Restorative Justice Theory & Practice: Addressing the Discrepancy is a ground-breaking book that examines the harmful gap between the restorative justice theory and its application in the U.S., Europe, and elsewhere. Data were obtained from four international surveys with over 300 restorative justice practitioners, using a combination of qualitative methodologies, including questionnaires, interviews and focus groups.

Restorative justice projects strive to restore peace after a crime has been committed by involving victims, offenders and community representatives in dialogue. Previous studies reviewed by Dr. Gavrielides have credited these programmes with such benefits as lower recidivism, and higher levels of satisfaction with outcomes among victims, offenders and community representatives, compared to the traditional criminal justice system. However, the author's seven-year research programme uncovered a pervasive gap between restorative justice principles and current restorative justice operations. This gap is blamed for widespread difficulties such as insufficient funding for restorative justice, inadequate training and accreditation of practitioners, lack of faith and commitment among staff, and a tendency for restorative justice over time to become increasingly similar to the standard criminal justice system.
 
Dr. Gavrielides warns that if these problems are not corrected, the original values and benefits of restorative justice may never be realised.
 
---------------
 
CONTENTS
Foreword;
 
Part One: Arguing and Analysing the literature
Restorative theory and practice in context;
Restorative justice: The Perplexing concept;
The International Dimension of Restorative Justice: From Theory to Policy and Practice;
 
Part Two: Measuring the Gap between the restorative justice theory and practice; 
Findings from Survey I: The International Practitioners’ Account;
Analysing and Triangulating the Findings of Survey I;
The Findings: Problems in the Practical and Theoretical Development of Restorative Justice;
Findings from Survey II: The UK Practitioners’ Account;
 
Part Three: Pushing the Barriers
Findings from Survey III and IV on the Application of Restorative Justice with Hate Crime and Sexual Offences
 
Part Four: Critical Reflections 
Mind the Gap Between the Restorative Justice Theory and Practice;
A Way Forward; Recommendations for the Restorative Justice Movement;
Conclusion.
 
Bibliography; Index; Appendices