THEORITICAL AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 3.1Global Nature of HDS
3.3 Conceptual Framework/Models used in this Study
3.3.7 Theoretical development for HDS, PPP, and AHD
The implication of too many information’s and disconnected pieces of empirical research are indicators for the need of holistic theories in housing (Rapoport, 2001; Brandsen, 2001).
Theory is needful to subsume much data by compressibility and it improves knowledge dissemination and applicability in various scenarios. The use of Generalization, recognizable patterns, and regularities are attributes of a good theory (Rapoport, 2001).
In the development of this research, the tested theories in housing cited herein exist in association to the elements of systems, partnerships, and adequacy that are subsets of the core subject of investigation. The holism needed to understand the embodiment of all three elements acting in synchrony is limited in this regard. Even then, systems theory provides a plausible lead in this direction and it is only critical to the process problems of HDS.
However, to solve the research problems, this study relied on the plausibility of various theories to inform the outlay of PPP towards achieving AHD. The study draws from the enumerated theories of GST, MER, market-economy in urban democratic settings in relation to the ‘activity settings’ of stakeholders in specific housing and the AAMP of operational research to develop a conceptual framework. The following elucidates the approach to theoretical and conceptual framework of this study.
-Theoretical framework: Housing objectives elicit outcome (succinct to the research hypothesis).
-Conceptual framework: PPP improves actors/partners AHD
Therefore, the unification of housing objectives reinforces the outcome into a ‘thrust’. A weak and poorly defined objective births a weak thrust. The housing debate is full of various objectives (in relation to optimizing housing ‘processes’ and ‘resources’) that are subject to the arrangements among households, actors/partners, and experts called stakeholders.
The conceptual framework specifies PPP as the variable under exploration within the context of HDS; and that PPP which represents a particular housing objectives called ‘thrust,’
improves actors/partners AHD (defined by the 3-Q factor delineated in this study as the universal objective of housing).
To analyze this relationship, the hierarchy of HDS, PPP and AHD became relevant in the order so stated to dismantle the elements and subsets of elements identified as determinants towards achieving efficient outcomes of housing objectives.
3.3.8 Schematic Model of determinants of HDS, PPP and AHD for the housing process The conceptual framework adapted for this study is based on schematic models by Ludwig (1968),Turner (1972), from theoretical models by Prins(1994), PRC(1982), and mathematical models developed by proponents of PPP Matrimort and Pouyet (2006).
The theoretical and mathematical models are utilized to explain the delineation needed for optimal division of labour between public and private sectors in modern industrial organizations; thus identifying the high points for efficient contribution and removal of risk areas to both sectors in terms of moral hazard and investment respectively.
The schematic in figure 3.6 shows the relationship between the determinants of housing delivery, Public private partnerships and adequate housing delivery in the housing delivery process. The schematic model suggests a relationship pattern based on the factors and their likely influences on the specific function in the housing process. Prins(1994) suggested nine specific housing function in relation to the housing process as a continuum; this research suggest that the Housing delivery system is different from the standards and settings which creates adequacy benchmark but, are basically working together to delineate the emerging partnerships. Prins’ analogy is useful in delineating the housing delivery systems in terms of the housing delivery process but not in terms of the stakeholders’ delineation in relation to housing objectives.
Therefore, it does not quantifiably describe the settings for adequacy. The research model redefines’ ‘Adequacy’ in terms of four broad based elements namely; the house unit, the housing setting, housing production and the specific housing process limited by setting. It does not assume that adequacy should be an outcome of stakeholders’ involvement (i.e. housing households, housing development actors/partners and housing development experts). The transmitted error of ignoring this vital aspect is that ‘copying’ becomes the template for standards (for most emerging economies of the world), as described by Rapoport (2001).
The settings are products of existing criteria (knowledge base/social capital; ability to coordinate and translate aspiration into effective actions), if inadequately informed or unprotected from partners (with other motives other than the housing creation) then, the
objectives of housing programmes will not be realized. For example, in a PPP, the private sector partner could tacitly introduce superior design-typology presentation or cheap funding to influence the thrust for a specific housing programme. This could mislead the PPP into adopting a technology that infuses tacit profit-motive reasons by the private sector partner. The outcome could create socio-economic imbalance for that setting. This is usually the case between developing countries and the developed countries; whereby, funding is tied to the importation of technology (and sometimes outdated) at a high cost, and this negates the subjective thrust of the PPP (Angel, 2000; Hunter 1981).
The relationship between HDS, PPP, and AHD is as delineated in the schematic model of figure 3.6. The indicators of HDS are the determinants and similarly those of PPP and AHD.
However, the PPP is earlier stated is a subsystem of HDS but interact independently with HDS based on the influence of social context; defined by the interaction within the institutional and organizational arrangements of households, housing development actors/partners and experts who form stakeholders within their settings.
It is from this platform that coalitions occur for or against the realities of planned objectives.
The feedback on housing objectives is delineated from the determinants of AHD as it affects the four components of adequacy already defines and shown in figure 3.6.
The resolution of these components in relation to the housing objectives derived from the PPP arrangements is the effective contribution of PPP expressed as outcomes of the universal objectives (the 3-Q factors).
By this model, the HDS is unbundled into the elements of resources and process for the purpose of optimization. Where this exists, the influence of reforms would need to be understood in order to avoid previous misgivings about models. This would inform the applicability of the model in various scenarios.
Figure 3.6 A Schematic model of determinants of HDS,PPP and AHD for the housing process (Author). (Adapted from Ludwig (1968), Turner (1972), Prins(1994), Ogu,2001; Aradeon (2005),Ying (1997)
Determinants of Housing Delivery Systems (HDS)
Resource Elements:
-Tenure
-Access to Finance -Access to Occupancy -Govt.policy
-Household income -Layout typology -Household size Process Elements:
-Levels of building activity regulation
-Infrastructure provision -Mgmt/maintenance -Construction cost -Process Costs
Determinants of Public Private Partnerships (PPP)
Resource Elements:
-Tenure -Govt.policy -Location
-Commitment(actors/Ptn) -Access to Land
-Access to Finance
Process Elements:
-Profit motive -Interest rate -Property price -Cost of foreign exch.
-Infrastructure provision -Construction cost
Determinants of Adequate Housing Delivery (AHD)
House Unit -household size -Design typology Housing Setting -Layout typology -Housing environment -Lifestyle
Housing Production -Estate Size
-Construction Technology -Construction Cost Housing Process
-Levels of building activity regulation
-infrastructure provision -levels of actors/partners commitment
Contributions of PPP
-Improved Quantity of Housing -Improved Quality of Housing -Improved Quality of housing Environment
*Sustainable housing cycle and lifestyle.
Influence of Social Context:
Institutional and Organizational Arrangements.
Through defined roles for households, housing Development
Actors/partners and experts in a Setting
Influence of standards Adequacy is infused directly into PPP based on performance of the defined roles (i.e.
experts) and it is reviewed on a feedback basis through the window of outcomes at the contribution point for stakeholders.
Infused Adequacy Template through Housing
Development experts
3.4 Origins of Housing Policies and Concepts