Sustainability and Lifecycle Performance of Residential Housing Developments in Gwarimpa and Apo Districts, Abuja, Nigeria

Sustainable housing is increasingly promoted as a strategy for improving environmental performance and reducing long-term housing costs; however, evidence on its economic viability in developing-country contexts remains limited. This study assessed the economic performance of sustainable housing developments in Gwarimpa and Apo Districts of Abuja, Nigeria. Data were obtained through household surveys, developer interviews, real estate agent consultations, property records, and field observations. The analysis examined construction costs, operational expenses, maintenance requirements, property value appreciation, lifecycle costs, and returns on sustainability investments. The findings revealed that sustainable housing attracted a 14.7% higher initial capital cost than conventional housing, with an average construction cost of ₦44.5 million compared to ₦38.8 million. However, sustainable housing achieved a 38.6% reduction in annual operational costs, a 24.4% reduction in maintenance costs, and a 30.8% decrease in repair frequency. Properties with sustainability features recorded a higher annual appreciation rate (10.8%) than conventional properties (7.2%) and demonstrated lower 20-year lifecycle costs (₦56.2 million versus ₦57.5 million). Sustainability investments yielded an average payback period of 4.9 years and a 20-year return on investment of 424.0%. The study concludes that despite higher upfront costs, sustainable housing provides substantial long-term economic benefits and represents a financially viable housing development approach in Abuja.

Sustainable housing; Economic performance; Lifecycle cost; Return on investment

1. Ashworth, A. (2015). Life cycle costing: A practical guide (6th ed.). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Berardi, U. (2013). Sustainability assessment in the construction sector: Rating systems and rated buildings. Sustainable Development, 21(6), 411-424. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Cabeza, L. F., Rincón, L., Vilariño, V., Pérez, G., & Castell, A. (2014). Life cycle assessment and life cycle energy analysis of buildings and the building sector. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 29, 394-416. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Darko, A., Chan, A. P. C., Yang, Y., Shan, M., He, B. J., & Gou, Z. (2017). Influences of barriers, drivers, and promotion strategies on green building technologies adoption in developing countries. Habitat International, 72, 1-10. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Ding, G. K. C. (2008). Sustainable construction: The role of environmental assessment tools. Journal of Environmental Management, 86(3), 451-464. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Elkington, J. (1997). Cannibals with forks: The triple bottom line of 21st century business. Capstone Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Fuerst, F., & McAllister, P. (2011). Green noise or green value? Measuring the effects of environmental certification on office values. Real Estate Economics, 39(1), 45-69. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. García-Navarro, J., González-Díaz, M., Valdivieso, F., & De la Cruz, M. P. (2014). Cost-benefit analysis of sustainable building solutions. Building and Environment, 80, 284-296. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Kats, G. (2018). Greening our built world: Costs, benefits and strategies. Island Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Kibert, C. J. (2016). Sustainable Construction: Green Building Design and Delivery (4th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Olatunji, O. A., Aje, I. O., & Oke, A. E. (2020). Factors influencing construction cost overruns in Nigeria. Construction Economics and Building, 20(2), 67-82. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Seeley, I. H. (2019). Building maintenance (5th ed.). Palgrave Macmillan. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. World Green Building Council. (2019). The Business Case for Green Buildings. London: World Green Building Council. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Zuo, J., & Zhao, Z. Y. (2014). Green building research-current status and future agenda: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 30, 271-281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.10.021. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• A Lean Construction-Based Evaluation of Prefabrication System Benefits in Modern Construction Projects
• Prioritising Subcontractor Prequalification Criteria in Construction Projects: Evidence from G7 Contractors in Sarawak, Malaysia