“…As a result of these higher prices, those with less economic muscles tend to be pushed further to the urban fringe where they strategically adopt "frequent visitation" (VIS) or "effective occupation" (EO) on informal residential properties at a relatively lower price (Vincent, 2009). The utility from "ineffective occupation" (V S ) may be determined by the utility of "effective occupation" (V R ) and the redistribution consequences arising from diversities in Value of formal titles to land population, growth rate and construction cost across settlements within the same city (Tinsley, 1993;Hansen and Skak, 2008); variation in housing types (Takeuchi et al, 2006); relative proximity to physical and social networks, workplaces and the CBD (Rath and Routray, 1997;Alananga, 2015); neighbourhood and housing services, sanitation and pressures on schools (Tinsley, 1993;Manaster, 1968;Penrose et al, 2010;Rose, 2006;Field, 2003); and lot size (Friedman et al, 1988). Other factors for utility and price differences may include original land access modality (Durand-Lasserve et al, 2013), gender of household head as female household head often engenders less transfer uncertainty (Lanjouw and Levy, 1998), type of employment, household size, duration of residency and education level (Friedman et al, 1988).…”