“…Drawing on this research, Daly (2000) was the first scholar to argue that restorative justice comprises alternative punishments rather than itself being an alternative to punishment. In her view, “punishment, broadly defined to include retributive censure, should form part of what occurs in a restorative justice process” (Daly, 2000, p. 41; see also Daly, 2002, 2013; Daly & Proietti‐Scifoni, 2011). Inspired by Daly's research, Ashworth stated that:Even if one were to adopt a narrow definition (that only measures intended to be punitive count as punishment [a reference to Walgrave's aforementioned intentionality argument]), many restorative justice outcomes satisfy that definition inasmuch as they are known to impose obligations or deprivations on offenders (Ashworth, 2002, p. 591).From the early 2000s, Duff also wrote about restorative justice.…”
This article has two objectives, both of which are new. First, it presents a new framework of punishment in nine dimensions, which makes it possible to distinguish systematically between different conceptualizations of the nature of punishment. Second, using the framework, it discusses the relationship between restorative justice and punishment, showing that some cases of restorative justice constitute punishment from the perspectives of some of the punishment positions in the framework but not for others. Thus, according to some positions, restorative justice (mediation, conferences, circles, etc.) is punishment.
“…Drawing on this research, Daly (2000) was the first scholar to argue that restorative justice comprises alternative punishments rather than itself being an alternative to punishment. In her view, “punishment, broadly defined to include retributive censure, should form part of what occurs in a restorative justice process” (Daly, 2000, p. 41; see also Daly, 2002, 2013; Daly & Proietti‐Scifoni, 2011). Inspired by Daly's research, Ashworth stated that:Even if one were to adopt a narrow definition (that only measures intended to be punitive count as punishment [a reference to Walgrave's aforementioned intentionality argument]), many restorative justice outcomes satisfy that definition inasmuch as they are known to impose obligations or deprivations on offenders (Ashworth, 2002, p. 591).From the early 2000s, Duff also wrote about restorative justice.…”
This article has two objectives, both of which are new. First, it presents a new framework of punishment in nine dimensions, which makes it possible to distinguish systematically between different conceptualizations of the nature of punishment. Second, using the framework, it discusses the relationship between restorative justice and punishment, showing that some cases of restorative justice constitute punishment from the perspectives of some of the punishment positions in the framework but not for others. Thus, according to some positions, restorative justice (mediation, conferences, circles, etc.) is punishment.
“…In the literature, this dimension of justice is discussed under different related terms with sometimes overlapping and sometimes clearly distinct meanings (Daly and Proietti-Scifoni, 2011). Particularly in the legal context, the concept "retributive justice" is used for just punishment of those who committed injustice (Boersama, 2011;Daly and Proietti-Scifoni, 2011). This concept thus concentrates on the appropriate punishment of the offenders for the wrongs that they committed.…”
Frontiers is more than just an open-access publisher of scholarly articles: it is a pioneering approach to the world of academia, radically improving the way scholarly research is managed. The grand vision of Frontiers is a world where all people have an equal opportunity to seek, share and generate knowledge. Frontiers provides immediate and permanent online open access to all its publications, but this alone is not enough to realize our grand goals.
Frontiers Journal SeriesThe Frontiers Journal Series is a multi-tier and interdisciplinary set of open-access, online journals, promising a paradigm shift from the current review, selection and dissemination processes in academic publishing. All Frontiers journals are driven by researchers for researchers; therefore, they constitute a service to the scholarly community. At the same time, the Frontiers Journal Series operates on a revolutionary invention, the tiered publishing system, initially addressing specific communities of scholars, and gradually climbing up to broader public understanding, thus serving the interests of the lay society, too.
Dedication to QualityEach Frontiers article is a landmark of the highest quality, thanks to genuinely collaborative interactions between authors and review editors, who include some of the world's best academicians. Research must be certified by peers before entering a stream of knowledge that may eventually reach the public -and shape society; therefore, Frontiers only applies the most rigorous and unbiased reviews. Frontiers revolutionizes research publishing by freely delivering the most outstanding research, evaluated with no bias from both the academic and social point of view. By applying the most advanced information technologies, Frontiers is catapulting scholarly publishing into a new generation.
What are Frontiers Research Topics?Frontiers Research Topics are very popular trademarks of the Frontiers Journals Series: they are collections of at least ten articles, all centered on a particular subject.
“…I use the term “reparative justice” for the notion that redress is owed to those who suffered injustice in the past. In the literature, this dimension of justice is discussed under different related terms with sometimes overlapping and sometimes clearly distinct meanings (Daly and Proietti-Scifoni, 2011). Particularly in the legal context, the concept “retributive justice” is used for just punishment of those who committed injustice (Boersama, 2011; Daly and Proietti-Scifoni, 2011).…”
In this article, I discuss access and benefit-sharing (ABS) for plant genetic resources from an ethical perspective. This leads to the question of what types of justice actually play a role when more equity and fairness is demanded for plant genetic resources. Five dimensions of justice will be distinguished: classical distributive justice, which deals with a fair distribution of goods; commutative justice, which concerns a fair exchange of “give-and-receive”; justice as recognition, which relates to treating all involved parties with the same respect; reparative justice, which pertains to fair amendments for wrongful actions in the past; and procedural justice, which is concerned with just decision processes. Drawing on the discussion of ethical problems with biopiracy, the distribution of environmental burdens, and plant genetic resources in agriculture, I will illustrate that the use of genetic resources poses challenges across all five dimensions of justice. Because the combination of justice challenges is specific for each case of resource use, I will argue that it is important that users of genetic resources are aware of the complexity of justice problems to ensure fair and equitable ABS negotiations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
