Safe Water Supply Determinants in Peri-urban Communities of South-East Nigeria

Open Access
Chapter
Part of the Water Science and Technology Library book series (WSTL, volume 72)

Abstract

In most peri-urban communities of south east Nigeria, shortages of domestic water supply relative to demand is a common feature. This is because most of these peri-urban communities usually fall outside the urban water supply projects physical boundary, thus forcing the people who live there to consume water from doubtful sources which most often contain pathogens found in human faeces. Apart from consuming water from doubtful sources, most inhabitants of this area also travel long distances to collect it or pay dearly to purchase it from water vendors. The study was therefore undertaken to determine the factors necessary for a safe water supply in such areas. Towards achieving this objective, a questionnaire was designed and 2000 were administered to households in the area between January and June, 2013. A total of 15 factors were isolated and analysed in 10 peri-urban communities of the region. The major analytical tool employed was multiple regression analysis with which we were able to determine the relative importance of each variable using SPSS version 20. Based on the result obtained, important determining factors for safe and sustainable water services were discussed in terms of their implications to the formulation of a needed policy that will ensure improvement in supply of the service to meet demand.

Keywords

Peri-urban communities Safe water supply Human faeces Water vendors Sustainable water services 

15.1 Introduction

In most peri-urban communities in Nigeria, there are multiple sources of water supply with municipal, shallow wells, vendors, streams and rain water sources being the most common. One common feature of all the sources is that water collected from them is of poor quality, although in varying degrees. Water collected from the municipal source is always adjudged the best in terms of quality although the standard is far short of prevalent international standards. Conversely, both shallow wells and streams are recognised as the sources with the lowest quality (Bob-Duru 2001; Osirike 2003: Onuzuligbo 2013). The problem of an inadequate safe drinking water supply is, therefore, of national concern in Nigeria. The continued increase in the population of such areas with associated economic activities imposes enormous pressure on the fresh water supply to the extent that the WHO maximum recommendation of per-capita water consumption of 20 l per day is becoming very increasingly difficult to realise in parts of some urban and peri-urban communities (Phil-Eze and Ezenwaji 2009; Adebiyi 2013). Increasing access to safe water supply is a sure way of ensuring a healthy populace. A number of researchers have investigated the pollution level of rivers, streams and shallow wells that serve as a source of water to peri-urban communities of South Eastern Nigeria and their health implications (Anyadike and Ibeziakor 1987; Okoli and Bade 2010; Ezenwaji et al. 2013). In all developing countries including Nigeria, the principal risks to human health associated with the consumption of polluted water are microbiological in nature although there are significant concerns about chemical contamination. The risk of acquiring a waterborne infection increases with the level of contamination by pathogenic micro-organisms There are indeed a wide variety of technologies for treating water at the point of need or use and the common methods include aeration, filtration and disinfection which are employed to remove physical and microbiological contaminants, but not chemical contaminants (Kayaga and Reed 2010).

In South Eastern Nigeria, government efforts at improving sanitation and hygiene has made some inhabitants of peri-urban settlements embark on various forms of water treatment before use. Boiling is a very effective method of disinfecting water but it is energy consuming. Apart from the high cost of energy involved in boiling water, the other disadvantage is the change in taste of the water. Apart from boiling many other ways exist to ensure that water available for consumption is safe from contaminants.

Many studies in peri-urban water supplies in South-East Nigeria largely involve investigations into the degree of water scarcity and its associated water pollution and in some instances local ways of purifying them (Ezeaku 2012; Abangwe 2011; Ezenwaji et al. 2013) but the study of determinants of a safe water supply in these communities has remained scanty. The aim of this chapter, therefore, is to determine the factors that have tended to inhibit safe water supplies in the study area. The result of this study will provoke government interest in tackling the age old problem of providing safe water to the inhabitants of the area as well as attract donor agencies that wish to partner with the governments of the area to tackle the problem.

15.2 Study Area

The South East geopolitical zone of Nigeria has 10 out of 15 urban areas in Eastern Nigeria and consists of 5 States namely, Abia, Anambra, Ebonyi, Enugu and Imo States and is located between Latitudes 50.001 N and 70.001 N and Longitudes 60.421E and 80.201E, (Fig. 15.1). It is surrounded by Benue State and Kogi States in the north, Rivers and Akwa-Ibom States in the South, Cross-River State in the east as well as Delta State in the west. It covers an approximate area of 29,000 km2 and has a 2013 projected population of 20,003,200 from the 2006 base figure of 16, 595, 555 (National Population Commission 2006).
Fig. 15.1

Map of South East Geopolitical Zone

The climate of the area is hot-wet equatorial with an average maximum annual temperature of 280 °C and a minimum of 240 °C. Rainfall begins in March and ends in October while dry season begins from November and ends in February. The total annual rainfall amounts hover between 1500 mm in the northern parts of the region to 2000 mm in the southern area of the region. Vegetation is typically rainforest, but has been largely disturbed by human activities thus leaving derived Savanna vegetation as patches of the outliers within the area.

Geologically, the northern parts of the region in Anambra, Enugu and Ebonyi States are made up of variegated formations which include the Imo clay shales, upper coal measure and lower coal measure. In the southern area around Imo State and a substantial part of Abia State there are Awgu/Ndiabo and Afikpo formations as well as a significant presence of basement complex formation (Orajiaka 1975). Ten peri-urban communities are selected for the study from ten urban areas. Each urban area and one prominent peri-urban community close to it are Abakaliki (Ezzangbo), Awka (Amawbia), Enugu (Ngwo), Owerri (Egbu), Umuahia (Ibeku), Okigwe (Uturu), Orlu (Nkwerre), Onitsha (Ogidi), Aba (Umungasi), Nnewi (Nnobi): The 2013 population of each peri-urban community are Ezzangbo (73,010), Amawbia (112,301), Ngwo (72,111), Egbu (101,210) and Ibeku (68,392), Uturu (112,120), Nkwerre (69,286), Ogidi (102,620), Umungasi (98,266) and Nnobi (78,214).

15.3 Data Collection

Data for the study were collected from households via the questionnaire which was designed and administered to them between January and June 2013. A total of 2000 questionnaires were served on the respondents according to an arranged proportion for each peri-urban community. However at the end of the questionnaire administration only 1600 were recovered as some respondents misplaced their copies while a small percentage did not fill them out. Stratified and random samplings techniques were employed in the administration of the questionnaire with each of the ten peri-urban communities forming a stratum. The total number of households in each community is as presented in Table 15.1 as well as their sample sizes together with total number of questionnaire returned from each community. Sample proportion from each peri-urban area was determined by dividing the number of households by the total number of households.
Table 15.1

Sample proportion and size from the peri-urban areas

Stratum (peri-urban community)

Total no. of household

Proportion

Sample size

Total returned

Ezzangbo

12,168

0.082

165

112

Amawbia

18,168

0.123

247

158

Ngwo

12,019

0.085

163

140

Egbu

16,868

0.114

229

213

Ibeku

11,399

0.077

155

127

Uturu

18,686

0.126

254

200

Nkwerre

11,548

0.078

156

124

Ogidi

17,103

0.116

232

206

Nnobi

13,036

0.088

177

150

Umungasi

16,377

0.111

222

170

Total

147,372

1.00

2000

1600

Source: Field work

From the questionnaire 15 determinants of safe water supply were extracted. Table 15.2 shows the variable label, code, description and their parametisation aimed at converting them to mathematical values.
Table 15.2

Variable description and their parametization

S/N

Variable label

Variable code

Variable description

Parametization of variables

1.

CONT

X1

Average no. of water containers not covered by the household

The average number of uncovered containers were determined and recorded

2.

SANI

X2

Average no. of days water stored in the container before use

The number was determined from the respondents and recorded

3.

OPEN

X3

Whether or not there is an open defecation around the water sources

If there is an open defecation (I) was recorded and if there are none (O) was recorded

4.

COST

X4

Total cost of water supply to household per month

Total cost was supplied by the respondents and recorded

5.

LEAK

X5

Average number of water leakages in the distribution pipe around the household

This was determined by the respondent while the average for each community was recorded

6.

TECH

X6

Type of Technology used in the treatment of water at the point of use

Each treatment technology was assigned numbers according to its sophistication – Aeration (1) filtration (2) Disinfection (3). The number assigned to a relevant technology in each case was recorded and average found for the peri-urban community

7.

CUPS

X7

The average hygienic condition of CUPS for drinking water

The hygienic condition was determined by examining the E-Coli content of the CUPS and recorded

8.

ACCE

X8

The average level of water access in terms of distance

This distance was determined from respondents and recorded

9.

WELL

X9

Sanitary condition of ropes and buckets used in drawing water from wells

This was determined by examining the E-Coli content of the ropes and buckets

10

ECON

X10

Average number of human activities near the water source

The average number was determined by the total number derived by total locations

11.

TYPE

X11

Dominant type of land use near the water source

Dominant land use was observed. Each land use was assigned number according to its pollution potential as follows: Residential (1) Commercial (2) Agricultural (3) and Industrial (4)

12.

PIPES

X12

Whether or not water distribution pipes pass through poor sanitation environment

When it passes through poor sanitation environment (1) was recorded and when not (O) was recorded

13.

HOUS

X13

Cost of water purification by households per month

This cost was supplied by respondents and recorded

14.

PLACE

X14

Whether or not water safety plan is in place in the study area

If the plan is in place (1) is recorded if not (O) is recorded

15.

DIST

X15

Average distance of refuse dumps to water sources

This distance was determined and average found for each peri-urban community and recorded

15.4 Data Analysis

The above data were analysed with the Multiple Linear Regression (MCR) statistical technique often employed to analyse causal relationships among dependent and independent variables. The dependent variable is the quantity of water supply in each of the communities during the period of the study extracted from various government publications while data in Table 15.3 are employed as independent variables. The technique may be viewed as a descriptive tool by which the linear dependence of a variable can be summarised and decomposed, or an inferential tool by which the relationships in the population are evaluated from the examination of sample data.
Table 15.3

Field data of determinants of safe water in peri-urban communities of South East Nigeria

Community

X1

X2

X3

X4

X5

X6

X7cfu/100 m

X8 (M)

X9cfu/100 m

X10

X11

X12

X13

X14

X15

Ezzangbo

8

1

1

4

10

3

3

300

10

4

2

0

2

0

150

Amawbia

10

0

1

4

7

3

1

250

12

4

1

0

3

0

50

Ngwo

4

1

1

6

10

3

3

300

10

6

1

1

2

0

30

Egbu

6

1

1

5

13

2

2

500

14

5

1

1

1

1

100

Ibeku

6

0

1

3

8

2

5

300

10

4

4

1

3

0

60

Uturu

4

1

1

4

6

1

5

350

15

4

2

1

3

0

120

Nkwerre

0

1

1

4

0

3

2

300

10

4

1

0

2

0

50

Ogidi

5

0

1

4

5

1

3

300

10

5

1

1

2

0

30

Nnobi

0

0

1

5

0

3

5

400

14

3

1

0

2

0

20

Umungasi

10

1

1

4

8

1

2

300

12

5

4

1

2

0

20

The general expression for the multiple linear regression is written as follows:
$$ \mathrm{Y}=\mathrm{a}+\mathrm{b}1\mathrm{X}1+\mathrm{b}2\mathrm{X}2+\mathrm{b}3\mathrm{X}3+\cdots +\mathrm{b}\mathrm{nXn}+\mathrm{e} $$
(15.1)
where y is the dependent variable

X1, X2, X3, …Xn are independent variables

While b1, b2, b3 … bn are regression coefficients; a is the base constant and e is the error term or the proportion of the variance not explained. All data were analysed using SPSS programme package Version 20.

15.5 Results

The total amount of water supply was regressed against 15 variables. The combined strength of the relationship between the 15 variables was assessed by multiple correlation coefficients (R). The level of variation was computed to be 77.7 % leaving 22.3 % unexplained. This shows that 77.7 % of the variation in water supply safety is explained by our 15 variables working together. The multiple correlation coefficients (R), the coefficient of determination (R2) and the standard error of estimates (SEE) of the determinants of water safety in the per-urban areas are presented in Table 15.4.
Table 15.4

Result of the multiple regression analysis, the determinants of safe water supply in the peri-urban communities

Statistics

Result

Multiple correlation (R)

0.8815

Coefficient of multiple determination (R2)

0.7770

Standard error of estimates (litres) SE

182

The standard error of estimates of 182 l explains the standard error and it is a measure of the magnitude of the likely error that may occur if the regression equation is used to estimate values of dependent variable. In a simple explanation the ± 182 l is a range implying either an over estimation or under estimation of safe water supplies using the 15 independent variables. The low standard error of estimates of ± 182 l indicates that safe water supplies in the area can be predicted by the 15 variables working together.

The relative importance of each of the independent variables in the Multiple Regression Analysis can be determined in a number of ways (Anyadike 2009). However, because of the weakness of some of the methods, the method involving calculation of successive values of the multiple correlation coefficient obtained by introducing independent variables at each computation i.e. Ry. X1, Ry. X1, X2, Ry. X1, X2, X3 etc. is the most universally employed. The difference between the Squared Multiple Correlations (R2) may be regarded as the contribution of each variable(s). In our own case all variables altogether contributed 85.23 % and so we used the formula to determine what individual variable contributes to the variation (Table 15.5).
Table 15.5

Relative contribution of safe water determinants

Variable label

Variable code

Multiple R

R2

R2 change

% R2 change

OPEN

X3

0.469

0.2199

0.2119

21.1

TYPE

X11

0.620

0.3844

0.1645

16.5

DIST

X15

0.725

0.5260

0.1412

14.1

LEAK

X5

0.788

0.6209

0.0953

9.5

CONT

X1

0.820

0.6720

0.0511

5.1

SANI

X2

0.841

0.7023

0.0303

3.0

COST

X4

0.852

0.7259

0.0236

2.4

ACCE

X8

0.861

0.7413

0.0154

1.5

WELL

X9

0.869

0.7551

0.0138

1.4

ECON

X10

0.874

0.7639

0.0088

0.9

PIPES

X12

0.879

0.7726

0.0087

0.9

PLACE

X14

0.882

0.7779

0.0053

0.5

HOUS

X13

0.884

0.7814

0.0035

0.4

CUP

X7

0.885

0.7832

0.0018

0.2

TECH

X6

0.886

0.7850

0.0017

0.2

15.6 Discussion

From Table 15.5 it could be seen that all the 15 variables contributed to a safe water supply in the 10 peri-urban centres under study but by varying degrees. One essential feature of their contribution is that three of them contributed very highly. For example apart from the variable X3 (whether or not there is an open defecation around the water source) with 21.1 % X11 (Dominant type of land use near the water source) with 16.5 % and X15 (Average distance to the refuse dump) which has 14.1 % all others contributed low values less than 10 % with many contributing less than 1.0 %. Based on this, we shall discuss more on the variable that contributed highly.

15.6.1 Open Defecation Near the Water Source

We had earlier noted that the inhabitants of these ten peri-urban communities rely on a range of water sources. These include rivers, shallow wells, public water sources, vendor’s rainwater harvesting etc. It is important to say that the level of open defecation in these towns is high which resulted in defecation even around the water sources. This has given rise to high cases of water borne diseases reported in the area. For example over 48 % of daily hospital visits in the area are as a result of typhoid fever while dysentery and cholera constitute about 30 % of the remainder which mostly affect children (Okedi 2011; Onyegocha 2013). This is in line with the opinion of Humphries (2009a, b) that more children under the age of five die from diarrhoea than from HIV, Malaria and Tuberculosis put together in Africa. Many more children, according to him, are irreversibly debilitated and stunted by water related illness during their early years. Furthermore, Bongartz et al. (2010) vividly described the menace of open defecation in the following ways:

During a “transect walk” to common areas of open defecation, the problem stares people right in the face: ‘shit’ is everywhere and seeing it, smelling it and stepping in it is highly unpleasant …. the effect this exercise has on the people is written largely on their faces. Combined with exercises that illustrate the paths from shit to the mouth and the way food and water gets contaminated, this generally leads to a moment of ignition.

The high rate growth of slum and squatter settlements in and around these peri-urban areas is alarming where the above observation is a daily occurrence. A visit to these settlements reveals that toilet facilities are not a part of their housing development, as only a few houses have toilets.

15.6.2 Dominant Type of Land Use Near Water Sources

Type of land use is an important determinant of a safe water supply, because some land use generates more harmful wastes to the environment than others. Although most of the peri-urban areas in the study area have residential land use as the dominant use, a few others have heavy industry located in their communities. Out of ten peri-urban areas in this study only two – Ibeku and Umunagasi have industries, two others namely Ezzangbo and Uturu have commercial activities, while residential land use dominate the rest. Residential areas generate household wastes, some of them microbiological and others chemical contaminants. The poor disposal of these wastes is one of the reasons why many water sources are the reason why water from such areas are polluted.

15.6.3 Refuse Dump

Contaminated refuse dumps are seen indiscriminately in most of these peri-urban communities. Johnson (2013) in his investigation of the effect of household wastes and refuse dumps on water sources in parts of Lagos, Nigeria concluded that household wastes that usually find their way to the water bodies contaminate them with both high microbiological and chemical substances and suggested that both the inhabitants and local governments authorities should always ensure that the areas around these sources are kept clean.

Distance of refuse dump sites to water sources is very closely related to the previous determinant which is the type of dominant land use near the source of water. The land use generates refuse which, for unknown reasons, are usually found very close to either a shallow well, at the river back, close to public water stand pipe or even dumped inside the storm drains or river channels from where the inhabitants collect the water they consume daily. Lack of appropriate refuse disposal is one of the central problems of environmental sanitation in Nigeria. Zadock (2012) was of the view that continued lack of interest by the relevant government authorities in this regard continues to be a veritable source of worry. One reason for this is that the environmental sanitation by the government on the inner city areas are often not extended to these peri-urban communities.

15.6.4 Policy Recommendations

The three most important determining factors for a safe water supply are already discussed namely; open defecation near the water source, dominant type of land use near water source and distance of refuse dump sites to water sources and should be drawn into the policy development of the sector in the affected peri-urban communities. The objective of such a policy is to limit the activities leading to these isolated determinants. The policy instruments to be employed to achieve this should include laws and regulations, economic incentives such as subsidies for those that keep a clean environment near the water source and fines for offenders. Also to be included are sensitisation and education programmes that will be designed to create safe water supply for the inhabitants.

In terms of laws and regulations, the various Houses of Assembly in the affected States should closely work with their State governments who are expected to prepare and send executive bills to the House in this regard. Such bills should be thoroughly discussed and expeditiously passed. The important areas of such bills should include (i) designating an area of about a 500 m radius of any water source as well as 500 m from a stream or river as open defecation prohibited zone (ii) imposing appropriate fines for offenders (iii) providing incentives to staff of the water corporation who will ensure compliance (iv) discouraging open defecation by making a provision mandating government to provide public latrines in squatter and slum settlements. The bill should also include the prohibition of establishment of housing estates or building of any house very close to urban rivers or streams as well as imposing appropriate fines for all economic activities including the siting of industries near these rivers. Furthermore, there should be a combined policy that should focus on water supply and sanitation. Such a policy will make it an offence for individual households to dump refuse at designated locations.

As it is not sufficient to look only at policy, but also on the conditions that need to be in place for policy to make a difference, it is recommended that all such conditions, especially the need for stakeholders to accept the provisions of the policy, should be pursued with clear commitment.

15.7 Conclusion

We have in this paper tried to determine the relevant factors that impede a safe water supply in the peri-urban communities of selected urban centres in the South Eastern parts of Nigeria. The result of our study indicates that three factors with high percentage contributions which are already discussed should be drawn into the water policy documents of the relevant peri-urban communities. Policy implications of the existence of these factors were examined and it is our recommendation that various Houses of Assembly in the zone should work together to handle all the issues relating to water supply in peri urban communities as they are located in the same geographical, cultural and environmental areas. This therefore means that the same measures will be taken by all of them to improve their water supply in peri-urban communities. Furthermore, it will be necessary that the Assemblies enact realistic laws that should check these activities. It is only when these measures are put in place than we will be sure that the citizenry of these areas would have safe water to consume. It is noted that all the five State governments in the region have now began small town water supply programmes as advised by donor agencies in the sector. This new measure will undoubtedly improve the water supply conditions of the peri-urban communities.

References

  1. Abangwe J (2011) Computing the health implications of the consumption of polluted water in Slums of Aba, Nigeria. J Environ Pollut Nigeria 3(1):48–59Google Scholar
  2. Adebiyi EO (2013) Water demand in peri-urban communities of Lagos Mainland, Nigeria. J Urban Environ 3(2):121–138Google Scholar
  3. Anyadike RNC (2009) Statistical methods for the social and environmental sciences. Spectrum Books Ltd, IbadanGoogle Scholar
  4. Anyadike RNC, Ibeziakor MN (1987) Spatial structure of residential demand in Enugu Urban Area Nigeria. J Soc Dev 2(1):54–62Google Scholar
  5. Bob-Duru RC (2001) Rural settlements in Nigeria. Survival or demise. In: Ofomata GEK, Phil-Eze PO (eds) Geographical perspectives on environmental problems and management in Nigeria. Jamoe Enterprises, Enugu, pp 96–115Google Scholar
  6. Bongartz P, Musyoki SM, Milligan A, Ashley H (2010) Tales of shit: community led total sanitation in Africa – an overview In: IIED (ed) Participatory learning and action on tales of shit: community – led total sanitation in Africa, Juggly Publishers, New Delhi, India, pp 27–61Google Scholar
  7. Ezeaku P (2012) Water scarcity in some sub-urban settlements of Onitsha, Nigeria. J Water Hum Ecol 4(1):22–31Google Scholar
  8. Ezenwaji EE, Phil-Eze PO, Otti VI, Eduputa BM (2013) Household water demand in the peri-urban communities of Awka, Capital of Anambra State, Nigeria. J Geogr Reg Plann 6(6):237–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Humphries J (2009a) Child under nutrition, tropical enteropathy, toilets and handwashing. Lancet 374:1032–1035CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Humphries J (2009a) Tropical enteropathy and poor sanitation in Africa. International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED) PublicationGoogle Scholar
  11. Johnson N (2013) Households, refuse dumps and water supply. Kamara Press, LagosGoogle Scholar
  12. Kayaga S, Reed B (2010) Emergency treatment of drinking water at the point of use. WEDC Technical Notes on Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene in Emergencies. vol 3Google Scholar
  13. National Population Commission (2006) 2006 population figures in Nigeria. Government Press, AbujaGoogle Scholar
  14. Okedi TN (2011) Assessment of dominant water borne diseases in hospitals located in peri-urban communities of Port-Harcourt, Nigeria. J Water Supply Urban Dev 4(2):68–79Google Scholar
  15. Okoli D, Bade AO (2010) Refuse dumping in urban water ways and implications for community health in Nigeria 8(1) J Urban Built Environ 4(2):210–224Google Scholar
  16. Onuzuligbo PA (2013) Water supply in some informal settlements of Enugu Urban Area, Nigeria. In: Abuja JJ (ed) Regional water supply and community development in Nigeria, Newway Publishers Ltd., Abuja, Nigeria, pp 114–124Google Scholar
  17. Onyegocha MM (2013) A determination of the prevalence of typhoid diseases in peri-urban communities of Okigwe, Nigeria. J Water Supply Urban Dev 6(1):120–131Google Scholar
  18. Orajiaka SO (1975) Geology. In: Ofomata GEK (ed) Nigeria in maps: Eastern States. Ethiope Publishers, Benin CityGoogle Scholar
  19. Osirike AB (2003) Water supply management in Niger Delta. In: Proceedings of the 29thWEDC international conference, Abuja, Nigeria, pp 273–276Google Scholar
  20. Phil-Eze PO, Ezenwaji EE (2009) Rural water supply development strategy for environmental sustainability in old Aguata Local Government Area of Anambra State, Nigeria. Int J Archit Built Environ 1(1):77–83Google Scholar
  21. Zadock JO (2012) Government and sanitation of small towns. Gale Pre Accra, Ghana.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Open Access This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 2.5 License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/) which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the work’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if such material is not included in the work’s Creative Commons license and the respective action is not permitted by statutory regulation, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to duplicate, adapt or reproduce the material.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Geography and MeteorologyNnamdi Azikiwe UniversityAwkaNigeria
  2. 2.Civil Engineering DepartmentFederal PolytechnicOkoNigeria

Personalised recommendations