Easy Housing: a solution to sustainable and affordable housing? - Hosted By One.com | Webhosting made simple

Easy Housing: a solution
to sustainable and
affordable housing?

Students Client
Mira Piel (6917658) Wolf Bierens (Easy
Anne Ha (4170547) Housing)
Aline Ramirez Banales (6825079)
Roy Lin (6877559) Supervisor
Niki Quee (5722861) Laura Bosch Pereira

Word count: Date:
13880 30-10-2020

2

SUMMARY
Due to a growing population and migration from rural areas into urban areas, many cities are facing a
severe shortage of housing, particularly for low- and middle-income earners. This affordable housing gap
is especially severe in emerging economies. While the need for housing constitutes a social problem, the
construction sector is very resource intensive and has adverse environmental effects. Consequently, there
is not only a need for affordable housing but for sustainable and affordable housing. This exploratory
research looks into the question, which obstacles the sustainable and affordable housing sector faces in
emerging economies. For the assessment, we apply a framework based on the three sustainability
dimensions – social, economic and environmental sustainability. The research looks into the housing
sector in three different cities, namely Dhaka in Bangladesh, Lagos in Nigeria, and Port-au-Prince in Haiti.
For the analysis, we used data from a broader literature search and conducted several interviews with
people having experience in the respective cities.
 We found that overall, sustainability does not play an important role in affordable housing
provision and that its sustainability is severely limited by various issues, like corruption in the housing
provision process, a mismatch between the price of housing developments and the actual purchasing
power of the target group, a lack of funding and financing opportunities and cultural preferences for
resource-intensive material like concrete. Based on our findings, we then look at Easy Housing, a concept
that aims to provide a sustainable and affordable solution to housing applicable in various contexts and
assess some challenges and opportunities it would face in an emerging economies context.
 While there are some similarities that become visible across the three case studies, it also
becomes clear that there is no universal answer on how to approach sustainability in an emerging
economies context. The whole lifecycle of the Easy Housing concept could not be assessed as it only the
sustainability of the structure is ensured while the sustainability of the rest of the process is unclear. The
concept has opportunities to offer a short-term solution for housing but in long-term the emphasis should
be on local supply chains. Easy housing certainly has potential to fill in the gaps in sustainable and
affordable housing in emergent economies, but further research needs to be done on the context of
where it will be provided. It should also be noted that sustainability is measured from a Western
perspective while the housing and sustainability needs differ among cultures. From empirical data it has
become clear that community and collective action is of great importance to take into account. With
determination, willingness and a lot of patience to engage in the local communities the concept could be
accepted anywhere.

3

SAMENVATTING
Door een groeiende migratie vanuit het platteland naar stedelijke gebieden hebben veel steden nu te
maken met een ernstig tekort aan woningen, dit is vooral het geval voor mensen met een laag tot
gemiddeld inkomen. Hoewel het tekort aan betaalbare woningen een sociaal probleem is, is de
bouwsector een van de meeste vervuilende sectoren en het gevolg hiervan dat het een impact heeft op
het milieu. Hierdoor is niet alleen de betaalbaarheid van huizen een probleem, maar is er ook vraag naar
duurzame woningen. In dit onderzoek wordt gekeken naar de vraag met welke obstakels de duurzame en
betaalbare woning sector te maken heeft in landen met een ontwikkelende economie. Om dit te
beoordelen passen we een wetenschappelijk kader toe dat gebaseerd is op de drie dimensies van
duurzaamheid - sociale, economische en ecologische duurzaamheid. De woningsector in drie
verschillende steden wordt onderzocht: Dhaka in Bangladesh, Lagos in Nigeria en Port-au-Prince in Haïti.
Voor de analyse is er data verkregen door een uitgebreid literatuuronderzoek en er zijn meerdere
interviews afgenomen met mensen die ervaring hebben in de desbetreffende steden.
 We hebben geconstateerd dat duurzaamheid geen belangrijke rol speelt in de
voorziening van woningen en dat de duurzaamheid ervan ernstig wordt gelimiteerd. Dit is het gevolg van
verschillende beperkingen zoals corruptie in het voorziening proces, een discrepantie tussen de prijs van
de ontwikkeling van de woningen en de daadwerkelijke koopkracht van de doelgroep, het tekort aan
financiering en financiële mogelijkheden en culturele voorkeuren voor materiaal met een hoge
ecologische impacts zoals beton. Het doel van het concept is om een duurzame en betaalbare oplossing
te bieden en we kijken of dit toegepast kan worden op verschillende contexten en de verschillende
obstakels en mogelijkheden te beoordelen die het kan tegenkomen in de context van opkomende
economieën.
 Hoewel er enkele overeenkomsten zichtbaar worden in de drie casussen, wordt het ook duidelijk
dat er geen algemeen antwoord is over hoe duurzaamheid moet worden benaderd in een context van
opkomende economieën. De hele levenscyclus van het Easy Housing-concept kon niet worden
beoordeeld, aangezien alleen de duurzaamheid van de constructie bekend is, terwijl de duurzaamheid van
het gehele proces onduidelijk is. Het concept biedt kansen om op korte termijn een oplossing te bieden
voor het tekort aan woningen, maar op lange termijn moet de nadruk meer liggen op lokale
toeleveringsketens. Er bestaan kansen voor Easy Housing, maar meer onderzoek is nodig naar de locatie
waar het concept start. De kansen en uitdagen die voor Easy Housing bestaan, zijn namelijk erg context
afhankelijk. Een kanttekening is dat duurzaamheid wordt gemeten vanuit een westers perspectief, terwijl
de behoeften op het gebied van huisvesting en duurzaamheid verschillen tussen culturen. Uit empirische
gegevens is gebleken dat gemeenschaps- en collectieve acties van groot belang zijn. Met vastberadenheid,
bereidheid en veel geduld om deel te nemen aan de lokale gemeenschappen kan het concept overal
worden geaccepteerd.

4

INHOUDSOPGAVE
1.1 Problem description _________________________________________________ 7
 1.2 Relevance of problem for the client ...........................................................................................8
 1.3 Definition of terminology used ..................................................................................................9
 1.4 Research questions ..................................................................................................................10

2 Methodology _______________________________________________________ 12
 2.1 Introducing an assessment framework ....................................................................................12
 2.2 Data collection .........................................................................................................................12

 2.2.1 Literature review ...............................................................................................................12
 2.2.2 Interviews ..........................................................................................................................13
 2.2.3 Survey................................................................................................................................14

 2.3. Explanation of integration process..........................................................................................15

3 Assessment framework _______________________________________________ 17
 3.1 Operationalisation ....................................................................................................................19

 3.1.1 Economic sustainability .....................................................................................................19
 3.1.2 Social sustainability ...........................................................................................................20
 3.1.3 Environmental sustainability .............................................................................................21

4 Case studies________________________________________________________ 23
 4.1 Lagos, Nigeria ...........................................................................................................................23
 4.2 Dhaka, Bangladesh ...................................................................................................................24
 4.3 Port au Prince, Haiti .................................................................................................................24

5 Results ____________________________________________________________ 26
 5.1 Application of assessment framework to the case studies ......................................................26

 5.1.1 Economic sustainability .....................................................................................................26
 5.1.2 Social sustainability ...........................................................................................................31
 5.1.3 Environmental sustainability .............................................................................................38

6. Integration: Affordable and sustainable housing in emerging economies and the application of
easy housing in practice ________________________________________________ 41
 6.1 Connecting the three sustainability dimensions for Dhaka, Lagos and Port-au-Prince............41
 6.2 Opportunities and challenges of Easy Housing in the context of emerging economies ..........45

7 Discussion _________________________________________________________ 47

5

8 Conclusion _________________________________________________________ 50
6 Sources ___________________________________________________________ 51
7 Appendix __________________________________________________________ 59
 Appendix - l: Interview guidelines ..................................................................................................60
 Appendix - II: Survey questions ......................................................................................................62

6

Lists of Figures & Tables

Figure 1. Flow diagram
Figure 2. Assessment framework modified from Oyebanji et al. (2017) & Gan et al. (2017)
Figure 3. Map (https://mapchart.net/world.html/)

Table 1. List of interviews
Table 2. Operationalisation of economic sustainability
Table 3. Operationalisation of social sustainability
Table 4. Operationalisation of environmental sustainability
Table 5. Overview of the results

7

1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Problem description
World population is expected to grow rapidly in the coming decades - with projections assuming that
population size will not reach its peak until around 2100 (United Nations, 2020). Population growth
and urbanisation are responsible for an immense pressure on demand for affordable and sustainable
housing (King et al., 2017). This challenge is particularly visible in cities, where growing demand
negatively influences affordable housing availability (Zhang, 2016). Especially in developing
countries, this has led to the emergence of informal settlements causing a “serious and common
problem” (Nassar & Elsayed, 2018, p. 2367). Having access to adequate shelter “is fundamental to
physical and financial security, economic productivity, healthy communities and human well-being”
(King et al., 2017, p. 2). This housing gap affects approximately 330 million households (King et al.,
2017). Therefore, to provide affordable, adequate housing for all is an urgent need that hits
developing countries the most due to limited resources, lack of knowledge and experience in housing
(Zhang, 2008).
 In addition, there is a need for more sustainable housing. The construction sector is one of
the most resource-intensive sectors concerning raw materials, water and energy. Thus, it is of great
environmental concern (Akadiri et al., 2012; Almeida et al., 2018). A vast amount of the energy
needed is associated with the prominent materials used in the building sector, such as cement or
steel. In 2018, the construction sector was responsible for “36% of final energy use and 39% of energy
and process-related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions” (IEA & UNEP, 2018, p. 9). Therefore, one
important aspect to sustainable housing is the reduction of resource input, particularly energy-,
water- or material input (Almeida et al., 2018; Horne & Hayles, 2008).
 A rethinking of design of human settlements is crucial not only for mitigating climate change
but also to absorb the most severe effects of climate change (Hales et al., 2007). This relates not only
to a need to reduce emissions caused by construction but also by occupation of the house (Horne &
Hayles, 2008). Sustainability questions in the housing sector have therefore gained momentum in
the last decades (Horne & Hayles, 2008). However, so far improvements made in these realms were
not able to outpace a growing demand in housing (IEA & UNEP, 2018).
 Furthermore, many authors point to the multidimensional characteristics of sustainability,
not only including environmental questions, but also social and economic aspects (e.g. Akadiri et al.,
2012; Ortiz et al., 2009; Salama & Alshuwaikhat, 2006). Particularly in the developing world, a lack of

8

adequate shelter has numerous consequences, e.g. overcrowding, physical insecurities or health
problems to name a few (Du Plessis, 2001; Hales et al., 2007; King et al., 2017).
 In 2009, emerging economies were responsible for almost 60% of total CO2 emissions
caused by the global construction sector with China bearing the biggest share (Huang et al., 2018).
When it comes to sustainable housing, there is often only limited recognition of the very little
environmental impact that informal settlements have compared to housing development projects
(Devi et al., 2017; Du Plessis, 2001). Here, a trade-off between economic, environmental and social
sustainability becomes visible. Therefore, there is an urgent need for innovation in the sustainable
construction sector: the use of less resource and energy intensive materials in connection to a limited
investment capacity of a majority of people poses a major challenge to the housing sector.
 Due to its multidimensional nature, the issue of sustainable and affordable housing is a very
complex problem. Salama and Alshuwaikhat (2006) criticise prior research on sustainable and
affordable housing for as it often defines affordable housing in economic terms and neglects the
importance of social and environmental concerns. “It is apparent that a new paradigm of thinking is
emerging where no one theory or discipline would have the upper hand in developing a
comprehensive understanding of sustainable affordable housing” (Salama & Alshuwaikhat, 2006,
p. 47). In this sense, the nexus between affordable and sustainable housing requires input from a
diverse range of disciplines complementing each other in order to find appropriate solutions to the
prevalent housing crisis.

1.2 Relevance of problem for the client
In the past decades, many innovations and instruments have arisen in order to tackle the housing
problem (Zhang, 2008). Easy Housing is a non-governmental organization, which attempts to offer a
solution to the worldwide housing crisis. The organisation provides the people locally (e.g.
developers or governments) with the materials to build the basic house structure. This structure
consists of engineered wood and does not require skilled labour as all material is prefabricated and
can easily be put together with only a drill on-site. All materials needed besides the basic structure -
like material for walls, however, need to be can then be sourced locally. Additionally, the housing
concept is circular as it can be demounted and rebuilt at a different location if needed. The floor
plans are flexible, and the concept is adaptable to different climatic conditions (Easy Housing, n.d.).
Like this, Easy Housing aims to be an affordable sustainable wooden concept that can be shipped all
over the world.
 However, as the literature on the subject of affordable sustainable housing shows, for a
sustainable housing solution to be successful, the three dimensions of sustainability need to be taken

9

into consideration. The nexus between economic, environmental and social issues is highly relevant
and therefore any housing concept targeting an emerging economies’ context must be in line with
the complex needs and demands of the housing sector there. To analyse the applicability and
usefulness of the Easy Housing concept in emerging economies, the concept should be evaluated in
terms of economic, environmental and social components of sustainability.

1.3 Definition of terminology used
When it comes to sustainable affordable housing in emerging economies, it is important to define
what it means. Emerging economies are low-income but rapid developing countries that meet the
criteria of rapid economic development, government policies favouring economic liberalization and
the adoption of a free-market system (Hoskisson et al., 2000). It is important to consider this broad
definition as a simple reference point since across countries economic growth and the nature of
government policies can differ substantially. Hence, the taxonomy of an emerging economy serves
the purpose of narrowing down the scope of the countries examined throughout this paper.
 Beyond the geographical aspect, affordability and sustainability are ubiquitous terms worth
defining. Affordability in the context of this study is a measure of the financial capability of a
household to access housing (be it by purchase or rent) with relation to the household’s income
(Adabre et al., 2020). Moreover, affordability entails that housing costs and other basic living costs
of the households are not mutually exclusive. In other words, for a housing unit to be affordable, the
household must have sufficient slack to also cover other living expenses (Oyebanji et al., 2017).
 Affordability at the same time is only one component of the larger economic sustainability in
housing that focuses on financial accessibility to housing. Economic sustainability looks at other
important factors that include the existence or lack of funding opportunities usually put in place by
government authorities to enable both public and private sectors to supply enough housing for
communities, the accessibility to mortgages and credit for housing, an efficient use of resources that
deals with minimizing future maintenance and expansion costs of a housing unit, as well as effective
legal frameworks that ensure that housing provision is efficient (Oyebanji et al., 2017).
 Social sustainability in certain studies refers to the opportunity of equal access to affordable
housing for the target population (Gan et al., 2017). Local culture and customs also represent an
important aspect of social sustainability. The design of the housing unit as well as the characteristics
of the neighbourhood that will shape social interactions should be context-specific to meet the needs
of residents are important aspects of social acceptability and suitability. (Pullen et al., 2009). In
contrast to quantitative criteria, analysing the social component requires a deep understanding of
cultural conservation needs, asymmetries in stakeholder powers within a community and the

10

opportunities to access opportunities (healthcare, education, jobs, skills, etc.) as a result of how
housing is conceived (Oyebanji et al., 2017).
 The third component of sustainability in housing in this research is environmental
sustainability. It encompasses a thorough evaluation of conditions related to the built environment
where housing is built, such as disaster resistance of the location, potential natural risks and the
resilience of the materials to cope with these risks (Choi & Seo, 2002). Additionally, the internal
environmental conditions of the house are closely linked to the socio-economic context that will play
an important role in water accessibility and energy efficiency. The method of construction itself will
also determine the interaction of households with their environment depending on the structure,
the installed physical facilities in place (type of roof material, floor, rainfall collection) and how they
interact or meet the social and economic needs specific to a certain location.
 The relevance of the above definitions for this study is to have a framework that highlights
the interdependence of the 3 sustainability dimensions in emerging economies. In other words, the
economic viability of a housing project can only be successful if it also addresses cultural demands of
the local context, just as environmental soundness of a project plays a major role in ensuring
resilience to environmental change but also plays a role in how the built environment will impact
social interactions of residents.

1.4 Research questions
With regard to the environmental impact of the construction sector as well as the growing demand
for housing, the housing crisis receives a lot of attention from scholars and practitioners in the field.
This exploratory research aims to deliver combined knowledge of the two fields by conceptualising
sustainable and affordable housing in emerging economies and by comparing these contextualities
to an existing solution to affordable and sustainable housing. Our research question therefore is:

What obstacles does sustainable and affordable housing face in emerging economies?

In order to answer our main question, we make use of three sub-questions. By doing so, we aim to
first understand what sustainable and affordable housing means in emerging economies. Afterwards,
we apply this to three case studies - three cities of our choosing that show a variety of different
characteristics, but can all be subsumed under emerging economies. Lastly, with the knowledge
obtained, we want to evaluate the Easy Housing concept within these contexts. Our sub-questions
are as follows:

11

 1. How can sustainable and affordable housing be defined in emerging economies?
 2. What does sustainable and affordable housing look like in practice in the cities of Dhaka,
 Lagos and Port-au-Prince?
 3. What challenges and opportunities would the Easy Housing concept face in the housing
 sector in emerging economies?

In the next section, we explain the methodology used to obtain information and data for answering
the three sub-questions. To define sustainable and affordable housing in emerging economies we
will make use of a framework that we will further present in chapter 3. In the subsequent chapter,
we will present the results of sub-question 2, followed by an integration of our results for sub-
question 3. Finally, we will discuss our findings, mention some limitations and give recommendations
for the Easy Housing concept in the context of emerging economies.

12

2 METHODOLOGY
This section elaborated on the methodology used for this study, it presents a guideline throughout
this research.

2.1 Introducing an assessment framework
In order to answer the first sub-question on how sustainable affordable housing could be
understood, a framework was put together. For each of the three sustainability subsystems,
frameworks that address important factors to examine when it comes to supplying sustainable and
affordable housing were collected. To find these frameworks, several search engines were used, e.g.
Google Scholar and Scopus. In the selection procedure, frameworks were prioritized based on how
comprehensive they were, how detailed in their descriptions of specific criteria and their potential
usefulness and applicability in the context of emerging economies and climate change. We evaluated
the selected frameworks in the context of our study and the understanding of the three sustainability
subsystems, and, based on this, developed a framework by combining and modifying the most
applicable frameworks.

2.2 Data collection
In this study, a mixed-methods approach was used in order to answer the sub-questions. The
indicators for economic and social sustainability were examined through literature review with
complementing interviews. The interviews were helpful to better answer and understand indicators
that are more experience-based, since more local experience information is hard to find in scientific
literature. Furthermore, for environmental sustainability only a literature review was conducted,
since these indicators are more based on facts than on subjective experiences.

2.2.1 Literature review
A literature review was conducted to understand the different indicators presented in the
subsystems. In this research, different forms of literature were used, including “academic and
professional journal articles, books and web-based resources” (Rowley, Jennifer, Slack, Frances,
2004, p. 31). In order to find relevant literature, different search engines were used, e.g. Google
Scholar and Scopus. In addition, to understand the environmental sustainability issues, databases of
the International Energy Agency and Food and Agriculture Organization have been consulted.

13

 2.2.2 Interviews
In order to give a broad understanding of our case studies, complementary interviews were needed.
For the economic and social sustainability subsystems, interviews were extremely insightful to
answer experience-based questions and to validate the outcomes of the literature review against
empirical input from the interviewees. For the environmental sustainability subsystem, only
information was mainly extracted from hard scientific data that served as a reference point hence
not necessarily with room for subjective interpretation. For every subsystem, eight interview
requests were sent out to experts. In order to harness the opportunity to talk to interviewees, we
used the ‘snowball technique’ as a means of “seeking additional interview leads from one’s
interviewees” (Bleich & Pekkanen, 2013, p. 87).
 For the economic and social sustainability subsystems, complementary interviews were
needed to better understand obstacles and opportunities for sustainable affordable housing in the
context of our case studies. We approached various experts using different means. We contacted
experts with an academic background as well as practitioners through emails found on papers,
researchers networks websites, LinkedIn profiles and contacts provided by our client. An overview
of our interview partners is presented in table 1.
 It is important to mention that among interviewees, some were not only researchers on
housing. At least one had also gone through the process of buying a house and one more took charge
of the development of a construction project, therefore having also an on the ground personal
experience with housing. Nevertheless, it is important to acknowledge that a potential bias from
interviewees not having experienced this might be present in the responses obtained.
 All the interviews were done on a semi-structured basis where the interviewees remain
anonymous. The interview guidelines can be found in appendix 1. The interview guideline contained
questions on both social and economic sustainability. In order to obtain as much information as
possible and given the short time span to conduct the interviews and translate them into results, in
every interview we asked questions on both social and economic sustainability. The interviews were
conducted online via Zoom and Microsoft Teams. One interview partner answered our guide in a
written format. In terms of privacy, the interviewees were asked for consent to be recorded so the
recording could be transcribed afterwards.
 Throughout the paper, we will refer to interviews by the number (#1,#2,#3,etc…) assigned in
the table below to avoid having a text overload.

14

Table 1. List of interviews
 # Function Organization Location Date
 1 PhD scholar Utrecht University Dhaka October
 14th, 2020
 2 Dhaka resident, developmental NGOs Former Dhaka Dhaka October 20st,
 collaborator and Easy Housing Resident 2020
 Consultant
 3 Center for housing and Sustainable University of Lagos Lagos October 21st,
 Development Founding Director and 2020
 University of Lagos Professor
 4 Private development company Alitheia Capital Lagos October 21st,
 2020
 5 Professor for Architecture at Quisqueya Port-au- October
 Université Quisqueya-written University Prince 24th, 2020
 questionnaire
 6 MexicanPolytechnical National INP/HIC-AL Port-au- October
 Institute Scholar (INP) & HIC-AL Prince 26th, 2020
 consultant
 7 Haiti former resident, project Private Consultant Port-au- October
 developer in Haiti and private in Mexico and Haiti Prince 27th, 2020
 consultant
 8 Department of Civil and Notre Dame Port-au- October
 Environmental Engineering and Earth University Prince 28th, 2020
 Sciences Scholars at Notre Dame
 University

2.2.3 Survey
A survey was designed for the social sustainability subsystem to better understand the ‘suitability’
and ‘stakeholder participation’ indicators in the context of community participation, since this is
experience-related and hard to find in literature. Many previously conducted studies assess this type
of information by conducting a survey amongst residents using a Likert scale from 1 to 5 (very
dissatisfied to very satisfied) (e.g. Ibem & Aduwo, 2013). The surveys were distributed on local
Facebook groups of the three cities. Noticing that the response rate was almost non-existent, we
adapted our survey to a more simplified version and requested some of our interviewees with access

15

to local networks to share the surveys via Whatsapp1. Like this, we aimed to generate a more
personalized connection between potential respondents and the person sharing the survey to
increase the response rate. Furthermore, to reach all respondents, the survey was translated into
French for Haiti.
 Running into various challenges distributing the survey, the data will not be used in the results
section but only as supplementary information in the discussion.

2.3. Explanation of integration process
In order to answer our main research question, we decomposed it into three sub questions as shown
in the integration diagram below (see figure 1).
 The first sub-question aims at narrowing down the concept of what affordable and
sustainable housing means given the lack of consensus in the literature revised. As a result, we
therefore built our own research framework that broadly looks at sustainable housing from three
angles: economic, social and environmental sustainability.
 To move from the theoretical perspective to a more empirical approach on our framework,
our second sub-question applies our modified framework in three emerging cities with a rapid
demand for housing. By doing so, we aim to gain insight into the sustainability in the affordable
housing sector in each of the cities and at the same time test how useful our framework proves in
the context of emerging economies.
 Lastly, we evaluated the Easy Housing concept of our client in the light of our results, to
identify the challenges and opportunities sustainable and affordable housing faces in the case
studies. With this information, we were able to formulate observations and recommendations for
our client. By condensing the information from the three sub-questions, we aimed to arrive at a
comprehensive answer to which obstacles sustainable and affordable housing faces in emerging
economies.

1
 We did not have any contacts for Port-au-Prince at that point, which is why this approach was only taken for Lagos
and Dhaka.

16

Figure 1. Flow diagram

17

3 ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORK
To answer the research questions presented in the introduction, the following integrated assessment
framework was used. In scientific literature, a multitude of frameworks to assess sustainable and
affordable housing can be found (e.g. Adabre et al., 2020; Gan et al., 2017; Nair et al., 2005; Oyebanji
et al., 2017; Wallbaum et al., 2012). Those frameworks share an understanding of sustainability in
the affordable housing sector in terms of the three sustainability dimensions: economic, social, and
environmental sustainability. Each dimension is considered equally important. For the purpose of
our research, we consulted various frameworks and eventually combined two frameworks,
developed by Oyebanji et al. (2017) and (Gan et al., 2017), to have a modified framework that is
useful for and within the scope of our research questions. According to prior research, our framework
is based on the three sustainability dimensions. The indicators presented in the framework will be
used to understand the characteristics of sustainable and affordable housing in our case studies.
 For economic sustainability, the framework by Oyebanji et al. (2017) was most suitable. Their
methodology comprises both desk and field work, where desk work consisted of document analysis
ranging from journal papers to government reports and PhD theses and field work took place in the
form of a questionnaire survey. The outcome of this analysis was a selection of eight criteria
prioritized by appearance frequency and weight given in the surveys. From the eight criteria, we
selected five (see figure 2 below) considering the availability of data but also the relevance in the
context of our case studies.
 Social sustainability in literature often includes many characteristics that are not relevant for
our research. For instance, Oyebanji et al. (2017) and Gan et al. (2017) refer amongst others to access
to institutions like education or health care or community development, which are not relevant for
the purpose of this research. For this reason, we additionally drew upon the conceptualisation of
social sustainability provided by Atanda (2019). The author gives an overview about different
dimensions important for social sustainability. In the light of this research, we decided to focus on
‘cultural value’ and ‘participation and control’. With these two general categories in mind, indicators
from the two before-mentioned frameworks were chosen that fit under these categories.
 To address environmental sustainability, the framework of Gan et al. (2017) was most
suitable. Again, keeping in mind the focus of our research and time constraints, we selected a small
number of indicators which can be seen in Figure 2 below.

18

Figure 2. Assessment framework modified from Oyebanji et al. (2017) & Gan et al. (2017).

19

3.1 Operationalisation
This section elaborates on the operationalisation of the independent variables presented in the
assessment framework above.

3.1.1 Economic sustainability
Affordability is considered the most critical economic factor when it comes to providing sustainable
housing. It is a precondition for low- and middle-income households to meet their housing needs in
a way that their financial capability is not compromised and that they can still meet other basic living
costs (Oyebanji et al., 2017). Sani & Rahim (2015) state that housing is often considered affordable
if it costs less than 30% of their gross income. Therefore, this is examined for every case research.
 Second, adequate housing and funding is considered to be an important factor for sustainable
and adequate funding and provisions. Provision points to active and direct government involvement
and intervention in ensuring funding is available, for example, through rent subsidies, mortgage
finance, housing benefits and services schemes that support household’s needs (Oyebanji et al.,
2017).
 Thirdly, economic design and efficient use of resources is regarded as important to ensure
economic sustainability of housing. The efficiency of resources is crucial, resulting in minimal future
maintenance and expansion costs (Oyebanji et al., 2017). In order to reduce whole-life construction
costs, certain aspects such as material consumption and maintenance have to be taken into account
(Oyebanji et al., 2017).
 Finally, effective legal and policy frameworks are indispensable for sustainable affordable
housing. Oyebanji et al. (2017)suggest that “effective policy and legal frameworks are necessary for
ensuring low sustainability costs, standards, and construction techniques that have the potential for
providing multiple benefits for residents and the wider population” (p. 220).

20

Table 2. Operationalisation of economic sustainability
 Indicator Operationalisation
 Adequate funding Governmental financing programs and subsidies that enable social and
 and provision private housing sectors to provide sufficient sustainable (and affordable)
 housing that meets the needs of every household (Oyebanji et al., 2017).
 Affordability Housing is often considered affordable if it costs less than 30% of the gross
 household income (Sani & Rahim, 2015)
 Efficient use of Considers what materials are used and if the structure minimises future
 resources maintenance and expansion costs (Adabre & Chan, 2020).
 Effective legal and Considers if implementation and control of social housing provision
 policy frameworks activities is efficient, f.e. distributions and contracts (Oyebanji et al.,
 2017).

3.1.2 Social sustainability
First, cultural and heritage conservation is considered to be a relevant indicator for sustainable
affordable housing. (Chiu, 2004) suggests that the way that the housing construction sector
developed mirrors the adaptation of the people living in a certain context to the conditions prevalent
there. However, the author also suggests that quantitative measuring for cultural and heritage
conservation might not be appropriate. Hereby, “external housing forms and the housing structure
are results of the availability of building resources, climatic conditions, construction capability of the
inhabitant and aesthetics of the specific communities over specific periods of time” (Chiu, 2004,
p. 75). We therefore aim to understand how the material used reflects the cultural as well as the
climatic context.
 Second, social acceptability can be defined as “the acceptability of a development” for
instance by the community or by local or state government (Pullen et al., 2009, p. 87). To understand
the acceptability of sustainability in affordable housing, we therefore use information to what extent
sustainability is considered by public housing providers and by the target population.
 Next, suitability can be understood in terms of residential satisfaction to dwelling unit
characteristics also related to cultural compatibility. This understanding is based on a variety of
studies that has been carried out in sustainable housing research (e.g. Azimi & Esmaeilzadeh, 2017;
Djebarni & Al‐Abed, 2000; Ibem & Aduwo, 2013; Riazi & Emami, 2018).
 For stakeholder participation is defined as in how stakeholders are involved in the whole
process for the provision of housing. The interactions between them are assessed in this research.

21

For sustainable housing to be achievable all the stakeholders have to work together.it is also
important to look at the involvement of the local communities and how they are involved in this
process (Oyebanji et al., 2017).
 The last indicator, skills acquisition and job opportunities are taken together because the
accessibility to these indicators is measured. The opportunities to obtain skills and for employment
should be available near the housing area. The lack of these opportunities will put a strain on the
affordability of housing which has a negative impact on social sustainability. Accessibility is measured
in terms of available opportunities in the area and if they are easily accessible (Mulliner & Maliene,
2011).

Table 3. Operationalisation of social sustainability
 Indicator Operationalisation
 Cultural and Physical form of housing over time, representing cultural and climatic
 heritage contexts (Chiu, 2004).
 conservation
 Social acceptability Acceptability of sustainability in affordable housing developments (Pullen
 et al., 2009).
 Suitability Residential satisfaction with dwelling unit features and residential
 satisfaction related to cultural compatibility (Azimi & Esmaeilzadeh,
 2017; Djebarni & Al‐Abed, 2000; Ibem & Aduwo, 2013; Riazi & Emami,
 2018
 Stakeholder The involvement of different stakeholders in the development process.
 participation Encouragement and engagement of community members (Oyenbanji et
 al. 2017).
 Skill acquisition and The opportunity and accessibility to education to develop new skills and
 job opportunities training for enhanced local employment (Oyenbanji et al.,2017).

3.1.3 Environmental sustainability
First, disaster resistance is considered to be important for affordable sustainable housing, since
disasters affect the life cycle of the house. To ensure long-lasting housing secure from natural
disasters, extra maintenance can be necessary. Housing structures are hereby most vulnerable to
earthquakes and flooding (Génova et al., 2018). We therefore focus on these two types of natural
disaster to evaluate in our research for the indicator disaster resistance proposed by Gan et al.
(2017).

22

 In this indicator, earthquakes and floods are analysed. To be sustainable, housing needs to
be able to withstand such natural catastrophes. As Easy Housing only provides the basic structure for
housing, but resilience is also influenced by further material use, we cannot directly test its lifecycle.
Thus, the analysis of this indicator looks into the vulnerability of our case studies to earthquakes and
flooding. In locations with high risk of disasters, more attention is needed for the structure and
maintenance of the house. To understand how natural disasters can affect environmental
sustainability, the operationalisation presented in Table 4 is utilized.
 Second, the efficiency of water and energy use is crucial for understanding the environmental
sustainability of housing (United Nations, 2014). Water efficiency is examined in measuring water
stress levels. Energy efficiency is evaluated by energy import & export and energy access.

Table 4. Operationalisation of environmental sustainability
 Indicator Operationalisation
 Disaster 1. Consider risks of earthquake magnitude to wooden housing. In
 resistance addition, analyse the earthquake record of the case studies with this
 standard (Choi & Seo, 2002).
 2. Considers the risks of flooding. Used indicators would refer to life
 cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle cost (LCC) (Balasbaneh et al.,
 2019).
 Water efficiency Considers if the case study locations have efficient water supply, by
 evaluating the level of water stress (UN indicator 6.4.2) (FAO, n.d.).
 Energy efficiency Examines the energy supply and demand, by using data of the
 International Energy Agency (IEA, n.d.).

23

4 CASE STUDIES
This section provides background information on the three cities selected as case studies to
represent emerging economies. The Easy Housing concept is developed for emerging economies,
which can be defined as low-income, but rapidly developing countries with economic liberalization
as their main growth strategy (Hoskisson et al., 2000). Given the limited scope of this research in
terms of time to cover the vast heterogeneity in emerging economies, we agreed with our client
upon certain criteria to choose our case studies. The first criteria was geographical representation,
therefore we picked countries from different continents: Asia (South), Africa (West) and Central
America (see figure 3). The second selection criteria was to pick countries with current and expected
high demand for housing in the future as a result of a rapidly increasing population. The third criteria
was to select countries that faced some kind of climate change-related vulnerability or exposure.
Finally, it was also agreed that one of the countries analysed be an island, in order to evaluate if being
more isolated would have an impact on how imports of prefabricated housing structures would be
conceived, in contrast to countries with continental connections. As a result, the cities of Lagos in
Nigeria, Dhaka in Bangladesh and Port-au-Prince in Haiti were selected as the ones covering all
criteria mentioned above and hence the most suitable for our study.

4.1 Lagos, Nigeria

In the last two decades, the rate of urbanization has been increasing in Nigeria. Now over 40% of the
Nigerian population live in urban centres which has led to severe housing problems (Olugbenga &
Adekemi, 2013). Until 1991, Lagos was the administrative capital of Nigeria and today it remains the
major economic hub in West-Africa. With a population of 21 million in the Metropolitan area it is the
biggest city in the whole African continent (Babalola et al., 2020). By the end of the century, Lagos is
expected to host 88 million people, making it the world’s largest city (Wallace & Alake, 2019). In this
metropolitan area the population growth has resulted in an extreme housing shortage and the
existing houses are not adequate (Olugbenga & Adekemi, 2013). Government efforts to meet the
housing needs of the citizens have failed. Not only in quantity but also quality (Babalola et al., 2020).
In Nigeria this is the result of several factors besides population growth, which will be examined in
this research. In addition, Lagos is a low-lying coastal city which means it has implications on storm
water management and flooding control. The majority of the population in Lagos is the urban poor
who are transforming the city to meet their needs in an informal way which goes against the official
laws (Olugbenga & Adekemi, 2013). From other researches it is seen that Lagos is a good example

24

for other cities in Nigeria. Measures and approaches in urban studies that work on Lagos have a big
potential to be effective in the other cities.

4.2 Dhaka, Bangladesh

Dhaka, the capital of Bangladesh has been experiencing tremendous urban growth in the last few
decades. As the largest city of Bangladesh with a population of 8.9 million in the city and 21 million
in the Greater Dhaka Area (Alam, 2018). The city has had a housing shortage since the 1970s due to
the population increase (Kamruzzaman, 2019). The inflowing people are often low- and middle-class
workers. These people often have no choice but to settle in informal housing and slums. These
settlements are unsafe and more prone to ecological hazards. The city’s infrastructure is struggling
to keep up with the influx of people (Xu, 2019). For higher income citizens there is a surplus in the
housing market while the lower income citizens struggle with the shortage of affordable housing.
The residential areas in the city have changed with the rapid urbanization. The traditional housing
form has undergone many radical transformations. With the increasing housing demand, multi-
storied apartments are replacing single storied independent houses (Kamruzzaman, 2019).

4.3 Port au Prince, Haiti
Port-au-Prince, the biggest city and capital of Haiti and has undergone rapid urbanization increasing
from 21% of the population living in urban areas in 29180 to 59% in 2015. It is estimated that 74% of
the urban population lives in slums. For Port-au-Prince it is estimated that 2.2 million people of the
3 million people living in the metropolitan area live in slums. This is mainly a result of the 2010
earthquake where the people who lost their houses got relocated into tent camps (McNairy et al.,
2019). More than 200,000 houses were destroyed or damaged during the earthquake in 2010 in
Haiti. Most of the new homes built are outside Port au Prince because it was easier to obtain land.
After the earthquake millions of dollars were donated but few houses were built. The focus was too
much on building houses on donor money instead of developing a local affordable housing market
which could be sustained after the donor funding ended. It was recognized that for long term
economic recovery and development, engaging the local private sector was an important factor
(Nielsen, 2020).

25

Figure 3. Map (https://mapchart.net/world.html/)

26

5 RESULTS
This section elaborates on the results in the three different dimensions of sustainability. To answer
sub-question two, per dimension the indicators are discussed for the three cities: Dhaka, Lagos and
Port-au-Prince. Subsequently, to answer sub-question three, the Easy Housing concept is evaluated
in terms of challenges and opportunities in the three cities.

5.1 Application of assessment framework to the case studies

5.1.1 Economic sustainability

Indicator 1: Adequate funding and provision

Dhaka
In Dhaka, there is a fragmented policy response to housing needs between the public and private
housing supply. Despite a commitment to providing housing for all by 2021, the government meets
only 7% of the annual housing demand and relies on the private sector to fill the gap (Rahman, 2019).
However, private housing supply focuses on catering upper and upper-middle-income households.
When it comes to housing finance, state-owned finance providers lack funds to offer mortgage and
the private market is limited to 10-year bonds financing with extremely high interest rates that
almost double the initial cost of the property to purchase (Interviewee#1).

Lagos
In Lagos, the government introduced a ‘rent-to own’ program in 2016 whereby potential
homeowners make a 5% down payment to take possession of the house and pay the remaining
balance with a relatively small interest in the form of rent over a 10 year period (Wallace & Alake,
2019).
In the private market, only around 50,000 home mortgages are available in the whole country,
making it almost impossible for most Nigerians to access home loans from banks or other private
financial institutions (Wallace, 2019). When they do, rising inflation in the country is so severe that
banks charge 20% on the loan just to cover for this effect. As a result, households that have access
to mortgages use them to build a dwelling on their own ‘bit by bit’, what is commonly known as
progressive or incremental construction, just like families without mortgage would do as well. As a

27

result, the mortgage doesn’t really make the difference between owning a house at once or having
to build it themselves (Interviewee#3; Interviewee#4).

Port-au-Prince
In Port-au-Prince, housing in urban areas is financed by family savings and remittances (Huynh et al.,
2013). Haiti has one of the lowest ratios of private sector credit to GDP in the world. Moreover,
residential mortgages constitute only 8.3% of all mortgages. Private banks are extremely risk averse
and have issued almost no debt for affordable housing. The little finance that exists has high interest
rates or requires exorbitant collaterals, sometimes equal to the amount of the loan itself.
Documentation includes proof of up to three years of formal employment, land title and additional
assets, which are impossible for most Haitians to provide (Huynh et al., 2013). The lack of a proper
mortgage market is even more deplorable because of two reasons: First, people in Haiti have been
accumulating savings since the earthquake. Hence, they do have a certain amount of capital but
cannot invest it further. Second, many Haitians pay rent, thus a scheme where monthly payment
would be made to a bank in exchange for ownership instead of rent that bleeds out their income is
a possible scheme (Interviewee#8).
 In recent years, housing microfinance has become an emergent tool to target low-income
borrowers but only covers 1% of the population. Moreover, the amounts assigned through
microfinance are only enough to build additions to the house or to make improvements, but they do
not cover the expenses to build a complete house (Interviewee#8).
Finally, subsidy systems for poor people in Haiti do not consider many families that are in great need
of assistance if they were not displaced or own a house in a neighbourhood targeted by a
reconstruction program after the 2010 earthquake (Huynh et al., 2013). In other words, people who
were not necessarily affected by the earthquake but that still have a precarious living situation are
relatively more excluded than people who were direct victims of the earthquake (Interviewee#6).

Indicator 2: Affordability

Dhaka
Research of Sultana and Nazem (2020) shows that 92,9% of people working in industries spend at
least 30% of their total income on housing. Therefore, these can be considered within the
affordability limit. However, in these conditions it means that people are not able to save any money.
While “based on the current housing finance system and only when the given loan covers housing
cost with a low interest rates and over a long repayment period” (Sultana & Nazem, 2020, p. 323), it
is possible for industry workers to afford housing in the peripheries of Dhaka, buying a house or

28

apartment in Dhaka can be considered impossible for them. According to interviewee#2 and Shams
et al. (2014), only the richest 5% of the population in Dhaka can buy a house due to very high land
prices. In addition, a ready-to-built housing plot in Dhaka needs to be 1,050 sq. ft. or larger to receive
a building permission from the RAJUK. “This would cost around Tk. 1,000,000 (equal to $12,600),
which is equivalent to nearly 20 years of income for an average poor household (Tk. 3,000 per
month). The cost of housing would be additional” (Shams et al., 2014, p. 180). Therefore, under the
current housing policy, both renting and owning is unaffordable for low to middle income people in
Dhaka.

Lagos
Housing is becoming more and more unaffordable in Lagos. Adeleke and Olaleye (2020) researched
the affordability of housing in Lagos State. Findings revealed that most low-income civil servants find
housing unaffordable; they need to take up extra jobs to afford housing. Additionally, “there's a
complete mismatch between affordability, what people can really afford to pay for a home, and the
homes that are being delivered” (Interviewee#4). In the past, supposedly affordable housing
developments have failed, as it is “common practice of starting to build houses without first findings
out if there are sufficient off-takers, if the financing is clear or if the intended selling price is actually
affordable” (Raschke, 2016, p. 10; see also interviewee#3, interviewee#4). According to
interviewee#3 and Babalola et al. (2020), people in Nigeria are paying up to 60-80% of their income
on housing, which is considered unaffordable. In addition, housing prices are still rising, while income
remains stagnant (interviewee#3). Concluding, the benchmark of 30% for housing affordability is
amply surpassed.

Port-au-Prince
In Port-au-Prince, after the earthquake 2010, housing prices doubled. Apartments that were rented
out for 250US$ before the earthquake, increased to costs of around 450US$ (Joos, 2015). In addition,
it is suggested that 85% of the urban population of Haiti lives in informal settlements, which are of
low quality (Huynh et al., 2013). Only the elite minority can afford formal housing within the urban
area, close to employment opportunities and existing communities (Huynh et al., 2013). Due to the
high costs of housing, many families also build their own homes; these often are not finished because
of a limited access to resources (Interviewee#5).

29

Indicator 3: Efficient use of resources

Dhaka
In Dhaka, people prefer to build their homes with concrete, as it is perceived as more resistant to
natural hazards than structures of other materials (Interviewee#2). According to interviewee#1, in
urban areas buildings are often prone to fire and collapse. A famous example is the collapse of the
Rana Plaza garment factory, which collapsed in 2013 due to lack of maintenance, killing over 1000
people (Safi & Rushe, 2018).

Lagos
In Lagos, most dwelling units are over 20 years old and required minor repairs (Babalola et al., 2020).
Also interviewee#3 emphasized and confirmed that housing in Lagos is of good quality. Therefore,
housing in Lagos can be understood as structurally sound.

Port-au-Prince
Interviewee#8 pointed out that in Haiti there is a struggle in providing affordable housing structures,
due to the high chance of collapse in consequence of seismic events. That results in a dilemma
between aiming to provide housing that are within the economic needs of people living in Port-au-
Prince but more prone to collapse during earthquakes, or aiming for better resilience, which often
makes housing more expensive (interviewee#8). Moreover, building codes that are in place are not
enforced; many people ignore them and build unsafe housings with the resources they have access
to (interviewee#5, interviewee#6). In addition, there is a lack of resources in Haiti, for example there
is a historic lack of wood. Other constraints for shifting in construction materials are the high import
taxes and deforestation. It is proved easier to improve existing ways of building, instead of
introducing new ways (Kijewski-Correa & Taflanidis, 2012). All these factors limit the efficiency of
resource use in the construction sector.

Indicator 4: Effective legal and policy frameworks

Dhaka
In Dhaka, for a number of years, suitable policies and measures for an efficient housing market were
lacking. Resulting in a lack of housing provision for middle income housing, the government needed
to take initiative to support the housing market by eliminating existing pressures on land supply and
on the housing finance system (Farzana, 2004). In addition, the economic development of
Bangladesh is strongly constrained by corruption and the lack of good governance (Interviewee#1).