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.