Institutional Harm, Restorativisim, and Conflict Mapping

In this article, Jorge Ollero Perán reflects on his insights from the 10th EFRJ Summer School program held this June in San Sebastián, and conducted for the first time in both Spanish and English. Representing the EFRJ Board, he joined the Spanish-language group led by expert Raúl Calvo Soler to explore how institutions can cause complex multilayered harm, and how restorative processes can address it. 

'This is a complex topic that can be approached from very different perspectives and poses challenges to "traditional" restorative justice interventions. How can we implement restorative processes when the offender is an institution? Are we capable of bringing to light all the harm victims suffer when they are victimised in organisational environments that, in principle, should protect them?'

Great beaches, delicious pinxtos, elegant and stately architecture, trees and parks everywhere... What more could you ask for in San Sebastián? A little bit of Restorativism!

Last June, on behalf of the Board, I attended the European Forum for Restorative Justice Summer School in San Sebastián, whose theme this year was "Restorative Justice Responses to Harm in Institutions." This is a complex topic that can be approached from very different perspectives and poses challenges to "traditional" restorative justice interventions. How can we implement restorative processes when the offender is an institution? Are we capable of bringing to light all the harm victims suffer when they are victimised in organisational environments that, in principle, should protect them? These and other questions were part of the discussions and lessons we were able to share at this Summer School. 

For the first time in its 20-year history, the EFRJ Summer School consisted of two separate courses, one in English and one in Spanish, taught respectively by Tim Chapman and Raúl Calvo Soler, two exceptional professionals.

In this brief review of the Spanish course, I will focus on the most innovative aspects that Professor Calvo Soler offered to the dozen students who were fortunate enough to spend a week learning with him.

A New World of Complexity 

Talking about restorative justice and institutional harm means talking about collective subjects called institutions, and this means confronting a world of great complexity. The classic restorative approach is based on the consideration that the victim and the perpetrator are individuals who have suffered or committed a harmful and unjust act. Sometimes we may have cases in which there are multiple victims or multiple perpetrators, but even so, the focus remains the same: to hold the individuals who caused the harm accountable for it and restore the victims. However, when we confront institutional harm, we must go further: institutions are more than the sum of the individuals who comprise them, and therefore, institutional harm is deeper and more complex than individual harm.

In the first part of the course, we were able to delve into the characteristics of institutions and how they impact restorative intervention. I would like to highlight a few points in this regard. 

First, the need to analyse the structure of the institution. Every institution is organised around roles and hierarchies, such that the position at one level or another of the organisation's echelons will entail different responsibilities. We must consider not only the responsibility of those who personally caused the harm, but also those who facilitated or concealed it. The different levels of harm and responsibility must be part of our analysis. 

(photo: participants of the 10th Summer School in June, 2025)

Second, we must consider the declared functions of the institution: what is its purpose, its mission, as stated in its statutes and public statements? In most cases, institutions have socially positive functions, such as "improving the spiritual life of communities" or "increasing the physical health of those who practice sports." Therefore, whether it's a church or a sports club, the harm that occurs within them often runs counter to their stated objectives. For a victim of institutional harm, this inconsistency between the positive support they thought they would receive and the abuse they ultimately suffer creates a cognitive dissonance that adds to the pain they have endured. As such, restorative work with institutional harm involves understanding the different layers of overlapping harm: abuse committed by a stranger is not the same as abuse committed by a person of reference who, moreover, receives support or concealment from the institution where the events occurred. 

This brings us to the third point: the importance of changing the institutional culture. We must show the divergence between the stated goals and actual practices to ensure that restorative intervention modifies the existing institutional culture and, thus, reduces the likelihood of harm recurring. Changing institutional culture is one of the keys to restorative intervention with a medium-term perspective.

From Restorative Justice to Restorativism

During this course, Professor Calvo Soler proposed that we consider restorative justice as something more than an approach to responding to harms considered criminal. He prefers to speak of "Restorativism" as a comprehensive philosophy that offers a way of understanding human relationships. Restorativism is a philosophy based on anthropological optimism (Rousseau versus Hobbes) and believes it is possible to generate cooperative human relationships in which mutual interdependence (which, in fact, is inherent to human beings) produces collective growth rather than violent confrontations. 

This broad vision of restorative justice is one of the most original aspects of Calvo Soler's thinking, although he is not the only one to hold this perspective. Many authors, such as Braithwaite, Wachtel, and Tim Chapman himself, have also advocated expanding the scope of restorative justice beyond the narrow confines of criminal conflict. It is possible to find preventive and constructive visions of restorative justice that apply to areas such as schools, neighbourhoods, cities, and the environment. 

However, a pertinent question is: how far can we expand the concept of restorative justice? Perhaps we run the risk of all cooperative and participatory action being called restorative, and in that case, the term would lose its meaning. Personally, I favour a broad concept of restorative justice, as a paradigm that can be applied in many areas and situations, but I believe we should debate the limits and essential characteristics of restorative justice without denying the unique and original contributions of other approaches. 

Conflict Mapping as a Basic Analysis Tool

Continuing with the topics covered in this Summer School, Raúl shared with us a outstanding diagnostic tool: conflict mapping. Mapping is a technique for analysing situations of conflict or abuse, so that our intervention is based on a more accurate understanding of the complex reality we face. 

According to Calvo Soler's proposal, the basic elements of conflict are: subjects, interests and objectives, recognition, power, frame of reference, emotions, relationships, and coalitions. Naming and characterising each of these elements is essential in any restorative intervention, whether it is a restorative response to an individual crime or a response to institutional harm. 

(photo: Raúl Calvo Soler discussing conflict mapping at the 10th Summer School)

Responding to institutional harm requires us to understand the dynamics inherent to collective subjects, as are institutions, and, although it may seem strange, collective subjects also have their own frames of reference and we could even say that they also feel collective emotions. For our intervention to hold the institution accountable and change its culture, it is necessary to understand the relationships between each of the elements of a conflict map. 

As an example of the use of this tool, we analysed the policies implemented to address sexual abuse committed within the Catholic Church in Navarre, as presented to us in one of the Summer School’s plenary talks by Eduardo Santos, former Minister of Justice of this autonomous region. We saw how, for example, it was important not to foster discourse against the Catholic religion in general, as many people in society would have felt attacked. Instead, it made sense to contrast the Christian values ​​of truth, honesty, and helping the disadvantaged with the institution's cover-up behaviour for many years, thus establishing a collaborative foundation that paved the way for more constructive solutions that responded to the needs of victims of abuse.

(photo: Eduardo Santos presenting the Navarre case study in addressing institutional harm)

This is just a summary of some of the discussions and lessons we shared in Donostia, as the Basque people call the city of San Sebastián, during the Summer School where, as always, the coexistence and human connections were as enriching as the training sessions. For my part, I continue to believe that the restorative approach, restorativism, is a much-needed response to the world's problems, and the more I learn about this beautiful paradigm, the more I realise how much I still have to learn. I am one of those who believe that we learn throughout our lives and that the greatest learning is that which we do with others. So I'm glad that EFRJ continues to offer us, year after year, more restorativism and more community.

Jorge Ollero Perán is a member of the EFRJ’s Board.

Published on the 2nd of October 2025.