JUDICIAL EFFICIENCY MODEL: RELATIONSHIP WITH FISCAL, BUDGETARY, LITIGIOUS DIMENSIONS AND PROCEDURAL RESOURCES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56238/revgeov17n3-183Keywords:
Judicial Efficiency, DEA, TOBIT, Public BudgetAbstract
The Judiciary must be independent and efficient. This study proposed and validated a model to measure judicial operational efficiency in State Courts of Justice in Brazil, using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), and analyzed the influence of factors such as fiscal, budgetary, and litigiousness dimensions, as well as internal and external appeal rates, on the efficiency scores of the Courts of Justice. The research employs an output-oriented DEA with variable returns to scale to calculate the efficiency score, followed by a TOBIT regression to identify its determinants. The results indicate that, after methodological validation, the most appropriate model for measuring efficiency in the Brazilian context is the one that separates outputs into criminal and non-criminal matters, capturing technological differences in procedural rites. The results also showed that the fiscal dimension contributes positively to improving judicial efficiency, while the budgetary dimension has a negative effect on the score. Moreover, litigiousness negatively affects efficiency, whereas internal and external appeal rates were not statistically significant. These findings provide unprecedented empirical evidence for public management in the Judiciary, indicating that fiscal health is more relevant to its efficiency than the mere budgetary volume of the Court.
Downloads
References
Aguiar‐Díaz, I., Mruk, E. M., & Ruiz‐Mallorquí, M. V. (2024). Judicial efficiency, debt structure, and cost of debt. Managerial and Decision Economics, 45(6), 3541–3563.
Amemiya, T. (1984). Tobit models: A survey. Journal of Econometrics, 24(1–2), 3–61.
Amudsen, S. B. (2018). A eficiência do poder judiciário e o crescimento econômico [Artigo apresentado]. 43º Encontro da ANPAD – EnANPAD, São Paulo. https://arquivo.anpad.org.br/eventos.php?cod_evento=&cod_evento_edicao=96&cod_edicao_subsecao=1665&cod_edicao_trabalho=26418.
Anessi-Pessina, E., Barbera, C., Langella, C., Manes-Rossi, F., Sancino, A., Sicilia, M., & Steccolini, I. (2020). Reconsidering public budgeting after the COVID-19 outbreak: key lessons and future challenges. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 32(5), 957-965. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBAFM-07-2020-0115.
Anessi-Pessina, E., Barbera, C., Sicilia, M., & Steccolini, I. (2016). Public sector budgeting: a European review of accounting and public management journals. Accounting, Auditing and Accountability Journal, 29(3), 491–519. https://doi.org/10.1108/AAAJ-11-2013-1532.
Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J.-S. (2009). Mostly harmless econometrics: An empiricist’s companion. Princeton university press.
Arake, H., & Gico Jr, T. (2018). O paradoxo da gratuidade de justiça. JUS. https://jus.com.br/artigos/69350/o-paradoxo-da-gratuidade-de-justica.
Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30(9), 1078–1092. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.30.9.1078.
Barbera, C., Jones, M., Korac, S., Saliterer, I., & Steccolini, I. (2017). Governmental financial resilience under austerity in Austria, England and Italy: how do local governments cope with financial shocks? Public Administration, 95(3), 670–697. https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12350.
Batista, A. P., Cruz, C. F. da, Ohayon, P., & Santos, O. M. dos. (2022). Articulando Perspectivas Teóricas e Metodológicas Aplicáveis à Resiliência Financeira Governamental [Artigo apresentado]. 46º Encontro Da ANPAD – EnANPAD, Evento online. http://anpad.com.br/uploads/articles/120/approved/662a2e96162905620397b19c9d249781.pdf.
Becker, F. E. N. (2018). Custas judiciais e justiça gratuita como fator de (in) eficiência da prestação jurisdicional do Poder Judiciário de Santa Catarina [Dissertação de mestrado, Centro de Ciências Jurídicas, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina]. Repositório Institucional UFSC. https://repositorio.ufsc.br/handle/123456789/205973.
Bergman, U. M., Hutchison, M. M., & Jensen, S. E. H. (2016). Promoting sustainable public finances in the European Union: The role of fiscal rules and government efficiency. European Journal of Political Economy, 44, 1–19.
Berkowitz, D., & Clay, K. (2006). The effect of judicial independence on courts: evidence from the American states. The Journal of Legal Studies, 35(2), 399–440. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/505052.
Bijos, P. (2014). Governança orçamentária: um relevante agenda em ascensão. Orçamento em Discussão, 12(12), 1–44. https://www2.senado.leg.br/bdsf/bitstream/handle/id/503101/1400411_Principal_Finalizado_145609.pdf?sequence=1.
Blöchliger, H., Merk, O., Charbit, C., & Mizell, L. (2007). Fiscal equalisation in OECD countries. OECD Publishing, (4), 1-38. https://doi.org/10.1787/5k97b11n2gxx-en
Borins, S. (2001). Encouraging innovation in the public sector. Journal of intellectual capital, 2(3), 310-319. https://doi.org/10.1108/14691930110400128.
Boyne, G (1986). Housing Administrators and Empire Building: A Test of Parkinson’s Law. Public Policy and Administration, v. 1, n. 1, p. 18–32, 1986.
Brasil. (1988). Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil.
Carberry, J. (2025). Discricionariedade judicial e erosão das garantias processuais. Revista de Ciências Jurídicas e Sociais Da UNIPAR, 28(1), 105–128. https://doi.org/10.25110/rcjs.v28i1.2025-12305
Casella, G., & Berger, R. L. (2002). Statistical inference. vol. 2. Pacific Grove, CA: Duxbury.
Castro, M. F., & Guccio, C. (2014). Searching for the source of technical inefficiency in Italian judicial districts: an empirical investigation. European Journal of Law and Economics, 38(3), 369–391. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-012-9329-0.
Cavalcante, H. H. A., & Gico, I. T., Jr. (2014). De graça, até injeção na testa: análise juseconômica da gratuidade de justiça. Economic Analysis of Law Review, 5(1), 166-178. https://doi.org/10.18836/2178-0587/ealr.v5n1p166-178.
Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Golany, B., Seiford, L., & Stutz, J. (1985). Foundations of data envelopment analysis for Pareto-Koopmans efficient empirical production functions. Journal of Econometrics, 30(1–2), 91–107. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(85)90133-2.
Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., Lewin, A. Y., & Seiford, L. M. (1994). Basic DEA models. In W. W. Cooper, L. M. Seiford & K. Tone, Data envelopment analysis: Theory, methodology, and applications (pp. 23–47). Springer. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-011-0637-5_2.
Coelho, M. L. M. M., & Lúcio, M. de L. (2010). Litigiosidade e Impacto na Gestão Pública–A mediação como instrumento de gestão–A experiência da Câmara de Conciliação e Arbitragem da Administração Federal. Revista Da Procuradoria-Geral Do Banco Central, 4(2), 75–97. https://www.bcb.gov.br/pgbcb/122010/revista_pgbc_vol4_n2_dez2010.pdf.
Conselho Nacional de Justiça (2021). Justiça em Números 2021. CNJ. https://www.cnj.jus.br/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/relatorio-justica-em-numeros2021-12.pdf.
Curristine, T., Lonti, Z., & Joumard, I. (2007). Improving public efficiency: Challenges and opportunities. OECD Journal on Budgeting, 7(1), 1–41.
Dam, K. W. (2006). The judiciary and economic development. Olin Working Paper, (287), 1-41. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.892030.
Daraio, C., & Simar, L. (2007). Advanced robust and nonparametric methods in efficiency analysis: Methodology and applications. Springer Science & Business Media.
Debreu, G. (1951). The Coefficient of Resource Utilization. Econometrica, 19(3), 273–292. https://doi.org/10.2307/1906814
Demo, G., & Pessoa, R. (2015). CRM na administração pública: desenvolvimento e validação de uma Escala de Relacionamento com o Cidadão (ERCi). Revista de Administração Pública - RAP, 49(3), 677–697. https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7612131226.
Deyneli, F. (2012). Analysis of relationship between efficiency of justice services and salaries of judges with two-stage DEA method. European Journal of Law and Economics, 34(3), 477–493. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-011-9258-3.
Dias, K. K., & Silva, J. H. (2019). Administração do planejamento orçamentário como forma de controle eficiente dos gastos públicos. QUALIA: A Ciência Em Movimento, 5(2), 1–17. http://www.revistas.unifan.edu.br/index.php/RevistaICSA/article/view/493.
Dyson, R. G., Allen, R., Camanho, A. S., Podinovski, V. V., Sarrico, C. S., & Shale, E. A. (2001). Pitfalls and protocols in DEA. European Journal of Operational Research, 132(2), 245–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(00)00149-1.
Edwards, W. (1954). The theory of decision making. Psychological Bulletin, 51(4), 380-417. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0053870.
Ellis, T. J., & Levy, Y. (2008). Framework of problem-based research: A guide for novice researchers on the development of a research-worthy problem. Informing Science: The International Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline, 11, 17-33. https://doi.org/10.28945/438
Emrouznejad, A., & Amin, G. R. (2009). DEA models for ratio data: Convexity consideration. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 33(1), 486–498. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2007.11.018.
Emrouznejad, A., & Anouze, A. L. (2009). A note on the modeling the efficiency of top Arab banks. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(3), 5741–5744. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2008.06.075.
Emrouznejad, A., & Yang, G. Liang. (2018). A survey and analysis of the first 40 years of scholarly literature in DEA: 1978–2016. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 61, 4–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2017.01.008.
European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (2016). Measuring the quality of justice. Council of Europe. https://rm.coe.int/1680747548.
Farrell, M. J. (1957). The measurement of productive efficiency. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (General), 120(3), 253–281. https://doi.org/10.2307/2343100.
Gabbay, D. M., & Cunha, L. G. (2012). Litigiosidade, morosidade e litigância repetitiva no judiciário: uma análise empírica. Saraiva.
Giacalone, M., Nissi, E., & Cusatelli, C. (2020). Dynamic efficiency evaluation of Italian judicial system using DEA based Malmquist productivity indexes. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 72, 100952. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2020.100952.
Gico, I., Jr., & Arake, H. (2019). Taxa de Recorribilidade, taxa de reversibilidade e eficiência judicial. Revista Eletrônica do curso de Direito da UFSM, 14(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.5902/1981369431820.
Gomes, A. de O., & Guimarães, T. de A. (2013). Desempenho no Judiciário: conceituação, estado da arte e agenda de pesquisa. Revista de Administração Pública - RAP, 47(2), 379–401. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-76122013000200005.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2009). Análise multivariada de dados. Bookman.
Hartwig, J. (2008). What drives health care expenditure? Baumol's model of ‘unbalanced growth’revisited. Journal of health economics, 27(3), 603-623. https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.910879
Holling, C. S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics, 4(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.04.110173.000245.
Ippoliti, R. (2014). La competitività del mercato forense e l’efficienza giudiziaria. Economia Pubblica - Italian Journal of Public Economics, 41(2), 53–90. https://www.torrossa.com/en/resources/an/3000501.
Ippoliti, R., & Tria, G. (2020). Efficiency of judicial systems: model definition and output estimation. Journal of Applied Economics, 23(1), 385–408. https://doi.org/10.1080/15140326.2020.1776977.
Jevons, W. J. (2018). Teoria da economia política. LeBooks.
Jolliffe, I. T. (2002). Principal component analysis for special types of data. In: Principal Component Analysis (pp. 338–372). Springer Series in Statistics. https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/0-387-22440-8_13.
Khan, M. A., Khan, M. A., Khan, M. A., Hussain, S., & Fenyves, V. (2024). Justice and finance: Does judicial efficiency contribute to financial system efficiency? Borsa Istanbul Review, 24(2), 248–255.
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–292. http://hassler-j.iies.su.se/COURSES/NewPrefs/Papers/KahnemanTversky%20Ec%2079.pdf.
Kaiser, H. F. (1958). The varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 23(3), 187–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289233.
Kantorowicz, J. (2014). Judges as fiscal activists: Can constitutional review shape public finance? DANUBE: Law, Economics and Social Issues Review, 5(2), 79–104. https://doi.org/10.2478/danb-2014-0005.
Koch, P., & Hauknes, J. (2005). On innovation in the public sector–today and beyond. Researchgate. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Per-M-Koch/publication/265318205_On_Innovation_in_the_Public_Sector/links/5a72d30caca2720bc0da757d/On-Innovation-in-the-Public-Sector.pdf.
Koch, P., Cunningham, P., Schwabsky, N., & Hauknes, J. (2006). Innovation in the public sector: Summary and Policy Recommendations. Nifu. https://nifu.brage.unit.no/nifu-xmlui/bitstream/handle/11250/226575/d24-summary-final.pdf?sequence=1.
Kocisova, K., Hass-Symotiuk, M., & Kludacz-Alessandri, M. (2018). Use of the DEA method to verify the performance model for hospitals. Business Administration and Management, 21(4), 125-140. http://hdl.handle.net/11025/31101.
Leone, M. C., & Kinkade, P. T. (1993). Bang for the buck: California court processing and budget allocations: 1976–1986. The Social Science Journal, 30(1), 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/0362-3319(93)90008-J.
Lewin, A. Y., Morey, R. C., & Cook, T. J. (1982). Evaluating the administrative efficiency of courts. Omega, 10(4), 401–411. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0483(82)90019-6.
Mahmoudi, R., Emrouznejad, A., Shetab-Boushehri, S. N., & Hejazi, S. R. (2020). The origins, development and future directions of data envelopment analysis approach in transportation systems. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 69, 100672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2018.11.009.
Martinez, A. L., Coutinho, J., Formigoni, H., & Santos, L. P. (2024). Tax litigation and corporate debt: A Brazilian perspective. Advances in Scientific and Applied Accounting, 275–290, 17(1), 275–290/291. https://doi.org/10.14392/asaa.2024170111.
McDonald, J. (2009). Using least squares and tobit in second stage DEA efficiency analyses. European Journal of Operational Research, 197(2), 792–798.
Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized Organizations: formal structııre as myth and ceremony”. American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/226550.
Morin, E., & Lisboa, E. (2007). Introdução ao pensamento complexo. Sulina.
North, D. C. (1991). Institutions. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 97–112. https://www.aeaweb.org/issues/270.
Oliveira, F. L. de, & Cunha, L. G. (2020). Os indicadores sobre o Judiciário brasileiro: limitações, desafios e o uso da tecnologia. Revista Direito GV, 16(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1590/2317-6172201948.
Oliveira, J. A. Jr., & Baggio, M. C. (2008). Jurisdição: da litigiosidade à mediação. Revista Direitos Culturais, 3(5), 109–136. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/322640073.pdf.
Papke, L. E., & Wooldridge, J. M. (1996). Econometric methods for fractional response variables with an application to 401 (k) plan participation rates. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 11(6), 619–632.
Parsons, T. (1956). Suggestions for a Sociological Approach to the Theory of Organizations-I. Administrative Science Quarterly, 1(1), 63–85. https://doi.org/10.2307/2390840.
Pekkanen, P., & Niemi, P. (2013). Process performance improvement in justice organizations—Pitfalls of performance measurement. International Journal of Production Economics, 143(2), 605–611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2012.08.009.
Petak, W. J. (1985). Emergency management: A challenge for public administration. Public Administration Review, 45, 3–7. https://doi.org/10.2307/3134992.
Pinheiro, D. A. R. (2016). O novo código de processo civil e a reduçao dos custos sociais da litigância. RePro-Revista de Processo, 253, 33–55.
Rocha, V. de O. (2001). Aspectos relevantes da lei de responsabilidade fiscal. Dialética.
Rodrigues, W., & Marcelino, J. (2014). O direito de acesso à justiça e a análise econômica da litigância: a maximização do acesso na busca pela efetividade [Tese de doutorado, Centro de Ciências Jurídicas, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina]. Repositório Institucional UFSC. https://repositorio.ufsc.br/xmlui/handle/123456789/123198.
Rosenn, K. S. (2011). Procedural protection of constitutional rights in Brazil. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 59(4), 1009-1050.
Saraceno, M. (2008). Access to justice and Litigation Trade-Off: A Theoretical Analysis. SSRN, 1-36. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1280795.
Schick, A. (2013). Reflections on Two Decades of Public Financial Management. In M. Cangiano, T. R. Curristine & M. Lazare, Public Financial Management and Its Emerging Architecture (pp. 21–76). International Monetary Fund. https://books.google.com.br/books?id=Iz8p0N41KvQC&printsec=frontcover&hl=pt-BR&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0.
Schneider, M. R. (2005). Judicial career incentives and court performance: An empirical study of the German Labour Courts of Appeal. European Journal of Law and Economics, 20(2), 127–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-005-1733-2.
Shuai, S., & Fan, Z. (2020). Modeling the role of environmental regulations in regional green economy efficiency of China: Empirical evidence from super efficiency DEA-Tobit model. Journal of Environmental Management, 261, 110227.
Silva, J. J., Matias-Pereira, J., & Borges, E. F. (2020). Determinantes de desempenho: influência do PIB na celeridade dos processos de litigiosidade de 1o grau no Judiciário Estadual Brasileiro. Brazilian Journal of Business, 2(2), 1712–1728.
Silva, Y. R., & Monte, E. Z. (2023). Produtividade total dos fatores e despesas públicas dos estados brasileiros: uma aplicação de dados em painel. Revista Brasileira de Economia de Empresas, 23(2), 49-66. https://doi.org/10.31501/rbee.v23i2.14482.
Simar, L., & Wilson, P. W. (2002). Non-parametric tests of returns to scale. European Journal of Operational Research, 139(1), 115–132. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(01)00167-9.
Sousa, M. D. M., & Guimarães, T. D. A. (2014). Inovação e desempenho na administração judicial: desvendando lacunas conceituais e metodológicas. Review of Administration and Innovation - RAI, 11(2), 321–334. https://doi.org/10.5773/rai.v11i2.1373.
Sperandio, L. (2019). Por que o Judiciário é tão caro e lento? Gazeta Do Povo. https://www.gazetadopovo.com.br/ideias/por-que-o-judiciario-brasileiro-e-tao-caro-e-lento/.
Steccolini, I., Jones, M. D. S., & Saliterer, I. (2017). Governmental financial resilience: International perspectives on how local governments face austerity. Emerald Group Publishing.
Vasconcelos, F. F., Sátiro, R. M., Fávero, L. P. L., Bortoloto, G. T., & Corrêa, H. L. (2023). Analysis of judiciary expenditure and productivity using machine learning techniques. Mathematics, 11(14), 3195.
Vercosa, L., Silva, V., Cruz, J., Bastos-Filho, C., & Bezerra, B. L. D. (2024). Investigation of lawsuit process duration using machine learning and process mining. Discover Analytics, 2(1), 9.
Viapiana, F. (2021). A performance-based budget in the judiciary: allocation of resources and performance variability in first instance courts. An analysis of three case studies. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 33(2), 177–206. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPBAFM-03-2020-0031.
Walker, J., & Cooper, M. (2011). Genealogies of resilience: From systems ecology to the political economy of crisis adaptation. Security Dialogue, 42(2), 143–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/09670106113996.
Weible, C. M., & Sabatier, P. A. (2007). A guide to the advocacy coalition framework. Handbook of public policy analysis: theory, politics, and methods, 125, 123-136.
Wooldridge, J. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. MIT press.
Yeung, L. (2020). Measuring efficiency of Brazilian courts: one decade later. Revista de Direito Administrativo, 279(1), 111–134. https://doi.org/10.12660/rda.v279.2020.81376.
Yeung, L. L. T., & Azevedo, P. F. (2012). Além dos “achismos” e das evidências anedóticas: Medindo a eficiência dos tribunais Brasileiros. Economia Aplicada, 16(4), 643–663. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1413-80502012000400005.
Yeung, L. L., & Azevedo, P. F. (2011). Measuring efficiency of Brazilian courts with data envelopment analysis (DEA). IMA Journal of Management Mathematics, 22(4), 343–356. https://doi.org/10.1093/imaman/dpr002.
