Restorative Justice: An International Journal Annual Lecture

Session Submission Type: Complete Thematic Panel

Abstract

In the past two decades restorative justice has been the subject of more rigorous criminological research than perhaps any other programme focused on crime prevention and the welfare of victims. Yet the misalignment of research and practice has resulted in much confusion about what constitutes evidence-based practice and what kinds of practice are supported by the existing research base. We propose that this has led to a crowded mix of restorative justice practices around the world with three serious deficits in their application. First, many of those practices remain untested, with tested practices sometimes being cited to support them; second, practices that have been rigorously tested and found to be effective are not widely used; third, problems remain in expanding existing effective practices and in creating an evidence base about the best ways of ensuring that appropriate cases are able to access good restorative programmes. We review this state of play and will suggest some strategies to address these deficits in the hope that restorative justice research will be applied more broadly and developed in directions that will lead to better practice and better outcomes for victims, offenders and communities.

Sub Unit

• Area IV. Criminal Justice Policy and Practice / 42. Community Corrections

Individual Presentations

• The Truth about Restorative Justice: Three Holes in Evidence-Based Practice - Lawrence W. Sherman, Cambridge University / University of Maryland; Heather Strang, Cambridge University

Participants

• Stephan Parmentier, University of Leuven

• Ivo Aertsen, KU Leuven Institute of Criminology

• Estelle Zinsstag, LINC, University of Leuven (Belgium)

• Elmar Weitekamp, University of Tuebingen

• Shadd Maruna, Rutgers University

• Joanna Shapland, University of Sheffield