
handle: 10419/30074 , 10419/26559
It has been argued that procedural formalism undermines economic efficiency by fostering rent-seeking and corruption. We challenge this view by arguing that a number of judicial procedures foster economic growth by increasing the predictability of court decisions, which leads to more transactions and higher investment levels. We investigate the effects on economic growth of 15 judicial procedures. Employing a standard growth model, we find in a cross-section of 67 countries that timeliness, written—as opposed to oral—procedures, and the right to counsel have a positive effect on growth, whereas the number of independent procedural actions as well as the presumption of innocence have negative effects. Our results partially contradict the results of former studies based on the Lex Mundi dataset.
330, Welt, Economics, growth, O40, Judicial procedure, Judicial procedure, legal formalism, judicial Independence, rule of law, investment, growth., legal formalism, growth., judicial independence, H11, Wirtschaftswachstum, Gerichtsbarkeit, Verfahrensrecht, ddc:330, rule of law, P51, Wirtschaft, investment, judicial procedure, legal formalism, judicial independence, rule of law, investment, growth, K40, judicial Independence, Schätzung, jel: jel:K40, jel: jel:O40, jel: jel:H11, jel: jel:P51
330, Welt, Economics, growth, O40, Judicial procedure, Judicial procedure, legal formalism, judicial Independence, rule of law, investment, growth., legal formalism, growth., judicial independence, H11, Wirtschaftswachstum, Gerichtsbarkeit, Verfahrensrecht, ddc:330, rule of law, P51, Wirtschaft, investment, judicial procedure, legal formalism, judicial independence, rule of law, investment, growth, K40, judicial Independence, Schätzung, jel: jel:K40, jel: jel:O40, jel: jel:H11, jel: jel:P51
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 20 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
