Skip to main content
Log in

Civic implications of restorative justice theory: Citizen participation and criminal justice policy

  • Published:
Policy Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Restorative justice, a normative theory and reform movement emphasizing dialogue and reconciliation between victim, offender, and community, is a widespread, if experimental, part of the practice of criminal justice in the United States. This essay argues that restorative justice draws connections between civic engagement and punishment practices that distinguish it as a normative theory of criminal justice. Advocates of restorative justice expect the growth of non-punitive attitudes and the weakening of support for incarceration to emerge from a public and lay-oriented context of adjudication. The role of lay participation in achieving social change, although prominent in restorative justice critiques of mainstream criminal justice norms and practices, has not been clearly articulated in practical terms. Significant ambiguities remain regarding the degree of lay participation, scope of authority, and the focus of restorative justice forums. The essay argues that an adequate assessment of restorative justice experiments should include an analysis of their impact on public attitudes towards crime and crime control policy and not simply on their impact on the specific victims and offenders involved. The link between less incarceration and restorative justice forums is public willingness to grant them the authority to hear and sanction offenses that would ordinarily receive incarceration. Whether and how they can influence broader public attitudes, then, is a critical test of restorative justice effectiveness.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bazemore, G. (2000). 'Community justice and a vision of collective efficacy: The case of restorative conferencing,’ Criminal Justice 2000 3: 225-297.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazemore, G. and M. Umbreit (2001). 'A comparison of four restorative conferencing models,’ Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite, J. (1999). 'Restorative justice: Assessing optimistic and pessimistic accounts,’ in M. Tonry, ed., Crime and Justice: A Review of Research 25: 1-127. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite, J. (2000). 'Survey article: Repentance rituals and restorative justice,’ The Journal of Political Philosophy 8: 115-131.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite, J. (2002). Restorative Justice and Responsive Regulation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite, J. and P. Pettit (1990). Not Just Deserts: A Republican Theory of Criminal Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braithwaite, J. and P. Pettit (1994). 'Republican criminology and victim advocacy,’ Law & Society Review 28: 765-777.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christie, N. (1977). 'Conflicts as property,’ British Journal of Criminology 17: 1-15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christie, N. (1981). Limits to Pain. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, F. T., B. S. Fisher and B. K. Applegate (2000). 'Public opinion about punishment and corrections,’ in M. Tonry, ed., Crime and Justice: A Review of Research 27: 1-79. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly, K. (2002). 'Restorative justice: The real story,’ Punishment and Society 4: 55-79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daly, K. (1999). 'Does punishment have a place in restorative justice.’ Unpublished paper presented to the Australia and New Zealand Society of Criminology annual conference; http://www.gu.edu. au/school/ccj/kdaly.html.

  • deLeon, P. (1992). 'The democratization of the policy sciences,’ Public Administration Review 52: 125-129.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doble Research Associates and Judith Greene (2000). Attitudes towards Crime and Punishment in Vermont: Public Opinion about an Experiment with Restorative Justice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: John Doble Research Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dooley, M. (1995). 'Restorative justice in Vermont: A work in progress,’ in Community Justice: Striving for Safe, Secure, and Just Communities. Washington, DC.: National Institute of Corrections, pp. 31-36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorf, M. C. and C. F. Sabel (1998). 'A constitution of democratic experimentalism,’ Columbia Law Review 98: 267-473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. S. (1996). Democracy in Capitalist Times: Ideals, Limits and Struggles. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. S. (2000). Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dzur, A. W. (2003). 'Restorative justice and civic accountability for punishment,’ Polity, forthcoming.

  • Dzur, A. W. and S. M. Olson (2004). 'The value of community participation in restorative justice.’ Journal of Social Philosophy, forthcoming.

  • Dzur, A. W. and A. Wertheimer (2002). 'Forgiveness and public deliberation: The practice of restorative justice,’ Criminal Justice Ethics 21: 3-20.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feinberg, J. (1970). 'The expressive function of punishment,’ in Doing and Deserving: Essays in the Theory of Responsibility. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, F. (1993). 'Citizen participation and the democratization of policy expertise: From theoretical inquiry to practical cases,’ Policy Sciences 26: 165-187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, F. (2000). Citizens, Experts, and the Environment. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garland, D. (2001). The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karp, D. (2001). 'Harm and repair: Observing restorative justice in Vermont,’ Justice Quarterly 18: 727-757.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karp, D. (2002). 'The offender/community encounter: Stakeholder involvement in the Vermont reparative boards,’ in T. Clear and D. Karp, eds., What is Community Justice? Case Studies of Restorative Justice and Community Supervision. Santa Monica: Sage Publications, pp. 61-86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karp, D., M. Sprayregen and K. M. Drakulich (2002). 'Vermont reparative probation year 2000 outcome evaluation final report.’ Unpublished report.

  • Kurki, L. (2000). 'Restorative and community justice in the United States,’ in M. Tonry, ed., Crime and Justice: A Review of Research 27: 235-303. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levrant, S., F. T. Cullen, B. Fulton and J. F. Wozniak (1999). 'Reconsidering restorative justice: The corruption of benevolence revisited?’ Crime and Delinquency 45: 3-27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lively, J. (1965). The Social and Political Thought of Alexis de Tocqueville. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manin, B. (1987). 'On legitimacy and political deliberation,’ Political Theory 15: 338-368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. (1993). 'Deliberative democracy and social choice,’ in David H., ed., Prospects for Democracy: North, South, East, West. Stanford: Stanford University Press, pp. 74-92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, J. G. (1988). 'Forgiveness, mercy, and the retributive emotions,’ Criminal Justice Ethics 7: 3-15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, J. G. and J. Hampton (1988). Forgiveness and Mercy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nozick, R. (1981). Philosophical Explanations. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, S. M. and A. W. Dzur (2003). 'Reconstructing professional roles in restorative justice programs.’ Utah Law Review 2003: 57-89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, S. M. and A. W. Dzur (2004). 'Revisiting informal justice: Restorative justice and democratic professionalism,’ Law & Society Review, forthcoming.

  • Perry, J. G. and J. F. Gorczyk (1997). 'Restructuring corrections: Using market research in Vermont,’ Corrections Management Quarterly 1 (3): 26-35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pettit, P. (1997). 'Republican theory and criminal punishment,’ Utilitas 9: 59-79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J. V. and L. J. Stalans (1997). Public Opinion, Crime, and Criminal Justice. Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, J.V. and L. J. Stalans (1998). 'Crime, criminal justice, and public opinion,’ in M. Tonry, ed., The Handbook of Crime & Punishment. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 31-57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Storing, H. J. and M. Dry, eds. (1985). The Anti-Federalist: Writings by the Opponents of the Constitution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tocqueville, A. de (2000). Democracy in America. H. C. Mansfield and D. Winthrop, trans. and ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tonry, M. (1998). 'Crime and punishment in America,’ in M. Tonry, ed., The Handbook of Crime & Punishment. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 3-27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Umbreit, M. S. (1994). Victim Meets Offender: The Impact of Restorative Justice in Mediation. Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Umbreit, M. S. (2001). The Handbook of Victim Offender Mediation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Ness, D. and K. Heetderks Strong (1997). Restoring Justice. Cincinnati: Anderson Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • von Hirsch, A. (1998). 'Penal theories,’ in M. Tonry, ed., The Handbook of Crime & Punishment. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 659-682.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walther, L. and J. Perry (1997). 'The Vermont reparative probation program,’ ICCA Journal on Community Corrections 8: 26-34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zehr, H. (1990). Changing Lenses: A New Focus for Criminal Justice. Scottdale, PA: Herald Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dzur, A.W. Civic implications of restorative justice theory: Citizen participation and criminal justice policy. Policy Sciences 36, 279–306 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1023/B:OLIC.0000017480.70664.0c

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/B:OLIC.0000017480.70664.0c

Keywords

Navigation