings and investments to serve the collective interests of their members (Adeyemo \u0026amp; Bamire, 2005). In this context, cooperatives are seen as mechanisms that provide disadvantaged groups with access to essential resources while fostering social integration and cohesion, particularly in many developing countries in Africa (Lemanski, 2008; Develtere et al., 2008).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe above definitions clearly illustrate that cooperatives are self-regulated socio-economic enterprises established, owned, and managed by voluntary associations of individuals with shared interests operating under democratic principles. Kaswan (2007) highlights that cooperative principles are rooted in core values such as self-help, democracy, equality, equity, solidarity, fairness, and concern for others. Historical records indicate that cooperative principles trace their origins to the Rochdale Pioneers\u0026apos; principles established in 1844. However, in Nigeria, traditional forms of cooperatives, such as \u003cem\u003eesusu\u003c/em\u003e (contribution clubs) and age-based groups, existed long before colonial rule and operated based on cooperative principles (Madu \u0026amp; Umebali, 1993). This suggests that cooperative principles have long been adopted in the country. The introduction of the modern cooperative movement in Nigeria followed the global economic downturn of 1929\u0026ndash;1930. As documented by Ukaga (1992) and Musa (2005), cooperatives were officially established in Nigeria in 1935 after the colonial government implemented the recommendations of Mr. C. F. Strickland\u003cspan dir=\"RTL\"\u003e\u0026rsquo;\u003c/span\u003es report on their potential in the country. According to Adinya et al. (2008) and Agbo (2009), the initial cooperative societies were predominantly formed by farmers, including cocoa farmers in the western region, palm produce farmers in the east, and groundnut farmers in the north. This suggests that cooperatives during the colonial period were strategically developed to support the extraction and supply of agricultural resources for industries in Britain and Europe.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFollowing Nigeria\u0026apos;s independence, the establishment and functioning of cooperatives have remained aligned with Strickland\u003cspan dir=\"RTL\"\u003e\u0026rsquo;\u003c/span\u003es report and the International Labour Organization\u0026apos;s (ILO) Recommendation 193 of 2000. Agbo (2009) highlights that the Nigerian government considers cooperatives as the primary vehicle for citizens to access agricultural and poverty alleviation initiatives, including Operation Feed the Nation (OFN), Better Life for Rural Women (BLFRW), the Family Support Programme (FSP), the Family Economic Advancement Programme (FEAP), and Government-Assisted Mass Transport Schemes.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe government has consistently provided the necessary legal framework and policy support to facilitate the growth of cooperatives in Nigeria (Onuoha, 2002). Enete (2008) notes that the primary legislation governing the registration and operation of cooperatives in the country is the Nigerian Co-operative Societies Decree 90 of 1993. This law established the position of Director of Co-operatives at both federal and state levels, along with the Department of Co-operatives under various state ministries. Enete (2008) further explains that to encourage the establishment and expansion of cooperatives, the legislation does not restrict them to specific activities, provided their primary objective is to enhance the socio-economic well-being of their members. Consequently, it can be inferred that cooperatives in Nigeria\u003cspan dir=\"RTL\"\u003e\u0026rsquo;\u003c/span\u003es post-independence period serve as a means for individuals to access and participate in government initiatives. As a result, cooperative activities are prevalent across rural and urban areas, involving workers from both the public and private sectors, as well as those in the informal economy.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.1. Forms and Structures of Cooperative Societies\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA review of the literature indicates that cooperatives vary in name, structure, and objectives across different countries (Adeyemo \u0026amp; Bamire, 2005; Agbo, 2009; Oyewole, 2010). In Nigeria, farmers\u0026apos; cooperatives are the most prevalent, which aligns with the country\u0026apos;s agriculture-driven economy. However, cooperative thrift and savings societies are becoming increasingly popular among traders, artisans, and both public- and private-sector workers in urban and rural areas. This growth is attributed to the role of cooperatives as essential mechanisms that provide low-income individuals with access to resources necessary for improving their socio-economic conditions and benefiting from government initiatives (Agbo, 2009; Enete, 2010).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eUkaga (1992) categorized cooperative associations in Nigeria into three main types: production, marketing, and multi-purpose cooperatives. According to Ukaga, these cooperatives are typically overseen by patrons, committees, and executive officers, while members periodically convene to assess the associations\u003cspan dir=\"RTL\"\u003e\u0026rsquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/span\u003eactivities, financial status, and progress toward their objectives. Regarding thrift and savings cooperatives, Adeyemo and Bamire (2005), along with Adekunle and Henson (2007), observed that these cooperatives primarily focus on mobilizing savings and providing credit facilities to support members in various entrepreneurial ventures. Their research also highlighted that the primary aim of thrift and savings societies is to promote financial prudence among members while protecting them from exploitative lenders and high-interest loan providers.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eRegarding housing, Oyewole (2010) identified various housing cooperatives operating in the UK, the United States, Kenya, Malawi, and South Africa. His findings indicate that these cooperatives play a crucial role in providing members with credit facilities to meet their housing needs. Additionally, he noted that the structure and operations of housing cooperatives in these countries differ significantly from the investment and credit societies that are more prevalent in Nigeria. The study showed that cooperative investment and credit societies founded in the past few years in Ogbomosho, Nigeria, which were formed mainly by low- and medium-income earners, provided members with credit facilities for housing construction. This finding reinforces the perspective that cooperatives can serve as effective agents for delivering affordable mass housing in Nigeria (Mabogunje, 2005).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFrom the reviewed literature, it is clear that, despite variations in name and structure across different regions, cooperatives are globally recognized as powerful tools for socio-economic development, poverty reduction, and social inclusion, particularly in developing countries. Furthermore, cooperatives are not restricted to specific sectors or activities and operate across both urban and rural areas. However, in Nigeria, the role of cooperatives in tackling the growing challenges of inadequate housing and insecure land tenure among low-income earners remains a relatively recent development. This concept is gradually gaining traction, especially among low- and middle-income groups.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e2.1. Forms of Housing Cooperatives\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe following short definitions are given for forms of housing cooperatives:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003col style=\"list-style-type: lower-roman;\"\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eHousing Cooperative:\u003c/strong\u003e A cooperative society established to meet the housing needs of its members. Members contribute equity, which funds from governments, financial markets, or other sources can supplement.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eShort-Life Housing Cooperatives:\u003c/strong\u003e Designed as temporary housing solutions for the homeless, these cooperatives use collapsible structures or mobile homes placed on vacant institutional land.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCommunity Housing Cooperative:\u003c/strong\u003e Formed by a network of individual cooperatives within a neighborhood, this type of cooperative allows members to support each other and collectively acquire or lease new buildings based on shared experience and membership.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eMutual Housing Cooperative:\u003c/strong\u003e A non-profit cooperative corporation that develops, owns, and manages housing. The corporation is collectively owned and governed by the housing project\u0026apos;s residents.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSubsidized Housing Cooperative:\u003c/strong\u003e This type of cooperative benefits from financial support provided by government or non-profit organizations, reducing housing costs for resident shareholders.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBuilding Cooperative:\u003c/strong\u003e A cooperative model where members collaboratively construct housing units. Once construction is complete, the cooperative dissolves, and ownership is transferred to individual members.\u003c/li\u003e\n \u003cli\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCommunal Housing Cooperatives:\u003c/strong\u003e A cooperative society where residents share resources such as food and communal activities. Decisions are typically made through a consensus-based approach. Variations of this model include greenhouse cooperatives.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"3.0. Informal Land Delivery","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eInformal land delivery refers to the process by which land transactions are governed through mutual understanding, traditional authority, or power relations, with rules being enforced internally rather than by formal legal systems. These transactions typically occur outside the control and registration of official institutions. The formation of informal land markets often reflects local cultural and traditional practices, with specific conditions varying by local government areas. For example, traditional authorities such as chiefs and heads of landowning families often hold the customary power to determine how land under their stewardship is allocated (Oloyede, 2011). Gore (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1993\u003c/span\u003e) characterizes informal institutions as socially accepted moral norms that form an alternative \u0026lsquo;moral economy.\u0026rsquo; These institutions operate at various levels of society, employing explicit rules to guide behavior and interacting dynamically with broader social systems.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"4.0. SDG Agenda 11: Make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe pursuit of sustainable development stems from the tension between the rapid transformation of human settlements and the slower regeneration of environmental resources. This tension is particularly pronounced in urban areas, where the majority of these changes are taking place, making cities both challenging and critical arenas for achieving sustainability (Abastante, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). This conflict in most developing countries has led to widening inequality between the rich and the poor who constitute the larger chunk of the urban population and who are at the mercy of the rich. The goal of SDG 2030 Agenda Target 11 is to guarantee that all individuals, especially the poor and vulnerable, have equitable access to economic resources. This includes access to essential services, land ownership and control, property rights, inheritance, natural resources, modern technology, and financial services. Nevertheless, cities and regions still face significant challenges in delivering adequate housing, infrastructure, and essential services\u0026mdash;challenges that are further intensified by the growing global frequency of natural disasters (High-Level Forum on SDG, 2018).\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eSecure land tenure rights for housing and natural resources are essential for impoverished populations to access fundamental resources necessary for sustaining and improving their livelihoods (UN-HABITAT, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). Without these rights, families and communities remain vulnerable to expropriation and encounter significant obstacles in obtaining financial resources, market opportunities, and essential services. Consequently, land tenure security is widely acknowledged as a critical factor in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), as it contributes to eradicating poverty and hunger, ensuring food security, promoting gender equality, developing sustainable cities and human settlements, and preserving terrestrial ecosystems.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eIn line with this, the 2030 Agenda\u0026mdash;particularly through SDG 11, which seeks to make cities inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable\u0026mdash;acknowledges the critical role of urban areas as central hubs where social, economic, and environmental inequalities are most visible, especially in relation to resource exploitation. This makes cities essential players in the pursuit of sustainable development. Since 2015, SDG 11 has fostered collaboration and partnerships among a wide range of stakeholders at the local level, as well as across local, regional, and national governments. Furthermore, the lack of adequate housing has been recognized as a major factor undermining urban equity, inclusion, safety, and livelihood opportunities, often resulting in adverse health outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"5.0. Methodology","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe current study seeks to provide an understanding of the operations pertaining to cooperative societies as effective and sustainable access options to land for all, irrespective of social and economic status. In this paper, they are also perceived as the alternative governance mechanism organically working behind the scene in pursuit of the core objectives of SDG 11 in Nigeria. This study employed spatial and quantitative research methods, utilizing data from both primary and secondary sources. To achieve the research objectives, purposive sampling was used to select respondents for the questionnaire administration. This approach focused on a specific group of executives who were well-positioned to provide reliable data. Primary data collection was carried out through questionnaires distributed to these carefully chosen respondents. The questionnaires were specifically directed to five (5) representatives of each of the 20 co-operative societies in KUA. It is important to note that these representatives were the elected executive members running the daily affairs of the cooperative societies.\u003c/p\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe questionnaires included a combination of semi-structured and open-ended questions, focusing on various aspects of cooperative operations. These questions explored the cooperative\u0026rsquo;s role in acquiring and securing land for housing, title registration, subdivision, and the allocation of plots for member development. Secondary data were gathered from documented land transactions between cooperatives and landowners, as well as from official records such as the cooperative's Constitution, by-laws, meeting minutes, and membership records.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"6.0. Results and Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ei. Spatial Analysis of the Distribution of various Forms of Housing Cooperatives in Karu Urban Area (KUA)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe identified four forms of housing cooperatives and their spatial spread in the five districts of KUA. Fourteen (14) of the 20 cooperatives adopted the mutual housing approach, thus accounting for about 70% of the identified housing cooperatives in the study area. These mutual housing cooperatives were not-for-profit organisations promoting new mutuals for mutuals. They were organisations owned by and run for the benefit of current and future members. In essence, they were formed to outlive the need for housing. As such, housing is just one of such basic deliverables targeted by the cooperatives which if achieved would free them to proceed to other endeavour that would benefit members. The cooperatives were involved in different investment endeavour and declared yearly dividends to their members. As Figure 2 shows, the mutual housing cooperatives are spatially spread across all the districts of KUA but retain a significant presence in Karshi District. Community housing cooperatives were the next to be identified. These cooperatives are established through an umbrella association comprising individual cooperatives within a neighborhood. They typically unite to provide mutual support and have the capacity to purchase or lease new buildings, leveraging their collective experience and membership strength. This is represented by four housing projects located along the major corridor, i.e., the Abuja-Keffi Highway in Mararaba and the New Nyanya and Masaka districts of KUA. The least represented form of cooperatives was the subsidised and building cooperatives, either of which was represented by one cooperative found only in the New Karu district of KUA. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eii. Role of Cooperative Societies in Securing Land for Housing\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs earlier observed, cooperatives, like other actors in the informal land delivery system, play an important role in securing land, especially for low-income earners. Among the things they do are scouting for land, securing land, documentation of land acquisition and allocation of land to members. It goes without saying that before they can secure land, cooperatives first have to scout for it. This process involves engaging selected members (land purchase committee [LPC]) of the cooperative societies to interact with stakeholders in locations where there is a high possibility of securing land that will meet the economic and social needs of members. When this step is completed and the LPC has found a suitable location based on the terms of reference, the LPC will then brief the house on its findings. After identifying a location of interest and a purchasable land, the intention of the cooperative will be disclosed to the land agent or landowners. The cooperative will then start negotiating the price of land with the landowners or land agent. After confirming the status of such land, the cooperative will then pay for the land. Regarding regularisation, the cooperative will provide the needed funds. This process includes local government change of ownership, traditional signing and processing of State Government Certificate of Occupancy. Moreover, the cooperative society will engage the services of professionals such as planners and surveyors in parceling out the land to members. \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCooperatives actively participate in all stages of land acquisition, from purchasing to title documentation. They also protect their members from land speculators, dishonest land agents, and fraudulent land title vendors, whose activities hinder the efficient functioning of the land and housing market in the study area. The involvement of a cooperative in the acquisition of land protects its members, who, if they were to act on their own, may fall into the hands of fake land speculators; as such, cooperatives help to reduce cases of litigation. Cooperative societies also help in the physical development of land. As the study found, cooperatives engage the services of professionals such as Urban Planners, Land Surveyors and Architects in the development of acquired land. This process goes a long way in reducing uncontrolled development since cooperative lands are planned, and developments are based on approved plans. Another benefit of the activities of cooperative society in land supply is that their lands are cheaper and the modalities for payment are flexible. As such, members are provided the opportunity to make payments based on their financial strengths.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe above chart (Figure 3) depicts the roles played by cooperative societies in housing delivery to society members. The process starts with a landowner who indicates interest in sale through an agent in most cases. The land agent, being an intermediary between the seller (landowner) and the buyers, will intimate the prospective buyer (a cooperative society) of the landowner\u0026rsquo;s willingness to sell. After purchasing the land, the cooperative society will do the land documentation starting from the endorsement of the seller through to the local government for customary right and finally to the Nasarawa Geographic and Information Service (NAGIS) for issuance of statutory right. When this is done, the cooperative society will engage the services of town planners to produce a layout (subdivide the land) plan for onward allocation to the members for housing construction.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eiii. Forms of housing cooperative societies\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThere are four forms of housing cooperative societies in the study area.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 1: Forms of housing cooperatives\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv align=\"\"\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"558\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 292px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eForms\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 118px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFrequency\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 83px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePercent\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 292px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eShort-life housing Cooperatives\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 118px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 83px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 292px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCommunity housing cooperative\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 118px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 83px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 292px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMutual housing cooperative\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 118px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 83px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e70.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 292px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSubsidised housing cooperative\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 118px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 83px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 292px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBuilding cooperative\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 118px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 83px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 292px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCommunal housing cooperative\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 118px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 83px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 64px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 292px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 118px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 83px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e100\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSource: Author\u0026rsquo;s analysis, 2021\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 1 shows that 70% of the cooperative societies are mutual housing cooperatives, while 20% are community housing cooperative societies. The remaining 10% exhibit variables and indicators of subsidized housing and building cooperative societies. These categorizations are defined by the mode of operations of the 20 identified housing cooperative projects in the study area.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eiv. Level of involvement of cooperatives in housing delivery to members\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe study identified five basic roles that cooperative societies perform in the bid to deliver low-income housing for members, viz: land acquisition, land documentation, land parceling, land allocation and development of housing units.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 2 shows that only four of the housing cooperatives were involved in the four stages leading to the delivery of housing through collective efforts. The sixteen (16) other societies were only involved to the extent that individuals had access to land and could proceed on individual bases to build their houses independently. In the study area, only these four cooperatives have successfully achieved full delivery of housing to their society members. For the remaining categories, their estates were dotted with pockets of individual housing at various stages of development. In essence, those who did individual housing construction had challenges finding funds to speed up their housing construction, as they solely depended on their income and scarcely available alternative income sources. Another dimension to this is that the incremental housing approach is significantly predominant for those cooperatives which engage only in land delivery compared to those which target deliveries of housing stock. Also important is the spatial concentration of housing cooperatives that adopted full delivery on corporate grounds in the Karshi District of KUA. It will be interesting to further understand factors that potentially motivate this nature of delivery and its spatial significance.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ev. Strategies adopted for land procurement\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTable 3 indicates that 50% and 35% of the cooperatives made lump-sum payments for their land, except that the former had accessed their funds via direct loans from the cooperatives or indirect loans collectively arranged with commercial and mortgage banks by these cooperatives for their members.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 3\u003c/strong\u003e: Strategies adopted for land purchase\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv align=\"\"\u003e\n \u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"558\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 314px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResponse\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 156px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFrequency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 88px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePercent\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 314px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOutright payment via saving\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 156px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e35\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 88px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e35.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 314px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOutright payment via loan\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 156px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 88px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 314px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eInstallment payment\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 156px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 88px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 314px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 156px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e100\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 88px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e100\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n \u003c/table\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSource\u003c/strong\u003e:\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eAuthor\u0026rsquo;s analysis, 2021\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe latter case involves those whose personal savings are potentially significant, a situation which allows them to pay for their land outright from their savings. In essence, since the predominant formation of most cooperatives is a mutual status, it is evident that they are equally engaged in other forms of investment since they are also thrift societies. Another crucial role that cooperatives perform on behalf of their members is the negotiation of prices and collective procuring of land. This gives the advantage of incurring marginal cost since the scale of land acquired is often large, thus reducing costs for individual members. Added advantages include cost-sharing in documentation including cost for planning, survey, design and infrastructure. Equally important is the flexibility of the cooperatives, as they allow members to also take the instalment payment options (15%), thereby allowing members to go at their own pace.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003evi. Sources of funding for residential buildings\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe sources of funding for residential building projects by members of cooperative societies are shown in Table 4. This reveals the accumulation of funds through personal savings (40%), loans from cooperative societies (50%) and bank loans (10%). Consequently, assistance from friends and relatives was 0%, as reported by the 100 executive members of the cooperative societies who provided primary data for the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable 4\u003c/strong\u003e:\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eSources of funding for residential building\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"558\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 403px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResponse\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 88px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFrequency\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePercent\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 403px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePersonal Savings\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 88px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e40.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 403px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eCooperative Societies\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 88px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e50.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 403px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBank Loan\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 88px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 403px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFriends and Relatives\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 88px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 403px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTotal\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 88px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e100\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 67px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e100.00\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSource\u003c/strong\u003e: Author\u0026rsquo;s field survey, 2021\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEssentially, these sources indicate that there is no sufficient formal support system backing housing needs for low- and medium-income earners. These variables, as outlined in Table 4, further substantiate the proliferation of the mutual housing cooperative form as the most predominant cooperative society in the study area. As the name implies the mutuality is the classical \u0026lsquo;do-it-by-yourself\u0026rsquo; response strategy adopted by low-income earners in response to the housing accessibility and affordability crisis prevalent in Nigerian cities and, by extension, urban areas in sub-Saharan Africa.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e6.1 Discussion: Spatial inequality, low- and medium-income earners\u0026rsquo; response and SDG Agenda 11 in Karu Urban Area (KUA)\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study documents, analyses and maps low- and medium-income earners\u0026rsquo; response mechanisms to inequality, especially in accessing land and housing. In response to increasing income disparity, urban residents on the lower rung of the socio-economic ladder are opting to deploy their collective energy to face the raging storm through the formation of housing cooperatives. Thus, they are contributing to achievement of Agenda 11 of the SDGs (making cities inclusive, sustainable and equitable for all by the year 2030). However, the results of the study indicate government absence and near-zero attempts in pursuing SDG Agenda 11 in the capital city (Abuja) as well as KUA. Importantly, shelter is a key priority area for urban and local governments, being one of the most significant variables that determine inclusiveness and equity as viable means of reducing spatial inequality in cities.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eEssentially, these responses potentially indicate spatial segregation and social classification of Nigeria\u0026rsquo;s urban system. KUA is the hub of spatially displaced low- and medium-income groups, especially those whose occupations and income-generating activities are domiciled in Abuja (Federal Capital City). In essence, KUA is by and large an urban agglomeration populated by this class of residents owing to its lower production and living cost compared to the capital city. It is therefore obvious that several international donor agencies, e.g. the World Bank, UN-Habitat, Cities Alliance and several country\u0026rsquo;s aid organisations, have identified KUA for various intervention programmes, such as the UN-Habitat\u0026rsquo;s WASH (Water, Sanitation and Hygiene) campaign and Karu Development Strategy by Cities Alliance, etc. The federal, state and local governments need to ramp up their interventions in this regard.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"7.0. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cdiv class=\"BlockQuote\"\u003e\u003cp\u003eThis study found that the selected cooperative societies focus on mutually based services, with an interest in land and housing development schemes. As shown by their mode of operation, they only facilitate land acquisition and or housing development for their members and not for profit. Equally important is the fact that despite the forms these cooperatives take, they are increasingly becoming popular vehicles with a motive for actualizing house ownership for most of the low- and medium-income families. Despite the clear targets and deliverables outlined in the SDG programme of which Nigeria is a key partnering country and has domesticated the agendas, Agenda 11 is not so clearly pursued concerning the target group. Furthermore, while the government (federal, state and local) is to coordinate and facilitate the activities of stakeholders whose primary role will be to achieve the key objective of Agenda 11 of the SDGs, residents have risen to the task of organizing themselves to resolve their challenges. As the saying goes, necessity is the mother of invention. However, the consequence is that without considering the holistic impact of these projects on the urban transportation system, essential urban services and the provision of necessary urban infrastructure to sustain the rising population in the Karu Urban Area (KUA), the study area will grow into another socially and spatially disoriented city. The development of the study area will be in disparity and despair unless the government agencies institutionalize the services of the cooperative societies and make them inclusive in the overall city and community development procedures. There should be a collaborative and inclusive approach to meet the SDG agenda 11.\u003c/p\u003e\u003c/div\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eFunding\u003c/strong\u003e: No funding was received for conducting this study.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Availability Statement (DAS)\u003c/strong\u003e: All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article or/ and its supplementary information files.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eEthics Approval and Accordance\u003c/strong\u003e: The study protocol was reviewed by the Nasarawa State University, Keffi Ethics Committee, in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations of the committee. All procedures performed in studies involving human participants in the form of surveys/ interviews/ questionnaires were in accordance with the ethical standards of the committee. Ethical approval was waived by the Ethics Committee of Nasarawa State University, Keffi, as the study involved minimal risk and did not collect sensitive personal data, in accordance with the guidelines and regulations of the committee.\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent to Participate\u003c/strong\u003e: Informed consent to participate in the study was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eConsent to Publish:\u003c/strong\u003e Not Applicable, as the manuscript does not contain identifiable personal data.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eD.A. and A.A.D. conceptualized the study and led the fieldwork. D.A. wrote the initial draft of the manuscript. F.Z. contributed to the literature review and data analysis. A.P. provided policy context, refined the discussion, and edited the final manuscript. All authors reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbastante F. (2021). Pursuing the SDG11 Targets: The role of the sustainability protocols.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAccelerating SDG 11 Achievement: Policy Brief in Support of The First SDG 11 Review at the UN High-Level Political Forum 2018.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAdamu, D and Danladi A. A 2019. Triggers of informal land supply dominance in Nigerian cities: \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Innovative Research and Development. 8(7) pp.346-352 \u003c/em\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAdamu, D and Danladi A. A 2019. A Karu based experience about the effect of informal land delivery channels on housing supply. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Innovative Research and Development. 8(7) pp.332-338\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAgbo, F, U. (2009). Farmers\u0026rsquo; Perception of Cooperative Societies in Enugu State, Nigeria. \u003cem\u003eAfrican Journal Online\u003c/em\u003e. Vol. 8 No. 3.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAdeboyejo, A., Oderinde, J. (2013). Housing cooperative societies and social housing delivery in Oyo state, Nigeria. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Cooperative Management, 16\u003c/em\u003e(2), 61-75.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAdeokun, C., Adewale, B., Oloke, O. (2014). \u003cem\u003eReworking traditional fund-raising institutions for affordable housing provision: a review of Nigerian and Kenyan case studies\u003c/em\u003e. Proceedings of the Eighth Construction Industry Development Board Postgraduate Conference (pp.1-7). Johannesburg, South Africa.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAderounmu, R., Oyedemi, O., Adeleke, M. (2014). The experience and responsibility of cooperative societies to poverty alleviation in Eruwa, Ibarapa region of southwestern Nigeria.\u003cem\u003e Developing Country Studies, 4\u003c/em\u003e(2), 1-8.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAjayi, C.A (1998). \u003cem\u003eProperty investment valuation and analysis.\u003c/em\u003e Ibadan, Nigeria: De-Ayo Publications.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAksoy, M., and Aydogus, S. (2012). Housing co-operatives in Turkey. In J.T. Cameron \u0026amp; D. Wood (Eds.). \u003cem\u003eProfiles of a movement: cooperative housing around the world. \u003c/em\u003e(pp. 76-79).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAdekunle, B. and Henson, S, J. (2007). The Effect of Cooperative Thrift and Credit Societies on Personal Agency. \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAdeyemo, R. and Bamire, A, S. (2005). Saving and Investment Patterns of Cooperative Farmers in Southern Nigeria. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Social Science\u003c/em\u003e. 11(3)183-192.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAdinya, I, B., Odey, S, O., Oniah, M, O., Umeh, G, N., Agiopu, B, F., and Ogbonna, K, I. (2008). Analysis of the Role of Agricultural Cooperatives in Funding Processing Mills in Cross River State, Nigeria. \u003cem\u003eContinental Journal of Agricultural Science. \u003c/em\u003e2:25-34.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBamire, A, S. (2005). Saving and Investment Patterns of Cooperatives Farmers in Southwestern Nigeria. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Social Sciences\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cem\u003e11\u003c/em\u003e(3):183.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDanladi A. A. and Adamu, D 2019. Strategies for recuperating the competence of informal land delivery channels. \u003cem\u003eInternational Journal of Innovative Research and Development. 8(8) pp. 350-356\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDeveltere, P., I, Pollet., and F, Wanyama. (2008). \u003cem\u003eCooperating out of poverty: The renaissance of the African cooperative movement\u003c/em\u003e. Geneva: ILO.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEnete, A, A. (2008). Political and Genuine Cooperatives in Enugu State, Nigeria. In Develtere, P, Pollet, I and Wanyama, F (eds) \u003cem\u003eCooperating Out of Poverty- The Renaissance of the African Cooperative Movement\u003c/em\u003e. International Labour Office, World Bank Institute, pp. 208-224.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEziyi, O, Ibem., and Chuba, O, Odum. (2011). The role of cooperatives in securing land for urban housing in Nigeria. A Case study of NEPA District Cooperative thrift and Loan saving association Enugu.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGore, A. (1993). The Gore Report on Reinventing Government: Creating a Government That Works Better and Costs Less. Report of the National Performance Review, Times Books, New York.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKaswan, M. (2007). Happiness, Politics and Co-operative Principles. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Co-operative Studies, 40\u003c/em\u003e(1) 30-40.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLemanski, Charlotte. (2008). House without Community: Problems of community (in) Capacity in Cape Town, South Africa. \u003cem\u003eEnvironment and Urbanization\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e20\u003c/em\u003e(2): 393-410.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMabogunje, A. (2005). Cooperative Societies as Agents of Affordable Mass Housing Delivery. \u003cem\u003eHousing Today, \u003c/em\u003e1(9): 11-12.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMadu, E, N., and Umebali, E. (1993). Self-Help Approach to Rural Transformation in Nigeria. \u003cem\u003eCommunity Development Journal\u003c/em\u003e, 28:141-53.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOdum, C, O., and Ibem, E, O. (2011). Securing urban land for housing among low‐income earners in Sub‐Saharan Africa: A case study of workers co‐operative society, Enugu, Nigeria. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Studies and Research in Human Geography, \u003c/em\u003e5(1): 61‐75\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eOnuoha, E. (2002). A critique of the draft Cooperative Policy for Nigeria. \u003cem\u003eNigeria Journal of Cooperative Studies\u003c/em\u003e, 2(1): 10-17.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eRakodi, Carole, (2007). Land for Housing in Africa Cities: Are Informal Delivery Systems Institutionally Robust and Pro-Poor. \u003cem\u003eGlobal Urban Development Magazine, \u003c/em\u003e3(1).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUkaga, O, M. (1992). \u003cem\u003eFarmers\u0026rsquo; Cooperatives in Nigeria: A vehicle for Mutual Help and Education. \u003c/em\u003ePaper Presented at the Eight African Educational Research Symposium, Ohio University, Athens, Ohio, December 5-7.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUNCHS. (1996). \u003cem\u003eThe Habitat Agenda: Goals and Principles, Commitments and Global Plan for Actions\u003c/em\u003e. UNCHS (Habitat II), UNCHS, Nairobi.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUN-HABITAT. (2006). \u003cem\u003eNational Trends in Housing \u0026ndash; Production Practices Volume 4.\u003c/em\u003e Nigeria, Kenya: United Nations Centre for Human Settlements Journal.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUN-HABITAT. (2020). Monitoring Human Settlements Indicators: A Short Guide to Human Settlements Indicators Goal 11. Accessed on 15/11/2022, URL: \u003cem\u003ehttps://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/18785E_HLPF_2018_2_Add.4_ECAadvanceduneditedversion.pdf \u003c/em\u003e \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"Table","content":"\u003cp\u003eTable 2 is available in the Supplementary Files section.\u003c/p\u003e\n"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"cooperative societies, low- and medium-income earners, housing, SDG Agenda 11, sub-Sahara Africa","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7936612/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-7936612/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eRapid urbanization in sub-Saharan Africa has intensified challenges around equitable access to land and housing, particularly for low- and medium-income earners. In Nigeria\u0026rsquo;s Karu Urban Area (KUA), adjacent to the Federal Capital Territory of Abuja, cooperative societies have emerged as grassroots mechanisms for navigating the complexities of land acquisition and housing development. This study investigates the role of housing cooperatives in facilitating access to land and incremental housing construction, highlighting their contribution to inclusive urban development and the realization of Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 11. Drawing on spatial and quantitative methods, the research analyzes the organizational structures, operational strategies, and spatial distribution of 20 cooperative societies in KUA. Findings reveal that mutual housing cooperatives dominate the landscape, enabling members to collectively negotiate land prices, manage documentation, and support housing development. Despite limited government involvement, these cooperatives function as informal governance systems, bridging gaps in formal land delivery and promoting resilience, equity, and community empowerment. The study underscores the potential of cooperative-led models to transform informal urban settlements into more habitable and sustainable environments.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Cooperative Pathways to Housing Equity through Community Led Land Access and Urban Inclusion in Karu Nigeria","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2025-12-10 15:50:36","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-7936612/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"edb0e1e2-cc00-46e9-9631-b40ae1cd5ee9","owner":[],"postedDate":"December 10th, 2025","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-04-10T11:39:46+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2025-12-10 15:50:36","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-7936612","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-7936612","identity":"rs-7936612","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}