1932

Abstract

Restorative justice may be effective because it is a street-level meta-strategy that is responsive and relational. Nonresponsive, nonrelational strategies that are enacted from desks are less likely to be effective; best-practice strategies may be less likely to be effective than wisely sequenced meta-strategies. Responsive regulation is conceived as a strategy of moving among strategies, as opposed to selection of any best strategy. Restorative justice is a way of selecting strategies to heal the hurts of injustice. Empathic empowerment of stakeholders who take turns to speak in a circle is at the heart of its strategy for strategy selection. Restorative justice can complement responsive regulation; at their best, they are mutually constitutive. Responsive regulation may work best when restorative justice is a first preference at the base of a pyramid of strategies. Responsive regulation involves listening and flexible deliberative choice among strategies arrayed in a pyramid. At the bottom of the pyramid are more frequently used, noncoercive strategies of first choice. Despite encouraging evidence that restorative and responsive regulation can work better than less dynamic top-down enforcement, the effectiveness of restorative justice and responsive regulation depends mainly on the efficacy of the interventions that are responsively chosen. It is time to redirect research and development to improving the quality of restorative-responsive strategy selection and the quality of the diverse strategies on offer.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-111720-013149
2021-10-13
2024-06-18
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/lawsocsci/17/1/annurev-lawsocsci-111720-013149.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-111720-013149&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

Literature Cited

  1. Ahmed E, Harris N, Braithwaite J, Braithwaite V. 2001. Shame Management Through Reintegration Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Alm J, Gerbrands P, Kirchler E. 2020. Using “responsive regulation” to reduce tax base erosion. Regul. Gov. In press. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12359
    [Crossref] [Google Scholar]
  3. Angel CM, Sherman LW, Strang H, Ariel B, Bennett S et al. 2014. Short-term effects of restorative justice conferences on post-traumatic stress symptoms among robbery and burglary victims: a randomized controlled trial. J. Exp. Criminol. 10:3291–307
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Ayres I, Braithwaite J. 1992. Responsive Regulation: Transcending the Deregulation Debate Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bonta J, Jesseman R, Rugge T, Cormier R 2006. Restorative justice and recidivism: Promises made, promises kept?. Handbook of Restorative Justice: A Global Perspective D Sullivan, L Tifft 10820. London: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Bouffard J, Cooper M, Bergset K. 2017. The effectiveness of various restorative justice interventions on recidivism outcomes among juvenile offenders. Youth Violence Juv. Justice 15:4465–80
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Bradshaw W, Roseborough D. 2005. Restorative justice dialogue: the impact of mediation and conferencing on juvenile recidivism. Fed. Probat 69:215–21
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bradshaw W, Roseborough D, Umbreit MS. 2006. The effect of victim offender mediation on juvenile offender recidivism: a meta-analysis. Confl. Resolut. Q. 24:187–98
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Braga A. 2008. Problem-Oriented Policing and Crime Prevention Monsey, NY: Crim. Justice Press
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Braithwaite J. 1985. To Punish or Persuade: Enforcement of Coal Mine Safety Albany: SUNY Press
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Braithwaite J 1998. Institutionalizing distrust, enculturating trust. Trust and Governance V Braithwaite, M Levi 343–75 New York: Russell Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Braithwaite J. 2002. Restorative Justice & Responsive Regulation Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Braithwaite J. 2005. Markets in Vice, Markets in Virtue. Sydney: Federation
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Braithwaite J. 2008. Regulatory Capitalism: How It Works, Ideas for Making It Work Better Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Braithwaite J. 2015a. Deliberative republican hybridity through restorative justice. Raisons Politiques 59:333–49
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Braithwaite J. 2015b. Paralegals changing lenses. Restor. Justice 3:311–24
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Braithwaite J. 2016a. Restorative justice and responsive regulation: the question of evidence. Res. Pap. No. 2016/51, RegNet Canberra: Aust .
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Braithwaite J. 2016b. In search of Donald Campbell. Criminol. Public Policy 15:2417–37
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Braithwaite J. 2018. Minimally sufficient deterrence. Crime Justice 47:69–118
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Braithwaite J. 2019. Crime as a cascade phenomenon. Int. J. Comp. Appl. Crim. Justice 44:3137–69
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Braithwaite J. 2020. Regulatory mix, collective efficacy, and crimes of the powerful. J. White Collar Corp. Crime 1:162–71
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Braithwaite J. 2021. Macrocriminology and Freedom Canberra: ANU Press. In press
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Braithwaite J, D'Costa B 2018. Cascades of Violence Canberra: ANU Press
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Braithwaite J, Gohar A. 2014. Restorative justice, policing and insurgency: learning from Pakistan. Law Soc. Rev. 48:3531–61
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Braithwaite J, Makkai T. 1991. Testing an expected utility model of corporate deterrence. Law Soc. Rev 25:17–40
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Braithwaite J, Makkai T, Braithwaite V. 2007. Regulating Aged Care. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Braithwaite V. 1995. Games of engagement: postures within the regulatory community. Law Policy 17:3225–55
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Braithwaite V 1998. Communal and exchange trust norms: their value base and relevance to institutional trust. Trust and Governance, ed. V Braithwaite, M Levi 46–74 New York: Russell Sage
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Braithwaite V. 2004. The hope process and social inclusion. Ann. Am. Acad. Political Soc. Sci 592:1128–51
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Braithwaite V. 2009. Defiance in Taxation and Governance: Resisting and Dismissing Authority in a Democracy Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Brehm S, Brehm J. 1981. Psychological Reactance: A Theory of Freedom and Control New York: Academic
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Burford G, Braithwaite J, Braithwaite B 2019. Restorative and Responsive Regulation of Human Services New York: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Choi KW, Chen XM, Wright S, Wu H. 2016. Responsive enforcement strategy and corporate compliance with disclosure regulations Work. Pap., RegNet http://ssrn.com/abstract=2722923
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Cohen N. 2021. Policy Entrepreneurship at the Street Level. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Collier P. 2009. Wars, Guns, and Votes: Democracy in Dangerous Places New York: Harper
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Daly A, Barrett G. 2014. Independent cost benefit analysis of the Yuendumu Mediation and Justice Committee Rep. http://www.centraldesert.nt.gov.au/sites/centraldesert.nt.gov.au/files/attachments/yuendumu_cba_0.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  37. DiClemente C, Corno C, Graydon M, Wiprovnick A, Knoblach D. 2017. Motivational interviewing, enhancement, and brief interventions over the last decade: a review of reviews of efficacy and effectiveness. Psychol. Addict. Behav. 31:8862–87
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Doyle M, Sambanis N. 2006. Making War and Building Peace Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Eck J. 2002. Learning from experience in problem-oriented policing and situational prevention: the positive functions of weak evaluations and the negative functions of strong ones. Crime Prev. Stud 14::93–117
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Eddy J, Leve L, Fagot B. 2001. Coercive family processes: a replication and extension of Patterson's coercion model. Aggress. Behav. 27:114–25
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Gunningham N, Grabosky P. 1998. Smart Regulation Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Gunningham N, Sinclair D. 2002. Leaders & Laggards: Next-Generation Environmental Regulation Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Hultman L, Kathman J, Shannon M. 2013. United Nations peacekeeping and civilian protection in civil war. Am. J. Political Sci. 57:4875–91
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Jenkins A. 1994. The role of managerial self-efficacy in corporate compliance with the law. Law Hum. Behav 18:71–88
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Kennedy D. 2009. Deterrence and Crime Prevention: Reconsidering the Prospect of Sanction New York: Routledge
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Kennedy J, Tuliao A, Flower K, Tibbs J, McChargue D. 2019. Long-term effectiveness of a brief restorative justice intervention. Int. J. Offender Ther. Comp. Criminol 63:13–17
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Kleiman M. 2009. When Brute Force Fails: How to Have Less Crime and Less Punishment Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Knauft B, Malbrancke A. 2017. Homicide reduction and conflict management in the Nomad Sub-District, Papua New Guinea Proj. Rep., Harry Frank Guggenheim Found. New York:
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Latimer J, Dowden C, Muise D. 2001. The Effectiveness of Restorative Justice Practices: A Meta-Analysis Ottawa, Can: Dep. Justice
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Lee S, Braithwaite V. 2020. Missing in action: bridging capital and cross-boundary discourse. Ann. Am. Acad. Political Soc. Sci 691:1258–75
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Lipsey M. 2009. The primary factors that characterize effective interventions with juvenile offenders: a meta-analytic overview. Vict. Offenders 4:2124–47
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Lipsky M. 1980. Street-Level Bureaucracy New York: Russell Sage Found.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Llewellyn J 2011. Restorative justice: thinking relationally about justice. Being Relational, ed. J Downie, J Llewellyn 89–108 Vancouver: UBC Press
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Lundahl B, Kunz C, Brownell C, Tollefson D, Burke B. 2010. A meta-analysis of motivational interviewing: twenty-five years of empirical studies. Res. Soc. Work Pract. 20:2137–60
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Lundahl B, Moleni T, Burke B, Butters R, Tollefson D et al. 2013. Motivational interviewing in medical care settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Patient Educ. Couns. 93:2157–68
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Makkai T, Braithwaite J. 1993. Praise, pride and corporate compliance. Int. J. Sociol. Law 21:73–91
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Makkai T, Braithwaite J. 1994a. Reintegrative shaming and regulatory compliance. Criminology 32:3361–85
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Makkai T, Braithwaite J. 1994b. The dialectics of corporate deterrence. J. Res. Crime Delinq 31:4347–73
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Makkai T, Braithwaite J. 1996. Procedural justice and regulatory compliance. Law Hum. Behav 20:83–98
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Maruna S. 2001. Making Good: How Ex-Convicts Reform and Rebuild Their Lives Washington, DC: Am. Psychol. Assoc.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Matza D. 1964. Delinquency and Drift. New York: Wiley and Sons
    [Google Scholar]
  62. McCold P 2008. Evaluation of a restorative milieu: restorative practices in context. Restorative Justice: From Theory to Practice H Ventura 99–138 Bingley, UK: Emerald
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Mikler J. 2009. Greening the Car Industry: Varieties of Capitalism and Climate Change Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Mills L, Barocas B, Butter R, Ariel B 2019. A randomized controlled trial of restorative justice-informed treatment for domestic violence crimes. Nat. Hum. Behav. 3:121284–94
    [Google Scholar]
  65. Morrison B. 2007. Restoring Safe School Communities Sydney: Federation
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Murphy K. 2004. The role of trust in nurturing compliance: a study of accused tax avoiders. Law Hum. Behav 28:2187–209
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Native Couns. Serv. Alta 2001. A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Hollow Water's Community Holistic Circle Healing Process Ottawa, Can: Public Saf. Can.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Nielsen V, Parker C. 2009. Testing responsive regulation in regulatory enforcement. Regul. Gov 3:4376–99
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Nonet P, Selznick P. 2001. Toward Responsive Law: Law and Society in Transition Piscataway, NJ: Trans. Publ.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Papu N, Wiessner P. 2018. The challenges of village courts and Operation Mekim Save Discuss. Pap. 2018/01 Dep. Public Aff., Aust. Natl. Univ Canberra: Aust .
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Parker C. 2002. The Open Corporation: Effective Self-Regulation and Democracy Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Parker C, Braithwaite J 2003. Regulation. The Oxford Handbook of Legal Studies P Cane, M Tushnet 119–45 Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  73. Patterson G. 1982. Coercive Family Process Eugene, OR: Castalia
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Pease K. 1998. Crime, labour and the wisdom of Solomon. Policy Stud 19:3–4255–65
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Pennell J, Burford G. 2000. Family group decision making: protecting children and women. Child Welf 79:2131–58
    [Google Scholar]
  76. Poulson B. 2003. A third voice: A review of empirical research on the psychological outcomes of restorative justice. Utah Law Rev. 2003.1167–203
    [Google Scholar]
  77. Power M. 1997. The Audit Society: Rituals of Verification Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  78. Pratt T, Cullen F 2005. Assessing macro-level predictors and theories of crime: a meta-analysis. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research M Tonry 373–450 Chicago: Univ. Chicago Press
    [Google Scholar]
  79. Rains SA. 2013. The nature of psychological reactance revisited: a meta-analytic review. Hum. Commun. Res. 39:147–73
    [Google Scholar]
  80. Rickwood D, Braithwaite J. 1994. Why openness with health inspectors pays. Aust. J. Public Health 18:2165–69
    [Google Scholar]
  81. Rossner M. 2013. Just Emotions: Rituals of Restorative Justice Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  82. Sabel C, Herrigel G, Kristensen P. 2018. Regulation under uncertainty: the coevolution of industry and regulation. Regul. Gov. 12:3371–94
    [Google Scholar]
  83. Sampson R, Bartusch D. 1998. Legal cynicism and tolerance of deviance: the neighborhood context of racial differences. Law Soc. Rev. 32:4777–804
    [Google Scholar]
  84. Sampson R, Raudenbush S, Earls F. 1997. Neighborhoods and violent crime: a multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science 277:5328918–24
    [Google Scholar]
  85. Schell-Busey N, Simpson S, Rorie M, Alper M 2016. What works? A systematic review of corporate crime deterrence of corporate crime deterrence. Criminol. Public Policy 15:2387–416
    [Google Scholar]
  86. Selznick P. 1994. The Moral Commonwealth: Social Theory and the Promise of Community Berkeley: Univ. Calif. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  87. Shapland J, Atkinson A, Atkinson H, Dignan J, Edwards L et al. 2008. Does Restorative Justice Affect Reconviction? The Fourth Report from the Evaluation of Three Schemes London: Minist. Justice
    [Google Scholar]
  88. Sherman L, Harris H. 2015. Increased death rates of domestic violence victims from arresting versus warning suspects in the Milwaukee Domestic Violence Experiment. J. Exp. Criminol 11:1–20
    [Google Scholar]
  89. Strang H. 2002. Repair or Revenge: Victims and Restorative Justice. Oxford, UK: Oxford Univ. Press
    [Google Scholar]
  90. Strang H, Sherman L, Mayo-Wilson E, Woods D, Ariel B 2013. Restorative justice conferencing (RJC) using face-to-face meetings of offenders and victims: effects on offender recidivism and victim satisfaction. A systematic review. Campbell Syst. Rev. 12:1–59
    [Google Scholar]
  91. Tyler T, Sherman L, Strang H, Barnes G, Woods D. 2007. Reintegrative shaming, procedural justice, and recidivism: the engagement of offenders’ psychological mechanisms in the Canberra RISE Drinking-and-Driving Experiment. Law Soc. Rev. 41:3553–85
    [Google Scholar]
  92. van der Heijden J. 2020. Responsive regulation in practice: a review of the international academic literature State Art Regul. Gov Pap., Victoria Univ. Wellington Wellington, NZ:
    [Google Scholar]
  93. Walter BF, Howard LM, Fortna VP. 2020. The extraordinary relationship between peacekeeping and peace. Br. J. Political Sci. In press
    [Google Scholar]
  94. Weatherburn D, Macadam M. 2013. A review of restorative justice responses to offending. Evid. Base 2013:11–20
    [Google Scholar]
  95. Weisburd D, Telep C, Hinkle J, Eck J. 2010. Is problem-oriented policing effective in reducing crime and disorder?. Criminol. Public Policy 9:1139–72
    [Google Scholar]
  96. Wiessner P, Papu N. 2012. Toward peace: foreign arms and indigenous institutions in a Papua New Guinea society. Science 337:61021651–54
    [Google Scholar]
  97. Wilson D, Olaghere A, Kimbrell C. 2017. Effectiveness of restorative justice principles in juvenile justice: a meta-analysis Grant 2015-JF-FX-0063, Off. Juv Justice Delinq. Prev., US Dep. Justice Washington, DC:
    [Google Scholar]
  98. Wong J, Bouchard J, Gravel J, Bouchard M, Morselli C. 2016. Can at-risk youth be diverted from crime? A meta-analysis of restorative diversion programs. Crim. Justice Behav. 43:101310–29
    [Google Scholar]
  99. World Popul. Rev 2021a. Suicide rate by country 2021 https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/suicide-rate-by-country
    [Google Scholar]
  100. World Popul. Rev 2021b. Murder rate by country 2021 https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/murder-rate-by-country
    [Google Scholar]
  101. Yeong S, Moore E 2020. Circle sentencing, incarceration and recidivism Rep., Bur. Crime Stat. Res Sydney: Aust .
    [Google Scholar]
  102. Zhang Y, Xia YW 2021. Can restorative justice reduce incarceration? A story from China. Justice Q In press
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-111720-013149
Loading
/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-111720-013149
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Review Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error