IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jinsec/v8y2012i03p351-369_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trust in judicial institutions: an empirical approach

Author

Listed:
  • ROUSSEY, LUDIVINE
  • DEFFAINS, BRUNO

Abstract

This paper investigates the relationship between judicial resources and individuals’ trust in the justice system. We argue that the justice budget is likely to have a positive and significant impact on individuals’ trust in justice, thanks to its role as a signal when individuals face uncertainty regarding the judicial environment. We test this hypothesis empirically using three different budget-related variables: the justice budget per incoming case, the number of magistrates and the intensity of legal aid. Across our three regressions, we find a positive and significant correlation between judicial resources and individuals’ declared trust in the justice system. This positive relationship is robust to the introduction of socio-demographic, cultural, institutional and economic control variables. We finally offer empirical support to the intuition that the effect of the justice budget on trust in justice is likely to be greater when individuals are more satisfied with the level of democracy in their country.

Suggested Citation

  • Roussey, Ludivine & Deffains, Bruno, 2012. "Trust in judicial institutions: an empirical approach," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(3), pages 351-369, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:8:y:2012:i:03:p:351-369_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S174413741200001X/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Roussey, Ludivine & Soubeyran, Raphael, 2018. "Overburdened judges," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 21-32.
    2. Bielen, Samantha & Peeters, Ludo & Marneffe, Wim & Vereeck, Lode, 2018. "Backlogs and litigation rates: Testing congestion equilibrium across European judiciaries," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 9-22.
    3. Palmisano, Flaviana & Sacchi, Agnese, 2024. "Trust in public institutions, inequality, and digital interaction: Empirical evidence from European Union countries," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    4. Pedro C. Magalhães & Nuno Garoupa, 2020. "Judicial Performance and Trust in Legal Systems: Findings from a Decade of Surveys in over 20 European Countries," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 101(5), pages 1743-1760, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:8:y:2012:i:03:p:351-369_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/joi .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.