Clearance rates and disposition times
Not the whole story of judicial efficiency
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21451804 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Miguel Alves Pereira (0000-0002-5315-8229, University of Lisbon, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 83 |
| Pages | 106283 |
| Publication date | 2025-09-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | International Review of Law and Economics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0144-8188 • E-ISSN: 1873-6394 |
| Publisher | Elsevier BV (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.irle.2025.106283 |
| OpenAlex | W4411275857 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 37 |
Judicial efficiency is often measured through clearance rate (CR) and disposition time (DT), yet these traditional metrics fail to capture the complexity of resource utilisation in courts. This study critiques the widespread reliance on CR and DT, arguing that they provide an incomplete and potentially misleading picture of judicial efficiency. Using Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA), a non-parametric method designed to measure resource-based efficiency, this research analyses courts across Europe’s three-tier judicial hierarchy. The findings reveal significant shortcomings in CR and DT, including weak or negative correlations with DEA efficiency scores, particularly at the Supreme Court level, where these metrics neglect the intricacies of resource management and case complexity. DEA, by accounting for multiple inputs (e.g., judges, staff, budgets) and outputs (resolved and pending cases), offers a more nuanced framework for measuring efficiency. The analysis highlights inefficiencies hidden behind high CRs and low DTs, suggesting that resource misallocation is a key issue. Furthermore, prioritising efficiency improvements in first-instance courts, where resource bottlenecks are most acute, could generate cascading benefits throughout the judiciary. This study provides empirical evidence for the inadequacy of traditional metrics and advocates for a paradigm shift towards comprehensive tools like DEA to measure judicial efficiency. By moving beyond simplistic case throughput measures, policymakers can design targeted reforms that ensure both the equitable delivery of justice and the sustainable management of judicial resources. The results underscore the urgency of rethinking how justice is measured and understood in modern judicial systems. • Exposes the limitations of CR and DT as metrics for judicial efficiency in Europe. • Reveals weak correlations between CEPEJ metrics and true judicial efficiency. • Demonstrates DEA as a superior tool for resource-based judicial efficiency analysis. • Identifies inefficiencies across European courts at all judicial hierarchy levels. • Provides actionable DEA-based insights for judicial reforms
Disposition · Economics · Environmental Science · Healthcare Policy and Management · Insurance and Financial Risk Management · Law, Economics, and Judicial Systems · Psychology · Social Psychology
Measuring the efficiency of decision making units
The Measurement of Productive Efficiency
Formulation and estimation of stochastic frontier production function models
Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis
Time efficiency as a measure of court performance
What lessons can be learned from cost efficiency? The case of Swedish district courts
Scale and scope economies in first-instance courts
Data envelopment analysis to investigate the Italian legal system and its reform
The Efficiency of the Italian Judicial System
| Highly cited | No |
|---|