ABSTRACT
A recent interest has been developed towards the participation of the public in programmes and decisions that affect them. In Nigeria, decision making in housing is centralised. This centralised nature of planning and decision-making process do not encourage the participation of the people being planned for. Basically, the approach negates the fundamental principle on which planning is based - 'Public Interest'. Public's needs, wants, preferences and requirements are not properly identified or often neglected before plans are prepared. The people are therefore not satisfied with housing programmes. The research evaluates the role of public participation in housing programmes and its decision making process, and tests the validity of the fundamental assumptions underlying public participation in relation to housing. It establishes among other things reasons why there is lack of public participation in housing process and decision making. These problems as established from the results of the test of hypotheses include lack of trust for the planners and the decision makers as to their role as the custodian of the people's interest. The people participate only when personally affected by housing and its related programmes. Their attitude towards participation is generally discouraging. The people are not properly informed about what planning means. Channels for communicating the people's views and opinions to the decision makers and vice versa are not adequate and efficient.As part of proposals, models have been developed for improving the existing centralised housing process and integrating public participation with housing process and decision making. In this model instead of centralisation, a decentralised organisation is suggested. The second model integrates public participation with housing process. Various stages of the process where direct and indirect participation are essential and where the decision makers and the planners should be the sole actors are highlighted. The feedback is communicated between the two groups of participants, hence facilitating coordination and integration of the various actors and activities in housing, consequently fostering participation. The other recommendations include educating the people on what planning is meant to achieve by employing Charrette technique; enlighting them on the valuable role their involvement in housing process and decision making plays; and making efficient channels of communication available to facilitate a two-way dialogue between the decision makers and the planners on the one hand, and the people on the other. The concept of metaplanning is also recommended whereby the people's needs, wants, preference, socio-ecomomic and cultural values are identified in order to make housing programmes responsive to its users.