CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
Survey  and qualitative research strategies as well as  proportionate and purposive  sampling techniques were used  in selecting respondents.  Primary data  was obtained  through the
administration of questionnaire  to 90 purposely selected staff members, and oral  interviews with four senior management staff in  four key public housing agencies. In addition, questionnaire and observation schedule were used in obtaining data from 517  housing units  selected from four different housing delivery strategies based on the proportion  of their occurrence in nine  newly constructed  public  housing  estates. The  quantitative  data was  analysed using frequencies, percentages, cross tabulations,  discriminant, principal component  and categorical regression analyses; while the qualitative data was analysed using content analysis. Findings  show  that  the  four public  housing agencies sampled  were rated as having adequate organizational capacity in public housing provision. However, housing provided by the agencies was  rated affordable,  inadequate and not satisfactory by the residents. Although, public housing estates  sampled  lacked  basic  socio-economic  infrastructure, majority of the respondents felt satisfied with life in their current residences. The  study found significant differences  in  socio-economic characteristics of residents and  levels of housing adequacy and satisfaction across the four strategies. Whereas the Core housing strategy  provided housing for low-income earners and  was rated as having provided the most adequate and satisfactory housing, the Turnkey and Public-Private Partnership (PPP)  strategies provided  the least adequate  and  satisfactory  housing respectively  for middle-income earners.  The  Shell strategy which provided housing for high-income class had the  highest proportion of those who felt  satisfied with  life.  Satisfaction with management of housing estates and housing unit attributes among other attributes discriminated between the residents who were satisfied with life and those who were not.    Housing  unit attributes were rated the most adequate and satisfactory while  socio-economic infrastructure and neighbourhood facilities were rated the least adequate and least satisfactory housing attributes.   
Findings also show that housing delivery strategies, additional space requirement in the housing units,  organizational capacity as well as age,  income and  tenure  status  of respondents  among others were  significant predicators of  housing adequacy and residential satisfaction  in the study area.  Residential satisfaction, tenure status, housing adequacy, housing delivery strategies, length of residency, income and age of respondents were factors that influenced satisfaction with life in the  housing  estates.  Although  findings of the study  are  consistent with the findings of prior research; the categorical regression analysis (R2
 = 1.000, F=718909256; P=0.000) however shows that adequate housing  (Beta=1.000, F=528886811; P=0.000) was  the strongest predictor of, and closely related to,  residential satisfaction; and that housing adequacy and residential satisfaction have significant influence on satisfaction with life. The  findings  imply  that  the different housing delivery strategies used in public housing perform differently in terms of residents’ perceived adequacy and satisfaction; the levels of housing adequacy and satisfaction  as well as quality of life in public housing   can be enhanced through adequate  provision and maintenance of basic housing infrastructure and neighbourhood facilities;   housing  adequacy  and satisfaction  can be used as    synonymous concept in the evaluation of housings; and  the underlying assumption in public housing in Ogun State is valid.