Conceptualizing Victims' ‘Restoration’ in Restorative Justice

Abstract

It has been argued that every scientific decision is co-determined by underlying worldviews. Which worldviews have guided research on restorative justice (RJ) with respect to the topic of ‘victims’ restoration'? In the RJ literature, ‘restoration’ appears from different perspectives, but it is not clear what the implications that these different perspectives might have for RJ practice and research are. This paper aims to a) describe how in RJ literature ‘restoration’ has been defined and measured, trying to uncover the underlying approaches adopted in both theory and research, and b) analyze their implications and limitations for the development of RJ theory and practice. The analysis shows that approaches differ in terms of how harm is defined and how the role of the victim is conceived, as well as with respect to the aspects that are considered to be most helpful for RJ practice. There also seems to be a gap between what has been theoretically defined and what has been empirically measured. Finally, it is concluded that the predominance of psychological models, the tendency to describe more than to explain, and the lack of a more comprehensive theoretical framework on victims' restoration are common characteristics of existing approaches.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 28 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.