Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Cross-sectional survey evaluates building regulation compliance in residential developers, highlighting awareness and enforcement issues.
Objective: This study evaluates respondent-rated compliance with building regulations among residential developers in Itigidi, Cross River State, Nigeria, and examines awareness, approval status, perceived enforcement constraints and neighbourhood variation. Method: A 2020 cross-sectional survey produced 371 usable questionnaires from 388 distributed copies. Questionnaire evidence was triangulated with interviews, field observation and Itigidi Area Planning Authority records for 2010–2020. Descriptive statistics were reproduced, and the exploratory one-way ANOVA was recalculated from aggregated neighbourhood counts. Results: In the overall archived table, 20.5% rated compliance as good, 35.6% as fair and 43.9% as poor. Most respondents reported no knowledge of the regulation (59.8%), no building approval (51.5%) and discomfort with the extent of compliance (85.7%). Weak enforcement was the leading perceived explanation (49.1%), followed by absence of penalties (35.6%). A separate neighbourhood table yielded inconsistent category totals and was analysed only for its spatial pattern and original ANOVA. The ANOVA was non-significant, F(2, 12)=1.552, p=.252, but does not establish neighbourhood equivalence. Implications: Policy should prioritise guidance, accessible permitting, risk-based inspections, staffing, mobility and auditable records. Contribution: The article explains how regulatory knowledge, approval practice and enforcement capacity intersect in a Nigerian town with comparable constraints.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ajom et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: