No abstract

Purpose Valuation for compensation on land and buildings compulsorily acquired for public purposes is statutory. The Land Use Act (LUA) of 1978 now cited as Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, CAP l5 LFN 2007, stipulates the use of Depreciated Replacement Cost (DRC) Method in the valuation for compensation purposes for building and installation. The purpose of this paper is to criticize the application of the DRC technique in the valuation by acquiring authority as it does not arrive at fair market value and adequate compensation in Nigeria. Design/methodology/approach The method adopted for the study was a case study of real world valuation for compensation. Data used in the study were gathered mainly from government ministries and agencies responsible for land acquisition and compensation purposes. They included the Ministry of Lands and Housing, Land Use and Allocation Committee, and Ministry of Works and Transport. Market data on rental value, sales prices and other relevant data were collected from firms of professional that deal in real property. Findings The result of the study reveals that valuation by acquiring authority using DRC methods as prescribed by the LUA does not reflect market value and it is inadequate to put the claimants in the position they were before the acquisition. As such, most victims expressed dissatisfaction with the amount paid to them, which sometimes result to crisis, conflict and prolonged litigation, resulting in delay in executing or abandonment of the intended project. Research limitations/implications The study is limited to only one case study on acquisition and compensation for land and buildings with particular reference to Akwa Ibom State. This limitation does not invalidate the result as the law is applicable to the whole country. Practical implications The implication is that the LUA needs to be review to fair market value as basis of valuation and payment for site value as well as the constitution to add “adequate” to Section 44 (1a). This will reduce the incidence of many communities and land owners protest against the decision of government or its agents to acquire their land for public purposes. Originality/value The methodology meets the requirement of the law regarding compulsory land acquisition and compensation in Nigeria: The LUA of 1978. Using three scenarios: the valuation by acquiring authority, claimant’s valuers and independent valuers to illustrate the critique of the methodology, the result shows the inadequacy of compensation.

Risk is a common feature of all forms of investment including

No abstract

Risk is inherent in building construction; and at every stage of the construction process, the burden is forced with the daunting task of mitigating the identified risk. This study seeks to examine the causes of risk in building construction as well as identifying the appropriate management strategies for mitigating the risk. The questionnaire was prepared and administered on a total of 36 persons found in twelve (12) project sites visited in Uyo, Akwa Ibom State. In each site, three (3) persons including property owners, site engineers/property managers, builders/masons, carpenters, electricians, plumbers and town planning officers were randomly picked for the administration of questionnaires. Out of the sampled 36 persons, 32 persons which represented 88.89% completed the questionnaires and returned same to the researcher within the timeframe. This constituted the sample size for the study. The major causes of risks in building construction were identified as poor soil texture which resulted to poor setting and timbering as shown by building construction index (BCI) of 0.88, poor concrete mix for blocks and choking as shown by BCI of 0.88 and foundation as shown by BCI of 0.72, use of inferior building materials as shown by BCI of 0.72, and poor workmanship as shown by BCI of 0.72. The research revealed that the key elements in risks management process revolve around proper supervision of the project which involves identification and evaluation of risk sources, adequate choice of building materials and workforce, and monitoring of physical construction. It recommended routine inspection to identify potential sources of risks and properly management to forestall unforeseen occurrences in the building.