Community-led responses to environmental harm

When we think of restorative justice (RJ), we often imagine dialogues between victims and offenders, healing from personal or interpersonal harm. But what happens when the victim is an entire community—or the planet itself? Environmental harm has long challenged the traditional boundaries of justice systems. Its diffuse nature, long-term consequences, and global impact demand not only legal accountability but also processes for healing and restoration. This is where restorative justice intersects with green criminology, opening new paths for addressing ecological degradation in more relational, inclusive, and community-driven ways.

Green criminology emerged as a critical response to the limitations of conventional criminology in addressing environmental destruction. It examines how power, policy, and economic structures contribute to ecological harm, and often focuses on the victims that remain invisible in legal frameworks: ecosystems, non-human life, and future generations. While green criminology has often highlighted the failures of existing institutions, restorative justice offers an avenue for more transformative responses. Rather than solely focusing on punishment or regulatory compliance, RJ introduces the possibility of dialogue, reparation, and community resilience in the face of environmental wrongdoing.

Consider a community affected by illegal dumping of toxic waste. Traditional legal responses might result in a fine for the polluting company or a court order to halt the activity. While necessary, these responses rarely satisfy the community’s need for acknowledgment, healing, or involvement in shaping remediation. Restorative justice, on the other hand, can offer something different: a process in which community members sit down with responsible parties, environmental experts, and policymakers to articulate harm, express their grief or anger, and jointly craft solutions.

Such processes are not merely theoretical. Around the world, we’ve seen efforts that mirror these principles, even if they aren’t always labeled “restorative.” In Aotearoa/New Zealand, Māori approaches to land and ecological harm emphasize collective accountability and connection to the whenua (land), blending indigenous traditions with modern environmental struggles. In Canada, First Nations communities have led healing circles to address the aftermath of pipeline spills, not only to speak with those responsible but also to support each other and assert their sovereignty. These are community-led responses rooted in RJ values: voice, participation, relationality, and repair. Similarly, in Colombia, certain rivers have been officially recognized as victims of the armed conflict and incorporated into the transitional and restorative processes of the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (Jurisdicción Especial para la Paz, JEP). This innovative approach integrates harm into justice mechanisms, acknowledging that ecological damage and human suffering are deeply interconnected, and thus requiring holistic pathways to repair and reconciliation.

The climate crisis only amplifies the urgency of these approaches. As global temperatures rise and disasters intensify, communities—particularly those already marginalized—are bearing the brunt of environmental harm. These harms are not abstract. They manifest as poisoned water, flooded homes, destroyed crops, or lost livelihoods. And while climate justice movements demand institutional change, they also recognize that resilience requires community strength, recognition of historical injustices, and platforms to tell the truth.

Here, restorative justice can serve as a bridge between harm and healing. It creates space for environmental storytelling, for sharing lived experience, and for imagining a shared future. Restorative processes can surface buried truths: how racialized communities were placed near polluting industries, how indigenous lands were exploited without consent, or how corporations prioritized profit over people. These stories need to be heard—not only to assign responsibility but to affirm the dignity of those affected and to collaboratively envision reparative action.

Moreover, restorative practices can contribute to preventing future harm. When communities are involved in environmental decision-making and have opportunities to speak openly about risk, trust and legitimacy increase. Local restorative circles focused on environmental education, policy deliberation, or community-based monitoring can foster shared responsibility and cultivate ecological citizenship.

Still, applying restorative justice in environmental contexts is not without challenges. Who represents the non-human world? Can you repair an extinct species or a deforested jungle? What does reparation mean when the harm is irreversible or the responsible party is a multinational corporation headquartered thousands of kilometers away? These are complex questions, and RJ doesn’t offer quick fixes. But what it does offer is a shift in orientation: from retribution to relationship, from invisibility to recognition, from exclusion to participation.

In this context, technology can be a powerful ally. Digital platforms like Restorativ can facilitate restorative processes even in geographically dispersed or disaster-affected communities. Through secure, accessible tools, Restorativ can enable affected individuals to share their stories, connect with others, and co-design repair strategies. Whether it’s hosting a digital restorative circle with climate activists and local officials, documenting testimonies of environmental injustice, or facilitating community dialogue with polluting entities, Restorativ can extend the reach and impact of restorative practices.

What makes Restorativ particularly valuable is its adaptability. Environmental harm often involves multiple stakeholders across time and space. The platform’s capacity to support hybrid processes—combining in-person and virtual dialogue, real-time collaboration, and long-term documentation—makes it well-suited for complex, evolving contexts. Moreover, by archiving processes and resolutions, Restorativ contributes to institutional memory and transparency, ensuring that restorative commitments are not forgotten once media attention fades.

Just as importantly, Restorativ empowers communities. Rather than waiting for courts or corporations to act, communities can initiate their own restorative journeys. With tools to guide, connect, and document these efforts, Restorativ becomes a companion in the pursuit of environmental justice—supporting dialogue, centering those harmed, and promoting a culture of responsibility and repair.

Ultimately, as we confront the ecological crises of our time, the need for relational, inclusive, and forward-looking justice grows. Restorative justice, when applied to environmental harm, reminds us that justice is not only about sanction—it is about connection. And through platforms like Restorativ, these connections can be nurtured, sustained, and transformed into collective action for the planet.