View
7
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
1
UN Peacekeeping Operations: Challenges in
Housing, Land and Property Rights in Post-
conflict Countries:
Case of Bosnia and Herzegovina
Lorena Castilla
Government Department
University of Essex
ECPR General Conference
Prague, September
2016
2
Can housing property rights reconstruction/ issues help us understand/improve
the chances for economic recovery in post-conflict zones? This article aims to
study the impact of the presence of the UNPKO on the performance of the
Housing Land and Property Rights (HLP) policies (property claims/property
restitution) across the 146 Municipalities in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). The
existing literature focuses on the study of UNPKO performance and its
effectiveness in establishing stability and therefore peace. Sambanis and Collier
1 suggested there is still much to understand when it comes to property rights
and their relation to economic concerns in a post-conflict stage, as they can be a
missing key to achieving major economic stability.
This article uses quantitative methods using the 143 municipalities as the unit
of analysis. The timing of this analysis is set in the post-conflict stage, when the
UNPKO must establish mechanisms to encourage the return of refugees, thus
laying the path to recovery and stabilisation. I summarise the existing literature
on the performance of the UNPKO regarding HLP issues and on economic
recovery in the aftermath of conflict. I present the case for HLP intervention,
the data and my research design.
Housing, Land and Property Rights Matters
In all conflicts, violence creates waves of Internal Displaced People (IDPs) and/or
refugees. Homes are destroyed and housing is scarce; in times of despair, illegal
occupation of available/abandon houses is frequent (Bosnia), either by imposition
or option (Kosovo); past disputes over land ownership emerge creating (more)
confrontation (Cambodia)2, and access to arable land becomes scarce
(Rwanda/Burundi or DR Congo) 3. At the same time, HLP issues can play
different roles in multiple processes including economic reparation (Colombia);
stabilisation of security conditions4; opportunities for international actors to
invest and underpin development; demographic stabilisation; disarmed,
1 Collier & Sambanis, 2006 2 See (Williams, 2009) 3 Unruh (2004 6), Leckie and Huggins (2011); Zevenbergen and Burns (2010) 4 Security conditions can be also explore in the opposite direction where security can provide the framework to address
PRs in the post conflict or by addressing these the security condition can improve.
3
demobilisation and reintegration process (DDR) (Sierra Leone and Liberia).
Table 1 shows a brief sampling of some of the most prominent HLP challenges
evident in countries enduring or emerging from conflict, revealing the extent to
which these are linked to conflict and post-conflict recovery.
Table 1: HLP challenges
Housing Land Destruction of property
Secondary occupation.
Abandoned houses.
Inequalities in gender ownerships.
Special cases for orphans, widows,
female households.
Homelessness and landlessness.
Insecure housing.
Un-administered public/social
housing units.
Inequalities in Land Distribution from
Colonial legacies.
Changes in land tenure relations.
Weak State’s institution of land and property
administration.
Territorial disputes/claims based on ethnic-
religious or geographic identities by armed
groups.
State involvement in local (natural) resource
struggles.
the political scope and scale of land-related
distributive conflicts.
Abandoned land.
Insecure land tenure.
Breakdown of traditional village structures.
The increase in the frequency and extent of
land disputes not solved because of lack of
governmental capacity.
Landmines and constraints in freedom of
movement and access to land.
Use of land for DDR programs and IDP. Property Rights
Pre-conflict ownership and tenancy disputes.
Discriminatory HLP laws.
Abandonment Laws.
Destruction or loss of property and ownership records.
The lack of appropriate land administration.
Inequalities in gender ownerships: special cases for orphans, widows, female
households.
Research into the re-establishment of HLP aspects in a post-conflict/peace
building context is still in its early stages. Civil wars represent an enormous cost
to societies in every single aspect. Civil wars curtail economic growth, destroy
human and physical capital and limit GDP growth5. In the peacebuilding post-
conflict process, property rights, land and housing issues reflect the extent of
5 Rodrik, 1999; Collier, 1999; Cerra and Saxena, 2008, etc
4
damage [refs]. Although these are associated with the humanitarian response,
they are actually the basis for further long-term recovery. Hence, HLP issues
must be addressed earlier in the peacebuilding process. The differences across
countries that experience conflicts regarding these issues are difficult to address:
clearly, it is not possible to assume that the way in which some African countries
organise land tenure and property rights are similar to the South Asian or
Balkans context.
Regardless of the context, institutional reconstruction of property rights is a
greater task requiring significant amount of resources: well-trained personnel on
all HLP aspects - at the local and national level- ; the establishment of a
minimum level of security to guarantee the safety of the returnees and a further
serious degree of commitment and cooperation with the recovery processes from
the local authorities. The size of the displaced population and the political
sensitivity of land conflicts will determine if addressing land issues can be one of
the most important aspects of post-conflict stabilisation6.
HLPs are important to several aspects of livelihood, macroeconomic recovery,
governance or reintegration of former combatants. Studies focus on civil wars,
predominantly in Africa and South Asia, but also in the Balkans and Latin
American countries. The strategies implemented and objectives affecting
property rights, land and housing issues vary from case to case, showing uneven
records of success. Most studies include HLP and refugee issues, either from a
humanitarian perspective7 or as part of a Human Rights or legal8 approach9,
with certain exceptions such as Barakat and Zyck10. On the other hand, studies
of property rights as part of the economic recovery are scarce. Research on the
effects of UNPKO performance on land and property issues is even more limited.
Wars and conflict force people to abandon their land and farms, often their only
source of livelihood in an agriculturally based economic system, and their
6 Leckie (2009: 3) 7 Pantuliano(****) 8 The legal dimension is linked to the understanding of property rights, land and housing as part of the economic and
social rights. 9 See Leckie(****) Fox (xxxx) 10 Put all the references from Barakat
5
houses, which can be their only asset. These conditions are common
characteristics of post-conflict settings but have been most relevant in cases such
as Rwanda, Liberia or Cambodia, where the number of displaced persons and
refugees represented a daunting challenge. HLPs can play a dual role as part of
conflict studies. In the case of Palestine-Israel, HLPs can be seen as the source of
conflict; in other cases, such as CDR Congo, HLPs can be a factor in prolonging
the conflict. In all cases, disputes over land, destruction of housing and other
immovable property become central to the attention of the affected population in
the aftermath of armed conflict. As poverty is identified as one of the strongest
factors leading to conflict and civil war11, it is also clear that rural areas highly
dependent on agriculture are the poorest and at greatest risk of conflict.
UN Peacekeeping Operations and Housing, Land and Property Rights
As a general practice, the multidimensional UNPKO do not have a specialised
body to face HLP issues. The trend has been that United Nation High
Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) would deal with some HLP aspects to solve
refugee and IDP issues. HLPs in the post-conflict context are diverse and highly
multifaceted, including housing destruction, illegal occupation, and destruction
of property and tenancy records, disputes over access to agricultural land or
unequal distribution of land. It might be expected that the United Nations
Peacekeeping Operations (UNPKOs) consider – or treat – as a priority the
reconstruction of housing units, clarification and restoration of property rights
and the redistribution of land12. It is also expected that these issues might be a
relevant part of the mandates of the different UNPKOs. In practice, different
missions have failed to address comprehensively the challenges presented by
HLPs in the aftermath of conflict.
11 (Collier et al., 2008) 12 Distribution of land can be look at from two perspectives: one as a reparation / reward elements or as mechanism to
encourage economic reactivation in rural areas.
6
Since 1990, the UN and other major peace-building operations have been active.
A common characteristic, regarding HLP issues, is that the record of missions is
somewhat inconsistent: the approach and policies implemented vary from
mission to mission or in the worst cases are completely ignored depending on the
mission’s mandate and what is established by the peace agreement. Until now,
the mission in Bosnia is unique by including housing land and Property rights
aspects as part of the mission core activities13. The tendency is to use “practical
initiatives” with the shape of quasi-judicial mechanisms to address HLP rights in
some national context. However, at the UN institutional level, there is no well-
developed framework with clear policies concerning HLP rights in post-conflict
environments, in comparison to those adopted to address other Human Rights
and Rule of Law issues14.
Scott Leckie15 has highlighted the mission’s lack of understanding regarding
HLPs and its inability to understand and integrate these into short and long
term strategies. The author evaluates the missions’ performances on HLP
aspects based on the compilation of 11 mission cases studies. A common
characteristic across missions is that HLPs are treated as part of the strategy for
the reconstruction and re-establishment of the rule of law, leaving the affected
population awaiting reform of constitutional and legal systems in order to
achieve resolution of their HLP disputes. In some cases, IDPs and refugees
might never secure assistance with these problems.
In the peacebuilding process, land issues do not receive necessary attention,
despite their relevance for economic recovery, in contrast to strategies geared
toward democratisation or security. The reason is the lack of understanding of
the local dynamics, characteristics and context of the organisation of property
rights. On the other side, lack of focal strategies to deal with difficult and
challenging HLP aspects makes economic recovery a weak point within the
peacebuilding process. In some cases, putting aside those challenges might be
13 There is currently a Land tenure Project in Afghanistan directed by USAID running from 2010. 14Cordial and Røsandhaug (2009), Leckie (2009) 15 See (Leckie, 2009). Since 2005
7
the difference between peace and the recurrence of violence. What happened in
BiH presents the opportunity to question the importance of HLP for post-conflict
reconstruction and the peace building process. Land and property issues play a
significant role in post-conflict reconciliation and economic rehabilitation, as the
agrarian reform has played an important role in many insurgent and
revolutionary agendas16.
In the literature, there are studies evaluating and explaining the way in which
property rights and housing issues were tackled in different post-conflict
situations (e.g. East Timor17, Bosnia and Herzegovina18, Kosovo19, Angola20 and
Mozambique21). The studies illustrated how difficult and challenging HLP issues
are, not only in a post-war context but also when there are old and complex
property rights and land distribution problems, such as communal costumes or
colonial legacy. For example, Unruh and Williams (2013b) conclude that, while
HLP programs are indeed context-specific and require technical expertise, the
issues themselves are deeply political. Experience shows that failure to address
them, or well-intentioned but inadequate international programs, can exacerbate
tensions and jeopardise the long-term viability of many efforts to foster security
and development. The studies agreed that it is necessary to understand the local
dynamic in HLP issues, and it is necessary that International Organizations,
donor and UN organisations increase awareness and attentions towards HLP
aspects, before-during-and after the conflict22 to fill this gap. None of these
studies focuses on or uses quantitative analysis of the importance of HLP to
economic recovery in a comprehensive way.
16Information on foot note (Cox and Garlick, 2003: 65-66) about a report from the World Bank in Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Boone (2014), Deininger (2003a), Deininger (2004) , Bigombe et al. (2000), Collier and Sambanis (2005a). 17Fitzpatrick (2012) 18 Cox and Garlick (2003), Belloni (2005), Williams (2013), Bisogno and Chong (2002), von Carlowitz (2005), von Carlowitz
(2004b) 19von Carlowitz (2004a), Eyre and Wittkowsky (2002), von Carlowitz (2005), Cordial and Rosandhaug (2009), von
Carlowitz (2004b) 20 Cain (2007) 21 Unruh (1997), Unruh (2001) 22 NGOs’ reports and guidelines are valuable source of data regarding HLP issues and an “objective” critic to UNPKO and
International Organization performance in the field and . For some of the most comprehensive reports see Hurwitz et al.
(2005), Pantuliano (2009b), (2009a) Pons-Vignon and Lecomte (2004); Wily (2009) and USAID (2004)
8
United Nation’s Peacekeeping Operation in Bosnia
In 1995, after three and a half years of war and ethnic cleansing, with 2.3 million
people displaced from their homes and the population divided among ethnic
groups. During the cease-fire, differences became more explicit and the mass
dispossession of property generated conflict. Despite this, contradicting
expectations, the armed confrontation stopped, and ground for ethnic co-
existence emerged. By 2002, large scale infrastructure and housing was repaired,
which become an incentive for the refugees to return to destroyed villages; more
than 600,000 refugees and Internal Displaced People (IDPs) have been able to
recover possession of the homes they had before the war. Regarding HLP issues,
the performance of the UNPKO in BiH UNMIBH is the only case (mission) that
has had a commission, entirely and uniquely, dedicated to land and property
issues23. As the UN Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina focused on the return of
refugees and IDPs, The Commission for Real Property Claims of Displaced
Persons and Refugees (CRPC) was created to process and deliver options to solve
most of the issues related to land claims, secondary occupation, housing and
reconstruction, among others. In BiH, HLP issues were used as a mechanism to
address segregation and ethnic division, and crucial to the achievement of major
concerns such as security, the rule of law and institutional reconstruction24. In
this way, Bosnia is special in the way that it allows us to look at the long-term
impact of the policies implemented on HLP issues, including the fact that despite
the war, there were institutional aspects that provided a base or framework to
build from25.
The Commission for Real Property Claims of Displaced Persons and Refugees
(CRPC) model could offer some valuable lessons for future cases. It is considering
the scope for creating and establishing mechanism dealing with post-conflict
property issues, such as security and return. In contrast to other missions, the
incentive for the return to abandoned houses was to provide security and safety
for those integrating into differentiated ethnic areas. Another example is that
23 Kroc Institute for International Peace Studies (2014) 24 See for example Unruh (2004 ) and (Cox and Garlick, 2003) 25 The Yugoslav institutional framework itself represents a challenge as how to adapt this communist-socialist oriented to
a more capitalist property rights system.
9
the land was part of the political motivation to address segregation and address
past grievances. Thus, it evidences of how land and property interact with local
dynamics.
Nevertheless, as was mentioned above, this has not provided a comprehensive,
holistic approach to tackling HLP challenges during and after the conflict. In
BiH, the mission implemented a comprehensive approach by putting in place
three strategies: (1) the creation of a mixed domestic/international property
claims tribunal; (2) establishment of an extensive campaign for legislative reform
repealing discriminatory laws, and to establish an administrative property
claims process at municipal level, under close international supervision. Lastly,
(3) to put in place a robust plan for the reconstruction of destroyed villages and
de-mining land26.
Why Bosnia?
The context in Bosnia at the beginning of 1996 could be a common context to
another post-conflict context where necessary measures had to be put in place
targeting specific HLP issues. Bosnia was challenging regarding the deep
divisions and polarisation that the war created, making the issues of property,
internal displacement, and return a critical bridge to pass through. Additionally,
Bosnia shows the challenges faced by the UN agencies and other organisations
trying to build or reconstruct institutional frameworks as a foundation for the
rule of law, economic recovery and peace. In the institutional framework, BiH
can bring light into the importance and relevance of pre-existing institutional
framework or infrastructure relating to HLP issues and how it can affect the
implantation of these policies.
Bosnia encompasses all the challenges that might be present in any other civil
war. It is possible to identify that the land and property issues brought to the
social level include the possibility of return, reconciliation and integration; at the
politic level they gave the opportunity to compromise on previous accords and to
26 In addition to seven years of military engagement, civilian police monitors and a US $ 5.1 Billion reconstruction
programme. (Cox and Garlick, 2003: 65-66).
10
enforce agreements regarding the land. Hence, we expect that as struggles in
BiH were based not only on ethnic struggles but at the end of a territorial
dispute, BiH sets the conditions to study the performance of the mission
regarding HLP aspects.
The Argument
There is a need to understand in a better and more comprehensive way the
policies that the UNPKO sets in practice, and how these have an impact on the
long term. The primary focus is frequently on policy and military reforms - on
security. The missions, however, do more than keep peace and facilitate
elections. There are additional activities that have not received sufficient
attention. Sambanis and Collier27 noted the lack of research into property rights
and the economic performance of those countries where the missions are
deployed. On the other hand, scholars from legal and human rights disciplines
started to include the importance of housing reconstruction and clarity on
property rights as tools to encourage the return of refugees and displaced
persons and to strengthen legal structures. Still, there is little clarity on how
much (practical/focus) policies targeting housing, land and how property rights
(HLP) can contribute [impact] to on the long term in the aftermath of conflict
[peace-building].
How can policies address/target HLP issues in a post-conflict setting impact
upon economic recovery? I argue that when the UNPKO implements policies
targeting HLPs, the mission is providing refugees and IDPs with the opportunity
to return to where they were expelled from, resulting in the beginnings of
reintegration and recovery. Figure 1 represents the structure of the argument on
how the presence of the UNPKO and the implementation of different policies
addressing HLP issues impact upon economic recovery. There are two phases:
The first phase is how economic recovery across the country can be explained by
the presence of the mission. The second phase [interaction] is how economic
27 Reference
11
recovery can be explained by the presence of the mission at the same time that
HLP policies are implemented.
Figure 1: Argument’ Structure
What happen when the UNPKO is present?
The provision and sustainability of the means of security is an element to
consider. The presence of the UNPKO provides security, creating a vote of
confidence for return. The presence of the mission can prove a credible
commitment from the mission regarding the long-term recovery of this particular
location, along with more reports and monitoring of particular aspects of post-
conflict. The presence of the mission indicates that there are other UN offices,
which translates into more investment and attention. This can provide
incentives for return and resettlement. The presence of the mission can make a
difference when it comes to deciding whether people wish to return or stay in the
place of displacement. In order to complete the return as a successful task, it is
important that those processes are accompanied by attempts to address unlawful
occupation of land and land disposition. Allowing people to return to their homes
must be a priority. Part of the sustainable economic recovery, it is the idea of
return and reintegration to the previous communities, or the current places of
displacement.
It is important to mention that property and land disputes might also be a pre-
war characteristic. Refugee and IDP return strategies, therefore, need to
12
address both land access and the security of property rights more broadly,
especially given the institutional vacuum that usually accompanies post-conflict
transitions. Managing these issues effectively in a peace process is crucial to
prevent continued instability and to sustain reintegration, including people’s re-
engagement in traditional land uses that sustain the agricultural production,
food security and trade on which recovery can be built28.
Hypothesis 1.1: Economic recovery is more likely to be higher in places where the mission
was present.
Hypothesis 1.2: The number of property claims is most likely to higher in the places where
the mission was present.
The Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina (UNMIB), based on the recommendation
of the UNHCR, set a plan focused on “Target Areas” for priority reconstruction
assistance. This program is part of the major strategy addressing HLP issues
focussing on 22 areas covering 34 of 143 municipalities. These 34 municipalities
were selected by the end of 1996 based on the assessment of priorities for
reconstruction and return of refugees. Figure 2 presents the comparison between
the general and focal policies. Moreover, in order to investigate whether there is
a difference within the municipalities’ performance, I separated the policies
applied on the different municipalities assuming that, although there is general
destruction, this would be higher in those 34. If the strategies were successfully
implemented there should be a larger effect on economic recovery.
Strategies addressing HLP help to mitigate negative experiences of returnees.
Not only is it difficult to go back “home”, but return to a post-war conflict can
contribute to a spiral of decline, whether through perpetuating inequalities,
through re-igniting the conflict or through economic hardship, both of which can
create more displacement and maintain the economic conflict trap. Taking the
decision to return conflates multiple considerations - the state of the house or
property, whether the property is habitable, or, what is the extent of the damage.
28 Leckie, 2009
13
Are there possible sources of income - job opportunities for households to provide
a minimum income? Is there a local provision of services such as hospitals or
schools? On the other hand, might war circumstances persist in affecting a
decision to enter the claim and further/possible return like a traumatic
experience; war grievances may generate reluctance to return to the place where
the loss was experienced.
Figure 2: Expected results from the implementation of the Policies.
In the case of BiH, the designs of the strategies addressing HLP were
comprehensive, including the reconstruction of health services and schools, and
assistance programs for food security and economic reactivation. For instance,
HLP strategies must create appropriate socio-economic conditions for the
returnees to start over. Then, in the case that the UNPKOs acts for the
reconstruction and resolution of PRs, this provides a stable context where
societies can settle and engage with the reconstruction process. Stability is
founded on confidence that there is somewhere to return to, to recover the
human capital lost during the war; this confidence underpins the incentive to
settle and to promote investment in the future in different ways29.
Once strategies and policies are in place the presence of the mission must help to
reinforce the implementation of the HLP policies. In BiH presenting a claim for
29 (de Soto, 2000) and ((DFID) UK Department for International Development, 2014)
14
a particular property did not necessarily translate into the return of the
claimant. One way to measure return and how the mission reinforces these
policies is the information on repossession of houses and properties. The task of
monitoring the implementation of the decision by the Commission was
performed by the Property Law Implementation Plan (PLIP). This commission
was created by a coalition of UN organisations including the UN International
Police Task Force (UNIPTF), UNHCR and the mission force itself. The function
of this commission was to accompany the owner of the property and make
effective the decision regarding repossession of the property.
Hypothesis 2.1.: Economic recovery is more likely to be higher in places where the mission
implemented HLP policies in contrast to where not implemented.
Hypothesis 2.2: Economic recovery is most likely to be higher in places where both
policies were implemented
The current argument considers how solving HLPs relates to the return of
refugees and IDPs and how it can have an impact on the economic recovery at
the local level. Refugees and IDPs usually belong to a specific and identifiable
group (e.g. ethnic, gendered or regional), hence they have different concerns.
Let’s assume that all necessary conditions are present in the place they fled
from: the war is over, there are no security fears and the possibility of returning
to their reconstructed home is guaranteed such as housing, access to public and
social services and employment30. Seemingly, refugees would have the option to
return and reintegrate. If they decided to return, they would start to reactivate
the local economy of their particular region. As they returned to their previous
activities, re-establishing ordinary commerce and daily life, restoring a mix of
generations, the returnees would start to create some sort of normality31.
In the case, that there are not in place any strategies promoting and/supporting
return of refugees, the consequences can be devastating. The returnees in
30 (Black and Gent, 2006) 31 If that were the case, their return would put in motion the recovery of human capital. Altjough this is something that it
will not disscus in this paper (Justino, 2009),(Justino, 2011b, Justino, 2011a) present an overview on the impact of violent
conflict on human capital. She sustain her ideas on the extended damage on human capital specially among children, due
to the destruction of school infrastructure, displacement, deterioration of economic conditions, destruction of family
structures among others.
15
Liberia encountered difficult situation after return, their houses were illegally
occupied by governmental forces looking for political and economic control of the
area, or in other cases they found their houses destroyed. For many of those, the
return was unaccompanied by any of the UN bodies, who did not have the
resources, nor the capability to support the return of refugees. The return
occurred in many cases without access to economic support or provision of social
services in a context of high gender-based violence and increased communal
conflicts over land and property rights32. Liberia is an example of how the gap in
human capital widens by not addressing PRs issues, leaving women and
children33 without opportunities to find sources or income and few or none access
to education and less expected job opportunities34.
Data and Research Design
This section is divided in three: The first gives details about the dataset and its
construction, the sources of the data, The dependent and independent variables
are explained, as well as I explain the different measurement elements on the
dataset. The second section describes the selected methods to test the hypothesis
and presents the statistical results. The final section summarises the findings
and it is followed by a brief conclusion.
Data Collection and Dataset
Comprehensive data on the main independent variables have not been collected
nor operationalized previously. At the moment when this dissertation is
presented, there is not for the knowledge of the author of any other similar data
sets with similar information on HLP policies on BiH from1996 to 2003. This
study presents new data based on archival research carried out in the National
32 Cited on IDMC (2007). Liberia: Focus for IDP returnees moves from conflict to development, country report UN SC, 15
March 2007) (IRIN, 8 February 2007; GoL/Ad Hoc Presidential Commission, October 2006)
33 The author is aware of how war impact negatively on education and schooling performance. At the same time the
research does not focus on the differences between the impacts of education on gender or child soldiers, nor is it the
concern of this research to look at the maximum levels of education achieved differentiated by gender or circumstances.
The magnitude and direction of the effects might vary from context to context and from country to country based on the
pre-existing economic conditions, the type of conflict and its duration and the context of country. 34 (Colletta and Cullen, 2000) and (Justino, 2010, Justino, 2011b, Justino, 2011a)
16
Bosnia and Herzegovina Archives, where the CRPC transfer all its
documentation and records on the individual (put the number) claims.
Additionally, some of the information was not available in digital format, hence
it was necessary to pass trough a digitalization process. that I collected from the
files rested on the Bosnia and Herzegovina Archives containing all the
information from The Commission for Real Property Claims of Displaced People
and Refugees (CRPC) from 1995 to 2003. All this information is not available in
a digital form. Hence, it was necessary to compile and transfer all that
information (13,000 circa) in a digital format (see annexe 2 and 3 for a summary
of the data collected from the archives).
The data concerning the peacekeeping presence in the municipalities derives
from my own coding of 36 Trimester report of the mission (UNMIBH) reports
from 1996 to 200335; the Secretary General’s reports on the situation of the
country (See Annex 2 for a draft of the coding book for this dataset)36. These
reports give a regular, fairly extensive and systematic account of the mission’s
activities. The reports are an accepted source of information used in other
studies37 to compile information on the activities of the mission on the ground.
On the other hand, the reports contain comprehensive information about the
different organisations working with the mission on the field, information of
resources invested, violent incidents, police training procedures, military
activities, the request of further economic and personnel resources38. There
might be questions on the bias on these reports. However, for the purpose of this
research, it does not represent a problem as it only focuses, initially, on the
places where the mission was present. The coding exercise recorded all the
incidents, actions, and strategies implemented by the mission in the mentioned
time. The database includes a wide variety of events and reports about the
activities of other UN organisations in Bosnia39, for example, deployment of
35 ****** 36 ******* 37 Put other studies using UNPKO reports such as Gizelis and Han studies fortna, Howard. Etc… 38 It is noted that the emphasis on the topics varies from year to year. Some years are focus on policing, others on
enforcement of UN decisions on the ground. 39 My coding mirrored the database of the Peacekeeping Operation Location and Event Dataset (PKOLED), Developed at the department of Government of the University of Essex. This dataset has coded all events reported by the troops involved in the UN peacekeeping missions
17
security assets on specific municipalities; Actions focus on refugees, opening of
UNHCR centres and resources allocated to programs for return and
reconstruction of housing units. I used the reports as main sources given the
amount of information available contained within these. Regarding information
on the policies, I used and coded information from the UNMIBH, United Nation
Refugee Agency (UNHCR)40, International Crisis Group (ICG)41 and the United
States Committee for Refugees and Immigrants42.
The Unit of analysis are the current 143 municipalities of BiH. As a result of the
Dayton Peace Agreement (DPA)43, initially, the country was divided into two
entities by the Inter-Entity Boundary Line (IEBL) which divided the country
into two separate entities: Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (FBiH),
Republika Srpska (RS). Until 1992 BiH was divided into 109 Municipalities, but
as a result of this division, some of the original municipalities got divided
between the two entities. After the war, from 1996 onwards the administrative
structure of the country will change. the number of municipalities increased to
143: 79 in the FBiH and 64 in the RS. Just after the DPA, Brčko Municipality
territorial disputes between the two future entities was not finalised as part of
the agreement. The Brčko District was formed of the entire territory of the
former Brčko municipality, of which 48% (including Brčko city) was in
the Republika Srpska, while 52% was in the Federation of Bosnia and
Herzegovina. Table 2 list the municipalities that were divided or created out of
the division between the two major entities. At the time of the creation of the
Dayton Accord, Brčko was also divided between FBiH and RS; but lately, In 2000
the territory of Brčko was declared an independent entity within the country of
BiH, creating an additional entity.
to intra-state conflicts in the post- Cold War period (1989-2005). However, this particular mission of UNMIBH is not part of PKOLED
dataset. 40 ***** put reference 41 ***** put reference 42 ***** put reference 43 Dayton Peace Agreement
18
Table 2: List of divided and new municipalities
Municipality in the FBiH Municipality in Republika Srpska
Bosanska Krupa Krupa na Uni
Sanski Most Oštra Luka
Ključ Ribnik
Bosanski Petrovac Petrovac
Drvar Istočni Drvar
Kupres (FBiH) Kupres (RS)
Jajce Jezero
Dobretići Kneževo
Doboj South and Doboj East Doboj
Gračanica Petrovo
Gradačac Pelagićevo
Orašje Donji Žabar
Domaljevac-Šamac Šamac
Odžak Vukosavlje
Čelić Lopare
Teočak Ugljevik
Sapna Zvornik
Kalesija Osmaci
Stari Grad Istočni Stari Grad
Novo Sarajevo Lukavica
Ilidža Istočna Ilidža
Trnovo (FBiH) Trnovo (RS)
Pale-Prača Pale
Goražde Novo Goražde
Foča-Ustikolina Foča
Mostar Istočni Mostar
Stolac Berkovići
Ravno Trebinje
Dependent and Independent Variables
Dependent Variable
The dependent variable is economic recovery. This variable is measured using
night-time lights data44 which is a valid proxy to measure and study economic
activities for the last two decades. There are many ways in which night-time
44 “Version 4 DMSP-OLS Nighttime Lights Time Series. Im-age and data processing by NOAA’s National Geophysical
Data Center. DMSP data collected by US Air Force Weather Agency.”
19
lights can help better understand economic activities. In some cases of
developing countries, where accurate measures are not available, nor collected.
The data present the intensity of night-light data from 1992 to 2012. The data
had to be intercalibrated as it has the format can capture 64 levels of brightness.
The range should be 0-63, but there were values outside of this. Any value less
than zero had to be changed to zero, and any value over 63 had to be changed to
63.
Independent Variables
Three main Independent variables are considered to test the different
hypothesis in this study. UNPKO presence, TARR and Open Cities Initiative.
UNPKO presence (PKOP_du): dummy variable when 1 is the presence of
mission. I used the information from the dataset to construct a dummy variable
that equals 1 when peacekeeping mission (troops, police station/officer, civilian
offices) are present in a given municipality. It is important to notice that the
presence of the mission is not random, which has further implications for the
analysis.
Open Cities Initiative (OC) policy (OC_Du) : this is a dummy variable 1 is equal
to the implementation of the policy in the given municipality. It is important to
notice that this policy /program was presented on a voluntary base, in which the
municipality that takes the status as an open city must ensure to not create
obstacles for return of refugees and IDP’s45
Target Areas for Return and Rehabilitation Assistance (TARR) policy
(TARR_Du): this is a dummy variable 1 is equal to the implementation of the
policy in the given municipality. This policy focuses on
For testing the second hypothesis, I identified the location where a particular
policy (Open City Policy) was implemented. I used the information of the
45
20
database to create a dummy variable that equals 1 when a particular
municipality benefit of the particular policy.
Control Variables
ECPR number of claimed Properties: this is a continuous variable. the variable
contains the total number of claimed properties by municipality between 1996
and 2003. (See Dataset statistics table 4) It was not possible to get monthly
information for all the year on the number of claims per municipality. Monthly
information is available from 1996 to 1997. After this point, the information is
presented by the number of claims presented at the collection points established
by the CRPC across the country and abroad. The information on the number of
claims and decision reports by the commission is monthly between the years of
1996 to 2003.
Finally, for the measurement of repossession of houses, I include information
from the final report of the Property Law Implementation Plan (PLIP) activities
for each of the 146 municipalities46. Table 4 presents information on additional
data available in my general dataset, which might be included as part of the
model.
In addition to this main set of explanatory variables, I included control variables
to ensure that the relation between the IV and DP is not spurious. I controlled
by using information on the ethnic diversity of the municipalities using data
from the census in Yugoslavia in 1991 prior to the outbreak of the war, which
recorded (self-assigned) ethnic identities of respondents (Bosniak, Croat, Serb
and others). On the population of the municipalities after the war, I used the
report compiled by UNHCR in 1997 which is in the BiH National archive47 [this
is estimation] and the 1st report on the recent Census in Bosnia carried out in
2012 and from which the final report has not been released48. To assess the level
of damage I included information on the number of houses destroyed by 1995
46 Mention more information on the origin of the PLIP data. 47 [….] 48 […]
21
categorised by the municipality and ethnic distribution and the assessment on
the remaining number of houses destroyed by 2005. Regarding return, I include
information on the return of “minorities” to each municipality by 200549.
The OLS regression table 3 was calculated to predict economic recovery based on
the presence of the UNPKO mission and the policies that were implemented
across the country. All the models include control for the region within BiH, the
total number of claimed properties, the total number of reposed properties, and
ethnic component. Model 1 tests for economic recovery without the interaction
between the presence of the mission and policies. The presence of the mission
has a negative effect on economic recovery, even when controlling for the
implementation of the policies. Still, both policies have a positive effect on
economic recovery. In Model 2, I test the impact on economic recovery with the
presence of the mission and an interaction of the two policies, the impact of the
implementation of the policies is positive and strongly significant a p<0.01. In
Models 3, 4 and 5 I run different interactions. Most relevant for this paper,
however, is Model 5, is showing the best results. We can conclude that the
presence of the UNPKO might not have a significant impact on economic
recovery, however, what they do when they are presence matters.
49 [….]
22
Table3: Economic Recovery: UNPKO Presence & Policy Implementation (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
VARIABLES Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5
1.PKOP_du -0.470 -1.050 -0.0124 -0.713
(0.666) (0.702) (0.668) (0.713)
1.POL_du 3.115***
(1.174)
1o.PKOP_du#0b.POL_du 0
(0)
1o.PKOP_du#1o.POL_du 0
(0)
Federation of BiH 0.0350 0.393 0.0132 0.142 0.121
(0.880) (0.870) (0.859) (0.870) (0.849)
Brcko District 6.439* 5.639 6.806** 6.444* 6.814**
(3.420) (3.434) (3.344) (3.375) (3.296)
CRPCPropertiesCLAIMED -0.000408** -0.000368** -0.000402** -0.000408** -0.000401**
(0.000181) (0.000179) (0.000177) (0.000179) (0.000175)
Total No. of Closed 0.00114*** 0.00114*** 0.00110*** 0.00113*** 0.00110***
(0.000220) (0.000221) (0.000215) (0.000217) (0.000212)
Bosniak Majority -0.321 -0.0666 -0.277 -0.355 -0.311
(0.861) (0.860) (0.841) (0.849) (0.829)
Serbs Majority -0.697 -0.562 -0.526 -0.685 -0.513
(1.071) (1.082) (1.049) (1.057) (1.034)
PKO Presence -0.350
(0.652)
Target Areas Policy 1.719** 1.949***
(0.730) (0.731)
Open Cities Policy 1.572* 1.038
(0.888) (0.897)
1.TARR_Du -0.189 0.0310
(1.077) (1.068)
1o.PKOP_du#0b.TARR_Du 0 0
(0) (0)
1.PKOP_du#1.TARR_Du 3.249** 3.271**
(1.375) (1.355)
1.OC_Du 5.234** 4.734**
(2.125) (2.083)
1o.PKOP_du#0b.OC_Du 0 0
(0) (0)
1.PKOP_du#1.OC_Du -4.439* -4.485*
(2.347) (2.290)
Constant 3.161*** 3.172*** 3.588*** 2.873** 3.300***
(1.134) (1.157) (1.123) (1.130) (1.116)
Observations 106 106 106 106 106
R-squared 0.365 0.343 0.400 0.388 0.424
Adj. R-square 0.306 0.288 0.337 0.324 0.356
Standard errors in parentheses
*** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1
23
Figure 3: Interaction Presence of UNPKO & Open City Initiative
24
68
10
12
Lin
ear
Pre
dic
tion
0 1PKOP_du
OC_Du=0 OC_Du=1
Presence of UNPKO and Open City Initiative
24
Figure 4: Presence of UNPKO & TARR Policy
Table 4 presents information on additional data available in my general dataset,
which might be included as part of the model.
Variable Obs Mean Std. Dev. Min Max
Claim_prop 112 2850.179 3046.528 5 15977
ClaimP_per 112 .0089241 .0095485 0 .0501
CRPCNo_Con~i 112 2783.545 3086.194 1 17889
CRPC_Confi~r 112 .0089277 .0098933 0 .0574
PKOP_Years 142 2.422535 2.679907 0 6
PKOP_du 142 .5070423 .5017201 0 1
NoClaim_SOP 129 744.1628 1567.802 0 9553
NoPosiDec~OP 129 678.938 1390.454 0 8651
NoNegaDec~OP 129 70.95349 188.2235 0 1181
NoCloseca~OP 129 678.3721 1389.155 0 8651
NoClaim_PP 129 888.6434 1274.775 0 7875
NoPosiDec~PP 129 854.4729 1207.652 0 7558
NoNegaDec~PP 129 27.0155 75.16991 0 646
NoCloseca~PP 129 854.093 1206.458 0 7558
TotalNo_Cl~s 129 1641.736 2428.501 1 15734
TotalNo_Po~i 129 1511.566 2197.185 0 13451
TotalNo_Ne~i 129 97.96899 239.8605 0 1723
TotalNo_Cl~e 129 1532.388 2196.431 0 13417
24
68
10
Eco
nm
ic R
eco
very
0 1Presence of UNPKO
TARR_Du=0 TARR_Du=1
Presence of UNPKO and TARR Policiy
25
Impl_Ratio 0
light1992_C 140 .12205 .534102 0 3.607018
light1993_C 141 .4577642 1.154465 0 6.730197
light1994_C 141 1.011539 2.258331 0 15.71728
light1995_C 141 2.208095 3.369002 0 26.43919
light1996_C 140 3.72658 5.527078 0 46.55178
light1997_C 141 4.024989 6.511213 0 54.07924
light1998_C 141 5.887985 7.622361 0 59.16999
light1999_C 141 5.883979 7.890371 0 59.70192
light2000_C 141 6.43019 7.78686 .1254 59.68401
light2001_C 141 5.746451 8.054703 0 59.74582
light2002_C 141 5.921475 7.730415 .0491 61.49095
light2003_C 141 6.853093 8.205992 .2217 59.81789
light2004_C 141 5.860446 7.114218 .2853 57.11203
light2005_C 141 7.202491 8.712313 0 61.41673
light2006_C 141 5.743883 7.703233 .1065 59.45348
light2007_C 141 5.822577 7.41157 .6394 59.8969
light2008_C 141 6.894699 8.12121 .5564 60.6244
light2009_C 141 6.513234 7.789698 .9492 54.60736
light2010_C 141 7.66179 7.819482 2.343 58.95106
light2011_C 141 7.630247 7.656315 1.8956 54.02625
light2012_C 140 7.716271 7.461657 1.875 48.61981
TARR_sum 142 1.415493 2.54392 0 6
TARR_Du 142 .2394366 .4282502 0 1
OC_sum 142 .2605634 .7596152 0 3
OC_Du 142 .1126761 .3173157 0 1
Srpks 156 .4230769 .4956385 0 1
entity_nu 156 3.397436 .5527583 1 4
FBiH 156 .5576923 .49826 0 1
Bos_pop_n91 140 13527.04 16231.72 0 80359
Cro_pop_n91 140 5344.857 7846.812 0 32592
Ser_pop_n91 140 9680.093 13131.57 6 106826
Oth_pop_n91 140 712.9929 1181.831 0 7626
Youg_pop_n91 140 1680.814 3737.733 0 23656
Total_pop~91 140 31036.25 31456.68 61 195692
Check_tot_~p 140 30945.8 31382.49 61 195692
Bos_pop_p~91 140 37.9803 28.65188 0 98.46517
Cro_pop_p~91 140 19.18579 27.91541 0 99.09525
Ser_pop_p~91 140 37.5291 30.65173 .0525271 99.2
Oth_pop_p~91 140 1.74268 1.274303 0 6.658076
Youg_pop_p~1 140 3.086399 3.265292 0 16.74561
tot_perc_c~k 140 99.52427 3.421685 68.1926 100
rec96_12 139 4.33735 4.092813 -.0069542 27.93669
Bos_du 156 .4294872 .4965972 0 1
Cro_du 156 .224359 .418503 0 1
Ser_du 156 .4038462 .4922476 0 1
26
rec96_00 140 2.748644 3.080327 .1254 22.34001
rec01_05 141 -1.45604 1.547778 -8.553144 2.071945
rec06_12 140 -2.356028 1.751447 -10.35878 .1118062
rec92_95 140 -1.912965 2.487434 -11.22396 0
Table 3: Data Survey
Data survey
Year Ethnic information
Book of Death People
War UNPKO presence PKOLED 1991-1995 Not Available
Census 1991 Yes
Devastation assessment 1995 Na
Distribution of housing units and
arrangements
1991 No
Displacement information 1996 and 2005 Yes
Registration of Displacement 2005 Yes
Potential returnees by current
residence
2005 Yes
Potential returnees by municipality to
return
2005 Yes
Returnees 2009 Yes
Returnees 2005 Yes
CRPC claims and type Monthly 1996-2003 No
CRPC claims and type Consolidate 2003
CRPC decisions Consolidate 2003 No
Property Land Implementation Plan
(PLIP) report (2000 to 2005) monthly
2000-2005 No
PLIP claims Consolidate 2005 No
Education info (CANTON) Consolidate 2002-2005 No
LSMS (survey) World Bank 2001-2004 Yes
Annexe 1
Code for each municipality: 1 to 146
Municipality: based on the political division presented in official documents.
Initial template: Census. (Admin level 1 )
Entity: After the war, Bosnia is divided into two political different political
entities:
FBiH
27
RS
Year: The database covers the active years of the second UNPKO mission in
Bosnia from 1996 to 2002.
Citystatu_Du: City Status, this is to determine the status of the municipality as
a major city or small one. This is a dummy variable. This information is based on
official classification.
1= city
2= capital
0= no city status
Canton: For the purpose of the analysis. In some cases, the reports do not
mention the cities as such, but the canton name where the actions occurred. This
variable might help with the later analysis a geographical level. In the same
way, depending on the entity the municipalities are classified in a different way.
See table below.
TARR_Du: “Target Return Area” (TRA) programme is a variable referring to a
UNHCR program that aims to encourage the return of IDPs and refugees to a
majority ethnic area. These municipalities received special attention in terms a
major implementation of programmes for reconstruction and return. This is a
dummy variable.
1= city identified as TRA
0= city is not identified as TRA
OC_Du: “ Return of minority Areas” programme is a variable referring to a
UNHCR program that aims to encourage the return of IDPs and refugees to a
minority ethnic area. These municipalities received special attention in terms a
major implementation of programmes for reconstruction and return. This is a
dummy variable.
1= city identified as RMA
0= city is not identified as RMA
PKOP_Du: (dummy variable) represents the presence of UNPKO in the
municipalities. The information of this variable is determined by the information
gather from the different UN peacekeeping operation reports. The information is
a representation of the different components of the mission present in each
particular municipality.
1= UNPKO is present in the municipality
0= UNPKO is not present in the municipality
28
CivilAff-Du: (Dummy Variable) Office of Humanitarian Affairs, which was one
of the initial UN bodies to be established after the creation of the second mission
UNMIBH. The information is collected from the different reports and maps
published on the different UNPKO mission reports. This variable shows where
this particular office was set in the different municipalities.
1= UNPKO is present in the municipality
0= UNPKO is not present in the municipality
CAType_pre: (Categorical variable). This variable presents the type and general
function of the office establish in the particular municipality. This variable helps
to differentiate from United Nations International Police Task Force (UNIPTF)
presence and type of offices.
Civil Affairs
OCHAOff_Action: This is a descriptive variable that present information on
specific actions carried out in the particular municipality in a particular year.
IPTF_Du (Ca): that represent the presence of UNIPTF in the municipalities. The
information of this variable is determined by the information gather from the
different UN peacekeeping operation reports and maps.
There are three categories
0= UNIPTF is not present in the municipality
1= UNIPTF is present in the municipality
3= UNIPTF visited the municipality but is not permanently establish there.
IPTFType_pre: (Categorical variable). This variable presents the type and
general function of the UNIPTF establish in the particular municipality. This
variable helps to differentiate from United Nations International Police Task
Force (UNIPTF) presence and type of offices.
Categorical
NP ( not present) (0)
District HQ (1)
Regional HQ (2)
Station (3)
UNIPTF HQ (4)
Occasional (5)
Num_Station: When is identified the number of stations present in the given
municipality (Numerical)
29
Num_force: when is possible to identify the number of police officers deployed in
this particular municipality.
IPTFT_Action: This is a descriptive variable that present information on specific
actions carried out in the particular municipality in a particular year.
UNHCR_Du: (dummy variable) that represent the presence of UNHCR in the
municipalities. The information of this variable is determined by the information
gather from the different UN peacekeeping operation reports and UNHCR
reports on the country. In this variable, there is a relation between the Open
City program and target Area for Return, where the UNHCR had to pay special
attention in these particular municipalities in a given year.
1= UNHCR is present in the municipality
0= UNHCR is not present in the municipality
UNHCR_Action: This is a descriptive variable that present information on
specific actions carried out in the particular municipality in a particular year;
Monitoring TRA actions
Information centres for refugees
Legal Aid Centres
Monitor OC
Incidents: This variable represents any particular incidents that are related to
issues of return, either by prevention of it or incidents related to it.
ACTIONS
GENERAL DESCRIPTION ACTION: It presents a description of the action or
incident reported in the UNMIBH report.
ACTIVITY
Police training
New programme/policy
Return of Refugees*
Reintegration ***
Economic and agricultural rehabilitation programme
Weapons inspections
Weapons confiscation
Freedom of Movement
Setting up an investigation committee
Provision of assistance to government structures
Transfer of responsibilities
Provision of technical assistance to confidence building
30
School rehabilitation (or school opening)*
Housing reconstruction*
Police reform
Incidents
Send Liaison team
Returnee related violence
Mine clearance
Open office/school/camp
Return of Minorities
Preparation for election/Elections
CATEGORY This section covers the type of categories that comprehend the types
of actions carried out by the UN Mission is Bosnia and Herzegovina UNMIBH
Assitance
Return of Refugees *
Governance
Extraction/Interposition
Enforcement
Extraction
Monitoring/Reporting
Other
Integration****
Rule of law
Security
AREA
ORGANIZATION-ACTOR 1: It presents the UN organisation that was involved
in the action.
There might be several actors participating in this action. So, in that case, there
is a
ORGANIZATION ACTOR 2:
ORG-ACT_COD: Code assigned to each actor to identification purposes.
1 IFOR Implementation force
2 OHR Office of High representative
3 UNIPTF International Police Task Force
31
Civilian Force
4 UNHCR United Nation Agency for Refugees
5 CRPC Commission of Property rights
6 WB World Bank
7 UNDP United Nations Development Programme
8 UNIPTF United Nations Police Task Force
9 ILO International labour Organization
10 OCHA Office of Humanitarian Affairs
11 MAC Mine Action Centre
12 UNTF United Nation Trust found-Quick impact found
13 UNICEF The United Nations Children's Fund
14 UNMIBH (HRO) The UNMIBH Human Rights Office
15 ITFY International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia
BMACP Bosnia and Herzegovina Mine Action Programme
16 USIP United States Institute of Peace
17 FAO The coordination office for emergency interventions of
the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United
Nations
18 OHCHR United Nations High Commissioner for Human
Rights
19 RS PM Republika Sprska Prime Minister
20 RRTF Reconstruction Return Task Force
21 UNESCO
22 Countries
LOCATION: it presents the place/country/canton/ region/municipality where the
action took place. When the place is identified as one of the 143 municipalities
it will assign the Municipality central code.
ENTITY: When it is possible I will assign the entity where the city is located or
when the specific city is mention in the report or map.
1= Republika Srpka
2= Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina
LEVEL OF THE ACTION: it indicates the level at which the action takes place.
Varying from:
32
1= Municipality level
2= Cantonal Level (in Federation)
3= Regional Level ( Federation of BiH & Republika Srpska)
4= Brcko District
5= National level
6= Abroad
7= Not mention/not clear
*There are some actions that are clearly developed at the national level.
YEAR: The database covers the active years of the second UNPKO mission in
Bosnia from 1996 to 2002.
Specific_ Date: It contains the specific dates when the action took place.
The month of Report : it represent when it is possible the month in when the
event occurred, or it will be the month in which the report was submitted to the
council.
UN report File : it contains the report reference with its UN universal
identification reference and the number of the paragraph where the information
extracted from; in addition to the date
Example: S/1998/862-
DATE OF THE REPORT: It contains the date of the publication of the report.
1998-09-16/31
Comments: It contains links to other/previous action or necessary extra
information.
Annexe 2
1. Dataset : CRPC Monthly 1998 by Municipalities
Presents information on the number of cases in each of the municipalities
The information is organised at unit of analysis for Municipality
Year 1998
Months: July, August, October, November
The information is divided into the different types of claim that the person presented,
depending on what s/he wanted to do with the property.
The options are as follows:
Claimant’s option A: Returning to possession of the property
33
Claimant’s option B: Retaining the rights to the property in order to dispose of it in a
manner that the person will decide later on.
Claimant’s option C: The claimant wishes to dispose of their rights by authorizing the
Commission to take all necessary actions on her/his behalf to propose terms for a
possible transfer of the ownership rights of the claimed property to the Commission or a
third party, in order to receive fair compensation to be accepted by the claimant in lieu
of return of property.
Claimant’s No particular option: No option chosen by the claimant.
2. Dataset : Mobile teams Commission for Real Property Claims of Displaced
Persons and Refugees
This data reflects the information collected directly by the Mobile Teams regulated by
CRPC (Commission for Real Property Claims of Displaced Persons and Refugees). This
team started operations during 2000.
The information is organised at unit of analysis for Municipality
Year: 2000
Estimated # of DP: This figures estimated the number of internal displacements in the
given municipality. The information is taken from estimates provided by UNHCR
# Claims collected: Information on the number of claims collected in each of the
municipalities visited by the mobile teams.
3. Dataset Name: Property Law Implementation Plan
These statistics reflect the implementation of the property laws in Bosnia and
Herzegovina since the passing of the property laws in April 1998 in the Federation and
in December 1998 in the Republika Srpska. However, this plan was not implemented
fully until late 1999.
These statistics are collected every month by the staff of OSCE, UNHCR and OHR in
the field on the basis of information provided to them by the municipal housing
authorities/OMIs.
These statistics do not include information on decisions and repossessions on destroyed
property, business premises or land. These statistics do not include information on
claims, decisions and cases closed on the uncontested/unoccupied property.
Municipality: based on the political division as represented in official documents
34
Entity:
Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina
Republika Srpska
Brcko District
Canton: This variable might help with later analysis on a geographical level. Depending
on which entity is documented, the municipalities are classified in different ways.
Year: 2000-2004
Month: May 2000 until September 2004 (There are some months missing in some of the
years)
SOP_#claims (Socially Owned Property Claims): The number of claims is equal to the
total number of properties on which a claim was filed with the Municipal authorities.
The figure stated is equal to the total number of properties on which a claim and/or
request for enforcement of a CRPC decision were filed with the municipal housing
authorities.
SOP_#Decisions (Socially Owned Property Number of Decisions): The number of
decisions is the total number of decisions issued by the Municipal authorities.
SOP_Reposessions (Socially Owned Property Number of Repossessions): The number of
repossessions is the total number of occupancy right holders or owners that have
collected their keys from the municipal authorities.
PP_#claims (Private Property Number of claims): The number of claims stated is equal
to the total number of properties on which a claim and/or request for enforcement of a
CRPC decision were filed with the municipal housing authorities.
PP_#Decisions (Private Property Number of Decisions): The number of decisions is the
total number of decisions issued by the Municipal authorities.
PP_Repossessions (Private Property Number of Repossessions): The number of
repossessions is the total number of occupancy right holders or owners that have
collected their keys from the municipal authorities.
Efficiency Ratio: The implementation ratio is the total number of repossessions divided
by the total number of claims, expressed in percentage form.
4. Data Set: Comparative Analysis on Access to Rights of Refugees and Displaced
Persons (2005)
This data set contains information collected in collaboration between the Ministry for
Refugees in Bosnia and Herzegovina, United Nations Agency for Refugees (UNHCR),
Commission for Real Property Claims of Displaced Persons and Refugees (CRPC) and
the Office of High Representative (OHR).
35
The information assesses the situation of BiH into five years after the Dayton Peace
Agreement. The report presents information at the municipality level, differentiating
between the different entities (FBiH, Republika Srpska and Brcko District).
Projection of Population Distribution Based on 1991 Census4 – per Present BiH
Municipalities
Number and Disposition of Housing Units – per 1991 Census: the information presents
the total number of Housing units (privately and socially owned). Information is collated
by ethnic identity in each municipality.
Projection of Housing Stock Situation by End of 1995 – per Present Municipalities in
BiH: the information is at Municipality level, and contains the level of destruction and
damaged housing Units between 1992 and 1995.
Number of Persons (Re)-registered in FBiH – per Places of Displacement and 1991
Residence: the information is at Municipality level and Canton level, with information
on the origin of displacement.
Number of Persons (Re)-registered in RS – per Places of Displacement and 1991
Residence: the information is at Municipality level, and Cantonal level, with information
on the origin of displacement.
Displaced Persons Re-registered in BiH – per Municipalities of Displacement and 1991
Residence: Detailed Review of Displaced Persons Re-registered in BiH – per
Municipalities by ethnic origin. The information is at Municipality level, and Cantonal
level, with information on the origin of displacement.
Detailed Review of Housing Stock Situation 2005 per Municipalities: the information is
at Municipality level, contains the level of destruction and damaged housing units, as
well as the number of repaired housing units.
Review of Potential Beneficiaries – per Municipalities of Current Residence in FBiH and
RS and Review of Potential Beneficiaries per Municipalities of return in FBiH and RS:
Information per Municipality, including ethnic identity.
Review of Number and Rate of “Minority” Returns at the Territory of BiH Federation
and RS: Information on the number of minority returnees at the Municipality level
classified by ethnicity at 2005
5. Dataset: Return Of Refugees And Displaced Persons To BiH for The Period 2009-
2014 (Projection)
Ethnic composition of potential assistance beneficiaries broken down by return entity:
A detailed review broken down by return entity and municipality has been presented in
separate tables, divided into:
36
Categories and ethnicities of potential beneficiaries (Refugees/Internal displaced
persons), Ethnicity : Bosniacs, Croats, Serbs, Others and Unknown) differentiation
between person and families.
Types of intervention and tentative costs: Information at the municipality level on the
type of reconstruction needed: house reconstruction/apartment reconstruction/addition
of a wing)
37
Annex 3: List of Data and variables within each data file.
File Name Description Variables Names
Property Claim Options_Claimant wishes to dispose
of right:
A: by returning into possession.
B: by retaining the rights to the real property in
order to dispose of it in a manner in which she/he
will decide later on.
C: by authorising the Commission to take all the
necessary actions on her/his behalf to propose terms
for a possible transfer of the ownership right over the
claimed real property to the Commission or a third
party, in order to received fair compensation, to be
accepted by the claimant in lieu of return of real
property.
None: No option Chosen
Preliminary Census_
2013
Contains preliminary results on the census carried
out in 2012
Total_Enumerated Persons
Total_Enumerated Households
Total_Enumerated Dwellings
Census_CRPC_1997 Contain information on preliminary census carried
out by CRPC and UNHCR on population in different
municipalities and Internal Displaces
WB_ID
Ent_na
Ent_ID
Canton_na
Canton_ID
Census _1991: population by municipality based on census
1991
Currentpop_97: population by municipality based on
partial census 1997
DP's % of DP's from Pop: Percentage of a number of
Internal Displaced based on the current living
municipality.
38
Review of Potential
Beneficiaries - per
Municipalities of
Current Residence
*Original file:
Refugees 2005
Corregido*
Contains the number of beneficiaries of ---------------
per municipality of current residence. The
information contains ethnic classification: Serbs,
Bosniacs, Croats and other.
It is also classified by a number of person and
number of families.
This refers to an ethnic identity.
Bos_fa (Number of Bosniac families per municipality)
Bos_per (Number of Bosniac persons per municipality)
Cro_fa (Number of Croats families per municipality)
Cro_per (Number of Croats persons per municipality)
Ser_fa(Number of Serb families per municipality)
Seb_per (Number Serb persons per municipality)
Other_fa (Number of other eth families per municipality)
Other_per(Number of persons per municipality)
n/a_fa (Number of n/a families per municipality)
n/a_per(Number of n/a persons per municipality)
Tot_fa (Total number of families per municipality)
Tot_per ( Total number of persons per municipality)
2005_Num_repaired_
destroyed
(per_category_damage
level)_houses
*Original file:
Refugees 2005
Corregido*
Contains information by 2005 on the number of
repaired housing units, and Number of remaining
damaged and destroyed housing units
(per categories and damage level) per municipality.
num_repar_hou (Number of repaired housing units)
damage_level1 (I – category damage level (5%-20%) p/
municipality )
damage_level2 (II – category damage level (25%-40%)
p/municipality
damage_level3 (III – category damage level (45%-65%) per
municipality
damage_level4 (IV- category damage level (75%-100%) per
municipality
Census_1991 Contains distribution of 1991 population per present
administrative units (municipalities) in BiH.
Mun_ID
Mun_na
Entity_na
Bosniaks_pop: Bosniaks population per municipality
Bosniaks_pop%: Percentage of Bosniak population per
municipality
Croats_pop: Croat population per municipality
Croats_pop%: Percentage of Croat population per
municipality
Serb_pop: Serb population per municipality
Serb_pop%: Percentage of Serb population per
municipality
39
Others_pop: Other population per municipality
Others_pop%: Percentage of Others population per
municipality
Yougoeslavs_pop: Yougoeslave population per municipality
Yougoeslavs_pop%: Percentage of Yugoslavs population
per municipality
Total_pop: total population per municipality
Total_pop%: Percentage of population per municipality out
of the overall pop.
HousingUnits_1991 Number and disposition of housing units by
municipalities in 1991 and Ethnicity based on 1991
census. This includes privately and socially owned
housing units. A housing unit area was 60.45 squares
meters per household or 6.68 m2 per an inhabitant.
Housing
Devastation_1995
Projection of Housing Stock Situation by the end of
1995 – per present municipalities in BiH.
Mun_ID
Mun_na
Entity_na
Condit_91 (Number of houses in municipality by 1991)
Damage_20% (Number of houses with 20% damage by end
of 1995)
Damage_20-70% (Number of houses with 20-70% damage
by end of 1995)Dama_abov_70%(Number of houses with
above 70% damage by end of 1995)
Damage_Total (Total number of houses damaged by end of
1995)
Total_dam% (Total % of houses damaged by end of 1995)
Displaced Persons Re-
registered in
BiH_2005
Number of persons (RE)-registered in FBiH and RS
per places of displacement and 1991 Residence
Mun_ID
Mun_na(placeofresiden_91)
Entity_na
Can_na
FBIH_Families
FBIH_Persons
40
RS_Families
RS_persons
BD_families
BD_persons
Total_families
Total _persons
Displaced_persons_re
_registeredpermunofd
isplacement91_05
This file compares the two exercise of registration
carried on in 2000 and 2005.
The information contain “nationality” information or
ethnic information.
Mun_ID
Mun_na(residence_91)
91_Bosniaks
91_Croats
91_Serbs
91_Others
91_persons
91_families
re_reg05_Bosnian
re_reg05_Croats
re_reg05_Serbs
re_reg05_Others
05_persons
05-families
Number of remaining
damaged and
destroyed housing
units_2005
Number of remaining damaged and destroyed
housing units_2005
(per categories and damage level)
Mun_ID
Mun_na
Entity_na
Numb_repairedhouse_unit( number of repaired house
units)
rema_damage5-20% (I – category damage level (5%-20%)
rema_damage25-40% (II – category damage level (25%-
40%)
rema_damage45-65% (III – category damage level (45%-
65%)
rema_damage75-100% (IV- category damage level (75%-
100%)
n/a ( Not information available)
41
Total_damage (Number of remaining damaged and
destroyed housing units)
Review
number_rate_minorit
y returns at
FBiH_RS_1996 to
2005
Municipality Data.
Data collected between 1996 to October 31 2005.
The data is not differentiated by years
(unfortunately)
In the overview of the number and rate of “minority”
returns by entities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the
number of registered “minority” returns is entered
from the Statistics of the UNHCR Representation in
Bosnia and Herzegovina, and the rate of
„minority“ returns is calculated as the relation
between the number of registered “minority” returns
of certain nationality at the territory of a particular
municipality and the number of population of the
same nationality according to the population based
on census from 1991 in that municipality.
In cases when the rate of “minority” returns was
more than 100%, i.e. when the number of registered
“minority” returns was higher than the number of
population of the same nationality in that
municipality based on the census from
1991 – n/a is entered. Municipalities, in which no
“minority” return was recorded, are not included in
the overview of number and rate of
“minority” returns. Also, there is a mismatch
between analytical indicators in the table below and
synthetic indicators from the UNHCR’s
Statistics in several cases:
• In the section related to the Municipalities of
Sarajevo Canton, there is the difference of 18.955
„minority“ returns recorded at the Cantonal level,
but it could not be determined at the territory of
which municipality these were realised;
Mun_ID
Mun_na
Entity_na
MinorityBosniaks_Ret (Number of Minority_Bosniaks
returning)
MinorityBosniaks_Ret% ( % of Minority_Bosniaks
returning) base_ can 1991
MinorityCroats_Ret (Number of Minority_Croats
returning)
MinorityCroats_Ret% (% Minority_Croats returning) base_
cen 1991
MinoritySebs_Ret (Number of Minority_Serbs returning)
MinoritySerbs_Ret% (Number of Minority_Serbs
returning) base_ cen 1991
MinorityRet_Total (Total number of MinoReturnees_
returning)
Minority_Ret% (total % Minority_Bosniaks returning)
base_ cen 1991
42
• 2.582 „minority“ returns were recorded in the
section related to Brčko District, which the UNHCR
keeps in the
Tuzla Canton of the Federation of Bosnia and
Herzegovina, and 2.600 in the section which the
UNHCR keeps
in the Republika Srpska as a separation zone;
• For the Brčko District of Bosnia and Herzegovina,
there is an only synthetic overview of “minority”
returns.
(citation Here)
PLIP_May_Dec_2000 Property Law Implementation Plan City ID
Municipality
Entity
Citystatu_Du
Canton
Canton_ID
Year
Month
SOP_#claims
SOP_#Decision
SOP_Reposessions
PP_#claims
PP_#Decision
PP_Reposessions
Efficiency Ratio
Previous Impl. Ratio
IR_?
IR_?
Last Update (19)
43
44
Bibliography
(DFID) UK DEPARTMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT 2014.
Secure property rights and development: Economic growth and household
welfare Property rights evidence paper April 2014. London: (DFID) UK
Department for International Development
BATES, R. H. 1988. Toward a political economy of development: a rational choice perspective, Univ of California Press.
BATES, R. H. 2008. When things fell apart: state failure in late-century Africa,
Cambridge University Press.
BIGOMBE, B., COLLIER, P. & SAMBANIS, N. 2000. Policies for building post-
conflict peace. Journal of African Economies, 9, 323-348.
BLACK, R. & GENT, S. 2006. Sustainable Return in Post‐conflict Contexts.
International Migration, 44, 15-38.
BOONE, C. 2014. Property and political order in Africa : land rights and the structure of politics, New York, Cambridge University Press.
COLLETTA, N. J. & CULLEN, M. L. 2000. Violent conflict and the transformation of social capital: Lessons from Cambodia, Rwanda, Guatemala, and Somalia, World Bank Publications.
COLLIER, P., ELLIOTT, L., HEGRE, H., HOEFFLER, A., REYNAL-QUEROL,
M. & SAMBANIS, N. 2003. Breaking the Conflict Trap: Civil War and Development Policy, Washington, World Bank-Oxford University Press.
COLLIER, P., HOEFFLER, A. & SÖDERBOM, M. 2008. Post-Conflict Risks.
Journal of Peace Research, 45, 461-478.
COLLIER, P. & SAMBANIS, N. 2005a. Africa. Vol. 1 of Understanding civil war : evidence and analysis. , Washington, DC, World Bank.
COLLIER, P. & SAMBANIS, N. 2005b. Europe, Central Asia, and other regions. Vol. 2 of Understanding civil war : evidence and analysis., Washington,
DC, World Bank.
COX, M. & GARLICK, M. 2003. Musical Chairs: property reposession and return
strategies in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In: LECKIE, S. (ed.) Returning home : housing and property restitution rights of refugees and displaced persons. Ardsley, NY: Transnational Publishers.
45
DE SOTO, H. 2000. The Mystery of Capital: Why Capitalism Triumphs in the West and Fails Everywhere Else, Basic Books.
DEININGER, K. 2003a. Land Policies for Growth and Poverty Reduction, World
Bank.
DEININGER, K. 2003b. Land policies for growth and poverty reduction. A
World Bank policy research report. . Washington, D.C.: World Bank
Publications.
DEININGER, K. Land policies for growth and poverty reduction: key issues and
challenges ahead. Inter-Regional Special Forum on the Building of Land
Information Policies in the Americas, Aguascalientes, Mexico, 2004. 26-27.
FOLEY, M. W., VICKERS, G. & THALE, G. 1997. Land, peace, and participation: the development of post-war agricultural policy in El Salvador and the role of the World Bank, Washington Office on Latin
America Washington, DC.
FUKUDA-PARR, S. 2011. Correcting Horizontal Inequality as a Developement
Priority: Poverty Reduction Strategy Papers in Haiti, Liberia and Nepal.
In: LANGER, A., STEWART, F. & VENUGOPAL, R. (eds.) Horizontal inequalities and post-conflict development. Palgrave Macmillan.
HENLEY, G. 2013. Property rights and development briefing.
JUSTINO, P. 2007. On the links between violent conflict and household poverty:
How much do we really know?
JUSTINO, P. 2009. Poverty and violent conflict: A micro-level perspective on the
causes and duration of warfare. Journal of Peace Research, 46, 315-333.
JUSTINO, P. 2010. How Does Violent Conflict Impact on Individual Educational
Outcomes? The Evidence So Far.‖ Background paper for the Education For
All Global Monitoring Report 2011. UNESCO.
JUSTINO, P. 2011a. The impact of armed civil conflict on household welfare and
policy. IDS Working Papers, 2011, 1-38.
JUSTINO, P. 2011b. Violent Conflict and Human Capital Accumulation. IDS Working Papers, 2011, 1-17.
KEEFER, P. & KNACK, S. 2002. Polarization, politics and property rights: Links
between inequality and growth. Public choice, 111, 127-154.
KROC INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE STUDIES 2014. Peace
Accords Matrix (PAM). In: UNIVERSITY OF NOTRE DAME (ed.).
https://peaceaccords.nd.edu/matrix/status/7/amnesty.
46
LECKIE, S. 2009. Housing, land, and property rights in post-conflict United Nations and other peace operations: a comparative survey and proposal for reform, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
LECKIE, S. & HUGGINS, C. 2011. Conflict and housing, land and property rights : a handbook on issues, frameworks, and solutions, Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press.
MASON, N. & NEWBORNE, P. 2013. Property rights and development briefing.
MATTINGLY, M. 2013. Property rights and development briefing.
NORTH, D. C. 1992. Transaction costs, institutions, and economic performance, San Francisco, California, ICS Press.
PANTULIANO, S. 2009a. Integrating land issues into post-conflict response:
Case study evidence and implications. Humanitarian Policy Group Overseas Development Institute, London.
PANTULIANO, S. 2009b. Uncharted territory: land, conflict and humanitarian action, Overseas Development Institute.
STEWART, F. 2005. Policies towards horizontal inequalities in post-conflict reconstruction, Oxford, Centre for Research on Inequality, Human
Security and Ethnicity.
STEWART, F. 2008. Horizontal inequalities and conflict : understanding group violence in multiethnic societies, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan.
SWIFT, J., HAMILTON, K., DEVEREUX, S. & MAXWELL, S. 2001. Household
food and livelihood security. Food security in sub-saharan Africa, 67-92.
UNRUH, J. D. 2004 Land and Property Rights in the Peace Process. Beyond Intractability [Online]. Available:
<http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/land-tenure>. [Accessed April
24th 2014].
WALTER, B. F. 2004. Does conflict beget conflict? Explaining recurring civil war.
Journal of Peace Research, 41, 371-388.
WILLIAMS, R. C. 2009. Stability, Justice, and Rights in the Wake of the Cold
War. In: LECKIE, S. (ed.) Housing, land, and property rights in post-conflict United Nations and other peace operations: a comparative survey and proposal for reform. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
ZEVENBERGEN, J. & BURNS, T. 2010. Land Administration in Post-Conflict
Areas; A key Land and Conflict issue. FIG Congress. Sydney, Australia.
BELLONI, R. 2005. Peacebuilding at the local level: Refugee return to Prijedor.
International Peacekeeping, 12, 434-447.
47
BISOGNO, M. & CHONG, A. 2002. Poverty and Inequality in Bosnia and
Herzegovina After the Civil War. World Development, 30, 61-75.
CAIN, A. 2007. Housing microfinance in post-conflict Angola. Overcoming
socioeconomic exclusion through land tenure and access to credit.
Environment and urbanization, 19, 361-390.
CORDIAL, M. & ROSANDHAUG, K. 2009. The Response of the United Nations
Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo to Address Property Rights
Challenges. In: LECKIE, S. (ed.) Housing, land, and property rights in post-conflict United Nations and other peace operations: a comparative survey and proposal for reform. New York: Cambridge University Press.
CORDIAL, M. & RØSANDHAUG, K. 2009. Post-conflict Property Restitution: Post-conflict property restitution for refugees and displaced persons under international law, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
COX, M. & GARLICK, M. 2003. Musical Chairs: property reposession and return
strategies in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In: LECKIE, S. (ed.) Returning home : housing and property restitution rights of refugees and displaced persons. Ardsley, NY: Transnational Publishers.
EYRE, D. & WITTKOWSKY, A. 2002. The political economy of consolidating Kosovo: property rights, political conflict and stability, Analyse Internat.
Politik, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung.
FITZPATRICK, D. 2012. Land policy in post-conflict circumstances: Some
lessons from East Timor. Journal of Humanitarian Assistance, Forthcoming.
HURWITZ, A., STUDDARD, K. & WILLIAMS, R. 2005. Housing, land property
and conflict management; identifying policy options for rule of law
programming. International Peace Academy. International Peace
Academy.
LECKIE, S. 2009. Housing, land, and property rights in post-conflict United Nations and other peace operations: a comparative survey and proposal for reform, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
PANTULIANO, S. 2009a. Integrating land issues into post-conflict response:
Case study evidence and implications. Humanitarian Policy Group Overseas Development Institute, London.
PANTULIANO, S. 2009b. Uncharted territory: land, conflict and humanitarian action, Overseas Development Institute.
PONS-VIGNON, N. & LECOMTE, H.-B. S. 2004. Land, violent conflict and
development. OECD Publishing.
UNRUH, J. 2001. Postwar land dispute resolution: Land tenure and the peace
process in Mozambique. International Journal on World Peace, 18, 3-29.
UNRUH, J. & WILLIAMS, R. 2013a. Land and post-conflict peacebuilding, London Routledge.
UNRUH, J. & WILLIAMS, R. 2013b. Land: A foundation for peacebuilding. In: UNRUH, J. & WILLIAMS, R. (eds.) Land and post-conflict peacebuilding. London Earthscan.
UNRUH, J. D. 1997. The role of land conflict and land conflict resolution in a
peace process: Mozambique's return to agriculture. Refuge: Canada's Journal on Refugees, 16.
48
UNRUH, J. D. 2004 Land and Property Rights in the Peace Process. Eds. Guy
Burgess and Heidi Burgess. . Posted: . Beyond Intractability [Online].
Available: <http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/land-tenure>.
[Accessed April 24th 2014].
USAID 2004. Land and Conflict -a toolkit for intervention. In: USAID-OFFICE
OF CONFLICT MANAGEMENT AND MITIGATION (ed.). Washington
DC: USAID.
VON CARLOWITZ, L. 2004a. Crossing the Boundary from the International to
the Domestic Legal Realm: UNMIK Lawmaking and Property Rights in
Kosovo. Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations, 10, 307-331.
VON CARLOWITZ, L. 2004b. Settling property issues in complex peace
operations: The CRPC in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the HPD/CC in
Kosovo. Leiden Journal of International Law, 17, 599-614.
VON CARLOWITZ, L. 2005. Resolution of property disputes in Bosnia and
Kosovo: The contribution to peacebuilding. International Peacekeeping, 12, 547-561.
WILLIAMS, R. C. 2013. Post-conflict land tenure issues in Bosnia:
Privatization and the politics of reintegrating the displaced. In: UNRUH, J. & WILLIAMS, R. C. (eds.) Land and post-conflict peacebuilding London: Earthscan.
WILY, L. A. 2009. Tackling land tenure in the emergency to development
transition in post-conflict states: From restitution to reform. Uncharted territory. Overseas Development Institute.
Recommended