ACResolution Magazine

explores contrasting viewpoints and practices in her article, page 12.)

e) Feminism resulted in changes to leadership and power styles, away from established hierarchies to fluid team structures, use of stereotypically feminine (but, actually, human) skills of empathy, nurture and care for the weak, and legitimization of both the subjective and the objective.

In current Restorative Practices, RJ is applied in innumerable settings. The practices began in the middle 1970s in North America, with rapid expansion and ever-new applications. (See Rudnick’s article, page 36, which presents many different applications in only one state, and Montoya’s account of new Mexican uses of RJ, page 32.)

Vigorous dialogue between theory and
practice has resulted in emergent new
work, maturing understandings, and
increased systematization of the meth-
ods used. We can observe fewer rules
and more relationship, less work with
crime and more work with wrongdoing
of all types, less punishment and more
repair, fewer lay workers and more
professionalization. (Morneau, on page
18, describes her own learning through
volunteer assignments; Barbee, in
her article on page 8, suggests effec-
tive program beginnings). To mention
only a few settings, RJ and Restorative
Practices are used in mediation, circle
dialogue and peacemaking, sentencing
circles, family group conferencing (note
Parker’s description of the Hidden
Water program, page 27), restorative
conferencing, community restoration
boards, alternative education models
(see Motel and McLaughlin’s descrip-
tion of restorative school practices,
page 22). There is much debate about
the limits of RJ (see Grochal and
Guerin’s discussion, on page 15, of the
restorative neutral role).

A key question facing us today is whether RJ actually results in more just relationships and communities. Specific answers to the question depends on the goals and hopes envisioned, the victim, wrongdoer, or community perspectives, and the criteria used to define a just and healthy community.

A serious challenge for future conflict research is measuring the benefits of RJ and Restorative Practices, using rigorous quantitative and qualitative studies. Most reports today are in individual and anecdotal forms, which can be very fitting, but we need more studies and more meta-studies. Clarification is needed of such issues as

•;The true costs of justice-making /
the true costs of injustice
•;Appropriate and inappropriate
uses of RJ and Restorative
Practices
•;Personnel using the practices -
background, training,
collaboration

•;Documentation of effectiveness -
measurables and immeasurables
We hope you will engage in an ongo-
ing dialogue with each other and with
us as a result of the many articles we
present here.

Lois Edmund and Richard Barbieri
Co-Editors, ACResolution Magazine

Community Mediation and Restorative Practices CMRP

We are happy to announce the creation of “Community Mediation and Restorative Practices”, a new section within ACR, through the merger of the Community Mediation and the Restorative Justice sections. This new section will focus on restorative justice and restorative practices. Thank you to all who contributed ideas and encouragement for this new venture! All members of the former sections will automatically become members of CMRP.

This Section of ACR highlights the restorative practice approaches which arise out of the principles and assumptions of Restorative Justice. Restorative Practices include community mediation in many forms and settings, as well as innovative alternative dispute resolution programs in criminal and community justice-making.