IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v11y2023i14p3195-d1198907.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Analysis of Judiciary Expenditure and Productivity Using Machine Learning Techniques

Author

Listed:
  • Fernando Freire Vasconcelos

    (School of Economics, Administration, Accounting and Actuarial Science, São Paulo University, São Paulo 05508-101, Brazil)

  • Renato Máximo Sátiro

    (“Luiz de Queiroz” School of Agriculture, São Paulo University, São Paulo 05508-101, Brazil)

  • Luiz Paulo Lopes Fávero

    (School of Economics, Administration, Accounting and Actuarial Science, São Paulo University, São Paulo 05508-101, Brazil)

  • Gabriela Troyano Bortoloto

    (School of Economics, Administration, Accounting and Actuarial Science, São Paulo University, São Paulo 05508-101, Brazil)

  • Hamilton Luiz Corrêa

    (School of Economics, Administration, Accounting and Actuarial Science, São Paulo University, São Paulo 05508-101, Brazil)

Abstract

Maintaining the judiciary requires a high level of budgetary expenditure, but the specifics of this relationship have not yet been fully explored. While several studies have examined the impact of spending on the judiciary through measures related to productivity and performance, none have used machine learning techniques. This study examines the productivity of the court system based on expenditures and other variables using machine learning techniques. In the clustering process Brazilian courts are ranked according to their productivity, while in the neural network step it is verified which characteristics are most relevant at the budgetary level related to judicial productivity for each cluster formed in the first step. The final neural network model supports the results of Pearson’s parametric correlation test, which found no significant correlation between expenditure and productivity. The findings from this study demonstrate the importance of understanding that increasing public budget expenditures alone is not sufficient to improve the efficiency of the judicial system. Instead, other administrative measures are necessary to meet the demands of the Brazilian judiciary and improve service delivery rates. These results offer important theoretical and managerial contributions to the field.

Suggested Citation

  • Fernando Freire Vasconcelos & Renato Máximo Sátiro & Luiz Paulo Lopes Fávero & Gabriela Troyano Bortoloto & Hamilton Luiz Corrêa, 2023. "Analysis of Judiciary Expenditure and Productivity Using Machine Learning Techniques," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-19, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:14:p:3195-:d:1198907
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/14/3195/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/14/3195/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mitsopoulos, Michael & Pelagidis, Theodore, 2007. "Does staffing affect the time to dispose cases in Greek courts?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 219-244.
    2. Demircioglu, Mehmet Akif & Audretsch, David B., 2017. "Conditions for innovation in public sector organizations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(9), pages 1681-1691.
    3. Tomas Aquino Guimaraes & Adalmir Oliveira Gomes & Edson Ronaldo Guarido Filho, 2018. "Administration of justice: an emerging research field," RAUSP Management Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 53(3), pages 476-482, June.
    4. Dimitrova-Grajzl, Valentina & Grajzl, Peter & Slavov, Atanas & Zajc, Katarina, 2016. "Courts in a transition economy: Case disposition and the quantity–quality tradeoff in Bulgaria," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 18-38.
    5. G. Falavigna & R. Ippoliti, 2022. "Model definitions to identify appropriate benchmarks in judiciary," Journal of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 339-360, December.
    6. Frank B. Cross & Dain C. Donelson, 2010. "Creating Quality Courts," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(3), pages 490-510, September.
    7. Beenstock, Michael & Haitovsky, Yoel, 2004. "Does the appointment of judges increase the output of the judiciary?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 351-369, September.
    8. Simard, Richard & L'Ecuyer, Pierre, 2011. "Computing the Two-Sided Kolmogorov-Smirnov Distribution," Journal of Statistical Software, Foundation for Open Access Statistics, vol. 39(i11).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stefan Voigt, 2016. "Determinants of judicial efficiency: a survey," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 183-208, October.
    2. Berlemann, Michael & Christmann, Robin, 2017. "The Role of Precedents on Court Delay - Evidence from a civil law country," MPRA Paper 80057, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Gupta, Maansi & Bolia, Nomesh B., 2024. "Factors affecting efficient discharge of judicial functions: Insights from Indian courts," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    4. Samantha Bielen & Wim Marneffe & Peter Grajzl & Valentina Dimitrova-Grajzl, 2018. "The Duration of Judicial Deliberation: Evidence from Belgium," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 174(2), pages 303-333, June.
    5. Peter Grajzl & Shikha Silwal, 2020. "The functioning of courts in a developing economy: evidence from Nepal," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 101-129, February.
    6. Roussey, Ludivine & Soubeyran, Raphael, 2018. "Overburdened judges," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 21-32.
    7. Moral, Alfonso & Rosales, Virginia & Martín-Román, Ángel, 2021. "Professional vs. non-professional labour judges: their impact on the quality of judicial decisions," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    8. Caio Castelliano & Peter Grajzl & Tomas Aquino Guimaraes & Andre Alves, 2021. "Judicial enforcement and caseload: theory and evidence from Brazil," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 52(1), pages 137-168, August.
    9. Konstantinos Kalliris & Theodore Alysandratos, 2023. "One judge to rule them all: Single‐member courts as an answer to delays in criminal trials," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 233-268, March.
    10. Arnaud Deseau & Adam Levai & Michèle Schmiegelow, 2019. "Access to Justice and Economic Development: Evidence from an International Panel Dataset," LIDAM Discussion Papers IRES 2019009, Université catholique de Louvain, Institut de Recherches Economiques et Sociales (IRES).
    11. Duol Kim & Heechul Min, 2017. "Appeal rate and caseload: evidence from civil litigation in Korea," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 339-360, October.
    12. Grajzl, Peter & Silwal, Shikha, 2020. "Multi-court judging and judicial productivity in a career judiciary: Evidence from Nepal," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    13. Romain Espinosa & Claudine Desrieux & Hengrui Wan, 2017. "Fewer courts, less justice? Evidence from the 2008 French reform of labor courts," Post-Print halshs-01634211, HAL.
    14. Dimitrova-Grajzl Valentina & Grajzl Peter & Zajc Katarina & Sustersic Janez, 2012. "Judicial Incentives and Performance at Lower Courts: Evidence from Slovenian Judge-Level Data," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 215-252, August.
    15. Dimitrova-Grajzl, Valentina & Grajzl, Peter & Slavov, Atanas & Zajc, Katarina, 2016. "Courts in a transition economy: Case disposition and the quantity–quality tradeoff in Bulgaria," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 18-38.
    16. Roberto Ippoliti & Massimiliano Vatiero, 2014. "An analysis of how 2002 judicial reorganisation has impacted on the performance of the First Instance Courts (Preture) in Ticino," IdEP Economic Papers 1408, USI Università della Svizzera italiana.
    17. Dimitrova-Grajzl, Valentina & Grajzl, Peter & Sustersic, Janez & Zajc, Katarina, 2012. "Court output, judicial staffing, and the demand for court services: Evidence from Slovenian courts of first instance," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 19-29.
    18. Przemysław Banasik & Katarzyna Metelska-Szaniawska & Małgorzata Godlewska & Sylwia Morawska, 2022. "Determinants of judges’ career choices and productivity: a Polish case study," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 81-107, February.
    19. Fauvrelle Thiago A. & Tony C Almeida Alessio, 2018. "Determinants of Judicial Efficiency Change: Evidence from Brazil," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(1), pages 1-36, March.
    20. Timothy Yu-Cheong Yeung & Michal Ovádek & Nicolas Lampach, 2022. "Time efficiency as a measure of court performance: evidence from the Court of Justice of the European Union," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 209-234, April.

    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:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:14:p:3195-:d:1198907. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.