Search results

European justice systems are facing a dramatic performance crisis due to the frequent inability to resolve cases without incurring unreasonable delays and backlogs. In this framework, the Italian Judicial system places itself well below the European countries average, in terms of speed of resolution of administrative, civil and criminal trials. The purpose of the paper was to (1) identify factors affecting Italian judicial system efficiency and (2) identify potential actions to manage them, improving judicial system efficiency.

In order to achieve the aims of this paper, a systematic review to map all critical factors discussed in previous studies was performed. Studies were extracted from Google Scholar, Web of Science and SSRN databases. In total, 22 studies were included.

The identified factors of inefficiency of the Italian judicial system have been divided into three macro-classes depending on whether they concern human resource management, the judicial process or whether they pertain to internal or external outside the judicial organization. For each of these, possible strategies have been developed in a new conceptual framework.

The framework seeks to assist policymakers in forming policy measures that can significantly increase court effectiveness. This is the first attempt to review and map all factors affecting judicial system efficiency systematically, providing a new conceptual framework to manage them.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the relationship between ownership structure and firm performance, including judicial system efficiency as a moderator to investigate the joint effects of both explanatory variables. Although prior studies have considered judicial system efficiency by examining de jure investor protection, this study identifies another useful proxy and explores de facto legal protection.

Ordinary least square multiple regression models were used to examine the influence of judicial efficiency, which was measured using the disposition time (DT) and legal origin, as a moderator of the relationship between ownership concentration and firm performance for a sample of 565 non-financial companies listed in Italy, France, Germany and Spain in 2013.

This paper shows that de facto investor protection ensured by an efficient judicial system is relevant to the relationship between firm performance and ownership structure. As a moderator variable, DT strengthens the intensity of this relationship in countries with low judicial efficiency, showing that ownership concentration leads to a better enhancement of firm performance and is, therefore, a more efficient governance mechanism in countries in which investor protection is weak.

The evidence presented expands the understanding of the link between firm performance and ownership structure. The institutional deficiencies suggest that internal governance mechanisms may substitute for external mechanisms in facilitating efficient governance. This study corroborates policymakers’ concerns regarding the efficiency of judicial systems and their role in protecting the rights of minority shareholders. The results suggest a need for more efficient external mechanisms of investor protection to facilitate investment in equity capital. Moreover, this study shows that DT is a more accurate measure of investor protection than the traditional measure of de jure legal protection.

This study investigates the presence of a productivity–quality trade-off in judicial decisions from an organisational standpoint, focusing on the courts as bureaucracies. Applied to the Italian context and focusing on criminal courts, the main question addressed is whether or not increasing productivity diminishes decision quality.

Directional distance function (DDF) models were utilised to assess productivity. Two-sample t-tests are then used to compare the quality of efficient and inefficient units in first instance and appeal, with the aim to determine whether a productivity–quality trade-off exists.

The study’s approach yields results that differ from previous studies. (1) The Italian judicial system is found less efficient. (2) The efficiency of the courts of first instance is relatively uniform. In contrast, there is a difference in efficiency between northern and southern courts of appeal, with northern courts on average being more efficient. (3) The analysis reveals a statistically significant productivity–quality trade-off when the courts of appeal are considered.

New evidence of a judicial system is presented, suggesting reforms regarding “reasonable time” as the optimal balance between quality and productivity.

The organisational framework leads to evaluating the efficiency of the courts by considering the various types of proceedings based on the gravity/complexity of the cases. In light of the pyramidal structure of the justice system, the quality is then defined in terms of hierarchical control expressed as review rate.

The purpose of this paper is to compare the different performance-based budgeting models used in the judiciaries of three European countries: Italy, Finland and the Netherlands. In particular, this paper focusses on the criteria adopted by these three countries to fund the courts, and it analyses the effects of these criteria on the distribution of resources and performance variability among first instance courts.

This exploratory research is based on a literature review and data analysis of three case studies. Equity in resource distribution and equality in courts' performance are assessed using the coefficient of variation.

The preliminary findings suggest the following: (1) funding models with a close link between performance and budget better guarantee equitable allocation of resources among courts and, therefore, more equal performance among courts within a country; (2) unbalanced allocation of resources is associated with disparities among courts in terms of judicial efficiency and effectiveness and consequently, unequal treatment of/outcomes for citizens coming before the law.

This paper is part of a broader research project aimed at analysing the impact of performance budgeting on the efficiency, quality, organization and values of judiciaries. This study only considers quantitative aspects of performance, but it will be followed by further analysis that will explore performance and judicial budgeting from other perspectives.

This paper describes examples of three different models of performance-based judicial budgeting from other countries, which aim to reform the budgeting processes of the judiciaries in question. The paper emphasizes the importance of adopting rational and transparent funding criteria in order to ensure judicial independence and accountability and to balance courts' performance, guaranteeing the principle that every citizen must obtain the same treatment before the law.

This paper contributes to the existing performance-based budgeting literature by studying its application to the judiciary, which, due to its peculiarities, is an area that has been overlooked in previous studies and deserves further attention. This study contributes to the court administration literature by exploring the issue of budgeting, which, despite its importance, is still a neglected subject.

That on accountability in public organizations is quite an old debate. Its introduction in judicial systems is, however, still viewed with some suspicion, due to its potential trade-off with independence and impartiality. Nevertheless, the need to respond to the demands for greater transparency and accountability has also pushed judicial organizations to establish a dialogue with a wide range of subjects. This study aims to explore the understanding and the current practices of sustainability reporting currently in place in judicial systems.

The study adopts a comparative approach, conducting an online survey in two European countries (Italy and Poland). The survey was built around the research questions and literature and administered between February and March 2020. Specifically, 804 courts were involved, of which 430 are in Italy and 374 in Poland.

Findings show that the current practices are still not widespread and there is still a lack of understanding of what sustainability reporting is, and therefore, of what its potential usefulness within the courts could be. Moreover, many differences between the two countries are pointed out, so it is possible to assume that the different cultural and institutional settings influence sustainability reporting practices. Finally, some interesting implications for policymakers are provided.

Judicial organizations are still poorly investigated in the literature, despite being at the center of a wide public and political debate. Moreover, the international comparative perspective adopted constitutes a further aspect of novelty.

Country of origin has profound effects on consumer behavior; yet few studies have examined an antecedent of these effects: why some countries enjoy a positive image while others suffer a negative one. Developing an institutional theory of country image, the authors argue that weak legal institutions at the country level increase firm opportunistic behavior that expropriates consumers and decrease the product quality of local brands, thus decreasing the country’s image regarding its products and brands.

This study measures country image for products and brands using the number of valuable brands (i.e. brands included in the top 500 brands from 2008 to 2016) in a particular home country. Data concerning the rule of law in each country come from the World Bank, and data on the efficiency of countries’ judicial systems comes from Djankov et al. (2007). We also collect patent data from the US Patent and Trade Office, national culture from Hofstede Insights and GDP and GDP per capita from the World Bank as control variables. Panel Poisson regression, Tobit regression and truncated regression are used in the analyses.

Supporting the institutional theory of country image, both the rule of law and efficiency of the judicial systems show positive and significant effects on country image, even when economy size (GDP), degree of economic development (GDP per capita), level of technology and skill (patents) and culture are controlled.

To improve their country’s image and the brand value of local firms, policymakers should strive to strengthen legal institutions aimed at punishing firm opportunistic behavior in their countries.

Previous research on the country-of-origin effect has not yet appreciated the role of legal institutions in developing the construct of country image.

E-court systems automate court processes and provide better case administration with more effective and efficient justice delivery. This paper aims to present the e-court system in the Sulaimaniyah Appellate Court in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq as a case study. It identifies significant improvements after adopting the system.

This study used a qualitative approach with an exploratory case study design. Data collected from a triangulation of three sources through structured expert interviews with 30 stakeholders, personal observations by two of the authors, supported by analyzing current relevant literature. R package for Qualitative Data Analysis was the analysis tool.

Findings showed 10 improvements that enhanced court efficiency and effectiveness concerning better case administration, a more transparent process and increased court case security.

This research is limited to improvements after adopting an e-court system.

This research provides a foundation for practitioners who are on the way to implement the e-court system and serves the decision-makers in the Kurdistan Regional Government to plan future expansion in the region.

This research focuses on the e-court system in the Kurdistan Region of Iraq. It is implemented as a first e-service to be a pilot for a broader plan to integrate all appellate courts in other cities in the Kurdistan of Iraq, hence, stepping toward the implementation of e-government.

Although recent models of place branding have proposed culture as a crucial element in establishing a strong place or nation brand, the way in which cultural products influence the brand equity of other products from the same nation has not yet been studied. This study aims to argue that when a nation has strong legal institutions, as perceived by investors and managers, it offers fertile soil for cultivating cultural products that, when exported, can act as “cultural ambassadors,” promoting the country image in the minds of consumers and the value of the country's brands.

Exports of cultural products are provided by UNESCO. Valuable brands are those that brand finance included in its global top 500 most valuable brands list. The rule of law is provided by the World Bank. Panel regression models are used.

Supporting the hypotheses, exports of cultural products show positive effects on the value of brands from that country, and the rule of law shows positive effects on exports of cultural products.

Policymakers could improve the brand value of local firms by promoting exports of cultural products. To do so, policymakers should initiate judicial reforms that strengthen the rule of law to protect contracts and property rights.

This study examines the hitherto underexplored effects that a country's cultural product exports have on the brand value of firms from that country. Most prior research has focused on factors affecting imports of cultural products.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the underlying differences in European Union (EU) country approaches to corporate governance and business ethics given the conformity imposed by the EU's recent standardization directives.

The authors conducted a multivariate statistical analysis, involving a two‐stage procedure where hierarchical and non‐hierarchical methods are used in tandem, using data from the 27 EU countries and 38 factors from the economic freedom of the world (EFW) index. This method is suitable for structured statistical data and allows for identification of groups that share similar characteristics – in this case among 38 criteria.

Despite the call for standardization by the EU's Transparency Directive, countries within the EU are adapting their governance and ethics practices, according to their own technical, cultural, and political process, creating unintended changes to the directive, especially in the implementation phase. The paper finds that in countries representative of four different clusters derived from the 27 countries making up the EU, specifically Sweden, Spain, Bulgaria, and Greece, have chosen to significantly adapt their ethics and governance protections to their specific context. While these alterations may serve to inhibit the goals envisioned by the convergence and standardization of the EU's directives, they may also present some improvements as well.

The paper provides empirical support for the comparative governance perspective at the cross‐cultural level for differences in the implementation practices of governance and business ethics across a representative set of four clusters within the 27 EU countries. This paper suggests new avenues of future research for institutional perspectives of corporate governance by suggesting that surface level conformity is only part of the story masking important underlying differences.

The paper offers insights for policy makers interested in enhancing the efficacy of corporate governance regimes across diverse regions such as the EU such that allowing for localization may come at the expense of standardization and comparison, foreign investment, job creation and other intended benefits of such policy initiatives but may also create opportunities for improvements to governance models.

The paper presents a unique cluster analysis based on the 38‐factors used in the EFW index. As such, the authors provide an alternative categorization of countries from previous research in an attempt to capture the current state of corporate governance and business ethics in four detailed case studies in order to move beyond comparisons of two countries which, to date, have dominated the governance research landscape.

This paper aims to contribute to research on corporate governance in regulated sectors, with emphasis in the field of activity of foreign investors through the ownership structure and legal system that regulates companies in Brazil.

In the first moment, the investigation had a quantitative approach of relational nature. Based on the data about the valuation of actions, statistical methods were applied to a secondary database containing measurable information provided by the organizations that operate the Brazilian stock-market and documentary evidence provided by the companies. In the second moment, a qualitative approach was adopted, resorting on the use of semi-structured interviews with investors and agents of the sector.

The results lead to two paths: presenting the perspective that foreign investors play a key role in improving governance practices because foreign ownership mitigates agency problems, provides adequate follow-up and optimizes the use of corporate resources; and evidencing the existence of a mitigation of operational risks in the face of the various obligations imposed by the concession contract with the regulatory agency, without direct interference under the ownership structure of regulated companies.

The literature portrays a distinct economic scenario in Brazil, where stock control is pulverized and mechanisms of corporate governance and scope of action of investors and regulated sectors are well-defined and implemented.

A great part of the studies from this field discusses the same object: the impact of the adoption of corporate governance mechanisms on selected efficiency indicators or on the value of the companies' actions. This investigation, on the other hand, targeted a differentiated approach so that its contribution would lie in the investigation under the influence of the regulation on the legal attributions and the performance of the investors how many conflicts between the other shareholder/regulatory body, as the control measures import by the regulatory agent the concessionaires of the Brazilian highways and transportation sector.

The identification of the presence of foreign investors as a determinant for: better performance of companies in Brazilian regulated sector in terms of market valuation; better mitigation of requirements with the regulatory framework for the agencies that regulate the concession sector, targeting a reduction in the asymmetry of information and transparency among all stakeholders.

The fact that Brazil is an emerging country that lacks a rigid legal system and corruption-control measures in corporate environments and public sectors, stresses the importance of the application of the “Best Codes of Corporate Governance Practices” in the main developed countries. This also stresses the need for effective supervisory bodies that contribute to a better financial performance of companies, guaranteeing investors the legal system.