Massey Documents by Type

Permanent URI for this communityhttps://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/294

Browse

Subject: search.filters.subject.risk assessment

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Professional insights into sexual violence restorative justice risk assessment, Recommendations for practice
    (Taylor and Francis Group, 2025-05-09) Bremer C; Fletcher RB; Shepherd M; Jülich S
    Conventional criminal justice systems are often ill-placed to offer appropriate justice responses for victim-survivors of sexual violence. Restorative justice following sexual violence (SVRJ) is a trauma-informed victim-centered justice process showing significant benefits for victim-survivors (e.g. meeting justice needs, supporting recovery), perpetrators (e.g. improved insight, community reintegration, reduced reoffending), and their wider communities (e.g. encouraging accountability, addressing harmful beliefs). Careful risk assessment within SVRJ is vital to preventing secondary victimization, yet standardized SVRJ risk assessment guidelines are not currently available in Aotearoa New Zealand. SVRJ professionals (n = 16) engaged in semi-structured interviews exploring their perspectives and experiences of SVRJ risk assessment. Data were analyzed by reflexive thematic analysis resulting in four themes: perceived participant preparedness, safe support systems, culturally competent assessment, and participant alignment. These themes formed the basis for the developed SVRJ risk assessment guideline recommendations. Wider implications of the findings are also discussed. The research contributes to understandings of SVRJ risk assessment and professional practice.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Balancing risk in sexual violence restorative justice : professional views on risk assessment for restorative justice processes addressing sexual violence : a thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctorate in Clinical Psychology at Massey University, Wellington, New Zealand
    (Massey University, 2024) Bremer, Charlotte (Charlie) Grace
    Sexual violence is an ongoing international human rights issue, often resulting in significant negative impacts, and not always well addressed within conventional criminal justice systems. Restorative justice following sexual violence (SVRJ) is a victim-centred justice process showing significant benefits for victim-survivors (including meeting justice needs and supporting recovery), perpetrators of harm (including insight, community reintegration, and reduced reoffending), and wider communities (encouraging accountability and addressing harmful beliefs). However, there is a risk of causing further harm through SVRJ, meaning professionals in this space have an obligation to manage risk as best as possible. Risk of further harm is one reason why SVRJ is not particularly common around the world, and why opinions are often divided regarding the appropriateness of its use. Currently, there are no standardised guidelines for assessing risk within SVRJ. Instead, professionals may rely on their judgement alone, which is the least reliable and valid method of risk assessment. The current research seeks to address this by investigating professional perspectives about the factors important within SVRJ risk assessment, and subsequently developing SVRJ risk assessment guideline recommendations, which could enable a structured and more reliable approach to SVRJ risk assessment. Professionals (n=16) experienced in the areas of SVRJ and RJ risk assessment were interviewed about their experiences of SVRJ risk assessment, particularly what they considered within their assessments and risk-related decisions. Interview data were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis, with four themes identified: perceived participant preparedness, safe support systems, culturally competent assessment, and participant alignment. These findings formed the basis for developed SVRJ risk assessment guideline recommendations. Wider implications of the findings for SVRJ risk assessment, policy and practice are discussed. It is hoped that this research provides important insight into SVRJ professional practice and risk assessment and contributes to the safe use of SVRJ both in Aotearoa New Zealand and internationally, allowing more people to access the benefits of SVRJ in safe and considered ways.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Assessing progress in regulation of aquatic nonindigenous species across the multijurisdictional waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes, with emphasis on the live trade pathways
    (Regional Euro-Asian Biological Invasions Centre (REABIC), 2021-09) Davidson AD; Tucker AJ; Chadderton WL; Jensen E; Weibert C; Death R; Dias J
    The inconsistency in regulated species lists across the shared waters of the Great Lakes undermines the collective prevention efforts of the region, resulting in a “weakest link” problem; some jurisdictions regulate more than 100 species, others fewer than 20. We examine progress over the last twelve years toward more consistent regulated species lists within the 10 Great Lakes jurisdictions. Using a risk assessment framework, we assess a suite of regulated and unregulated organisms that have been identified as having the potential for introduction. Using these species assessments, we determine how sufficient current regulated species lists are in protecting against high-risk species. We also use these species assessments to transparently identify potential high-risk candidates for regional regulatory consideration. A total of 136 aquatic species were regulated by at least one jurisdiction (69 plant species and 67 animal species). The number of species regulated by 5 or more jurisdictions has gone from 10 in 2008 to 44 in 2020. However, the majority (68%) of the currently regulated species are listed in less than half of the Great Lakes jurisdictions. The number of regulated species varies widely across jurisdictions for both taxonomic groups. Wisconsin regulates the largest number of plant and animal species (104 in total), followed by Minnesota (71), New York (59), Illinois/Indiana/Michigan/Ohio (45), Pennsylvania (34), Ontario (23) and Québec (19). We observed only a weak positive correlation between impact score and regulation status. Many of the most-regulated species have impact scores in the low or low-moderate categories, and several species with high impact scores are regulated by less than half of jurisdictions. Twenty-one species (17 plant and 4 animal) are identified as priorities for future regulatory listing.