How can victimology become positive?

In the coming pages, I present a relatively new concept-positive victimology-and describe some aspects of its application. Following my earlier denition of positive criminology as a new concept in criminology (for a description of its development, see Ronel, 2015)— dierent than positivistic criminology (Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1987)—it was initially all but natural to expand it to the eld of victimology. However, the process of dening this concept was not an immediate one. I found myself hesitating more than once. To clarify it, I initialized several discussions with colleague victimologists; we also presented such a group discussion at the 14th International Symposium of the World Society of Victimology (Ronel et al., 2012). I was invited to present this topic at several international conferences and courses (Ronel, 2012, 2013b, 2014), including the Second International Conference of the South Asian Society of Criminology and Victimology (SASCV), Kanyakumari (2013), which serves as the basis for this book. Notwithstanding the warm acceptance of this concept, I still had my reservations: victimology, to my understanding, ought to always be positive. erefore, positive victimology might be a redundancy (Toren, 2015). ere is no need to add a new concept that adds nothing. Actually, an anonymous reviewer of one of our positive victimology papers claims the same, adding that according to the rule of parsimony, there is no need for positive victimology. In a way, I do agree with this straightforward reviewer, but I also do not. My purpose here is to show how positive victimology, as a concept and as a topic of research, theory, and practice, can contribute to theoretical and applied victimology.