IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/ejlwec/v44y2017i2d10.1007_s10657-017-9565-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Careerism and judicial behavior

Author

Listed:
  • Alessandro Melcarne

    (EconomiX, CNRS and Université Paris Nanterre)

Abstract

Although often criticized by part of legal scholarship, the idea of judicial behavior being influenced by judges’ egoistic goals simply needs the appropriate institutional setting in order to be validated. In the present paper, the hypothesis of careerism affecting judges’ conduct is investigated with regard to the case of the Italian Constitutional Court, where judges only serve for a limited and non-renewable term of 9 years. This institutional framework allows to reasonably assume on a theoretical level the existence of career concerns among them. In order to maximize the chances of future appointments, judges try to earn as much reputation as possible among relevant audiences. Empirical evidence supports the theory that career concerns push judges to react to incentives that alter the reputational returns of their conduct. This result holds independently of judges’ personal characteristics that might influence their professional concerns.

Suggested Citation

  • Alessandro Melcarne, 2017. "Careerism and judicial behavior," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 241-264, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:ejlwec:v:44:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s10657-017-9565-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10657-017-9565-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10657-017-9565-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10657-017-9565-4?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 look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Melcarne Alessandro & Ramello Giovanni B., 2015. "Judicial Independence, Judges’ Incentives and Efficiency," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(2), pages 149-169, July.
    2. Fabio Padovano, 2009. "The time-varying independence of Italian peak judicial institutions," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 230-250, September.
    3. Cohen, Mark A, 1991. "Explaining Judicial Behavior or What's "Unconstitutional" about the Sentencing Commission?," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(1), pages 183-199, Spring.
    4. Albert Breton & Angela Fraschini, 2003. "The Independence of the Italian Constitutional Court," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 319-333, December.
    5. Martin Schneider, 2005. "Judicial Career Incentives and Court Performance: An Empirical Study of the German Labour Courts of Appeal," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 127-144, September.
    6. Eisenberg, Theodore & Huang, Kuo-Chang, 2012. "The effect of rules shifting supreme court jurisdiction from mandatory to discretionary—An empirical lesson from Taiwan," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 3-18.
    7. Fon, Vincy & Parisi, Francesco, 2006. "Judicial precedents in civil law systems: A dynamic analysis," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 519-535, December.
    8. Roberto Ippoliti & Alessandro Melcarne & Giovanni Ramello, 2015. "Judicial efficiency and entrepreneurs’ expectations on the reliability of European legal systems," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 75-94, August.
    9. Nadia Fiorino & Fabio Padovano & Grazia Sgarra, 2007. "The Determinants of Judiciary Independence: Evidence from the Italian Constitutional Court (1956-2002)," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 163(4), pages 683-705, December.
    10. Padovano, Fabio & Fiorino, Nadia, 2012. "Strategic delegation and “judicial couples” in the Italian Constitutional Court," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 215-223.
    11. Peter Grajzl & Valentina Dimitrova-Grajzl & Katarina Zajc, 2016. "Inside post-socialist courts: the determinants of adjudicatory outcomes in Slovenian commercial disputes," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 85-115, February.
    12. Stefan Voigt, 2016. "Determinants of judicial efficiency: a survey," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 183-208, October.
    13. Ramseyer, J Mark & Rasmusen, Eric B, 1997. "Judicial Independence in a Civil Law Regime: The Evidence from Japan," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(2), pages 259-286, October.
    14. Feld, Lars P. & Voigt, Stefan, 2003. "Economic growth and judicial independence: cross-country evidence using a new set of indicators," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 497-527, September.
    15. Ahmed E. Taha, 2004. "Publish or Paris? Evidence of How Judges Allocate Their Time," American Law and Economics Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(1), pages 1-27.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Melcarne, Alessandro & Monnery, Benjamin & Wolff, François-Charles, 2022. "Prosecutors, judges and sentencing disparities: Evidence from traffic offenses in France," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    2. Melcarne Alessandro & Ramello Giovanni B., 2015. "Judicial Independence, Judges’ Incentives and Efficiency," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(2), pages 149-169, July.
    3. Nicolas Lampach & Arthur Dyevre, 2020. "Choosing for Europe: judicial incentives and legal integration in the European Union," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 65-86, August.
    4. repec:hal:journl:hal-03680153 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Freyens, Benoit Pierre & Gong, Xiaodong, 2020. "Judicial arbitration of unfair dismissal cases: The role of peer effects," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Melcarne Alessandro & Ramello Giovanni B., 2015. "Judicial Independence, Judges’ Incentives and Efficiency," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 11(2), pages 149-169, July.
    2. Fiorino, Nadia & Gavoille, Nicolas & Padovano, Fabio, 2015. "Rewarding judicial independence: Evidence from the Italian Constitutional Court," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 56-66.
    3. Berlemann, Michael & Christmann, Robin, 2017. "The Role of Precedents on Court Delay - Evidence from a civil law country," MPRA Paper 80057, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Roberto Ippoliti & Giovanni B. Ramello, 2018. "Governance of tax courts," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 317-338, November.
    5. Samantha Bielen & Wim Marneffe & Peter Grajzl & Valentina Dimitrova-Grajzl, 2018. "The Duration of Judicial Deliberation: Evidence from Belgium," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 174(2), pages 303-333, June.
    6. Garoupa, Nuno & Grembi, Veronica, 2015. "Judicial review and political partisanship: Moving from consensual to majoritarian democracy," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 32-45.
    7. Amaral-Garcia Sofia & Garoupa Nuno, 2017. "Judicial Behavior and Devolution at the Privy Council," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 13(3), pages 1-40, November.
    8. Przemysław Banasik & Katarzyna Metelska-Szaniawska & Małgorzata Godlewska & Sylwia Morawska, 2022. "Determinants of judges’ career choices and productivity: a Polish case study," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 81-107, February.
    9. Moral, Alfonso & Rosales, Virginia & Martín-Román, Ángel, 2021. "Professional vs. non-professional labour judges: their impact on the quality of judicial decisions," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    10. Stefan Voigt, 2016. "Determinants of judicial efficiency: a survey," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 183-208, October.
    11. Fiorino, Nadia & Gavoille, Nicolas & Padovano, Fabio, 2015. "Rewarding judicial independence: Evidence from the Italian Constitutional Court," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 56-66.
    12. Fabio Padovano, 2009. "The time-varying independence of Italian peak judicial institutions," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 230-250, September.
    13. Padovano, Fabio & Fiorino, Nadia, 2012. "Strategic delegation and “judicial couples” in the Italian Constitutional Court," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 215-223.
    14. Pontus Mattsson & Jonas Månsson & Christian Andersson & Fredrik Bonander, 2018. "A bootstrapped Malmquist index applied to Swedish district courts," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 109-139, August.
    15. Berger, Helge & Neugart, Michael, 2011. "Labor courts, nomination bias, and unemployment in Germany," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 659-673.
    16. Matej Avbelj & Janez Šušteršič, 2019. "Conceptual Framework and Empirical Methodology for Measuring Multidimensional Judicial Ideology," DANUBE: Law and Economics Review, European Association Comenius - EACO, issue 2, pages 129-159, June.
    17. Lars P. Feld & Stefan Voigt, 2004. "Making Judges Independent – Some Proposals Regarding the Judiciary," CESifo Working Paper Series 1260, CESifo.
    18. Przemyslaw Banasik & Monika Odlanicka-Poczobutt & Maciej Wolny & Sylwia Morawska, 2020. "Preliminary Identification of Quantitative Factors Determining the Duration of Court Proceedings in Commercial Cases," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(Special 1), pages 279-293.
    19. Melcarne, Alessandro & Ramello, Giovanni B. & Spruk, Rok, 2021. "Is justice delayed justice denied? An empirical approach," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    20. Grajzl, Peter & Silwal, Shikha, 2020. "Multi-court judging and judicial productivity in a career judiciary: Evidence from Nepal," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).

    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:kap:ejlwec:v:44:y:2017:i:2:d:10.1007_s10657-017-9565-4. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.