Policy reforms and productivity change in the judiciary system: a cost function approach applied to time series of the Dutch judiciary system between 1980 and 2016

The judiciary is constantly undergoing change in order to respond to a wide range of social developments that have brought the sector under increasing pressure. In order to deal with the constant call for enhancing budgets, different policy measures have been taken to downsize the appeal to the judiciary and to improve productivity. One of the central questions hereby is whether these measures have actually contributed to a more productive sector. This paper focuses on the development of productivity in the judiciary and how policy measures have affected productivity. In this empirical analysis, we apply a cost function model to time series data of the Dutch judiciary between 1980 and 2016. The results show a dramatic decline of productivity over the entire period (−50%), in spite of various policy measures. The year 2001 can be regarded as a turning point, as since then productivity has remained more or less stable. It seems that this is largely due to the establishment of the Council for the Judiciary and the associated increase in (financial and operational) autonomy for the judiciary. Another striking result is that technical change is biased toward using more personnel through time.

[1]  S. Voigt.  Determinants of judicial efficiency: a survey , 2016 .

[2]  Giuliana Palumbo,et al.  Judicial Performance and its Determinants: A Cross-Country Perspective , 2013 .

[3]  Michael Tonry,et al.  Why Crime Rates Are Falling throughout the Western World , 2014, Crime and Justice.

[4]  Finn R. Førsund,et al.  Efficiency analysis of Norwegian district courts , 1992 .

[5]  P. J. Verdoorn.  Verdoorn's Law in Retrospect: A Comment , 1980 .

[6]  B. Soro.  ‘Fattori che regolano lo sviluppo della produttività del lavoro’ Fifty Years On , 2002 .

[7]  D. Butler.  Judicial reform , 1993, Nature.

[8]  F. Lucidi,et al.  The Economic Impact of Civil Justice Reforms , 2014 .

[9]  W. Voermans,et al.  Councils for the Judiciary in EU Countries , 2008 .

[10]  A. Gouveia,et al.  The impact of structural reforms of the judicial system: a survey , 2016 .

[11]  P. Langbroek.  Organization Development of the Dutch Judiciary, between Accountability and Judicial Independence , 2010 .

[12]  D. Jorgenson,et al.  TRANSCENDENTAL LOGARITHMIC PRODUCTION FRONTIERS , 1973 .

[13]  Francisco Pedraja-Chaparro,et al.  An assessment of the efficiency of Spanish Courts using DEA , 1996 .

[14]  S. Voigt,et al.  Identifying the determinants of aggregate judicial performance: taxpayers’ money well spent? , 2016 .

[15]  D. Hensler.  Our Courts, Ourselves: How the Alternative Dispute Resolution Movement Is Re-Shaping Our Legal System , 2004 .

[16]  T. Farrow.  Public Justice Private Dispute Resolution and Democracy , 2008 .

[17]  F. Dijk.  Improved performance of the Netherlands Judiciary: Assessment of the gains for society , 2014 .

[18]  J. Blank,et al.  Specifying technical change: a research on the nature of technical change in Dutch hospital industry , 2004 .

[19]  Robert W. Gillespie,et al.  The Production of Court Services: An Analysis of Scale Effects and Other Factors , 1976, The Journal of Legal Studies.

[20]  E. Eggink,et al.  The impact of policy on hospital productivity: a time series analysis of Dutch hospitals , 2014, Health care management science.