Victims’ Material Losses

The Structure:

The fair market value of the house, shelter or other structure(s).  This is probably greater than the cost, as indicated in official records of the most recent tax assessment, for example.  That price may be a guide, but is likely to be out of date with the value that would be obtained if the property were to be sold on the market.  The market value would also likely be less than the “speculative value,” which is considered to be that value (price) that a speculator, investor or other interested party would anticipate after the demolition/eviction and after converting the structure--if partially retained—for eventual exchange or reassessment.  The reference for determining the market value would be reliable real estate agents, banks, or other parties involved in the sale and exchange of such properties.  The standard methodology would involve collecting three quotes/estimates and selecting the average, or taking the middle quote as the fair market value.

     In the likely event that no such property market is actively issuing quotes on the value of the affected property.  The remaining alternative method for determining market value would be the estimated cost of replacing the property at current market values.

     Note that the victim incurring the loss in this case would be the owner(s) and or title holder(s), including those owning the property individually, or collectively, under formal title, or by traditional tenure systems.

Plot:

The plot and the structure are considered separately in this methodology to accommodate systems where the two aspects of property value are determined separately, or by different methods.  For example, a cooperative arrangement may provide for outright title to the structure, but a “share” of the land area under it.  It also allows for disaggregating these values in the event of a dispute over one and not the other.  In the event that the structure and the land are both held in title by the same owner and the values are customarily assessed in combination, the structure and plot values could be combined in the matrix.

     The eviction and/or demolition may not involve the dispossession of land title or ownership of the plot on which the structure stands.  In that case, the evaluator would proceed to the next categories and not enter a value for the plot.  However, in some cases, such as in Israel, the land plot under a demolished structure may, perforce, be assumed by, or “revert to” the state as “state land” or “national land.”  The evaluator must be familiar with the local laws and regulations to determine if that is the case in the event of an eviction or demolition.  That may determine whether or not a value is entered in this category of the matrix or not.

  In the case of a housing plot being confiscated by the state, determining the value of that plot may be difficult if, again, no market value cane be determined for the affected area.  In that case, the methodology would involve determining the cost at current market value of a comparable site in another location.

Contents:

Each affected party should cooperate with the field workers to provide and inventory of the actual contents lost and damaged in the demolition.  The value of those contents for this quantification purpose is the replacement value of the items, not the market value.  The contents (furniture, clothing, foodstuffs, electronics, housewares items, etc.) would be subject to depreciation and the resale or fair-exchange values would not be sufficient to cover the cost of replacement.  The replacement value represents the actual cost of repurchasing items comparable in quality to those lost or damaged by the demolition.  (For heirlooms and other items sentimental value, a replacement costs should be included in this category; however, the nonmaterial loss or irreplaceability should be expressed in the “Victims’ Nonmaterial Losses” section of the matrix, with a narrative either included in the matrix or attached to it.

Collateral damage:

This section of the matrix allows for inclusion of the material losses to the indirect victims in particular, including neighbors’ and public property that are affected by the act.  In cases of violent eviction or demolition, using bulldozer or explosives, for example, nearby property can be damaged in various degrees, or destroyed.

Infrastructure:

This section refers to services and other infrastructure lost in the demolition/eviction/confiscation that would have to be replaced after the event.  For example, electricity provided at the original site may have to be replaced by a generator or purchasing energy from an alternate source.  Water, previously available from installed or nearby facilities may have to be replaced by purchasing water or hauling it from another source. The resulting added cost—including the relative cost of labor at the going rate of such work for hire, which is beyond the existing regular costs of obtaining same—is the value to be calculated here.

Business losses:

If the demolition/eviction/confiscation results in the loss of a business, or a portion of business, that cost is to be included here.  Those losses are the subject of subcategories to be detailed below.

     Equipment/inventory:

This includes the value of machinery and equipment, other installations, such as furnishings and built ins, as well as all stock and supplies.  This should include also the property belonging to others lost or damaged in the event.  For example, a laundry or repair service would hold clients’ property to be processed and returned.  The values of those items are also to be included in this figure.

     Prospective income:

The loss resulting from inability to deliver goods and services, and the anticipate profit from existing stores, orders, contracts, etc. that would be unfulfilled due to the event.  The short-term and long-term affects are to be calculated by different methods.  This category of loss follows the method developed ocally for determining “goodwill” as an asset, which would include the projected income from a pattern of business developed through the lifetime of the enterprise.  [Refer to insurance law methods.]

Mortgage, other debts and penalties:

The demolition/eviction/confiscation removes the owner’s relationship with the land and/or structure, contents, livestock, inventory and other matters of material value, such as materials and work performed for physical improvement to the property.  However, the event does not relieve the owner from responsibility to repay for those values obtained on a credit basis.  Those values, including any penalties and increased interest resulting from the event, are to be included here for both the short-term and long-term.  If a situation prevails, as in many legal systems, that a debtor relinquishes claims (as in a natural disaster, for example), then that cost should nonetheless be calculated and listed under the category of “Other than Victim’s Losses.”

Livestock:

The value of livestock lost and the treatment of those injured by the event is calculated here.  This would include also the labor costs for time spent in rounding up dispersed livestock at the rate of pay for such work for hire.  The calculus for these values includes the loss of anticipated returns from normal sale of, and/or produce from the animals, including their normally anticipated progeny over the short-term and long-term.  In the case of the animals’ value as beasts of burden, the returns on their labor are to be included in the figures provided under lost revenue, increased transportation costs, returns from crop loss, or other appropriate category.

Land:

The landed property not associated with the affected structure itself is to be calculated on the basis of fair market value, as with the structure and its plot entered above.  This could be land adjacent to the dwelling or other affected structure, or land confiscated separately.  This land could be lost entirely through confiscation, or its value could be reduced as a result of the eviction or demolition.  In the case of eviction, land title might not be lost outright, but the conditions created by the eviction may prevent the owner(s) from returning to or reclaiming their land.  In that case, the land in question would be calculated as an outright loss.

Trees/crops:

The value of a lost or damaged nonfruit-bearing, or otherwise unharvestable tree or other vegetation would be determined by the cost of purchasing and replanting a comparable replacement.  The nonmaterial, aesthetic, or sentimental value of the tree or other vegetation would be included by narrative in the Victim’s Nonmaterial Losses item under Environment or Heritage, as appropriate.  The value of harvestable trees and crops would include the value of the replacement itself for fruit-bearing trees and crops, as well as the (short-term and long-term) value of the harvest.  The loss of timber would be calculated accordingly also, with the value being the anticipated return from the harvesting or sale of the tree itself. 

     The ecological loss of vegetation, depending on the nature of the event—if by demolition were by fire or other destructive means—also carries a value.  Ecological damage is calculated on the basis of the restoration costs entailed.  Collateral damage to wildlife and other natural assets, owing to the damage and the time required to restore it, may be of both a calculable and incalculable loss.  Where possible, such calculable values should be included here.  Otherwise, those losses are to be recorded in the narrative section of both the Victim’s and Nonvictim’s Nonmaterial Losses, for those losses would be of a more public nature.

Lost/decreased wages/income:

The loss of a home, including subsequent short-term or long-term resettlement, may involve the loss of livelihood, whether that livelihood is linked to the dwelling and/or land lost.  In any event, wages would inevitably be lost (to victim or her/his employer) for nonproductive time attending to the event and its aftermath.  Resettlement can lead to loss of a job or jobs altogether, or necessitate securing alternative employment, especially if temporary or long-term resettlement is far from the regular workplace.  To calculate that value, one would subtract the short-term and long-term wages and other income of affected persons from the normal, anticipated wages and other income before the event.  Since obtaining new employment and other income involves a loss of certain benefits, such as accumulated vacation leave, seniority and other benefits, the relative loss of those values should be included here if calculable.  Job seniority may not be calculable value in monetary terms if it involves merely standing vis-à-vis colleagues.  However, if that seniority arguably would have led to promotion with material effect in the short or long terms, that value is to be factored here as well.

Health care:

The event itself or its aftermath may have negative health consequences.  Social science has recorded the effects of eviction and resettlement upon the increased mortality and morbidity rates of the affected communities.  While these notable consequences belong among the Victim’s Nonmaterial Losses, the care for these consequences has clearly calculable values.  The loss of life, limb and other health effects are the subject of the laws of states for the purposes of calculating victim compensation in insurance and other cases involving law suits.  A sample of such methods taken from such statutes could form a composite methodology for calculating victims’ health losses here.

     The overcrowding, such as in interim or alternative housing arrangements, often leads to negative health consequences for those evicted, as well as for those providing the alternative shelter in their own quarters.  The care and treatment of these health consequences (such as influenza, scabies, malnutrition, etc.) are an additional value added to these health care costs.

Interim housing:

Eviction, confiscation and demolition victims often seek alternative housing with relatives or friends, either within the community or elsewhere.  This housing has a value, which is to be calculated on the basis of fair rental rates for such shelter, whether rent is paid or not.  It remains a cost and value that is subsidized in one form or another. It also can lead to an actual expanded definition of what constitutes the victim, for persons and groups offering assistance in various forms can be counted as second tier victims by virtue of the loss—voluntary or otherwise—incurred as a result of servicing the persons directly affected by the eviction, confiscation or demolition.

Bureaucratic and legal fees:

While under threat of a violation, such as eviction, demolition and confiscation, the eventual victim would likely undergo costs related to both time spent and out-of-pocket costs in order to restrain or defend against the impending violation (if the threat is known in advance).  Both the time and monetary costs incurred by both bureaucratic processes and legal advice and defense work should be quantified.  Even if the legal advice given is free of charge to the affected person(s), those rendering the advice (NGO, CBO, other pro bono service) should put a value on that service for the purposes of this costing exercise.  (The costs of bureaucratic efforts by public personnel is determined below under “Other than Victims’ Nonmaterial Costs.”)

     Before the victim(s) can restore their proper housing, s/he conventionally undergoes a procedure and cost toward obtaining a license to rebuild or otherwise restore a dwelling.  The costs incurred in this process, including fees, legal service, bribes and other out-of-pocket expenses should be included as a category in its own right.

Alternative/replacement housing:

The cost of securing comparable housing on a permanent basis is represented here.  (Temporary lodging costs are treated above under “Interim housing.”)  The comparable housing is meant to include a dwelling with similar spatial dimensions, infrastructure, location and services as the home lost in the violation.  This may involve calculation of the replaceable features of the original dwelling with some adjustments, depending on circumstances.  For instance, a comparable dwelling space may be found near the source of livelihood, but may be in a differently priced market, and the adjusted figure would account for that.  That dwelling may be comparable in most aspects, but lack services or infrastructure.  In that case, the cost of obtaining the replacement services or infrastructure at the local rate would have to be added.  Likewise, if the replacement housing is comparable to the original dwelling lost, but its location is less convenient for commuting to one’s source of livelihood or family and original community members, that additional transportation cost would be included in the “Transportation” item below.

     Since this category of cost is of a more-or-less permanent nature, it should be cited in the “Long-term” cost column of the matrix.  Typically, obtaining permanent replacement housing is a lengthy process; therefore, calculating this costs would be a subject for, and a further argument for follow up monitoring of violation cases.

Resettlement:

The expenses of traveling and transport of goods to both interim and replacement housing sites form part of the resettlement cost.  This, too, would likely involve the efforts and time on the part of several persons—with equivalent values—in order to locate and secure the short-term and long-term housing alternatives.  All related costs should be calculated as much as possible.

Transportation costs:

This category is the amount of difference between the amounts spent on transportation as a result of the eviction, demolition or confiscation and the amounts spent (if any) on transportation in the normal conduct of life at the original place of residence.  Such values include expenses and time spent commuting to and from the source of livelihood, visiting family and community members, going to market, carrying out cultural and religious activities, visiting grave sites, conducting other official or private business, etc.

Victims’ Nonmaterial Losses

Health

Living space

Reconstruction licensing

Psychological harm

Disintegration of family

Loss of community (including support systems, child-care arrangements, domestic division of labor, etc.)

Investment in infrastructure (e.g., electricity, water, transport, roads)

Investment in sanitation and waste-management systems

Investment in security protection systems

Investment in educational infrastructure

Heritage:

For heirlooms and other items sentimental value, a replacement costs should be included in this category; however, the nonmaterial loss or irreplaceability should be expressed in the “Victims’ Nonmaterial Losses” section of the matrix, with a narrative either included in the matrix or attached to it.

Environment/ecology:

Standing/seniority

Political marginalization

Social marginalization

Further vulnerabilities

Other-than-Victims’ Material Costs

Police

Bulldozers

Lawyers

Army

Other forces

Bureaucratic and personnel costs

Other-than-Victims’ Nonmaterial Costs

Political legitimacy

Social costs

Rebellion

Type of cost/loss

Methodology

Short-term

Long-term

Victims’ Material Losses

Structure

Plot

Contents

Collateral damage

Infrastructure

Business losses

     Equipment/inventory

     Prospective income

Mortgage, other debt penalties

Livestock

Land

Trees/crops

Lost/decreased wages/income

Health care

Interim housing

Bureaucratic and legal fees

Alternative housing

Resettlement

Transportation costs

Subtotal

Victims’ Nonmaterial Losses

Health

Living space

Reconstruction licensing

Psychological harm

Disintegration of family

Loss of community

Inheritance

Environment/ecology

Standing/seniority

Political marginalization

Social marginalization

Further vulnerabilities

Police

Bulldozers

Lawyers

Army

Other forces

Bureaucratic and personnel

Subtotal

Political legitimacy

Social costs

Rebellion

Subtotal

Type of cost/loss

Methodology

Short-term

Long-term

Victims’ Material Losses

Structure

Plot