The Effectiveness of Restorative Justice

Fulham, L., Blais, J., Rugge, T., and Schultheis, E.A., 2023. The effectiveness of restorative justice programs: A meta-analysis of recidivism and other relevant outcomes. Criminology & Criminal Justice. https://doi.org/10.1177/17488958231215228

Fulham et al. (2023) conduct a meta-analysis to estimate the effectiveness of restorative justice (RJ) programs to reduce recidivism and improve outcomes regarding victim and client satisfaction, procedural justice, and accountability. The review sample has examined 27 articles conducted in 34 different samples over 40 years. The results had revealed that the restorative justice programs were weakly correlated to the general recidivism, but nondestructively related to the violent recidivism. One strength of the study is the scale on which it was conducted, which inspired a synthesis of findings of different studies to create a total image of the effects of restorative justice. The other strength is the rigid methodological framework, which allowed the authors to evaluate the standards of the sample studies included and reduce the possible bias. However, a drawback of the study is that not all studies reviewed were of high quality, thereby partially impacting the validity of the results. Lastly, these results of violent recidivism did not hold much value at all, which could be indicative of the fact that RJ is not as efficient as it is with more serious crimes.

Additionally, the article’s conclusion supported the view that restorative justice programs (RJP) yield limited results in curbing recidivism. Furthermore, it is also reversed to fight when the recidivism outcome is a failure: i.e., where the clients and victims are contented. Moreover, the research recommends that RJ consider restorative outcomes such as client reintegration and recidivism outcomes. The source may hold an accurate value regarding criminology and restorative justice models, particularly alternative justice models, which are currently on rocket fuel. Therefore, it offers some valuable suggestions on the impacts of RJ on criminal nature and general society, as well as the victim interaction and satisfaction.

Gaffney, H., Jolliffe, D., Eggins, E., Ferreira, J.G., Skinner, G., Ariel, B., and Strang, H., 2024. Protocol: The effect of restorative justice interventions for young people on offending and reoffending: A systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 20(2), p.e1403. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1403

The article by Gaffney et al. (2024) suggests a methodological approach to a systematic review of restorative justice interventions (RJIs) to attempt to intervene and change offending and reoffending among the young population. This report reviews quantitative and qualitative studies of various RJ strategies, including mediating between individual and family members and family conferencing. The research focuses on whether such programs are effective for the youngsters at risk of crime (criminality) and aims to record situations that might force the juveniles to succeed. Thus, the strength of this article is the mixed method as both quantitative and qualitative results were used, and a sufficient amount of space was considered. Moreover, this makes the results more generalizable as numerous RJIs were used and the participants were diverse. Lastly, limitations of the article include the relevance of youth, which proves inhibitory in transferring the knowledge of the youth to adult populations, and the application of process evaluations in the study, which are expected not to cover all RJI emotional and restorative outcomes.

In addition, the article estimates that the potential of the RJIs to lessen youth offending is enormous and can only be erroneous if it is applied accurately and solely when the results of the use change depending upon the different outcomes of variables like the quality of the facilitation used, the form of intervention, and the atmosphere in which the RJ process is implemented. Relevance to the field of criminology is the growing interest in alternative justice systems, where the information from this source would be valuable as additional data regarding the success of RJ interventions in juvenile justice systems. Lastly, the research results can be applied to criminologists and policymakers who want to devise more restorative and rehabilitative interventions for young offenders.

Kimbrell, C.S., Wilson, D.B. and Olaghere, A., 2023. Restorative justice programs and practices in juvenile justice: An updated systematic review and meta‐analysis for effectiveness. Criminology & Public Policy, 22(1), pp.161-195. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12613

Kimbrell et al.'s (2023) article is a subsequent update to a systematic review and meta-analysis of restorative justice (RJ) program effectiveness, where juvenile justice is involved. The appraisal comprised 57 reports and 79 measurements that were reduced to the effect of the RJ program on delinquency, victim outcomes, and non-delinquency outcomes. In the conclusion, the authors made a supposition that RJ programs will result in minor-to-moderate re-offending changes and higher victim satisfaction and fairness. One of the strengths of this article is the combination of both random and quasi-experimental approaches in the same study, which provides the reader with a general view of the evidence. This is what the study district lacks, and given the quasi-experimental nature, there is a repugnance to implication that may affect the externalization of results. Additionally, the random assignment studies had more minor statistically insignificant effects for delinquency outcomes, which explains that the effectiveness of RJ may not be as strong as initially claimed.

Furthermore, Kimbrell et al. (2023) conclude that the outcomes of the RJ programs are moderately effective in reducing delinquency, and the research findings are more promising for improving perceived fairness and satisfaction of victims and youth. This conclusion implies that it is necessary to view RJ programs as more than just a mechanism to reduce recidivism, noting their restorative benefits for both the victim and the offender. The source is highly relevant to criminology, notably juvenile justice, as there is significant evidence regarding the effectiveness of the alternative justice practices. It also plays a part in the debate of models of justice between restorative justice models and punitive juvenile justice models. It also provides valuable insights into how restorative justice (RJ) can be practiced within real-life juvenile justice systems.

Lodi, E., Perrella, L., Lepri, G.L., Scarpa, M.L. and Patrizi, P., 2021. Use of restorative justice and restorative practices at school: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(1), p.96. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19010096

Lodi et al. (2021) employ a systematic literature review based on the implementation of restorative justice (RJ) and the concept of restorative practices (RP) in schools between 2010 and 2021. This review includes 34 studies specifically concentrating on the effectiveness of the follow-up practices as a strategy that promotes a favorable school climate, reduces the number of suspensions, and enhances students' social and emotional skills. The remaining restorative practices suggested by the authors are circles, restorative conferences, and peer mediation, and how they positively influence discipline and student motivation. The power of the given source is in the fact that it is a literature review that contains a comprehensive description of 34 extensive and diversified studies that have a global comprehensive approach within the implementation of RJ and RP in different school cultures. However, there is a significant weakness in that most qualitative information is collected on such a level that we cannot come to a final decision and move into a long tunnel on whether the practices are effective or not.

Additionally, the article's findings also conclude that restorative justice and restorative practices have a significant potential effect on climate change because of reduced effectiveness of disciplinary intervention processes (suspension), emergence, and development of beneficial relationships between the teacher and students. The authors emphasize the importance of such beneficial findings in raising awareness about gathering more measurable statistics through meta-analysis to provide more substantial evidence. The article is highly relevant in criminology, as it will give an insight into the use of restorative justice beyond the criminal justice system and how restorative actions could help improve rehabilitation and community building, significantly reducing the use of punishments in schools.

Rossner, M. and Taylor, H., 2024. The transformative potential of restorative justice: what the mainstream can learn from the margins. Annual Review of Criminology, 7(1), pp.357-381. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-criminol-030421-040921

Rossner and Taylor examine how restorative justice (RJ) has grown and ponder whether it can tackle pressing global challenges, from racial inequity to sexual violence and climate-related injury. The authors criticize mainstreaming RJ and affirm its eagerness to become what the criminal justice system demands, which is undermined in its efforts to change. Therefore, new methods, trained on the periphery of where the RJ is deployed to cause systemic annihilation and accumulate community-technical measures, are also addressed and confronted. The strength of the article includes a detailed discussion on the theoretical side and the practical side of RJ, which is backed by properly conducted and established case studies under diverse circumstances. The article's weaknesses are rooted in using case studies that might not be representative enough of the general effects of RJ, and the article lacks a concrete plan for addressing the problem of scaling up RJ without sacrificing its change agenda.

In addition, the article concludes that RJ possesses a transformative potential mainly when it operates as an innovation and in a partner case in a community setting based on equalized institutional support. Rossner and Taylor mention that the potential future success of RJ lies in its ability to relate interpersonal justice to structural reform, which is aimed at healing and transforming society in their study. Its findings indicate that RJ may utilize its adaptability to evolve and constantly alter its strategy in accordance with the needs that can change over time, in accordance with the necessity to handle structural instances of racial and gender-based injustice. Thus, it relates to the field of criminology due to the disapproved character of the traditional understanding of justice in this article and the suggestions of bigger and more efficient solutions.