Research Article

AN ANALYSIS OF NIMBY SOLUTION AND TENANTS’ PROPERTY RIGHT TO A HOME WITH A GRAVE IN THE PRIVATE RENTED SECTOR

Solomon Pelumi Akinbogun1*
1 Department of Estate Management, School of Environmental Technology, Federal University of Technology, Akure, PMB 704, Nigeria
* Corresponding author: akinbogunpelumi@yahoo.com
Published: Mar, 2017
DOI: 10.68128/jocrebe.2017.4zvu8jsu
Pages: 116-135
Views: 20
Downloads: 5

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to determine the practicality of applying not in my backyard concept to prevent location of grave within home in the private rented sector. Method: This research applies both quantitative and qualitative research approach. It starts by analysing the voice, exit and loyalty option available to renters in a private residence with a grave. It applies logistic model to analyse the role of elitist status, property right and other variable in opposition to the use of private residences for grave. Findings: The study establishes a link between property right and tenants’ ability to oppose a grave within private residence; unfortunately, the awareness of property rights is very low. Though we found that the tenants’ elitist status is high, it has no significant contribution to the model. Parameter estimates show that elitist tenants are less likely to oppose the location of a grave in their current residences. The result also shows that 67% would rather move home than opposing grave. Implication of Findings: As most renters prefer the exit option to applying the nimby approach in a home with a grave, their security of tenure is not guarantee in the private rented sector. Originality and Value: This is the first attempt to explore not in my backyard approach to negative externality from the African perspective. It establishes a logic between the approach and ability to defend welfare in the renter sector.

Keywords

Property right; Nimby; grave; housing

References

  1. Read 7 files, ran 2 commands ABIODUN, A. (1999). Housing Finance under National Housing Fund, An Appraisal Paper Presented at the General Meeting of the Nigeria Institute of Town Planning.
  2. AKINBOGUN, S.P, JONES, C. & DUNSE, N. (2014). The property market maturity framework and its application to a developing country: the case of Nigeria, Journal of Real Estate Literature. 22(2), 217-232.
  3. AKPOM, U.N., (1996). Housing Attributes and the Cost of Private Rental Buildings in Lagos Nigeria: a Hedonic Price Analysis, The Review of Regional Studies, 26(3), 351-364.
  4. BERRISFORD, S. (2013). Getting land governance right in Sub-Saharan African Cities: more than land administration. Trading Place: Accessing land in African Cities, 73-90.
  5. BURNINGHAM, K. BARNETT, J & THRUSH, D (2006). Beyond Nimbyism, a Multidisciplinary investigation of Public Engagement with Renewable Energy Technology, A Working Paper of a Project Funded by ESRC.
  6. DEAR, M. (1992). Understanding and overcoming the Nimby Syndrome, Journal of American Planning Association, 58(3), 288-300.
  7. DEVERTEUIL, G. (2013). Where has Nimby gone in urban social geography Social and Cultural Geography, 14(6), 599-603.
  8. DEVINE-WRIGHT, P. (2012). Explaining "NIMBY" Objection to a power Line: The Role of Personal, Place Attachment and Project related Factors, Environment and Behaviour, 45(6), 761-781.
  9. EFInA (2010). Overview of the Housing Finance Sector in Nigeria, Enhancing Financial Innovation & Access. http://www.efina.org.ng/assets/Documents/EFInA
  10. ESAIASSON, P. (2014). NIMBYISM- A re-examination of the phenomenon, Journal of Social Science Research, 48, 185-195.
  11. FREUDENBERG, W. & PASTOR, S. (1992). Nimbys and LULUs: Stalking the syndromes. Journal of Social Issues, 48(4), 39-61.
  12. GEHLBACH, S. (2006). A Formal Model of Exit and Voice: Rationality and Society, 18(4), 395-418, Sage Publication.
  13. HARTMANN & NEEDHAM (2012). Introduction; Why Consider Planning by Law and Property Rights? In Hartmann, T, Needham, B. (Eds), Planning by Law and Property Rights Reconsidered, Ashgate, Farnham, Surrey, UK, pp.1-23.
  14. HARTMANN, T & NEEDHAM .B (2016): Why Reconsider Planning By Law and Property By law and property rights, Planning By Law and Property Right Reconsidered, edited by Needham & Hartmann, Published by Routledge, 1-13.
  15. HIRSCHMAN, A.O. (1970). Exit, Voice and Loyalty: Responses to decline in Firms, Organization, and States. Cambridge, M.A: Harvard University Press
  16. JONES C (2014). Land use planning policies and market forces: Utopian aspirations thwarted?, Land Use Policy, 38, 573-579.
  17. MATTHEWS, P. BRAMLEY, G. & HASTINGS, A. (2014). Homo-economicus in a Big Society: Understanding middle-class activism and Nimbyism towards new housing Developments, Housing, Theory and Society, 32(1), 54-72.
  18. MALPEZZI, S. (1999). Economic analysis of the housing market in developing and transition economies, chapter in E.S. Mills and P. Cheshire (eds), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, Applied Urban Economics, 3, 1791-1864.
  19. MURRAY, M. (2010). Participatory Rural Planning; Exploring Evidence from Ireland, Published by Routledge.
  20. NPC (2016): National Population Commission Census Figure. www.population.gov.ng/index.php/c
  21. OKUPE, L. (2000). The Role of Private Sector in Housing Delivery in Nigeria. A Seminar Paper on Effective Approach to Housing Delivery in Nigeria, Organised by the Nigerian Institute of Building, Ibadan.
  22. ONABULE, G. (1992). Understanding the Role of NHF and Primary Mortgage Institution in Housing Finance. A Paper presented at the Housing Policy Council Seminar on the Implementation of National Housing Policy, Abeokuta Nigeria.
  23. ONI, A.O., ADEDAPO, O & DURODOLA, D.O (2012). Real estate market regulation and Property values in Lagos State, Nigeria, European Scientific Journal, 8(28), 61-77.
  24. RYDIN, Y. (2011). The Purpose of Planning; Creating Sustainable Town and Cities, Policy Press, Bristol, UK.
  25. ROWLEY, S. (2005). The Value for Money of Delivering Affordable Housing through Section 106, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, London.
  26. SCHIVELY, C. (2007). Understanding the NIMBY and LULU phenomenon: Reassessing our knowledge base and informing future research, Journal of Planning Literature, 21(3), 255-266.
  27. STURZAKER, J. (2010). The exercise of power to limit the development of new housing in the English countryside, Environment and Planning A, 42, 1001-1016.
  28. SWYNGEDOUW, E. (2005). Governance Innovation and the Citizen: The Janus Face of Governance Beyond the State Governance Beyond the State, Urban Studies, 42(11), 1991-2006.
  29. TAYLOR, M. (2008). Living Working Countryside: the Taylor Review of Rural Economy and Affordable Housing, Communities and Local Government, http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuildin/pdf/livingworkingcoun tryside.pdf
  30. UN-HABITAT, (2015). Habitat III Issue papers, 22-Informal Settlements, United Nation Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development, 31st May, New York.
  31. UN-HABITAT (2003). Rental Housing-An Essential Option for the Urban Poor in Developing Countries. http://www.unhabitat.org/housing/pub.
  32. WALLACE, A. (2012). Low cost home ownership initiatives: Satisfying ambition for home ownership? International Journal of Housing Policy, 12(2), 205-22.
How to Cite

Akinbogun, S. P. (2017). AN ANALYSIS OF NIMBY SOLUTION AND TENANTS’ PROPERTY RIGHT TO A HOME WITH A GRAVE IN THE PRIVATE RENTED SECTOR. Journal of Contemporary Research in the Built Environment, 1(1), 116-135. https://doi.org/10.68128/jocrebe.2017.4zvu8jsu

S. P. Akinbogun, "AN ANALYSIS OF NIMBY SOLUTION AND TENANTS’ PROPERTY RIGHT TO A HOME WITH A GRAVE IN THE PRIVATE RENTED SECTOR," Journal of Contemporary Research in the Built Environment, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 116-135, March 2017. doi: 10.68128/jocrebe.2017.4zvu8jsu

Share this article:
Facebook X / Twitter LinkedIn
Download PDF View Full Text (PDF) Back to Articles