Source: (2003) In, Kieran McEvoy and Tim Newburn,eds., Criminology, Conflict Resolution and Restorative Justice. Basingstoke, Hampshire, UK and New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan. Pp. 101-134.The authors of this chapter remark that a growing number of scholars have attempted to integrate âbeing niceâ? with theoretical precepts. Peacemaking criminology is an example. It blends scholarship and praxis with an ideology of social harmony and unity. Thus it risks being seen as something less than a rigorous intellectual position and more as a philosophical belief system. Hence, while interest in peacemaking criminology has increased in recent years, there has also been a corresponding increase in questions about its practical utility and intellectual consistency. Is peacemaking criminology useful as a means to reduce crime, or is it simply a catchall phrase with little substantive value beyond mobilizing some people around an emotional idealism? Unequivocally sympathizing with peacemaking criminology, yet wary of mere idealism with little substance or substantiation, the authors of this chapter explore these questions by summarizing peacemaking criminology, examining criticisms of this perspective, and identifying its potential.