Abstract: This is a report on investigation carried out in order to determine the way and manner building survey is practiced in Nigeria. An investigation on the curriculum of many tertiary institutions that run building programme, method of carrying out building survey in Nigeria, its use and whether or not there is an enabling environment that would ensure its proper use in the building industry. Besides that as a multidisciplinary subject, the perception and level of participation of all professionals in the building industry was assessed. The method used for carrying out the study was through the use of well structured questionnaires, oral interviews and the study of documents especially the syllabus of building programmes in universities and polytechnics and planning laws in some states of the federation and some of the building survey reports prepared. Results showed that students do not receive adequate training for the practice of building survey in most of the tertiary institution, there is also no standard format followed in carrying out building survey in Nigeria, also clients are not taking advantages that building survey offers as 63% of respondents have shown that building survey report is not used as part of collateral. Also, using a Likert scale of 1-4 on the reasons for carrying out building survey, the following results were obtained: use of building survey when a property is to be sold is 4.0, while the use of building survey when there is a problem with foundation is 3.84 and the use of building survey when there is fear of collapse of building is 3.65. Results also showed that building survey is beneficial to financial institutions and that the overall perception of building survey from all the groups of respondents has shown that most professionals are aware of building survey and the benefits derived from it and they view building survey as a basis for good maintenance work as well as one of the viable means of forestalling building collapse in Nigeria. However, it is not practiced as it ought to as such, it was recommended that government and professional bodies should regulate the practice of building survey in Nigeria.

INTRODUCTION

The importance of the built environment to individuals and indeed, to any organization or even nation cannot be overemphasized because it provides the infrastructural base for all human activities. Adebayo (2008) noted that built space is among the two essential requirements, for achieving certain defined organizational objectives set by man. However, for any building to perform its function, it is necessary that they are maintained and kept at their optimal performance level at all times. One important factor needed for the accomplishment of such task is accurate, regular and systematic inspection of such building. Bokinni (2007) classified such inspection into two; these are: ongoing which is the type undertaken by the tenant or landlord on regular basis, as the user of such building, so as to detect any problem; the second type is the building survey which is within the province of the professional builder; for the fact that building is a complex product of his professional practice and faults in buildings are in many cases, hidden and hence, difficult to find. That is why Awe (2008) noted that, it is logical to allow the producer (builder) to assess what has gone wrong with his product, for whatever reasons and prescribe possible remedial measures or solution to the diagnosed problems. The Nigerian Institute of Building (NIOB) classifies building survey as a specialized division of the building profession. Odetoyinbo (2006) defines building surveying as a comprehensive inspection and report of a property, providing a detailed picture of the condition and proposing remedial actions to restore or replace the building.

In Nigeria, presently, buildings deteriorate faster than they should due to lack of building surveying culture and maintenance (NIOB, 2006). Report by the Petroleum (Special) Trust Fund (PTF) shows that most public structures suffer from inadequate maintenance if not outright neglect (Usman, 2000). Unfortunately, the problem is not confined to maintenance problem for according to the Leadership Newspaper (Anonymous, 2008), even some important measures such as inspection and survey of structures were not carried out as they ought to have which are necessary prerequisite to maintenance work. For instance, the structural defects on Lagos mainland bridge which has gulped (x700,000,000) was not detected by authorities charged with the responsibility of maintaining the bridge but by the road users. The study further noted that the nation is yet to imbibe the maintenance culture. Also, Adebayo (2008) observed that the run down syndrome which is an attribute of public facilities in Nigeria, due to poor or lack of maintenance of public facilities has been the Achilles heel of economic development of the country. According to Ghalot and Sharma (2006) maintenance of building contribute significantly to the Gross National Product (GNP) of a country because efficiency can be related to human, equipment and services. If services and equipments are maintained to a high standard, this will mobilize high morale in the people using these equipment and services thus, completing the cycle of better efficiency and increased production which affect the GNP.

In addition, large amount of capital is used in the construction of buildings as such the only way that the value of such capital assets can be enhanced is by keeping them correctly maintained to prescribed standard. For if the building exhibits symptoms of distress and it is left unsurveyed, diagnosed and treated, its collapse not only results in loss of investment but often in loss of lives also.

However, with increase in technological complexity of the buildings, it leads to the need for something much more than maintenance. The growth of technology in business operation has focused attention of the building as resource which should be adaptable to the changing need of the business. Thus, properties increasingly demand more active management depending on its function.

This leads to asset management and recently Facility Management, all of which are geared towards maintaining the condition of the building, optimizing its running cost, making an effort to improve the efficiency of the organization through the improvement of the potential contribution of the building itself towards the work of the organization that is, managing the building in such a way that it support the core business of the organization.

All these will only be possible if there is continuous monitoring of building in order to detect any defect or problem associated with the building through building survey. This is particularly true in the case of Nigeria, where, according to Akinsola (2008), there is prevalence of various degrees of unsafe buildings located mostly in urban cities across the country. This, he noted leads to recurring rate of building collapses and ultimately death of innocent lives. Survey carried out by Iyagba between 1999-2003 shows that more than ever before the need for building surveying is higher now (Akinsola, 2006).

One major factor that is responsible for this serious problem faced in the Nigerian building industry is the lack of enforcement of and even, absence of national building code. While it is true that a new building code has been produced now, however most of the existing buildings were constructed with little or no regard to the provisions of the Building Code which in the opinion of Anderson (2005) leads to among others, risk, poor construction, billions in amount losses and 25-40% of those losses could be avoided through better code enforcement. A way out of the problem is by ensuring that the concept of building survey in Nigeria gains currency.

Concept of building survey: The NIOB (2002) Handbook described building surveying as, a specialized division of the building profession with expert knowledge of building inspection, identification of building defects, defects diagnosis, determination of causes and proposing appropriate remedies with a view to retaining all the design criteria and creating improvements to an existing building.

The survey, according to the Construction Industry Council (2003) will generally include the structure, fabric, finishes and grounds while exposure and testing of services are not usually covered. In addition, building survey will not normally include advice on the value. In the case of planning in existing built context, the buildings survey is the starting point for initial planning proposals, for the diagnosis and documentation of building damages for the creation of objectives, catalogues, for detailed design of renovation and conversion measures and for ensuring fulfillment of building legislation, particularly by change of use and refitting.

According to Petzold and Donath (2004), economically viable project realization necessitates the capture of a particular amount of relevant information. The principal means of obtaining such information is through an initial building survey which entails, organizing an interactive season with the client, consultants, contractors and their agents and if possible, the artisans, carpenters, mason and steel benders etc., this is aimed at getting raw data that will shed more light on the condition of the building. Information would be sourced from desk study of designs, proposed and as-built, specifications, bill of qualities, site reports and diary: Weekly report, site progress report and minutes. It also includes an initial site visit (i.e., room and building element oriented, recording of building and access routes). Besides that research into historic documentation and basic geodetic, geotechnical and other basic information regarding the immediate relevant surroundings. Integrity checks should be carried out so as to determine the soundness and the degree of compliance of the design with relevant codes, standards and regulation.

It also involve checking of the soundness of various provisions in the design with relevant codes and standard, through selecting critical structure elements such as beam, column foundation, analyzing and designing them so as to check the adequacy of the section and the steel reinforcement.

Thus building survey is in nutshell, examination of a property in whole to determine the current soundness and functionality of the building. The primary purpose of building survey is to give an independent professional opinion on the condition of the property that is why those who are best qualified to carry out such study, must have sound knowledge and considerable experience in the performance of the buildings and their components as well as their design, construction, defect finding, remedying and giving approximate costs.

According to Bokinni (2007) building surveyor should be well informed on how a particular building and the elements of which it is composed will perform in a given environment. He should be conscious of traditional materials and traditional construction methods for that particular locality.

The extent of the survey will be subject to specific agreement between professionals and the client. It is suitable for all properties, it examines all accessible parts of the property and the client can ask to have specific area included so it covers any particular concern the clients have about the building.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Field survey: The field survey was mainly concerned with the way and manner building survey is practiced in Nigerian building industry. The survey was confined to the key participants in building industry in Nigeria and financial institution in Nigeria.

The samples were collected randomly from building construction organization, consultants of the client in the building industry, banks and other financial institution, professionals. The places in which this research was carried out covered the Federal Capital Territory Abuja, Kaduna, Kano, Plateau, Sokoto and Kebbi states. Three major tools were used in the survey. These are:

Preparation of questionnaire: A well-structured questionnaire were prepared and administered to the respondent.

Oral interviews: Interview of some professionals was conducted. This was specially targeted to lecturers in the higher institutions that teach building so as to discuss the quality of training on building survey; planning authorities were also consulted to determine the existence of legislation, extent of application and enforcement of legislation on building survey. Those that were involved in the survey were also interviewed.

Study of documents: The curriculum of universities and polytechnics, sample of building survey report, local planning laws and document relating to the conditions for the award of loans to customers by the banks were studied.

Description of data and collection instrument: Structured questionnaires containing closed ended questions with suggested answers measured on a Likert scale were developed and administered to two distinct groups of respondents. Respondents to questionnaire Type A financial institutions while professionals in the building industry responded to questionnaire Type B.

Likert scale is concerned with determining the respondents' degree of agreement or disagreement with a statement; it enables the ranking of the attitudes of the respondents on the statement (Osuala, 1987; Fellows and Liu, 1997). Four point scales of the Likerts were adopted in this research. Most of the data for this research fall under the ordinal scale since they involve rating which normally uses integers in ascending or descending order for instance, the respondents' professions. Others fall under the nominal scale which tends to classify the data having a particular property but does not imply any idea of rank or priority. For example, on four points scale (i.e., 1-4), respondents were asked to indicate their level of importance attached to the reasons for building survey and benefits of building survey.

The scales were labelled as follows; 1 = not important, 2 = less important. 3 = important, 4 = very important. And also as 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = agree, 4 = strongly agree were used for determining the level of agreement with the benefits derived from building survey.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Results of the study on building survey are analysed as follows:

Work experience: The response among financial institutions shows that majority of the respondents have work experience 10-15 years (36.8%) followed by those with work experience 15 years above (31.6%). Also the professionals in the construction industry had work experience between 5-10 years (35.5%) followed by those with work experience 15 years above and 10-15 years whose percentages were 25.8%, respectively.

Qualifications: The qualification of these professionals shows that 41.9% possesses Bachelor of Science Degree (B.Sc) and 29% possess Master of Science Degree (M.Sc) as against Ordinary National Diploma (0%), 19.4% Higher National Diploma (HND) and 9.7% Doctorate Degree (PhD). Thus, most of the respondents are intellectually capable of understanding and answering questionnaire.

Guidelines for accepting building as collateral: In order determine whether building survey was used as guidelines for accepting building as collateral 3 categories of guidelines were presented to respondent to choose the one they use.

Category A: Comprises of presentation of a document certified by a builder or an engineer confirming the integrity of the building. Presentation of a cost valuation document certified by a Quantity Surveyor.

Category B: Comprises of presentation of a cost valuation document certified by a Quantity Surveyor. Visual inspection and knowledge on the area in which the building is located.

Category C: Comprises of presentation of a document certified by a builder or an engineer confirming the integrity of the building Presentation of a cost valuation document certified by a Quantity Surveyor. Visual inspection and knowledge on the area in which the building is located Majority of the respondents adopted the guidelines in category B (63%) as against 21% to category C and 16% to category A.

Reasons for building survey: Building Survey has several reasons that are attributed to its practice. Akinsola (2008) outlined the reasons for building survey, some of the reasons identified in the literature were presented to all groups of respondents and results shown in Table 1-3. Some of these reasons for building survey presented on a four point scale, the respondents were asked to rate the level of importance attached to these reasons.

Table 1-3 displays the frequencies and mean value for all the groups of respondents, the most important reason to the first group of respondents (financial institutions) are; to determine the value of sale when a property is to be sold (4.00) and when a heavy construction undermines the foundation of a near building (3.89) while the most important reasons to the second group of respondents (professionals in the construction industry) are; fear of collapse (3.65) and when a property is to be leased for a long period. The response from financial institutions shows that all the reasons for building survey were important except for fire hazards and bomb explosion near a property while response from professionals in the construction industry showed that all the reasons for building survey were all important.

Benefits derived from building survey: The importance of building survey to clients in the construction industry cannot be over emphasized. Several benefits derived from building survey as outlined by Odetoyinbo (2006) in the literature were presented to all groups of respondents and the results presented to all groups of respondents and the results shown in Table 4.

Table 4 shows the frequencies and mean value for all the groups of respondents. The most beneficial to the first group of respondents (financial institution) are; It is used by financial institutions to determine the value of the property which is to be used as collateral (4.00) and it assists in conservation of existing buildings to retain it's structural stability and functionalities (3.84) while the most beneficial to the second group of respondent (professionals in the construction industry) are; it creates awareness on the state of the property and determines its value (3.90) and it is used by financial institutions to determine the value of the property which is to be used as collateral (3.71).

Table 1:	Fequency distribution table for identified reasons of building survey (questionnaire type A)
Field survey (2008)

Table 2:	Frequency distribution table for benefits derived from building survey (Questionnaire type A: banks)
Field survey (2008)

Table 3:	Response to policy on building survey (documenting results to determine the organization with policy on building survey)
Field survey (2008)

However, based on the data's collected it was observed that the benefits of building survey as outlined by Odetoyinbo (2006) were beneficial to the two groups of respondents.

Format of preparation of a building survey report: The format of preparation of a building survey report is a framework to serve as a guide and reminder on what is required to be discussed and included in the building surveying report. The formats as outlined by Akinsola (2008) in the literature were presented to the respondents (professionals) to select from a list the various parts of a building survey report.

Table 5 shows the frequency of response and percentage response. The response shows most respondent adopted the following as part of the format of preparation of a building survey report. Introduction (58.06%), site surveys (61.29%), preparation of schedule of defects/dilapidation (74.19%), recommendation of remedial works necessary (67.74%), cost summary of remedial works (83.87%), conclusion (74.19%) and few of the respondents adopted the following object of study (32.26%), interview report (22.58%), preliminary and stamp and seal (41.94%), respectively.

Table 4:	Frequency distribution of factors responsible for an organization without policy on building survey
Field survey (2008)

Table 5:	Response to format of preparation of a building survey report
Field survey (2008)

However, based on the data's collected, no respondent fully followed the formats used in the presentation of a report on building survey as Outlined in the literature by Akinsola (2008).

Enabling environment for the practice of building survey: As regards to the policy on building survey, the respondents (financial institutions) were asked whether they had any policy on building survey and it was observed based on the data's collected that majority of the respondents (78.95%) do not recognize building survey as an important requirement regarding the acceptance of building as a collateral and this was largely due to lack of awareness on the practice of building survey in Nigeria.

Table 6:	Level of participation of professionals in any team carrying out building survey
Field survey (2008)

Extent of participation of professionals in building survey: Table 6 shows the level of participation by professionals in the practice of building survey, from the data's collected 41.94% of 31 respondents participated in building survey while 58.06% of the 31 respondents do not participate in building survey. However, based on the data's collected, the practice of building survey is still very low compared to the level of awareness among professionals.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

From personal interaction with lecturers/professionals in an attempt to ascertain the practice of building survey in Nigeria, the investigation shows that the current syllabus of building survey taught in the universities is inadequate to enable one practice building survey. Also, it was observed from this investigation that Building Survey is partially practiced in Nigeria and that government and professional bodies were responsible for enforcing the practice of building survey but since there is no legislation that makes it mandatory to carry out building survey on buildings that are supposed to be survey, this could be responsible for lack of serious attention paid to building survey in Nigeria. Although, the new building code in Nigeria has taken care of that but result of the interview shows that failure of those responsible to regulate its practice added to the fact that it is not practiced as a group.

Results of interview and inspection of some few building survey reports shows that there important steps that are not taken. For instance in all the reports, there was no anywhere that some major structural elements like beams columns, foundation that were subjected to rigorous analysis, design and checking so as to determine their structural integrity. The investigation also shows that lack of building survey is responsible for unplanned maintenance work, bad maintenance culture and confusion with respect to occupancy changes especially in office buildings which will be responsible for damages.

CONCLUSION

Based on the results obtained in this research, the following conclusions were drawn:

RECOMMENDATIONS

Based on the results obtained in this research, the following were recommended:

APPENDIX A

Questionnaire Type A

Department of Building, Faculty of Environmental Design, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria

APPENDIX B

Questionnaire Type B

Department of Building, Faculty of Environmental Design, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria