Restorative Justice Approaches To The Informal Resolution Of Student Sexual Misconduct

This article reviews controversies about campus Title IX adjudication and the recent implementation of restorative justice (or RJ) responses to campus sexual harm. The RJ approach focuses on who has been harmed, what their needs are, and how the person who harmed them can meet those needs. Instead of engaging in adjudication, RJ aims to get an individual who caused harm to understand the impact of and take responsibility for their actions. Part I defines the RJ approach, describes various practices, and details the preparation necessary for a structured informal resolution process. Part II explains why RJ approaches have been limited to date for Title IX cases and outlines evolving guidance in this realm. Part III reviews legal considerations, including compliance requirements from the Department of Education’s 2020 Final Rule and the implications of the approach for concurrent or subsequent civil or criminal proceedings. Part IV offers three case studies of implementation. Part V summarizes evidence of effectiveness and Part VI concludes. By tracing these essential elements, this article moves beyond the philosophical underpinnings of RJ to offer tools and procedures to consider when adopting RJ for student-on-student sexual misconduct

Overview of Land Use Transport Models

The previous chapters in this Handbook have shown that spatial development, or land use, determines the need for spatial interaction, or transport, but that transport, by the accessibility it provides, also determines spatial development. However, it is difficult to empirically isolate impacts of land use on transport and vice versa because of the multitude of concurrent changes of other factors. This poses a problem if the likely impacts of integrated land-use and transport policies to reduce the demand for travel are to be predicted. There are principally three methods to predict those impacts. The first is to ask people how they would change their location and mobility behaviour if certain factors, such as land use regulations or transport costs, would change ('stated preference'). The second consists of drawing conclusions from observed decision behaviour of people under different conditions on how they would be likely to behave if these factors would change ('revealed preference'). The third method is to simulate human decision behaviour in mathematical models. All three methods have their advantages and disadvantages. Surveys can reveal also subjective factors of location and mobility decisions, however, their respondents can only make conjec-tures about how they would behave in still unknown situations, and the validity of such con