The terms Restorative Justice and Social Justice are often used interchangeably, yet distinctions may be made between them to better nuance our work at Grinnell. Restorative Justice is most frequently discussed as counterpoint to Retributive Justice, restorative being a theory of justice in which crimes, injustices, and misconduct are violations experienced by individuals and their communities. It focuses on repairing harms by engaging all affected stakeholders in dialogue centered on how they have been impacted and on collaboratively determining what needs to be done to repair the harm(s). This is a process of accountability and restoration.
Alternately, Retributive Justice relies on a system where neither those who are harmed nor those determined to have harmed, shape a just or dignifying response.Punishments often disincentivize accountability and the reclamation of identity for those who have created harm, which contributes to the fracturing of communities and relationships. Retributive Justice and processes may appear to value codified policy and process, such as laws, over the human impacts.
Restorative Justice and more broadly, restorative practice, borrows from ancient and indigenous practices employed in cultures around the globe, among them Native American, African, and First Nation Canadian. We are indebted.
Social Justice, while inclusive of the experience of individuals, may best be thought of as focused on raising awareness of and ultimately, addressing the systemic inequities that give rise to disparate individual experiences. As an institution founded in 1946 by social reformers - access, inclusion, and advocacy or dismantling barriers to equity is quite literally our raison d'être. Rightly so, these objectives continue to inform our collective aims and initiatives as well as our shared future.