HOUSING, HEALTH AND THE LAW: A STUDY OF HOUSING CONDITIONS, PUBLIC

HEALTH REGULATIONS ON HOUSING AND THEIR HEALTH IMPLICATIONS IN

LAGOS NIGERIA

ABSTRACT

Background: housing attributes have a direct effect on health. Clearly, living in a crowded, damp,
mouldy house with poor water and sewage facilities is extremely hazardous to the health of
residents. There appears to be enough evidence, to suggest that this is link between pour housing
and health problems particularly respiratory diseases, especially children and elderly people. The
impact of housing on health is influenced by social and economic circumstances and
neighborhood factors which may well change during improvement programs. These changes can
indirectly affect health positively or negatively.
Objective: this study is aimed to describe the level of the health problem associated with poor
housing in Lagos
Methodology: Descriptive cross-sectional survey was carried out in Lagos. every one of
respondents are randomly selected by using structured questionnaire. The ethical consideration of
this study focused primary on the rights of the participants who were questioned for the purpose of
gathering data. The Study sample will be 50 participants from Lagos.

Result: The study included fifty participants. 74% of the participants identified health effects from
pour housing. Despite 78% of the participants indicate that the pour housing problems is
preventable, and also they improve the best way to protect this problem is to make housing
polices.

This study also indicates pour housing problems on health are more common in the study area.

Recommendations: Health Education Community mobilization, Housing and Urban plan are the
best ways to reduce Housing Problems on Health.
 Chapter one

Introduction

1.1 Background

Bad housing covers a wide range of issues, including homelessness, overcrowding, insecurity,
housing that is in poor physical condition, and living in deprived neighborhoods (.Lisa Harker.2006)
Housing and built environments have a profound impact on human health. In developed countries,
80‐90% of the day is spent in built environments and most of this is in the home. Therefore,
exposures and health risks in this private setting are of crucial relevance. The role of the home for
health is enhanced by the fact that the most vulnerable population groups (poor, sick, children and
elderly, disabled…) spend even more of their time in this setting, and are therefore most vulnerable
and most in need of healthy living environments. (WHO,2010).

The association between housing conditions and both physical and mental health, has long been
recognized and is now generally accepted (Jan and Geoff, 2012)

Poor housing conditions are associated with a wide range of health conditions, including
respiratory infections, asthma, lead poisoning, injuries, and mental health. Addressing housing
issues offers public health practitioners an opportunity to address an important social determinant of
health. Public health has long been involved in housing issues. In the 19th century, health officials
targeted poor sanitation, crowding, and inadequate ventilation to reduce infectious diseases as well
as fire hazards to decrease injuries. Today, public health departments can employ multiple strategies
to improve housing, such as developing and enforcing housing guidelines and codes, implementing
“Healthy Homes” programs to improve indoor environmental quality, assessing housing conditions,
and advocating for healthy, affordable housing. Now is the time for public health to create healthier
homes by confronting substandard housing (James and Donna 2002).

Housing is intimately related to health. The structure, location, facilities, environment and uses of
human shelter have a strong impact on the state of physical, mental and social well-being. Poor
housing conditions and uses may provide weak defenses against death, disease, and injury or even
increase vulnerability to them. Adequate and appropriate housing conditions, on the other hand, not
only protect people against health hazards but also help to promote robust physical health, economic
productivity, psychological well-being and social vigor (WHO, 1989)

1.2 Research Problem

In more recent years, epidemiological studies have linked substandard housing with an increased
risk of chronic illness. Damp, cold, and moldy housing is associated with asthma and other chronic
respiratory symptoms, even after potentially confounding factors such as income, social class,
smoking, crowding, and unemployment are controlled for. Water intrusion is a major contributor to
problems with dampness (James and Donna, 2002).

Experience of multiple housing problems increases children’s risk of ill-health and disability by up
to 2 5 per cent during childhood and early adulthood. bad housing is linked to debilitating and even
fatal, illnesses and accidents. Children in overcrowded housing are up to 10 times more likely to
contract meningitis than children in general. Meningitis can be life threatening. Long-term effects of
the disease include deafness, blindness and behavioral problems (Lisa, 2006)
However, possibly hundreds of studies have reported consistent statistically significant
associations between unsatisfactory housing conditions and the incidence of ill health. In terms of
the wider policy environment housing has re-emerged as an element in policy debates around public
health, improving the health of the nation and national health inequality issues (Jan and Geoff, 2012)

Children living in damp, mouldy homes are between one and a half and three times more prone to
coughing and wheezing– symptoms of asthma and other respiratory conditions – than children
living in dry homes (Lisa,2006)

In particular, the world's growth is happening in developing cities, and nearly 40% of that is in
slums on urban peripheries (WHO,2010).
Current evidence shows that the home – despite highly developed technologies, materials and
construction styles – remains a major cause for ill health through exposure to many factors,
including home injuries, chemical substances, mold and damp, noise, radon, pests and infestations,
 poor access to water and sanitation, proximity to pollution sources, or flooding, and inadequate
protection from extreme weather(WHO,2010).
The relationship with children’s health was much stronger, with diarrhea, wheezing and persistent
cough being significantly worse in unimproved housing ( Diana Wilkinson 1999).
Almost half of all childhood accidents are associated with physical conditions in the home.
Families living in properties that are in poor physical condition is more likely to experience a
domestic fire (Lisa Harker.2006).

1.2.1 Justification of the research

 WHO estimates that nearly 2 million people in developing countries die from indoor
pollution caused by the burning of biomass and coal in leaky and inefficient household
stoves.
 In Nigeria and many other developing countries, the housing and lifestyle is poor Nigeria
more than 850,000 people are in make shift housing.
 There are also displaced people who live in the dumps.  In Nigeria if you cannot provide a
house for yourself and family, no one will help you get a house or provide shelter for you.
Many people have to move more than 10 times within a period of one or two years because
of fighting (Claudia et al,2016 ).

1.3 Research objective

1.3.1General objective

To describe the level of the health problem associated with poor housing in Lagos.

1.3.2 Specific Objective

 TO describe effects of Poor Housing to human health.

 TO identify factors that cause health problems associated with poor housing.
 TO describe relationship between Pour Housing and Health problems.

1.4 Research Questions

 Some questions that come to mind included:

1-How poor housing effect to Human health?

2-What are contributor factors that causes health problems from poor housing?

3-What is relationship between poor Housing and Health?

1.5 Research Hypothesis

1.5.1 Null Hypothesis

Poor Housing cannot contribute health problems in Lagos.

1.6 Significance of This Study

This study is descriptive /cross-sectional study that is concerned to obtain poor housing level
and associated factors that causes housing problems. information from the findings communicated
through healthy policy or media will influence people have poor health problems and will help in
making recommendations to reduce poor housing factors and will be promote knowledge of the
people to avoid homes leading a diseases or healthy problems.

The findings will be used as advocacy for the planning and development of relevant health policy,
and also be contributed literature for the academicians who are interesting to make father research
in this field .

1.7 Scope of the study

This study determines factors contributing the persistence of poliomyelitis in children under five
years in Lagos.
 CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction:

Housing, as an environment, means the building or structure in which we live, work, rest and
play. They may be private building, residential houses or public building (club, school, theatre,
workshop, factory, etc.). They should be so constructed and laid out as to promote physical,
mental and social well-being. For physical well-being the house must provide enough space inside
and outside to promote health by good light and ventilation and to prevent respiratory and contact
infections. It must be constructed on firm and dry soil with subsoil water at a depth more than 3
meters ( Mahajan and Gupta,2013)
Old towns and cities have developed without proper planning. Haphazard growth ignores the
need for wide and straight streets, roads and open places. Back-to back houses are constructed
without proper ventilation. Public places such as playgrounds, parks, gardens, schools, libraries,
markets, swimming pools and entertainment theaters, etc. are absent or scarce in such areas. The
problem is made worse by ever growing population of the towns due to high birth rate and
immigration from rural areas. The problems of urban housing are increasing with rapid increase in
urban population. One-fourth of world population was living in cities and towns in 1959. By 2025,
this proportion is expected to reach 60 percent. Health of residents is affected by multiple aspects
of housing, such as per capita floor area, illumination, vectors and reservoirs of disease, etc
(Mahajan & Gupta,2013)
Suspected reasons for the link between high-rise housing and psychological distress are social
isolation of mothers and restricted play opportunities for children. In many high-rise buildings,
particularly for low-income families, insufficient resources are allotted to spaces that afford the
development and maintenance of social networks. Lobbies, lounges, and other small-group spaces
are absent or located too far from residences or in public areas that afford insufficient residential
control and feelings of ownership (e.g., public lobby upon entrance). Women in large, high-rise
housing developments report more loneliness and diminished territorial control in comparison to
women of similar backgrounds living in other types of housing. Parents of young children in large
multiple-dwelling units often cope with the paucity of nearby play spaces by keeping children
inside their apartments. Such restrictions height tenintra familial conflict, minimize play
opportunities with others, and remove a primary avenue for parents to get to know their neighbors.
Floor Level some of the adverse mental health consequences of high-rise housing may be caused
by floor level itself. Families living on higher floors have more mental health problems. However,
all of the studies showing this, save one, are cross-sectional. Thus, the potential methodological
problem of self-selection bias is a plausible rival explanation. People with greater preexisting
mental health problems may wind up living on higher floor levels (Gary, 2003).

The range of health problems which can be attributed to poor housing conditions is large from
psychological and physiological effects to specific diseases varying in the degree of associated
morbidity. There is a large and significant body of scientific literature that demonstrates
convincingly that there are direct causal links between different aspects of poor housing and
particular health conditions (John, 2000).

Common health effects of unsatisfactory housing include respiratory symptoms, such as

asthma, lung cancer through exposure to asbestos and radon; depression and anxiety; injury or
death from accidents and fires; hypothermia; skin and eye irritation; and general physical
symptoms. Studies of the impact of housing investment on health have not always demonstrated
improvements in health and, overall, evidence is mixed. However, improvements to mental health
are consistently reported by intervention studies. It is likely that investment in housing
improvements, particularly re housing and major refurbishment, will help improve residents’
mental health. The impact of housing improvements on physical health and well-being are less
clear cut and more difficult to detect. Respiratory health may be improved through energy
efficiency improvements to housing, although improvements to respiratory health following more
general housing improvement and neighborhood regeneration cannot necessarily be assumed (Jan
and Geoff ,2012).

A few explanations for the positive link between housing quality and mental health have been
offered. Insecurity often accompanies poor-quality housing. There are constant difficulties with
repairs and unresponsive landlords. The occupants of poor-quality housing are often low-income
renters who are concerned about housing tenure. Frequent relocations, which occur more often
among people living in poor-quality housing, are a risk factor for socio emotional problems in
children. Involuntary relocation negatively affects psychological adjustment among older19 and
middle-aged adults as well. People living in poor-quality housing experience stigma and may
attribute some of their predicament to themselves. Parents in poor housing are more apt to contend
with safety hazards including insufficient safety protection (e.g., smoke detectors, hot water
temperature regulators), close proximity to higher volume street traffic, and a greater number of
housing code violations, all of which contribute to childhood injury rates ( Gary 2003).

Although the health relevance of the private home is well accepted, health considerations do not
represent a major objective in construction and rehabilitation of housing and built environments.
There is a wealth of evidence indicating that housing and construction standards are almost
exclusively based on technical norms, engineering knowledge and architectural design aesthetics.
Consequently, standards of “adequate housing” or “sustainable housing” in the modern era tend to
be informed by technological rather than health rationales, despite the fact that many housing laws
have their origins in public health concerns. Similarly, building codes and national regulations
governing the production and approval of buildings often tend to be vague, requiring buildings to
be “safe”, to be equipped with “adequate ventilation options” or “functional heating systems”.
These requirements provide little information on what the minimum standards of healthy housing
are, and what characteristics need to be fulfilled to provide adequate shelter from the perspective
of human health (WHO,2010).
Clearly, living in a crowded, damp, mouldy house with poor water and sewage facilities and in
need of major repairs is extremely hazardous to the health of residents (John ,2000).

2.2 Housing as a determinant of Health

Housing is an important determinant of health, and substandard housing is a major public health
issue (James and Donna 2002).
 Philippa Howden‐Chapman summarized the main health impacts of housing environments in
the context of climate change. There are multiple components of housing environments, including
outdoor areas, which should be considered in terms of their potential contribution to physical
health as well as social and psychological wellbeing. The association between housing and health
is complex, and causal relationships can be hidden or otherwise influenced by a host of
confounding variables and effect modifiers. Some aspects of housing and health are directly
impacted by climate change mitigation strategies, others indirectly so. Health conditions and
categories typically considered in the health literature, include: Respiratory diseases related to
indoor air quality; Thermal comfort‐related morbidity and mortality; Vector borne and zoonotic
diseases; Exposure to pests and infestations; Air‐borne infections; Waterborne diseases; Domestic
injuries; Mental health; Noise effects and morbidity; Lead poisoning; Asbestos; Health relevance
of urban design, density and the immediate housing environment. Many of these outcomes refer to
formal houses, while there are many people who are living in informal houses. Exposure to
dangerous waste, asbestos, insufficient hygiene and sanitation are only a very few to mention in
regard. PhilippaHowden‐Chapman underlined the need to strengthen life‐cycle analysis of
buildings when looking at the health effects of mitigation measures (WHO,2010).
Health problems that have been associated with poor housing include the infectious diseases,
non-infectious respiratory diseases such as asthma, and social and psychological problems (John ,
2000).
However, improvements can have detrimental impacts on health and the programs of
redevelopment itself can prove harmful for some residents. Those who are already vulnerable in
terms of their health and age are likely to be most at risk of such consequences, but these groups
perhaps have the most to gain from improvements. The impact of housing on health is influenced
by social and economic circumstances and neighborhood factors which may well change during
improvement programs. These changes can indirectly affect health positively or negatively (Jan
and. Geoff,2012)

2.3 factors of pour housing

Housing and health The association between housing conditions and physical and mental ill
health has been empirically established through epidemiological studies. The relationship is,
however, complex comprising of the interaction of poverty, inequality, access to housing and
housing as an internal and external living environment. Aspects of housing that affect health
outcomes are often described in relation to the internal and external environment. Factors
influencing the quality of the internal environment include indoor pollutants, cold and damp,
hazardous internal structures and fixtures and noise. Those affecting the external environment
include neighborhood quality, infrastructure deprivation, neighborhood safety and social cohesion.
(Jill Stewart et al.,2006).
Thus, it can be seen that housing should have a prime place on the health inequalities agenda. It
also has wider importance because small health effects can have a large impact at the population
level (Jill et al.,2006).
Public health community has grown increasingly aware of the importance of social
determinants of health (including housing) in recent years, yet defining the role of public health
practitioners in influencing housing conditions has been challenging. Responsibility for social
determinants of health is seen as lying primarily outside the scope of public health (James and
Donna 2002).

An increasing body of evidence has associated housing quality with morbidity from infectious
diseases, chronic illnesses, injuries, poor nutrition, and mental disorders. We present some of this
evidence in the following section (James and Donna 2002).

The accumulated evidence indicates that the health consequences of exposure to these various
hazards are of sufficient magnitude that they constitute a serious public health problem. If the
threat was bacteria, the public health response would be to declare an emergency and quarantine
the population. The problem with bad housing is that the alternative, in the absence of a major re-
housing initiative, is no housing. Of even more insidious importance to this review is the fact that
children suffer the worst effects of bad housing. All of the health consequences cited above
including infectious diseases, respiratory illness, and psychosocial problems have been found to be
particularly prevalent in children who live in bad housing. The significance of this finding is that
these health effects experienced in childhood may influence the health of the person throughout
their life course. There is increasing evidence that childhood experiences of multiple chronic
infections may have long term consequences for the immune system and the adult onset of various
chronic conditions such as heart disease and diabetes ( John ,2000).

Poor conditions such as: overcrowding; damp/mould; indoor pollutants/infestation; cold/low

temperature have all been shown to be associated with physical illnesses including respiratory
disease, asthma, eczema, hypothermia and heart disease. Respiratory health has been shown to be
particularly affected. The prevalence and exacerbation of asthma, for example, is associated with
both indoor and outdoor air quality, the presence of dust mites or cockroaches, excess particulates
from cooking or smoking, dampness and mould, and community violence (Matt et al, 2013)

2.3.1 Overcrowding
Features of substandard housing, including lack of safe drinking water, absence of hot water
for washing, ineffective waste disposal, intrusion by disease vectors (e.g., insects and rats) and
inadequate food storage have long been identified as contributing to the spread of infectious
diseases. Crowding is associated with transmission of tuberculosis and respiratory infections.
Lack of housing and the overcrowding found in temporary housing for the homeless also
contribute to morbidity from respiratory infections and activation of tuberculosis (James and
Donna, 2002).

There is a direct link between childhood tuberculosis (TB) and overcrowding. TB can lead to
serious medical problems and is sometimes fatal. Children living in overcrowded and unfit
conditions are more likely to experience respiratory problems such as coughing and asthmatic
wheezing. For many children this means losing sleep, restricted physical activity, and missing
school. Overcrowded conditions have been linked to slow growth in childhood, which is
associated with an increased risk of coronary heart disease in later life (.Lisa Harker.2006)
Overcrowding is one of the many tangible impacts of the housing crisis on households across
the country (Crystal, 2004).

Overcrowding is generally considered as more of a threat to mental than physical health,

although the spread of infectious diseases such as tuberculosis and scabies is also associated with
overcrowding .The epidemiology of respiratory infections including pneumonia, influenza and
acute upper respiratory infections (John ,2000).

Household exposure to a known TB case is probably the most important mode of TB

transmission. This conclusion is supported by both epidemiological and microbiological data. For
example, in a study of active TB among Iraqi schoolchildren and their household contacts, the
authors concluded that 77.2% of new TB cases were attributable to household contacts
(WHO,2011).

It is therefore not surprising that household crowding, which increases the frequency and
duration of contact between infectious cases and household members, has often been shown to be
a risk factor for TB. Increased use of laboratory typing methods has also helped to clarify the
important role of contacts outside the household, particularly in areas with high prevalence of
disease (WHO,2011).
There is strong evidence to support an independent relationship between overcrowding and
TB. However, each of the four studies reported (in addition to the earlier reviewed study of TB in
children (15)) is of aggregate populations (i.e. the studies are of populations within a particular
area rather than groups of randomly-selected individuals). Studies that explore the impact of
overcrowding as a risk factor for TB at the individual case level, controlling for other factors,
would be needed in order to strengthen conclusions in this area. ( Office of the Deputy Prime
Minister: London,2004) .

There is evidence to suggest that adults exposed to chronic conditions of crowding socially
withdraw in an effort to create space for themselves. This is the functional equivalent of increasing
personal distance requirements (Crystal, 2004).
There may also be a link between increased mortality and overcrowding (Lisa,2006)

2.3.2 Chronic Diseases

In more recent years, epidemiological studies have linked substandard housing with an
increased risk of chronic illness. Damp, cold, and moldy housing is associated with asthma and
other chronic respiratory symptoms, even after potentially confounding factors such as income,
social class, smoking, crowding, and unemployment are controlled for. Pest infestations, through
their association with asthma, provide another linkage between substandard housing and chronic
illness. Cockroaches can cause allergic sensitization and have emerged as an important asthma
trigger in inner-city neighborhoods. Children with asthma who are sensitized and exposed to
cockroaches are at elevated risk for hospitalization. Mouse allergen also acts as a clinically
important cause of allergy and asthma morbidity. Structural defects permit entry of cockroaches
and rodents; leaking pipes and other sources of water provide them with water to drink. Inadequate
food storage and disposal facilities provide them with opportunities for obtaining food. Exposure
to toxic substances found in homes can result in chronic health problems. The association of
passive exposure to indoor tobacco smoke with respiratory disease is well documented (James
and Donna,2002).

2.3.3 Dampness and mold houses

The study collected data on households' own assessments of damp together with a standardized
measure of perceived health problems, and a separate, independent, assessment of damp by the
Council's Environmental Health Officers. The study found no clear evidence to support the
hypothesis that damp housing has a detrimental effect on physical health of adults. There was no
significant difference in health between those living in damp and non-damp homes, with the
exception of emotional reaction scores which were higher in damp homes. However defective
housing was strongly associated with ill health among children. Aches and pains, nerves, diarrhea
and headache were more prevalent among children in damp housing; 85% had experienced at least
one respiratory problem in the previous 2 months compared with 60% of children in non-damp
housing. Children in homes with visible mold had higher symptom rates, vomiting and sore
throats. Although criticized for respondent bias in terms of self-reported health, its use of double
blind design enabled objective and subjective assessments of damp to be compared (Diana,1999)

The same research team set up a second study in winter 1988 to further explore the role of
fungi. Taking a larger and random sample of households containing children in selected council
estates in Edinburgh, Glasgow, and London, this research again involved household interviews
plus separate and independent assessments of housing conditions and health. This study reached
firmer conclusions on the relationship between adult ill health and damp and mouldy housing.
Adults in such housing had more symptoms and were more likely to have suffered nausea and
vomiting, blocked nose, breathlessness, backache, fainting and bad nerves. As an example 21% of
those in mouldy houses had blocked noses compared with 13% in damp and 14% in dry homes.
Levels of nausea and vomiting were 4% in dry homes, 6% in damp and 10% in mouldy homes.
Children in damp and mouldy houses showed greater prevalence of respiratory symptoms and
headaches and fever. A dose-response relationship was established between the number of
symptoms and increasing severity of dampness and mould. (Diana ,1999).

According to WHO (2011) To cover the different exposure assessment approaches we chose to
carry out separate burden of disease assessments for two types of indicators: A general indicator
for “dampness”, which includes observations of high relative humidity, condensation on surfaces,
moisture/water damage, signs of leaks and stained/discoloured surface materials. This indicator
reflects a larger spectrum of potential causal agents, including house dust mites and emission of
chemicals, and comprises also milder problems. This indicator is widely used in many
epidemiological studies. A specific indicator for “mould” includes observations of visible
microbial growth, especially visible mould, and mould odour. This indicator reflects more specific
microbial origin and may reflect more extensive damage and higher exposure indoors. The fact
that the signs are visible and/or can be smelled may also mean that this exposure could have more
direct health relevance, as it is more likely to be accompanied by exposure agents in the breathing
zone of humans. Living in cold, damp housing may well have an impact on children’s mental
health too, increasing children’s chances of experiencing stress, anxiety and depression. It is hard
to isolate a causal link though, because children living in poor housing conditions have often
experienced considerable adversity besides substandard housing (Lis,.2006)

One of the ways that damp housing poses a risk to health is through the effects of house dust
mites and moulds. Allergic reactions and infections develop with repeated exposure and children,
the elderly and those with existing illnesses are most at risk. House dust mites and airborne mould
spores can cause or exacerbate respiratory conditions such as asthma as well as other symptoms
such as wheeze, aches and pains, diarrhea, nausea and headaches. Children who sleep in damp
homes are twice as likely to suffer from wheezing and coughs than those who sleep in dry homes.
They are more likely to experience gastrointestinal upsets, aches and pains, fatigue and
nervousness too. Adults tend to report aching joints, nausea, blocked nose, breathlessness and poor
mental health (Jan and Geoff ,2012)

Damp and mould have been linked to respiratory problems, allergies and asthma. Research
found people with asthma were twice as likely to live in homes with damp as those without
(Jake,2014) (Image A and B).

2.3.4 Cold homes

Poor energy efficiency in existing homes and rapidly rising fuel costs make it unaffordable for
low income households to adequately heat their homes (Jake,2014 ).

The biggest causes of these winter deaths are cardiovascular and respiratory Conditions
(Diana,1999).
Many homes have inefficient heating systems and the presence of a central heating system
does not necessarily result in warmer homes. Issues of affordability and fuel efficiency are
important when considering the health implications of cold housing. The ability to keep the home
warm enough in winter, and in particular the worry that can be associated with such concern, has
been shown to be associated with poor health outcomes (Jan andGeoff,2012).

A cold home is bad for your health and increases the risks of cardiovascular, respiratory and
rheumatoid diseases as well as the worsening mental health. Cold homes are a significant
contributor to the level of excess winter deaths in the UK every year (Jake, 2014 ).

Two analyses of hospital admissions for cold related illnesses in Edinburgh and Glasgow
between 1970 and 1980 and between 1980 and 1985 showed that cold weather explained at least
10% of admissions, with highest correlations with bronchitis/emphysema (Diana,1999)

2.3.5 Asbestos and lead

 Evidence on the health effects of radon and lead water from painted houses has been accepted
and acted on through legislation (Diana,1999).

Inhalation of asbestos fibers causes two main kinds of cancer: mesothelioma and lung cancer.
There are many sources of asbestos which may contribute to non-occupational exposures and
many asbestos materials are present in homes. The risk of exposure will be related to the release of
these fibers, for instance during home renovations or repairs, or when building surface materials
have been damaged or have deteriorated. The link between exposure to non-occupational sources
of asbestos and lung diseases highlights the importance of the use of asbestos free materials in
the home. Accidents in the home and home safety Home and leisure accident statistics estimate
that each year in the UK there are approximately 2.7 million accidents in the home which
necessitate a visit to hospital and around 4,000 deaths as a result of injury in the home(Jan and
Geoff,2012)

2.3.6 Injuries from Pour Housing

The importance of designing homes to prevent injuries has received long-standing attention,
especially with regard to reducing burns and falls. Attributes of substandard housing that increase
the risk of injury include exposed heating sources, unprotected upper-story windows and low sill
heights, slippery surfaces, breakable window glass in sites with a high likelihood of contact, and
poorly designed stairs with inadequate lighting. Building design and materials influence the risk
of injury from fires. These hazards are frequently present in temporary accommodations provided
to homeless women and young children (James and Donna 2002).

In the Years 2002–2004, in some countries home injuries were the leading cause of injury death
in children under 5 years of age, home injuries can be reduced through Adequate building design
(WHO,2010). (Image D).

2.4 Prevention and control

. The site should be on a street of adequate width in pleasing surroundings free from hazards
of flooding, landslides, fly breeding, mosquito breeding and from the nuisance of dust,
 smoke foul smell and excessive noise. The soil should be dry.
. The set back should be such as to permit enough light and ventilation. The floor should be
rat proof and smooth. The height of plinth should be as per approved standards and proper
damp proofing should be done.
•The walls should have minimum thickness of 30 cm and should be plastered on both sides.
and they should be damp proof.
• Roof height should be not less than 3 m unless the room is air-conditioned.
• The number of rooms should be at least two or more as per the size of family
• The floor area per capita should not be less than 4.5 sqm (50 sq ft), the optimum being 9 sqm.
• At least two windows should open directly into the compound, street or open space.
They should be placed not higher than 1 m from the floor. Windows and doors should ensure
privacy. .The window shutters should be able to cut off heat, glare and wind when required.
. Lighting should be adequate during both day and night.
• The kitchen should have enough light and ventilation. It should be protected against dust and
smoke.
• Water supply of the house should be adequate along with suitable bathing and washing facilities.
• Sanitary latrine of approved type should be provided.
• Construction materials should conform to the approved standards of plumbing structural
Strength, fire protection and electric installations ( Mahajan & Gupta,2013)
• Community awareness the problems of pour housing.
• Setting housing polices to reduce health problems from pour housing.
• Setting urban polices to prevent slum building in the towns.
• Using prober materials for building to avoid materials that causes health problems such as lead.
• Using west management containers in homes.
 CHAPTER TREE:
MATERIALS AND METHODOLOGY

3.1 introduction

This chapter will deal with methodology of study. The focused is on research design, target
population, sampling technique, sample size, research instruments, date collection produce date
analysis ethical considerations and finally limitation of the study.

3.2 Study area

The study area is Lagos, Nigeria.

3.3 Study Design

Cross sectional study design was used in this study. The researcher used quantitative survey
design. Through descriptive research design, data collected in detailed information about a given
subject and uses it in Order to address a specific research problem. Cross sectional study design
helps to intensively study, describe characteristics of some entities in depth in order to gain answer
questions like what, when, where and how.

3.4 Study Population

3.4.1 Inclusion Criteria

All residents of Lagos and are capable of responding to the research questionnaire and have
children under 5 years are included in the study population.
3.4.2 Exclusion criteria
Non residents in Lagos are excluded from the study, also residents of Lagos and are not able to
respond to the research questionnaire due to age or psychological problems and also don’t have
children are excluded from the study.

3.5 Sample size determination

The study sample size consists 50 respondents only; this number is chosen according to the
capacity of the researcher.

3.6 Sampling procedure

This study will employ simple random sampling and all the respondents will have an equal chance
to participate when responding the question being asked.

3.7 Research instrument

The research employed questionnaire as tool for data collections for this research because of
questionnaire have advantages over some other type of survey in that they are cheap, do not
require as much effort from the questionnaire as verbal or telephone surveys, and often have
standardized answer that make it simple data, also have the advantage of being cheaper, especially
when large samples are used.

3.8 Data Analysis

When the data was collected, the incomplete questionnaires were eliminated. Data entry was made
using SPSS.

3.9 Ethical consideration

 Every respondent was asked to complete questionnaire.

 Good respondent explanation was done before filling in.

 Privacy and confidentiality was maintained.

 Choice/freedom to participate in the study or not was given to every respondent.

 CHAPTER FOUR
DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

4.1 Introduction:

The study was set to establish health problems associated with poor housing; this chapter provides
presentation, interpretation and analysis of data. Presentation and analysis of the collected data
was computed using percentage

4.2 Respondents by age

The below table indicates the majority of respondent (34% ) were 31-40, 30 % were21-30,.24%
were above 41,while1 2% were10-20.

age Frequency Percent

10-20 6 12.0 Table 4.2respondents of age
21-30 15 30.0 4.3 sex respondents
31-40 17 34.0 The majority of respondents
above 41 12 24.0 indicates that 30(60%) of
Total 50 100.0 respondents were male, while
40(40%) of respondents were
female.

20

chart4.3 :sex
male
female respondents
30
4.4marital status
respondents
The majority of respondents
indicates that 33(66%) of the respondents were single , while 12(24%) of the respondents were
married and 5(10%)of respondents were divorced.
 Chart Title
5
single
12
married
Divorce d

33

Chart 4.4marital status respondents

4.5 educational respondents
This majority of respondents Indicates of the majority respondents of 16 (32% )are universities
were other respondents are15 (30%), illiterate 10(20%) ,secondary are 7(14%) and 2(4%) are
primary respondent.

Chart Title

10 illiterate
15 primary
secondary
2
university
other
7

16

Chart 4.5 educational respondents

4.6 occupational respondents

The majority of respondents indicates that 29(58 %) of the respondents’ were students, while11
(22%) of the respondents house wife, 8(16%) of respondents are jobless and 2(4%) of the
respondents of employed.
 occupation Frequency Percent
employed 2 4.0 Table
jobless 8 16.0 4.6occupational
student 29 58.0 respondents
house wife 11 22.0
Total 50 100.0
4.7respondents of do
you know poor housing effect on human health?
This chart indicates the majority of respondent 13( 74%) said yes, while13( 26%) said no.

Chart Title
Chart 4.7 respondents do you
13
yes know poor housing affect on
No
human health?

37
4.8 respondents do you know of any evidence that bad housing causes
health problems?
This chart indicates the majority of respondent 34(68%) said yes, while 16 (32% ) said no.

Chart Title

16 Yes
No

34

Chart 4.8: respondents do you know of any evidence that bad housing causes health
problems?
4.9 respondents of If you answered ‘Yes’ Have you personally experienced any
problems with your housing within the past 12 months?
This chart indicates the majority of respondent 26(52%) said yes, while 24 (48% ) said no.

Chart Title
26

24

Yes No
Chart4.9:respondents of have you personally experienced housing problems?

4.10 respondents of which type of your housing?

This chart indicates the majority of respondent 30(60%) were own your homes, while 11 (22%)
were rent and other were 9 (18).

Chart Title
9 11
rent
own your home
other

30

Chart 4.10 :respondents of which type of your housing?

4.11 Respondent of what is your current living situation?

The majority of respondent 28(56%) were live their parent, while 12 (24% ) were live their
partner and 10(20) live their friends.

Current living
situation Frequency Percent
Vpartner 12 24.0
aparent 28 56.0
l Friends 10 20.0

i Total
50 100.0
d
4.12Table4.11: respondent What is your current living situation?

4.12 Respondents of What are the most important housing factors related
to human health?
the majority of respondent16 (32%) said Related to affordability, 12 (24%) said related to the
quality, 8(16) said Related to insecurity,6(12) said Related to adequacy of supply,6(12) said
other and 2 (4) said Related to Suitability.
Related housing factors
Frequency Percent
VRelated to affordability 16 32.0
a
Related to the quality 12 24.0
l
Related to adequacy of
i 6 12.0
supply
d
Related to insecurity 8 16.0
Related Suitability 2 4.0
Others 6 12.0
Total 50 100.0
 Table 4.12: Respondents ofWhat are the most important housing factors related to human
health?
4.13 Respondents of what are the effects of poor housing condition that you
know?
the majority of respondent26(52%) saidOpportunistic infections, 15 (30%) disability, 9(18) said
death .

Chart Title
Disability
15 Death
Opportunistic
26 infections

Table 4.13: Respondents of What are the most important housing factors related to human
health?

4.14 respondents What are the most important obstacles for people to provide
good health houses?
the majority of respondent32(64%) said lack of knowledge, 9 (18%) said lack of polices, 9(18) said
poverty.

Obstacles to provide
good health houses Frequency Percent
Vpoverty 9 18.0
a
lack of polices 9 18.0
l
lack of knowledge 32 64.0
i
dTotal 50 100.0
Table 4.14: respondents of what are the most important obstacles for people to provide good
health houses?
4.15 Respondent of do you believe that pour housing can be preventable?
This chart indicates the majority of respondent 38(78%) said yes, while 11 (22% )said no.

Chart Title
11

YES
NO

39

Chart 4.15: respondent Do you believe that pour housing can be preventable?

4.16 respondents of If yes, which interventions can be used to prevent the pour
housing?
The majority of respondent20 (40%) said To make housing polices, 16(32%) said Health
education, 14(28) said Community awareness.

Chart Title
16
20 Health education
Community awareness
To make housing
polices

14

Chart 4.16: respondents of which interventions can be used to prevent the pour housing?
4.17 respondent of do you think that the effects of pour housing are more
common in the study area?
This chart indicates the majority of respondent 33(66%) said yes, while 17 (34% ) said no.

Chart Title
17

YES
NO

33

Chart 4.17: of do you think that the effects of pour housing are more common in the study
area?

CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1Conclusion

This result shows that the age of the people between were 31-40 were the most respondents in
research, while the other ages were little. Such as: 21-30,. above 41,and 10-20.. This result
expresses the male genders were the mostly in research rather than female genders.

The result indicates the majority respondents were single and married while the divorced were so
little than single and married.

This respondent results expounds the mostly were universities but primary, secondary and
illiterate respondents were not as more as universities. This result illustrates that majority of
respondents were students but employed, jobless and house wives were little.
This result expresses the people who know poor housing affect were the majority respondents.
The people who know poor housing evidence were the majority respondents, while people who
un known were little then the other who know poor housing evidence affect.

The result shows that majority of the respondents said personally experienced housing problems
while other said no were little than the other said personally experienced housing problems.

This result indicated that majority of the respondents live their own homes while the rents and
other were little then the other live their own homes.

This result shows that majority of the respondents live with their parents while respondents live
with their partner and friends were little then the other live their parents.

This result explore that majority of the respondents said the most important housing factors related
to human health is related to affordability while respondents said related to the quality, insecurity,
adequacy of supply, Suitability were so little

This result shows that majority respondents said effects of poor housing condition is
opportunistic infections, while respondents said disability, and death were little.

This result indicates that majority respondents said the most important obstacles for people to
provide good health houses is lack of knowledge while respondents said lack of polices, poverty
were minority.

This result explore that majority of the respondents said that pour housing can be preventable
while respondents said no were little.

This result indicates that majority of respondents said the appropriate interventions can be used to
prevent the pour housing were To make housing polices while respondents said Health education,
Community awareness were the minority.

The result shows that majority of respondents think that the effects of pour housing are more
common in the study area while respondents said no were so little.

5.2 Recommendations
The solution to this serious health threat is relatively simple:

1. Housing political system should be develop due to the scale of the present problems of the
social and economic significance of the housing sector.

2. Eliminating damp and mould houses, and ensuring a sufficient number of sanitary housing
units to reduce overcrowding does not require millions of dollars of medical research, expensive
drugs or costly medical procedures. It simply requires an investment in the basic infrastructure of
a community; an investment that not only will prevent a major public health problem but
will also contribute to the economic well-being of the community and in the process ameliorate
the other major and associated risk factor to health – low socioeconomic status.

3. A solid and liquid wastes should be properly disposed to promote sanitations of houses.

4. Government should be establishing urban planning system to prevent the formation slums and
sub standard houses in the towns.

5.rooms and other area of house should sufficient the size of the family to avoid overcrowding that
causes most of housing problems such as asthma and other respiratory diseases.

6. Old houses should carefully reconstruct to avoid injury from old houses.

7. In the implementation of housing improvement policies and programs should be given to:
(a) Clarifying the effective ownership of the housing stock;
(b) Facilitating the establishment of functioning management and maintenance systems for the
housing stock, in particular the multi-unit buildings.

5.3 Areas for further research

People perception affects of pour housing
How to be establishing Housing improvement polices?
How to be protecting pour housing affect on human health?
 REFERENCES

Bonnefoy, X. (2007) ‘Inadequate Housing And Health: An Overview’, Int. J. Environment And
Pollution, Vol. 30, Nos. 3/4, Pp.411–429.

Brooks, C. A. (2004). In Overcrowding And Violence In Federal Correctional Institutions (P. 81).
Crystal Anita Brooks Publisher.

Evans, G. W. (2003). The Built Environment And Mental Health. Journal Of Urban Health , 20.

Jan, G., & Geoff, G. (2012). Good Housing And Good. Glasgow: Housing Corporation And The
Housing Learning And.

Mahajan, & Gupta. (2013). Preventive And Social Medicine. New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers Medical
Publishers (P) Ltd.

Mathians, B., David, J., & David, O. (2003). Enviromental Burden Of Desease Associated With In
Adequate Housing. Geneva.

Office Of The Deputy Prime Minister: London. (2004). The Impact Of Overcrowding On.
London: Office Of The Deputy Prime Minister Publications.

Ondola, S. O., P. O., & Rambo, ,. C. (2013). Effectiveness Of Housing Policies And Their
Implementation Strategies In The Provision Of Low-Cost Housing To The Urban Poor.
International Journal Of Academic Research In Progressive Education And Development ,
14.

Organization, W. H. (2010). International Workshop On. Geneva.

Wilkinson, D. (1999). Poor Housing And Ill Health. Department Or The Secretary Of State For
Scotland.
 QUESTIONNAIRE

SECTION A: SOCIO-DEMOGRAPHIC DATA

1. Age:

a) 10 -20 { }

b) 21-30 { }

c) 31-40 { }

d) Above 40 { }

2. Sex:
a) Male { }

b) Female { }

3. Marital status:

a) Single { }

b) Married { }

c) Divorced { }

d) Widowed { }

4. Level of education:
a) Illiterate { }

b) Primary { }

c) Secondary { }

d) University { }

e) Other { }
5. Occupational status:
a) Employed { }
b) Jobless { }
c) Students { }
d) House wife { }
SECTION B: KNOWLEDGE
6. Do you know poor housing affect on human health?
a. YES { } b. NO { }
7. Do you know of any evidence that bad housing causes health problems?
a. YES { } b. NO { }
8. If you answered ‘Yes’ Have you personally experienced any problems with your
housing within the past 12 months?
a. YES { } b. NO { }
9. Which type of your housing?
a. Rent { }
b. Own your home { }
c. Other { }
10. What is your current living situation?
a) Single { }

b) Partner { }

c) Parents { }

d) Friends { }

11. What are the most important housing factors related to human health?
a) Related to affordability { }

b) Related to the quality { }

 c) Related to adequacy of supply { }

d) Related to insecurity { }

e) Related Suitability { }

f) Others { }

12. What are the effects of poor housing condition that you know?

a) Disability { }

b) Death { }

c) Opportunistic infections { }

13. What are the most important obstacles for people to provide good health houses?
a) Poverty { }
b) Lack of polices { }
c) Lack of knowledge { }

14. Do you believe that pour housing can be preventable?

a. YES { } b. NO { }
15. If yes, which interventions can be used to prevent the pour housing?

a. Health education { }
b. Community awareness { }
c. To make housing polices { }

16. Do you think that the effects of pour housing are more common in the study area?

a. YES { } b. NO { }