It has been scientifically well documented that culturally evolved norms as public goods can constrain individual interest and facilitate collective action to overcome tragedies of the commons as well as common tragedies. However, we have little understanding of how existing norms are shifted and new norms evolve, so that justice is seen to be done and cooperation furthered in the face of change. Many jurisdictions have adopted legal pluralism to bring about harmony at different levels of society with formal western-based law courts for administering retributive justice and customary courts negotiating compromise through restorative justice. This project explores the role of these public forums for restorative justice, which are optimal settings for understanding the dynamics of coalescing diverse opinions into norm shifts to maintain community cooperation despite rapid demographic, economic and social change. The project includes educational components that broaden the participation of underrepresented groups in science, and improve the public's understanding of science. The research team will produce educational materials on courts and customs. The work is highly generalizable to other traditional court and restorative justice systems, which will contribute to the field at large.
The study conducted by Dr. Polly Wiessner (Arizona State University and the University of Utah) and Mr. Nitze Pupu, J D (Enga Tradition and Transition Centre) will build on a decade of research observing and documenting over 1,000 customary court cases in village courts within and between the tribes of the Enga of Papua New Guinea since 2008. Customary courts are open air forums, manned by elected local leaders, have broad participation, and host extensive public discussion. They are sanctioned by the government for resolving conflicts and minor crimes, although they often mediate settlements for serious ones. The study will examine the processes and outcomes of the documented cases and continue to research new ones asking: (1) Which procedures, norms, and customs continue to bring about decisions that satisfy communities; which do not and why? (2) How are norms and values updated during public forums to address new realities, such as radically altered patterns of communication with mobile phones, changing norms in sexual relations and marriage, guns in warfare, and land inheritance? (3) How do community members assist in making up for harm done and bringing wrong-doers back into the fold as productive citizens? (4) What are rates of recidivism for different infractions? (5) Why are customary courts often favored over formal courts? (6) How are the relations between the formal western-based courts and customary village courts altered in response to changing conditions and how are mismatches resolved to avoid legal dissonance? Methods proposed include the collection of court case data, follow-up data collection on compensation payment, follow-up interviews with participants in key cases (to include customary court officials, those involved in cases, and those that observed proceedings or contributed to restitution payments), follow-up data collection on recidivism, and finally workshops and focus groups with magistrates and customary court officials to get their perspective on changes in the customary court system over time. The PI plans to use content analysis methodologies to identify shifting norms around reproduction, production, and social support; as well as changing articulation with the formal courts. The research will contribute to better understanding of the articulation between local, regional, and national systems. The adaptive potential of restorative justice systems is of wider interest to anthropologists and other scholars of legal systems.
This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.
