Judicial Efficiency Drivers Across Institutional, Economic, and Procedural Dimension
Click to verify publication status
Authors
-
Intan Sukmasakti Suwarno Putri
Sharia Business Law at the Faculty of Sharia and Law, Universitas Islam Negeri Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
Keywords:
Judicial efficiency, Court digitalization, Institutional reform, Resource allocation, Legal costsAbstract
Objective: The objective of this study is to analyze the institutional, economic, and procedural drivers of judicial efficiency, paying special attention to the role of court digitalization, as a direct determinant and as a moderator factor.
Methods: It relied on a mainly quantitative method, with primary original survey data collected from judicial actors and administrative staff. We tested nine direct and moderating relationships using Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) to analyze data.
Results: he results demonstrate that all the factors considered—judicial resource allocation, court organizational structure, legal cost availability, digitalization of the court—exert a positive influence on the efficiency of justice, while the pressure of litigation demand exerts a negative influence. The moderation effect of court digitalization is significant for all four predictors as the positive influencing and negative impact will be increased and decreased respectively. The model explains most of the variance (R2=0.674) and its predictive power is high (Q2=0.412).
Novelty: This analysis brings together institutional, economic, and procedural dimensions into a single empirical model, through where court digitalization serves as a joint enabler that allows other reform efforts become more productive.
Implications: The results point to actionable directions for policy intervention through effective resource allocation, organizational downsizing, affordable access reforms, and integrated digital transformation to help court performance sustainability.
Downloads
References
Afzal, J. (2024). Future of Legal Tools and Justice BT - Implementation of Digital Law as a Legal Tool in the Current Digital Era (J. Afzal (ed.); pp. 155–177). Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-7106-6_8
Ahmed, R. K., Muhammed, K. H., Pappel, I., & Draheim, D. (2021). Impact of e-court systems implementation: a case study. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 15(1), 108–128. https://doi.org/10.1108/TG-01-2020-0008
Bendoly, E., & Hur, D. (2007). Bipolarity in reactions to operational ‘constraints’: OM bugs under an OB lens. Journal of Operations Management, 25(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jom.2005.08.004
Bhatt, H., Bahuguna, R., Swami, S., Singh, R., Gehlot, A., Akram, S. V., Gupta, L. R., Thakur, A. K., Priyadarshi, N., & Twala, B. (2024). Integrating industry 4.0 technologies for the administration of courts and justice dispensation—a systematic review. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1076. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03587-0
Brauer, M., & Laamanen, T. (2014). Workforce Downsizing and Firm Performance: An Organizational Routine Perspective. Journal of Management Studies, 51(8), 1311–1333. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12074
Burbank, S. B., & Farhang, S. (2014). LITIGATION REFORM: AN INSTITUTIONAL APPROACH. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 162(7), 1543–1618. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24248343
Deichmann, U., Goyal, A., & Mishra, D. (2016). Will digital technologies transform agriculture in developing countries? Agricultural Economics, 47(S1), 21–33. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/agec.12300
Estrela, M., Ferreira, P. L., Roque, F., & Herdeiro, M. T. (2025). “Simplification, decentralization, proximity” – A critical analysis of the digital health framework in Portugal through expert interviews. International Journal of Medical Informatics, 201, 105962. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2025.105962
Falavigna, G., Ippoliti, R., & Ramello, G. B. (2018). DEA-based Malmquist productivity indexes for understanding courts reform. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, 62, 31–43. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2017.07.001
Figlio, D., & Loeb, S. (2011). Chapter 8 - School Accountability (E. A. Hanushek, S. Machin, & L. B. T.-H. of the E. of E. Woessmann (eds.); Vol. 3, pp. 383–421). Elsevier. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-444-53429-3.00008-9
Franco, J. C. (2008). Making Land Rights Accessible: Social Movements and Political-Legal Innovation in the Rural Philippines. The Journal of Development Studies, 44(7), 991–1022. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220380802150763
Gelade, Garry, & Gilbert, Patrick. (2003). Work Climate and Organizational Effectiveness: The Application of Data Envelopment Analysis in Organizational Research. Organizational Research Methods, 6(4), 482–501. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428103257364
Greavu-Şerban, V., Gheorghiu, A., & Ungureanu, C. (2025). A multidimensional perspective of digitization in Romanian public institutions. World Development, 191, 106996. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2025.106996
Kolade, O., & Owoseni, A. (2022). Employment 5.0: The work of the future and the future of work. Technology in Society, 71, 102086. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.102086
Lewin, A. Y., Morey, R. C., & Cook, T. J. (1982). Evaluating the administrative efficiency of courts. Omega, 10(4), 401–411. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0483(82)90019-6
Li, S., Chen, L., Jiang, T., Wang, Y., & Shen, C. (2024). Multidimensional financial development and natural resources: A path for sustainable development via natural resources and digitalization. Resources Policy, 88, 104400. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.104400
Mohr, R., & Contini, F. (2011). Reassembling the Legal. Griffith Law Review, 20(4), 994–1019. https://doi.org/10.1080/10383441.2011.10854728
Nee, V. (1998). Norms and Networks in Economic and Organizational Performance. The American Economic Review, 88(2), 85–89. http://www.jstor.org/stable/116898
Ni, Z., Yang, J., & Razzaq, A. (2022). How do natural resources, digitalization, and institutional governance contribute to ecological sustainability through load capacity factors in highly resource-consuming economies? Resources Policy, 79, 103068. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.103068
Rennecker, J., & Godwin, L. (2005). Delays and interruptions: A self-perpetuating paradox of communication technology use. Information and Organization, 15(3), 247–266. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoandorg.2005.02.004
Sourdin, T., Li, B., & McNamara, D. M. (2020). Court innovations and access to justice in times of crisis. Health Policy and Technology, 9(4), 447–453. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2020.08.020
Weerakkody, V., Omar, A., El-Haddadeh, R., & Al-Busaidy, M. (2016). Digitally-enabled service transformation in the public sector: The lure of institutional pressure and strategic response towards change. Government Information Quarterly, 33(4), 658–668. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.06.006
Williams, N., & Vorley, T. (2015). The impact of institutional change on entrepreneurship in a crisis-hit economy: the case of Greece. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 27(1–2), 28–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2014.995723
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Intan Sukmasakti Suwarno Putri (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Sharia Economic Law Innovation (SELI) © 2024 by Inovasi Analisis Data is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0
