This paper deals with dichotomy in access of people in the oil producing and non-oil producing areas of Ondo State, Nigeria, to the basic infrastructural facilities. The study aims to measure and appraise the differential access of people in the oil producing and non-oil producing sub-regions to living facilities. Housing, transportation, healthcare, power and potable water are the five major basic infrastructural facilities selected based on the result of the reconnaissance survey undertaken by the author in the study area. Four local government areas (LGAs) constitute the sample frame, while the sample size was taken from fifteen communities across the four LGAs. 1.0% of 148,574 population (1485) was sampled, using both purposive and random sampling techniques. Both parametric and non-parametric statistics were used in analyzing the data. Tabulation and cross tabulation were used for infrastructural counts, z-score was used for infrastructure ranking to determine access to, and satisfaction from infrastructural facilities; while correlation analyses were applied to determine the level of significance. The result revealed that housing was rated highest in both areas, followed by transportation (30.1%), while water supply was rated lowest (7.8%). The z-score revealed that both water supply and power supply, on both sub-regional and general basis had negative values. Health care delivery had positive value (0.0313) in the oil producing area but negative value (-0.0313) in the non-oil producing zone and also, negative value (-0.0915) in the general analysis. In the final analysis, the oil producing areas expressed better infrastructural satisfaction as compared to the non-oil producing areas. The study concludes that access to, and satisfaction from infrastructure were poor in both sub-regions and therefore recommends that, for the purpose of policy formulation on infrastructure provision, water supply requires highest attention, followed by power supply, healthcare delivery, transportation and housing in that order.

Keywords: Region, differential access, satisfaction, infrastructure