IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/socsci/v100y2019i1p198-214.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perceptions of the Rule of Law: Evidence on the Impact of Judicial Insulation

Author

Listed:
  • Jeff Yates
  • Andrew B. Whitford
  • David Brown

Abstract

Objectives The purpose of this article is to determine whether judicial insulation influences how individuals assess the rule of law. Methods We employ panel data models using data collected by the World Bank and other sources to differentiate the influence of two kinds of judicial insulation—designed (de jure) and implemented (de facto)—on individuals’ perceptions of the viability of the rule of law in their country. Results We find that while insulation (as designed) has no bearing on how individuals score rule of law strength, insulation (as implemented) increases individual assessments. Notably, we find that disappointment from unmet expectations—where institutional implementation falls short of design—negatively influences rule of law strength scores. Conclusions We conclude that the degree to which expectations regarding the insulation and independence of the judiciary are met (or not met) can have important implications for how the viability of the rule of law is perceived.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeff Yates & Andrew B. Whitford & David Brown, 2019. "Perceptions of the Rule of Law: Evidence on the Impact of Judicial Insulation," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 100(1), pages 198-214, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:bla:socsci:v:100:y:2019:i:1:p:198-214
    DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12538
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12538
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ssqu.12538?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
    ---><---

    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:bla:socsci:v:100:y:2019:i:1:p:198-214. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0038-4941 .

    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.