Bazemore, Gordon

Restorative justice has come to the forefront of criminal justice discourse with growing interest and support. Despite increasing research and theory in the past decade, a missing link in the research has been a lack of focus on the role of criminal justice organizations in the implementation process. The purpose of this paper is to examine the capacity of organizational literature to inform criminal justice system organizational transformation so that it is consistent with the values, principles and practices associated with restorative justice. The literature review involves an overview of the restorative justice framework, a general presentation of organizational theory, and finally, an articulation of three main categories of organizational literature: bureaucratic, post-bureaucratic, and what is referred to in this thesis as contemporary. This literature analysis contributes to the development of a model for an organization that is consistent with restorative justice and the proposed transition from a bureaucratic organization to a restorative organization. Finally, both evaluative and policy implications for the research findings and proposed model are considered.

Two distinct models have guided the juvenile justice system during the past century---individual treatment/rehabilitation and retributive justice. While its historical orientation has been individual treatment, in recent years it has become predominately punitive (Bazemore and Day, 1998; Bazemore, 1993). The organizational mission and goals of the juvenile justice system have become internally inconsistent as it tries to satisfy competing goals, such as punishment, treatment, and protection of public safety. Currently, justice professionals have sought to clarify the aims of juvenile justice management and policy. Several possibilities exist for the future of the juvenile justice system. One proposal for the future of the juvenile justice system is to abolish the juvenile court by combining it with the adult court to create one criminal court (Feld, 1993; 1999). Another proposal is to reaffirm the individualized treatment/rehabilitation model. Finally, restorative justice holds promise as a transformative, guiding philosophy for the future of the juvenile justice system, a departure from the traditional thinking about the role of juvenile justice in society (Bazemore, 1993; Bazemore, 1999; Daly and Immarigeon, 1998; Hahn, 1998). Justice professionals are considering a new approach to the justice system, a reorientation of how to think about crime and justice (Zehr, 1997). Restorative justice provides an alternative "lens" for viewing and developing new responses to juvenile crime. This alternative perspective may potentially have a profoundly, positive effect on the justice system by incorporating community participation, victim involvement and restoration (Dunlap, 1998; Zehr, 1990; Zehr, 1997). This study includes the results of a national telephone survey of key juvenile justice professionals who have been identified by key informants in each state as possessing knowledge and experience related to the status of restorative justice in the fifty states. A significant number of states and local juvenile justice systems are setting policy for the development and implementation of innovative programs and practices based on restorative justice principles. Case-study analyses of two states were also included. The case-study states are Minnesota, a government initiated, community-driven model, and Pennsylvania, a government-driven model. Each state has successfully developed and implemented a restorative justice approach using its respective model.