Handbook on Restorative justice programmes

7.4 Evaluation results and evidence of
emerging best practices
Although only a relatively few systematic evaluations of restorative justice
programmes have been conducted to date, their findings seem to indicate
chapter 7
Programme monitoring and evaluation
63 
Bonta  et al., 2006. 
64 
Hayes and Daly, 2004, p. 20.
65 
See: Hayes and Daly, 2004, Hayes and Daly, 2003; Maxwell and Morris, 2001.
66 
Hayes and Daly, 2003; 2004.
67 
Maxwell and Morris, 2001.

---

86
that restorative processes have a greater potential than the standard jus-
tice process operating alone to effectively resolve conflict, secure offender
accountability and meet the needs of victims. Even in the absence of suffi-
cient evaluation studies, there seems to be a consensus that restorative
justice programmes perform no worse than any other method in terms of
addressing the needs of victims and offenders and with respect to recon-
viction rates.
68
The following are some general findings that have emerged from the eval-
uations conducted to date:
앫 Restorative justice has a positive effect in reducing the frequency
and the severity of re-offending.
앫 There are high levels of support among crime victims and in com-
munities for offender reparation.
앫 Many crime victims would like the opportunity to meet with their
offender.
앫 Many crime victims and offenders will participate in a restorative
process if given the opportunity to do so.
앫 There is some evidence that restorative justice processes can reduce
post-traumatic stress disorder among victims.
앫 In some jurisdictions, restorative approaches have reduced court
costs and court processing time and improved service delivery.
앫 It is less certain that restorative processes can function to enhance
the capacities of communities and families to repair the harm from
criminal activity.