Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Although reintegration is widely recognized as a central objective of restorative justice (RJ), it remains conceptually underdeveloped within the literature. Existing scholarship often treats reintegration as a taken-for-granted outcome of RJ encounters, with limited attention to its meaning or underlying processes. This article addresses this gap by reconceptualizing reintegration as a dynamic, multidimensional process. Drawing on insights from contemporary desistance research, it also develops a theoretical model comprising three dimensions of reintegration in RJ: moral reconstruction, relational repair, and civic reauthorization. It argues that RJ should not be understood as producing reintegration as a discrete outcome of the encounter. Rather, RJ is best viewed as a relational and moral intervention that creates opportunities for reintegration by facilitating moral reconstruction, relationship rebuilding, and social recognition within broader desistance trajectories.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Suzuki et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: