The experiences of community workers and other professionals using restorative approaches in Kingston-upon-Hull

Lambert, Craig L.

doi:10.1093/cdj/bsu026

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, they have been largely overlooked within the field of community development. Academic literature in the field has mostly focused on the potentials of conflict resolution as a set of skills for community practitioners (see for instance Beck, 2012; Daley and Keltner, 1981; Lambert, 2015; Morrison and Branigan, 2007; Phillips and Pittman, 2014; Prokopy and Castelloe, 1999; Verity and King, 2007). Scholars have been excited about the possibility of using conflict resolution to enhance community relations (Abatena, 1997; Drozd, 2017; O’Brien, 2007; Skipper, 2016) or as a tool to promote capacity building (Hamdi, 2010; Rodrigues, 2017; Westoby, 2007).…”

Section: Problematising Conflict Resolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conflict resolution in community development: Are the benefits worth the costs?

Palma

2018

Critical Social Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the UK, conflict resolution strategies have become increasingly popular within community development practice. Conflict resolution has been used to prevent homelessness, tackle neighbourhood disputes, address family conflict, facilitate community involvement, address discrimination and reduce anti-social behaviour. The promise of conflict resolution is that confidential and informal processes of ‘justice from below’ might better reconcile community interests, improve relationships and promote social change. Within the field of community development, these promises have been widely vaunted. However, outside community development, conflict resolution has been subject to extensive criticism. This article draws upon debates in legal scholarship to discuss four criticisms in particular: that conflict resolution disadvantages vulnerable groups, undermines social justice, suppresses legitimate grievances and mistreats public issues as private problems. It then considers these criticisms in relation to community development practice and explores potential solutions.

show abstract

Section: Problematising Conflict Resolutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conflict resolution in community development: Are the benefits worth the costs?

Palma

2018

Critical Social Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Police‐initiated diversion for youth to prevent future delinquent behavior: a systematic review

Wilson¹,

Brennan²,

Olaghere³

2018

Campbell Systematic Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This Campbell systematic review examines the effects police‐initiated diversion programs on delinquent behavior, compared to traditional system processing. The review summarizes evidence from nineteen high‐quality studies, including 13 randomized controlled trials and six quasi‐experimental studies. This review includes studies that evaluated the effects of police‐led diversionary practices compared to traditional processing for youth under 18 years of age. We identified a total of 14 manuscripts representing 19 evaluations. Of these 19 evaluations, 13 used randomized controlled designs (random assignment to conditions) and 6 used quasi‐experimental designs (no random assignment to conditions). Many of these designs included two or more diversionary conditions compared to a common control (traditional processing) producing 31 treatment‐comparison contrasts for analysis. These studies were conducted between 1973 and 2011, inclusively. Most were conducted in the USA (11) with the remaining conducted in Canada (4), Australia (2), and the UK (2). The general pattern of evidence is positive, suggesting that police‐led diversion reduces the future delinquent behavior of low‐risk youth relative to traditional processing. Assuming a 50 percent reoffending rate for the traditional processing condition, the results suggest a reoffending rate of roughly 44 percent for the diverted youth. This overall benefit of diversion holds for the random assignment studies judged to be free from any obvious risks of bias. No meaningful differences were found across types of diversionary programs. Furthermore, we found no evidence to suggest these findings suffer from publication selection bias. Plain language summary Police‐led diversion of low‐risk youth reduces their future contact with the justice systemPolice‐led diversion of low‐risk youth who come into contact with the justice system is more effective in reducing a youth's future contact with the justice system compared to traditional processing. What is this review about?Youth misconduct and misbehavior is a normal part of adolescence and that misbehavior sometimes crosses the line from disruptive or problematic to delinquent. Nationally representative surveys of youth in the USA have indicated that minor delinquent behavior is normative, particularly for boys. The normative nature of minor delinquent behavior raises the question of how police should respond to minor delinquent behavior in a way that is corrective, but also avoids involving the youth in the criminal justice system beyond what will be effective in reducing future misbehavior.Police diversion schemes are a collection of strategies police can apply as an alternative to court processing of youth. Diversion as an option is popular among law enforcement officers, as it provides an option between ignoring youth engaged in minor wrongdoing and formally charging such youth with a crime. Police‐led diversion has the potential to reduce reoffending by limiting the exposure of low‐risk youth to potentially harmful effects of...

show abstract

The experiences of community workers and other professionals using restorative approaches in Kingston-upon-Hull

Cited by 2 publications

References 12 publications

Conflict resolution in community development: Are the benefits worth the costs?

Conflict resolution in community development: Are the benefits worth the costs?

Police‐initiated diversion for youth to prevent future delinquent behavior: a systematic review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About