Type | Journal Article - International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research |
Title | Comparative analysis of ecological footprint of two different neighbourhoods in Minna, Nigeria |
Author(s) | |
Volume | 4 |
Issue | 5 |
Publication (Day/Month/Year) | 2013 |
Page numbers | 178-183 |
URL | http://www.ijser.org/researchpaper\Ecological-Footprint-of-Two-Different-Neighbourhoods.pdf |
Abstract | This paper discusses the comparative analysis of Ecological Footprint of two different neighbourhoods in Minna: M.I Wushisi and Tunga Low-Cost estate. It considers the building design, types, consumption pattern, lifestyle, and land-use in these estates. One prominent way of curbing sprawl is the design of eco-village that encourages human-scale settlement that encompasses social interaction, environmental sustainability and low-impact lifestyle. Globalization has been seen as a factor that determine environmental and social problem in the society. The method employed in this study makes use of both primary and secondary data to analyse and present the analysis in tabular form to show the relationship of different consumption that contributes to Ecological Footprint of these estates. There was the use of questionnaire for data collection, and a total of 360 and 370 questionnaired administered in both estates. The result indicated that the Ecological Footprint of Tunga Low-Cost (0.94gha) is lower than M.I Wushishi (0.98gha) due to building type, household size and lifestyle. Thus, this implies that the urban planners and designer has to be abreast of necessary information that will allow them to design a city that will be sustainable and consider consumption and lifestyle of the inhabitants of such city or neighbourhood. In addition, the study illustrates that Ecological Footprint could play a useful role in conducting such assessments, by documenting some of the behaviours that are most crucial to a person’s total environmental impact and how they are related to design and building form. |
» | Nigeria - Population and Housing Census 2006 |