ANALYSIS: Balancing the Scales, The Private-Public Hostel Paradox in Nigerian Universities, by Akanni Oluwasegun

Student housing in Nigeria is at a crossroads. On one side, there are the deteriorating public hostels struggling to meet the needs of a burgeoning student population. On the other hand, private hostels offer comfort and modern amenities—but only for those who can afford them. This duality raises pressing questions about equity, accessibility, and the role of universities in ensuring basic student welfare.

The rapid expansion of higher education across Africa and Nigeria in particular, has resulted in significant challenges related to student accommodation. Over the years, student enrollment rates have surged, straining the capacity of on-campus housing facilities. In the face of increasing demand for university education, the problem of inadequate accommodation has grown critical, creating a scenario where the number of students exceeds the available housing spaces. This imbalance has forced many students to seek accommodation off-campus, leading to a proliferation of student housing in surrounding neighborhoods. As these issues continue to persist, they have brought about concerns about the impact of off-campus living on students’ academic performance, social activities, and overall well-being.

Historically, Nigerian universities, like many institutions of higher learning across the globe, have been unable to provide adequate accommodation for all students, especially as enrollment figures increase. As early as 1948, universities such as the University of Ibadan had only a handful of students—55, to be precise—whereas, by 2015, the number had skyrocketed to over 8,000 students. However, the number of accommodation spaces has not seen a proportional increase, resulting in overcrowded dormitories and a shortage of spaces. This gap in student accommodation availability has been compounded by a lack of affordable and safe housing options in the university’s surrounding neighborhoods.

The establishment of off-campus housing became an inevitable solution to this crisis. In some cases, universities have been involved in the development and regulation of off-campus accommodation policies, as studies suggest that such policies are crucial in influencing students’ academic success, retention rates, and general satisfaction. However, government funding and initiatives have largely fallen short of meeting the growing demands, leading to a situation where private providers, including landlords and other stakeholders, must step in to address the housing shortfall. The inadequacies of government intervention are evident, as a majority of students are left to find housing solutions through private means.

In light of the growing student population, the question of whether university authorities should shoulder greater responsibility for off-campus housing has emerged. While some universities attempt to provide on-campus accommodation, many have increasingly had to limit spaces to first-year students, final-year students, physically challenged students, and those involved in sports. These measures, however, leave many students, particularly those in the middle years of their academic journey, without viable on-campus housing options.

As a result, students are left with the option of renting off-campus housing in nearby communities. While some students find this arrangement advantageous due to the potential for greater privacy, comfort, and flexibility, it also brings challenges. Students living off-campus are often distanced from campus-based academic and social activities, potentially hindering their overall university experience. The lack of a social support system can lead to isolation, poor academic integration, and even disengagement from academic pursuits. Off-campus students may also face challenges such as longer commute times, higher transportation costs, and concerns regarding safety and security.

Research suggests that students’ preference for off-campus accommodation is often driven by factors such as noise, overcrowding, and lack of privacy in on-campus facilities. Many students have expressed a preference for more private and quieter environments, which they find in off-campus housing. However, this desire for privacy and a more conducive living environment is often tempered by the absence of necessary services such as stable electricity, water, and adequate sanitation in off-campus accommodations.

Further complicating this situation is the limited availability of affordable housing in the neighborhoods surrounding many universities. Many students are forced to settle for substandard housing conditions due to the high demand for accommodation in these areas. These conditions can negatively affect students’ health, academic performance, and overall quality of life. The absence of basic amenities, such as access to clean water, electricity, and proper sanitation, makes life in off-campus housing particularly challenging.

Off-campus housing also has broader socio-economic implications. For instance, students living off-campus are more likely to experience financial strain due to higher rent prices and commuting costs. In many cases, students living in such conditions have to juggle their studies with part-time work to meet their accommodation and living expenses, which can affect their academic focus and performance. Additionally, the higher cost of living in private accommodation compared to on-campus housing can contribute to an increase in student debt and financial insecurity.

From a social perspective, students living off-campus may also face isolation from the university community. The lack of direct involvement in campus life, including student organizations, extracurricular activities, and social events, can lead to a sense of disconnection and alienation. Studies have shown that social integration and peer interaction are key factors in promoting students’ academic success and personal development. Therefore, students who are disengaged from campus activities due to off-campus 

Student accommodation in Nigeria’s universities is increasingly becoming a critical issue. Public hostels, once the cornerstone of accessible university living, are now bursting at the seams, unable to keep pace with the surging student population. Meanwhile, private hostels, offering better facilities, are out of reach for most students due to their steep costs. This divide exposes profound inequities in Nigeria’s higher education system and raises pressing questions about the future of student welfare, accessibility, and the role of public universities.

Historically, public hostels were designed to provide affordable housing for students from all socioeconomic backgrounds, embodying the ideal of education as an equalizer. However, as student enrollment surged and government funding dwindled, public hostels have struggled to meet demand. Overcrowding, dilapidation, and unreliable utilities have become the norm, compromising the quality of student life.

The 2012 Presidential Committee on the Needs of Nigerian Universities highlighted a stark reality: only 8.9% of students—roughly 111,509 out of 1.25 million—had access to on-campus housing. In many cases, rooms designed to accommodate two students now house five or more, and basic amenities like water and electricity are often unavailable or erratic.

To address these challenges, private sector involvement in student accommodation began to gain traction in the 1980s. Initially, entrepreneurs catered to non-residential universities by offering alternative housing solutions. By the 1990s, federal universities charged a nominal fee of ₦90.00 per bed space per academic session—an amount far from sufficient to cover maintenance and operational costs. This financial gap created an environment ripe for exploitation, with students reselling bed spaces at exorbitant prices.

In response to the growing housing crisis, the National Universities Commission (NUC) in 1996 called for increased private sector participation, aiming to redirect university resources toward teaching and research rather than housing. By 1998, recommendations from the Harmonization Committee on Education Policy proposed the full privatization of student accommodation and feeding services, with the goal of offsetting costs through scholarships and bursaries.

Despite these efforts, public hostels have remained largely neglected. By 2001, federal universities faced a 72% deficit in student bed spaces, underscoring the urgency for private sector involvement. While private sector participation in student housing is common in markets like the UK, where investments have driven occupancy rates to 99% and returns as high as 15%, the Nigerian market remains stagnant.

In developed economies, institutions like the Universities Partnership Programme (UPP) and UNITE have capitalized on investor interest, creating a thriving niche market. Between 2009 and 2012, investment in student housing in the UK soared, driven by rising demand for high-quality accommodation and consistent returns. In contrast, Nigeria’s formal private sector contribution to student accommodation remains limited, with most housing provided by informal landlords around university campuses.

Where private hostels do exist in Nigeria, they often provide modern amenities—en-suite bathrooms, stable utilities, and enhanced security—at premium rates. Annual rents for these facilities can exceed ₦300,000, a far cry from the ₦70,000 or less students typically pay for public hostels. This pricing disparity has created a tiered housing system, where only wealthier students can afford superior living conditions, which often correlates with better academic performance due to the added comfort and security.

The reluctance of formal private investors to enter the Nigerian market is largely attributed to perceived risks and the burdensome demands of institutional management. However, informal private developers have seized the opportunity, converting existing properties near university campuses into hostels or constructing new ones to meet the growing demand for accommodation.

For Nigeria to close the housing gap and meet the demands of an expanding student population, a structured approach that incentivizes private investment while ensuring affordability is crucial. 

Public-private partnerships (PPPs) are often promoted as a viable solution to address the student accommodation deficit in Nigerian universities. Through Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) schemes, private investors are tasked with financing and constructing hostel facilities on university land, with the promise of increased capacity and affordability. On paper, this approach appears efficient. In practice, however, the reality is far more complex, as a closer analysis reveals significant structural and operational shortcomings.

The Federal Government’s policy on PPPs in higher education dates back to 2004, when universities were directed to hand over hostel management to private operators and encourage the construction of new hostels through private investment. By 2006, the government refined this directive, mandating that all new hostel projects be developed under BOT schemes. These arrangements were designed to align private-sector efficiency with public-sector oversight, with universities providing land and essential infrastructure while private investors bore the construction and management costs.

In theory, this partnership seems mutually beneficial. Universities extend their capacity without upfront financial strain, while investors recoup their investments through rental income over a lease period, often capped at 25 years. Rent, ideally, is to be determined by a balance between market conditions and students’ financial capabilities.

However, reality has often fallen short of these ideals. Research, including Abdulhafeez Ibrahim’s An Investigation into Build Operate and Transfer in the Provision of Hostels in Nigerian Federal Universities, suggest critical flaws in the BOT framework. Bureaucratic bottlenecks, inadequate regulatory oversight, and poor enforcement have stymied progress. Few universities have fully implemented the policy, with delays and disputes over project specifications, contract terms, and land allocation eroding trust between stakeholders.

Where BOT projects have been successfully executed, affordability remains a contentious issue. The profit-driven nature of private investment often leads to rental rates that are out of reach for many students. While the National Universities Commission (NUC) prescribes standards for design and infrastructure, ensuring compliance has proven difficult, with investors prioritizing cost recovery over student welfare.

Moreover, the policy’s reliance on universities to provide land and extend infrastructure, such as roads and drainage, has been another point of contention. Many institutions, already grappling with funding constraints, struggle to meet these obligations. This has further limited the policy’s adoption and effectiveness, leaving the accommodation crisis largely unresolved.

Despite these challenges, there has been some progress. Over the years, PPPs have facilitated the development of modern hostel facilities in a few institutions, demonstrating their potential when implemented effectively. However, these successes remain the exception rather than the rule.

For PPPs to deliver on their promise, a fundamental shift is required. Stronger regulatory frameworks, better contract enforcement, and a genuine commitment to affordability are necessary. Additionally, universities must adopt a more proactive role in project supervision and stakeholder engagement to ensure that private investments align with the broader goal of improving student welfare.

The BOT approach, while promising in concept, is not a panacea. Without addressing its underlying weaknesses, it risks becoming another well-intentioned but poorly executed policy. Ultimately, solving the student housing crisis requires a nuanced approach that combines private-sector efficiency with public accountability and student-centered policies.

Take, for instance, the University of Lagos (UNILAG) and the University of Ibadan, where public hostels house less than a third of their students. This scarcity forces many students to seek private accommodation, often at unaffordable rates. Ahmadu Bello University’s recent PPP projects have expanded accommodation capacity, but affordability remains a key concern. Nationwide, there exists a 90% deficit in student housing, leaving millions of students to scramble for subpar options.

The consequences are far-reaching. Overcrowding in hostels negatively impacts students’ mental health, academic performance, and general well-being. Research consistently shows that inadequate living conditions can reduce concentration, hinder study efforts, and exacerbate stress—challenges that further undermine the potential for higher education to serve as a means of social mobility.

Addressing the accommodation crisis requires a multifaceted approach. Rent controls for private hostels near campuses could curb exploitation and make private accommodation more accessible. Transparent and student-inclusive PPP agreements would ensure that private investments prioritize student welfare. Additionally, there must be a concerted push for increased public funding to renovate and expand on-campus housing. In 2004, the cost to meet the accommodation shortfall in federal universities was estimated at ₦63.19 billion—an eye-watering figure, but one that pales in comparison to the long-term societal costs of neglecting this issue.

Equally important is the inclusion of students in housing policy decisions. Too often, student representatives are excluded from conversations about housing, leaving them without a voice in shaping the very conditions that affect their daily lives. Empowering students to participate in negotiations with universities and private investors could help ensure that solutions are both practical and equitable.

The housing crisis in Nigerian universities is a microcosm of broader societal issues—economic inequality, strained infrastructure, and competing national priorities. The solution lies not only in financial investment but also in a commitment to education as a tool for social transformation. For Nigerian universities to remain agents of social mobility and academic excellence, they must provide every student, regardless of background, with a safe and affordable place to call home.