IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/recsxx/v27y2024i1p2284010.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A meta-regression analysis on judicial efficiency literature: the role of methodological and courts diversity

Author

Listed:
  • Francesco Aiello
  • Graziella Bonanno
  • Francesco Foglia

Abstract

This study presents a meta-regression analysis on the literature of courts efficiency. The metadata set comprises 264 efficiency scores retrieved from 36 papers published from 1992 to 2019. Our models explain a substantial proportion of both within- and between-study heterogeneity. Estimates indicate that the efficiency score of primary papers decreases when the sample size and the sum of inputs and outputs increase. It is also found that parametric papers yield higher efficiency scores than non-parametric studies. Furthermore, the scores obtained in studies that analyse first-instance courts are significantly higher than those from studies on appeal courts. Finally, papers focusing on specific courts (tax, civil or criminal) yield efficiency scores that are higher than those obtained in studies where the analysed courts are mixed.

Suggested Citation

  • Francesco Aiello & Graziella Bonanno & Francesco Foglia, 2024. "A meta-regression analysis on judicial efficiency literature: the role of methodological and courts diversity," Journal of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(1), pages 2284010-228, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:recsxx:v:27:y:2024:i:1:p:2284010
    DOI: 10.1080/15140326.2023.2284010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/15140326.2023.2284010
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/15140326.2023.2284010?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:taf:recsxx:v:27:y:2024:i:1:p:2284010. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/recs .

    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.