The emergence of the idea of a ‘restorative city’ and its link to restorative justice

Abstract

From the very beginning, mainly criminologists, criminal lawyers and social work‐ ers have processed and fostered the theory of restorative justice. The basic, sim‐ ple, yet revolutionary idea behind it is to encourage dialogue with cooperative and constructive processes, in order to manage conflict by listening and acknowledg‐ ing the other person’s dignity and by a concrete, credible offer of monetary or even symbolic reparation. From a practical viewpoint, restorative justice has been interpreted with vari‐ ous forms of methods and standard procedures: these mainly include mediation, conferencing, restorative dialogue and circles. The common thread linking the different methodologies is the dialogue form of the meeting, the perspective of reparation and the fundamental role of the mediator/facilitator, appointed as an impartial, equidistant, adequately trained individual.1 In concrete terms, restora‐ tive justice was initially used with young offenders, as a diversion intervention, and subsequently with adults for even serious offences and during the adminis‐ tration of the sentence. Although it began as an approach to conflict arising from an offence, restora‐ tive justice has shown over time to be extremely adaptable. Restorative methods have spilled beyond the sphere of extra-judicial settlements to be experimented in various fields and not merely in a reactive, but also in a proactive dimension (i.e. with a view to preventing conflict): from family conflict to interethnic or interreligious conflicts; from school bullying to improper or oppressive behaviour on university campuses; from inappropriate conduct or mobbing in the workplace, to the management of disputes in complex organisations. Of particular interest among these areas of intervention is the emergence of the so-called restorative cities.