Over the past 20 years the claims of restorative justice advocates have been considerable. Th ey include the reduction and prevention of reoff ending, greater social cohesion through joint problem solving by neighborhoods and communities, and more harmony in schools and other institutions. Research has addressed many of these claims, and much is now known about the eff ects of restorative justice on all these dimensions. However, the only claim for which unequivocal evidence now stands is the greater benefi t that restorative justice off ers victims of crime who are willing to meet their admitted off enders. Th is evidence emerges from a large number of observational and comparative studies conducted in recent years [e.g., Umbreit and Coates, 1992, 1993; Umbreit, 1994, 1995, 2001; Miers et al., 2001; Nugent et al., 2003]and from a meta-analysis of 35 restorative justice programs carried out by Latimer et al. . Perhaps the most compelling evidence, however, is off ered by fi ndings from randomized controlled trials comparing the benefi ts available to victims from restorative justice with that from courts and other formal justice procedures [Sherman and Strang, 2007].
|Title of host publication||International handbook of Victimology|
|Editors||S Shoham, P Knepper, M. Kett|
|Place of Publication||Boca Raton, FL, USA|
|Publisher||Taylor & Francis Group|
|Publication status||Published - 2010|