The major research findings on the effectiveness of RJ relate to victim satisfaction, reduction in offending and impact on the community.
Research findings in relation to victims:
- victims who participate show consistently high levels of satisfaction and sense of fairness
- victims who participate have reduced fear, particularly of re-victimisation by the same offender
- victims can be as satisfied with indirect mediation as with face-to-face meetings.
The evidence available shows a more intense dialogue and powerful emotional impact is experienced in face-to-face meetings. However, when victims decline to participate or direct RJ is otherwise inappropriate,.they can still derive benefit from indirect mediation, which provides an acceptable alternative.
The Oxford University July 2002 report on the 46 YJB-funded RJ projects found that 79% of victims had been able to put the offence behind them and 70% thought that the offender better understood the impact of the offence on the victim. Key factors determining the victims’ level of satisfaction appear to be their positive feelings about the mediator or facilitator, their sense that the agreement is fair and their initial motivation to meet with the offender.
Research findings in relation to reducing offending:
- generally, reoffending rates after RJ are at least as low as for alternative approaches and considerably improved in many cases
- consistently more powerful impacts are reported from face-to-face RJ meetings
- consistently high levels of agreement are reached in face-to-face meetings
- rates of completion and compliance with agreements found to be higher than for court-ordered alternatives
- offenders have consistently high levels of satisfaction and sense of fairness.
Nugent et al. 1999, in a study of juveniles, found a marked improvement in reconviction rates. A large meta-study by Latimer, Dowden and Muise, 2001, of 35 programmes found that RJ produced on average some reduction in recidivism. Oxford University research on Thames Valley Police found that restorative cautioning appeared significantly more effective than traditional cautioning in reducing the risk of reoffending.
Much of the research is open to question because of the potential impact of self-selection, i.e. offenders who choose RJ may be more motivated and less likely to reoffend anyway. In the light of this, the emerging findings from random controlled trials are particularly important. Notably, the Australian Canberra RISE project, while finding no significant difference in reoffending for juvenile property theft or drink drivers, found for violent offenders, randomly assigned to a conference rather than court, a very substantial 38% lower reoffending rate. The Indianapolis Juvenile RJ Experiment in its initial findings, in connection with minor non-violent offences, reported a 25% reduction in reoffending after 12 months.
Community impact and involvement
Relatively few studies have addressed the impact on the wider community of RJ, but the available findings suggest that the ‘community of interest’ beyond the victim and the offender also report high levels of satisfaction. Many RJ projects explicitly involve members of the local community. The experience of establishing Youth Offender Panels has demonstrated the competence, as well as the potential energy, commitment and enthusiasm available from local community volunteers to work through RJ on the problems of youth crime. The involvement of local communities has potential benefits in increasing understanding, empowering local people, enhancing appropriate social control and modelling and reducing fear of crime.