Resumo Muito se tem discutido acerca dos fatores que levariam a uma atuação eficiente ou ineficiente do sistema judiciário brasileiro, e uma parte das discussões acadêmicas em relação ao campo de Administração da Justiça diz respeito aos antecedentes de desempenho/produtividade relativos aos tribunais e magistrados. Nesse sentido, o objetivo principal do presente trabalho foi identificar os aspectos determinantes da produtividade dos tribunais de justiça estaduais no Brasil e testar variáveis emergentes que possam auxiliar nesse entendimento. A partir de uma análise da literatura de referência, foram definidas variáveis já consolidadas: carga de trabalho, quantidade de recursos humanos (servidores efetivos e empregados terceirizados); e variáveis emergentes: advogados e conciliadores. A técnica de inferência utilizada foi a Regressão Múltipla com dados em painel. Após o teste e a validação do modelo e dos pressupostos da Regressão foram confirmadas as hipóteses de que a quantidade de advogados, a carga de trabalho e a quantidade de servidores efetivos e empregados terceirizados afetam a produtividade dos tribunais. Por último, os resultados apontam na direção contrária das orientações do Conselho Nacional de Justiça (CNJ); concluiu-se que a quantidade de conciliadores não está relacionada à produtividade dos tribunais de justiça.

Maintaining the judiciary requires a high level of budgetary expenditure, but the specifics of this relationship have not yet been fully explored. While several studies have examined the impact of spending on the judiciary through measures related to productivity and performance, none have used machine learning techniques. This study examines the productivity of the court system based on expenditures and other variables using machine learning techniques. In the clustering process Brazilian courts are ranked according to their productivity, while in the neural network step it is verified which characteristics are most relevant at the budgetary level related to judicial productivity for each cluster formed in the first step. The final neural network model supports the results of Pearson’s parametric correlation test, which found no significant correlation between expenditure and productivity. The findings from this study demonstrate the importance of understanding that increasing public budget expenditures alone is not sufficient to improve the efficiency of the judicial system. Instead, other administrative measures are necessary to meet the demands of the Brazilian judiciary and improve service delivery rates. These results offer important theoretical and managerial contributions to the field.

RESUMO Observa-se que o desempenho organizacional é um dos conceitos centrais na pesquisa em Administração Pública e tem ganhado importância na administração da justiça. No entanto, a despeito de tal importância, observa-se que o setor público ainda enfrenta entraves na mensuração de seu desempenho. O Judiciário não é imune a tal constatação, pelo contrário, como um dos poderes mais conservadores do Estado, observa-se que somente recentemente passou a ocupar-se de questões relativas à gestão de seus serviços. O objetivo do ensaio é discutir as variáveis componentes do desempenho judicial, bem como suas dimensões de análise. Foi realizada uma revisão narrativa. A literatura corrobora a multiplicidade de dimensões e de componentes das dimensões de desempenho, evidenciando um construto complexo, multifacetado e, por vezes, de difícil mensuração. O estudo contribui de três formas: trata de tema interdisciplinar envolvendo Direito, Administração Pública e Economia; identifica conceitos, métodos e abordagens, em que os estudos empíricos quantitativos têm sido operacionalizados; e propõe uma agenda de pesquisa sobre o tema.

Access to justice is understood as a fundamental right that serves as an instrument for the courts to claim other rights. Factors such as ignorance of rights and the perception of justice as expensive, slow, and exclusionary prevent most of the population from going to court. This study aimed to analyze the quantitative determinants of (potential and actual) access to the Judiciary across all Brazilian courts, focusing on two perspectives: internal elements of the Judiciary and external elements. The method used was multiple linear regression, with a sample of 89 Brazilian courts (27 state courts of justice, 27 electoral courts, 24 regional labor courts, five federal regional courts, three military courts, and three superior courts). The results indicate that the statistically significant variables for effective access to the judiciary were the number of judges, the number of effective civil servants, resources invested in technology, the education rate, and Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita. Regarding potential access to the judiciary, the only statistically significant variables were the number of civil servants and GDP per capita.

Objective: access to justice is a fundamental human right in civilized societies and must be ensured within an efficient and effective judicial system. Most discussions regarding the legitimacy of the judiciary as a mediator of social conflicts revolve around the population’s access to justice. Therefore, this study delves into the factors that determine both potential and actual access to the Brazilian Courts of Justice. Methods: longitudinal data from the 27 Brazilian State Courts of Justice between 2009 and 2020 were organized into panel data, constituting a sample of 324 observations. Results: the results indicate that the number of judges, the number of employees (including civil servants and outsourced personnel), investment in information and communication technology, and the number of lawyers working in the state are the variables that influence actual access to justice. In contrast, the number of civil servants is the sole variable influencing potential access to justice. The results further indicate that the ratio of civil servants per judge - a structural variable - has a statistically significant influence on both potential and actual access to justice. This suggests that institutional staffing plays a dual role: it contributes to expanding access conditions and also supports the judiciary’s capacity to deliver outcomes. While this finding highlights the relevance of this specific structural factor, no other structural variables tested showed consistent significance, which cautions against generalizing the influence of structural determinants as a whole. Additionally, the results show that effective access is more closely related to operational efficiency and the system’s ability to resolve cases. Conclusions: regarding information and communication technologies, the study found limited but relevant evidence of their role in facilitating access to justice, with one specific ICT-related variable showing a statistically significant and positive effect. These findings suggest that the impact of ICTs may depend on particular institutional and managerial conditions and should therefore be interpreted with caution.