Book review: The Role of Community in Restorative Justice
| Author | Xiaoyu Yuan |
| Published date | 01 September 2016 |
| Date | 01 September 2016 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0269758016649069 |
| Subject Matter | Book reviews |
why there is little collaboration between the two types of practitioners and why, for instance, in the
Netherlands, a country with a strong victimological focus, very few victims are referred to RJ
by VSPs.
One slight disappointment of the book is that, whilst the authors provide a much required insight
into participating victims’ experiences, only a limited insight is provided into non-participating
victims. This cohort of victims requires further research and the authors acknowledge that the
limited numbers of non-participating victims impinges on the generalisability and validity of their
research findings. One positive finding though was that all of the non-participating victims stated
that the process of RJ should be offered to all victims of crime. Overall, the findings of this
European research invaluably contribute to the fields of criminal justice, victimology and restora-
tive justice through the perspective of the victims’ experiences of RJ.
Fernanda Fonseca Rosenblatt, with Foreword by Carolyn Hoyle
The Role of Community in Restorative Justice
London: Routledge, 2015, hbk, ISBN 978-1-138-85895-4, xvi þ226 pp.
Reviewed by: Xiaoyu Yuan, Leuven Institute of Criminology (LINC), Belgium
DOI: 10.1177/0269758016649069
Whilst no one will contest that community is a key th eme in today’s restorative justice (RJ)
rhetoric, it is perhaps not clear what form community involvement takes in so-called RJ activities.
Rosenblatt’s book, originally her doctoral study, therefore, comes at a good time, providing
clarification about the concept of community involvement. Her contribution lies in both a theore-
tical and empirical investigation, and most importantly, a well-structured, in-depth analysis of
both.
The author starts from a broad discussion of the restorative justice ‘spirit’ in chapter 1, and then
narrows down to RJ’s appeal to community in chapter 2. To summarize the author highlights the
‘problematic’ nature of such an appeal by posing a few provocative questions, such as ‘How more
concrete can community involvement get? ...What is so good about lay involvement? ...What
does the community get through its involvement in restorative justice practices? ...What are the
dangers of community involvement?’ (pp. 52–59); these key issues are addressed in the following
chapters.
These questions which are raised, in my opinion, are substantive and more concrete than the
simple critique or questioning of ‘community rhetoric’ by many other RJ scholars. But they are not
entirely new since, for example, Crawford and Clear (2001) asked who the ‘stakeholders’ in RJ are,
what stakeholding entails and how far the involvement of stakeholders should go. Exactly because
these questions are so important, I applaud Rosenblatt for exploring them.
In chapter 3, ‘Selecting a Case Study’, the author explains the legal framework of English youth
justice, which is useful for readers who are unfamiliar with the English context, including the
Crime and Disorder Act 1998, Youth Offending Teams (YOTs), the Youth Justice and Criminal
Evidence Act 1999, referral orders and youth offender panels. Simply put, youth offender panels
are a way of dealing with youth offending performed by community members (volunteers) and
YOT workers. There are different opinions about their restorative nature, but it is largely seen as a
Book reviews 359
To continue reading
Request your trial