Public Opinion and Restorative Justice
Julian V. Roberts of the University of Ottawa and Loretta Stalans of Loyola University are conducting a research review of public opinion research in restorative justice. The purpose of the project is to identify which elements of restorative justice receive public approval and which do not. Julian Roberts has provided a brief description of the project.
Within the past decade, restorative justice has become a global phenomenon, with restorative programs and policies instituted in most industrialized and many developing nations. Restorative initiatives exist at all stages of the criminal justice process, from policing to community-based corrections. Although voluminous (and proliferating), the scholarly literature on restorative justice has to date neglected one critical issue: the nature of public opinion with respect to this new justice paradigm. Researchers have explored the effectiveness of restorative initiatives such as conferences and circles, the benefits for crime victims and sundry other topics, yet almost nothing has been written about public reaction to the theory and practice of restorative justice. It is a curious omission, in light of the importance of the issue of community in restorative justice.
With the exception of a brief discussion in Cullen, Fisher and Applegate’s recent review of public attitudes to crime and justice, (2000), public opinion researchers too, have generally neglected to examine this issue. Almost all the research into public attitudes to criminal justice has explored components of the conventional criminal process, or elements of retributive justice (e.g., Flanagan and Longmire, 1996; Roberts and Stalans, 1997; Roberts, 1992). One possible explanation for this oversight is the rapid ascendancy of restorative justice in recent years with the field of public opinion being slow to react.
The goal of this research activity review is to explore the nature of public reaction to restorative justice, drawing upon related international research published in English over the period 1982-2002. Our primary emphasis is upon the findings from quantitative surveys using representative samples of the public (e.g., Mattinson and Mirrlees-Black, 2000), although qualitative surveys are also included (e.g., New Zealand Department of Justice, 1995). The aim of the review is not to determine whether the public is for or against restorative justice, but rather to determine which elements of the new paradigm generate public approval, and which features are likely to provoke public opposition. As well, we attempt to uncover the reasons why laypersons may oppose or support restorative initiatives. Particular emphasis is placed upon restorative initiatives at the sentencing stage because the volume of public opinion research is greatest for this component of the criminal process. Much of this literature has included stimulus materials with a restorative element. In addition, it is at the sentencing stage that the differences between restorative and criminal justice become most marked.
If anyone is aware of public opinion surveys on restorative justice in general, or specific programs such as VORP and mediation, we would be most grateful to hear. We have conducted a thorough literature review of the topic, but in our experience, a considerable volume of research in the area often remains unpublished. We can be reached at: jvr1@sympatico.ca.
Julian V. Roberts
February 2003
