Simon Scott, User Voice 

Two decades ago, I would never have been asked to write this piece. That change tells its own story. Lived experience has come a long way through the pioneering efforts of User Voice and of everyone who has fought to make it part of service design and improvement. It is now embedded in policy discussions, research, advisory boards and front-line services. Progress has been made. 

But is it working? Are people with lived experience truly being listened to, or simply being heard? 

The 2025 Independent Sentencing Review marks an important moment in justice reform, yet its promise will remain unfulfilled unless those with firsthand experience of the system are fully involved. At User Voice, we have long said that people with lived experience are not passive subjects of reform. They are partners in shaping it. 

Why lived experience matters 

Lived experience matters because it shows what works and what fails from the inside. It reveals where policy meets reality. When people affected by justice systems help to design them, we gain sharper insights, better engagement and more sustainable outcomes. Bringing services and those they serve together transforms feedback into action and makes change possible. 

Co-production depends on asking the right questions and creating spaces where answers can be explored freely. Independence is vital. Participation must be unrestricted, not limited by the agendas of those already in power. Real engagement means openness to challenge, disagreement and creativity. 

The UK Research and Innovation Council describes co-production as “partnership between researchers and communities to shape knowledge and solutions” (UKRI, 2024). At User Voice, we take this further. Often, the researcher is the person with lived experience. Increasingly, people have followed this path through our work or with academic partners who recognise that positionality matters. There are no detached observers in criminal justice; policy and practice affect everyone. By being open about their position, lived experience researchers bring honesty, depth and access to realities that conventional research has missed. 

Bethany Schmidt’s Democratising Democracy reimagines prisoners as active citizens who help shape the systems that govern their lives (Schmidt, 2019). Participation is a democratic necessity. When those most affected by injustice co-produce reform, the results have legitimacy and impact that no external process can achieve. 

When lived experience is absent 

The justice system is under heavy pressure. Probation services are stretched, community provision is fragile, and problems in prisons often spill into the community. Helen Wakeling and colleagues show, through participatory action research in prison culture, that genuine engagement between staff and residents can change relationships and improve institutional climate (Wakeling et al., 2023). Centrally driven reforms, in contrast, tend to reproduce mistrust and disengagement. 

Probation supervision is a particular concern. HMI Probation has acknowledged that it is struggling, and its focus on risk management can obscure the human work of rehabilitation. People with lived experience have known this for years, especially those from marginalised groups. For many, probation is at best a friendly chat with someone who avoids difficult questions. Yet probation could be something else entirely: a bridge back to life after the criminal justice system. Lived experience research and co-produced insight can help to reshape the service. This will be crucial once the Sentencing Bill takes effect and probation carries greater responsibility for community sentences. 

Real engagement also means asking difficult questions about power. We often describe some groups as “hard to reach”, but the harder question is who is doing the reaching and whether people feel free to speak. Co-production must begin with an honest look at whose voices are still missing. 

Without lived experience, reform becomes procedural rather than personal. It focuses on outputs instead of outcomes, on compliance instead of change. 

Evidence from User Voice Councils 

User Voice has put co-production into practice through our User Voice Councils. These participatory forums in prisons and communities bring people with lived experience into structured discussion with decision-makers. 

Weaver (2020) found that councils build agency, responsibility and better relationships between residents and staff. Participants begin to see themselves as active citizens, not simply people to be managed. Buck and Tomcak (2022) also show that participatory structures in justice settings improve legitimacy and reduce alienation, particularly for those who are most marginalised. 

The co-production of justice is not a theory. It is a proven, working method. 

A justice strategy that heals 

A justice system should create the conditions for people to grow. Prison should be a place where people can learn, develop and rediscover their potential as leaders, workers, learners and citizens. Opportunities for growth and purpose need to run through every part of prison life: education, work, recreation and relationships, supported by staff, peers and role models. These aren’t rewards for good behaviour, they are the foundations of progress and belonging. People take them because they want to live better lives and contribute to the world around them. 

Reform should also build stronger community responses that tackle the causes of crime. Poverty, trauma, addiction and exclusion are best met through connection and support. Co-production provides the structure for this change. It links policy to lived reality and helps people take ownership of solutions that last. 

Implications for the Sentencing Review and beyond 

We welcome David Gauke’s Sentencing Review as an ambitious step. To succeed, it must include lived experience from the very beginning. Co-production should be part of design and delivery, not an optional extra. Reformers should create clear routes for participation in advisory groups, pilot schemes, evaluation and oversight. 

Investment is also essential. Co-production takes time and trust. It needs proper funding for probation, voluntary sector partners and peer-led initiatives. Without resources, participation risks becoming symbolic rather than substantive. 

A justice system that listens is one that can heal as well as hold people to account. That balance between authority and understanding cannot be achieved without the insight of those who have lived it. 

Conclusion and call to action 

Reform without co-production is unfinished work. If we want to build safer, fairer communities, we must share power with those most affected by the system. 

At User Voice, we stand ready to work with policymakers, researchers and practitioners who share that aim. Together, we can design a justice system that truly serves the people it touches. 

Contact: sscott@uservoice.org