When autonomy is necessary for performance: Brazilian public defenders’ offices
Main Article Content
Abstract
Public Defender’s Offices (PDOs) are responsible for providing legal assistance to citizens in situations of social and economic vulnerability. These organizations litigate directly against the state to guarantee the provision of public services and prevent government abuses or deviations. Therefore, these organizations require autonomy to fulfill their mission. This work analyzes the relationship between autonomy and performance in Brazilian PDOs. The work tests the perception of the impact between autonomy and performance of Brazilian PDOs. A survey was carried out with bureaucrats from 27 Brazilian PDOs, and the data was analyzed through structural equation modeling. The variables observed include, in addition to performance and autonomy, availability of resources, competencies, and accountability. The results point out a perception that PDOs must be autonomous and free from political influences to perform their mission properly. The bureaucrats’ skills and accountability were identified as relevant factors for the organizations’ performance. However, there was no significant relationship between resource availability and perceived performance. The contributions of this study include obtaining evidence of empirical validity to measure the constructs “autonomy,” “availability of resources,” “skills,” and “responsibility” and their impact on the performance of PDOs.
Downloads
Article Details
The Brazilian Journal of Public Administration (RAP) undertakes to contribute to the protection of authors’ intellectual rights. On this matter:
- It uses the Creative Commons BY (CC-BY) license for all texts it publishes, except when there is indication of specific holders of copyrights and property rights;
- It uses the similarity verification software of content - Plagiarism (Crossref Similarity Check);
- It takes actions to fight against plagiarism and ethical misconduct aligned with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Further information on the Code of Ethics adopted by RAP can be found in Ethical Standards and Code of Conduct.
References
Abramo, C. W. (2010). Tempos de Espera no Supremo Tribunal Federal. Direito GV, 6(2), 423-442. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1590/S1808-24322010000200004
Akutsu, L., & Guimarães, T. A. (2015). Governança Judicial: proposta de modelo teórico-metodológico. Revista de Administração Pública, 49(4), 937-958. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7612116774
Anand, P., Exworthy, M., Frosini, F., & Jones, L. (2012). Autonomy and improved performance: lessons from an NHS policy reform. Public Money & Management, 32(3), 209-216. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2012.676279
Beenstock, M., & Haitovsky, Y. (2004, setembro). Does the appointment of judges increase the output of the judiciary? International Review of Law and Economics, 24(3), 351-369. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irle.2004.10.006
Beer, C. C. (2006). Judicial Performance and the Rule of Law in the Mexican States. Latin American Politics and Society, 48(3), 33-61. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-2456.2006.tb00355.x
Beers, D. J. (2012). Judicial Self-Governance and the Rule of Law: evidence from Romania and the Czech Republic. Problems of Post-Communism, 59(5), 50-67. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.2753/PPC1075-8216590504
Bertelli, A. M. (2006). The Role of Political Ideology in the Structural Design of New Governance Agencies. Public Administration Review, 66(4), 583-595. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6210.2006.00618.x
Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural Equations With Latent Variables. Chapel Hill, NC: Wiley.
Braadbaart, O., Van Eybergen, N., & Hoffer, J. (2007, maio). Managerial Autonomy: does it matter for the performance of water utilities? Public Administration and Development, 27(2), 111-121. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.447
Buta, B. O. (2019). Autonomy and Capacities of Public Defender’s Offices in Latin America. In Proceedings of the IRSPM expert meeting: Design-led Approaches to Renewing Public Management and Governance, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Buta, B. O. (2021). The autonomy of public defender's offices: a systematic comparison between Latin American countries. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 34(5), 586-601. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1108/IJPSM-09-2020-0241
Buta, B. O., Gomes, A. O., & Lima, C. M. (2020). Proposta de um Índice de Desempenho para a Defensoria Pública da União. Direito GV, 16(2), 1-19. Recuperado de http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2317-6172201959
Cavalcante, P., & Lotta, G. (2021). Are Governance Modes Alike? An Analysis Based on Bureaucratic Relationships and Skills. International Journal of Public Administration, 45(4), 319-334. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2021.1874983
Cavalcante, P., & Pereira, A. (2019). Do State capacity dimensions differently affect policy areas performance? An analysis of a federal government. In Proceedings of the 4º International Conference on Public Policy, Montreal, Canada.
Christensen, R. K., & Gazley, B. (2008). Capacity for Public Administration: analysis of meaning and measurement. Public Administration and Development, 28(4), 265-279. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1002/pad.500
Cingolani, L., Thomsson, K., & Denis, C. (2015, agosto). Minding Weber More Than Ever? The Impacts of State Capacity and Bureaucratic Autonomy on Development Goals. World Development, 72, 191-207. Recuperado de http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2015.02.016
Cortina, J. M., Chen, G., & Dunlap, W. P. (2001). Testing Interaction Effects in LISREL: Examination and Illustration of Available Procedures. Organizational Research Methods, 4(4), 324-360. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810144002
Cunha, A. S. (2020). Public Defenders' Offices In Brazil: Access To Justice, Courts, And Public Defenders. Indiana Journal of Global Legal Studies, 27(1), 273-287. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.2979/indjglolegstu.27.1.0273
Cunha, L. G., Oliveira, F. L., & Glezer, R. E. (2014). Brazilian Justice Confidence Index: measuring public perception on judicial performance in Brazil. International Law, 25, 445-472. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.11144/Javeriana.il14-25.bJCI
D’Almeida, A. C., & Klingner, D. E. (2008). FEMA and the Witt Revolution: Testing the Hypothesis of “Bureaucratic Autonomy”. Public Organization Review, 8, 291-305. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-008-0060-9
Fukuyama, F. (2013, July). What Is Governance? Governance, 26(3), 347-368. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12035
Gilardi, F. (2002). Policy credibility and delegation to independent regulatory agencies: a comparative empirical analysis. Journal of European Public Policy, 9(6), 873-893. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1080/1350176022000046409
Gomes, A. O., Alves, S. T., & Silva, J. T. (2018). Effects of investment in information and communication technologies on productivity of courts in Brazil. Government Information Quarterly, 35(3), 480-490. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2018.06.002
Gomes, A. O., Buta, B. O., & Nunes, R. R. (2019). Relação entre Demanda Judicial e Força de Trabalho nas Justiças Estaduais no Brasil. Cadernos de Gestão Pública e Cidadania, 24(78), 1-14. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.12660/cgpc.v24n78.72978
Gomes, A. O., & Freitas, M. M. (2017). Correlação entre demanda, quantidade de juízes e desempenho judicial em varas da Justiça Federal no Brasil. Direito GV, 13(2), 567-585. Recuperado de http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2317-6172201722
Gomes, A. O, & Guimarães, T. A. (2013). Desempenho no Judiciário. Conceituação, estado da arte e agenda de pesquisa. Revista de Administração Pública, 47(2), 379-401. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1590/S0034-76122013000200005
Gomes, A. O., Guimaraes, T. A., & Akutsu, L. (2016). The Relationship between Judicial Staff and Court Performance: Evidence from Brazilian State Courts. International Journal for Court Administration, 8(1), 12-19. Recuperado de http://doi.org/10.18352/ijca.214
Gomide, A. A., Machado, R. A., & Albuquerque, P. M. (2019). Measuring State capacity in contemporary Brazil: is weberian bureaucracy a useful paradigm? In Proceedings of the 4º International Conference on Public Policy, Montreal, Canada.
Grajzl, P., & Silwal, S. (2020, março). Multi-court judging and judicial productivity in a career judiciary: evidence from Nepal. International Review of Law and Economics, 61, 105888. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irle.2020.105888
Guimaraes, T. A., Gomes, A. O., & Guarido, E. R., Filho. (2018). Administration of justice: an emerging research field. RAUSP Management Journal, 53(3), 476-482. Recuperado de http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/RAUSP-04-2018-010
Han, Y., & Hong, S. (2019). The Impact of Accountability on Organizational Performance in the U.S. Federal Government: The Moderating Role of Autonomy. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 39(1), 3-23. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X16682816
Howlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (2016). Achilles’ heels of governance: Critical capacity deficits and their role in governance failures. Regulation & Governance, 10(4), 301-313. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12091
Jonski, K., & Mankowski, D. (2014). Is Sky The Limit? Revisiting ‘Exogenous Productivity of Judges’ Argument. International Journal for Court Administration, 6(2), 53-72. Recuperado de http://doi.org/10.18352/ijca.135
Kim, N., & Cho, W. (2014). Agencification and Performance: The Impact of Autonomy and Result-Control on the Performance of Executive Agencies in Korea. Public Performance & Management Review, 38(2), 214-233. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1080/15309576.2015.983826
Maggetti, M., & Verhoest, K. (2014). Unexplored aspects of bureaucratic autonomy: a state of the field and ways forward. International Review of Administrative Sciences, 80(2), 239-256. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1177/0020852314524680
Meade, A. W., Johnson, E. C., & Braddy, P. W. (2008). Power and Sensitivity of Alternative Fit Indices in Tests of Measurement Invariance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(3), 568-592. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.3.568
Oliveira, F. L., & Cunha, L. G. (2016). Medindo o acesso à Justiça Cível no Brasil. Opinião Pública, 22(2), 318-349. Recuperado de http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1807-01912016222318
Overman, S., & van Thiel, S. (2016). Agencification and Public Sector Performance: a systematic comparison in 20 countries. Public Management Review, 18(4), 611-635. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2015.1028973
Pasquali, L. (2010). Testes Referentes a Construto: teoria e modelo de construção. In L. Pasquali (Ed.), Instrumentação Psicológica: fundamentos e práticas (p. 165-198). Porto Alegre, RS: Artmed.
Pereira, A. K., Machado, R. A., Cavalcante, P. C., Gomide, A. Á., Bersch, K., Magalhães, A. G., ... Pires, R. R. (2019). Qualidade do Governo e Capacidades Estatais: resultados do survey sobre Governança aplicado no Brasil. Brasília, DF: Instituto de Pesquisa Econômica Aplicada.
Pollitt, C., & Bouckaert, G. (2017). Public Management Reform: a comparative analysis into the age of auterity. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Rainey, H. G., & Steinbauer, P. (1999). Galloping Elephants: Developing Elements of a Theory of Effective Government Organizations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 9(1), 1-32. Recuperado de http://www.jstor.org/stable/1181850
Schillemans, T. (2010). Redundant Accountability: The Joint Impact of Horizontal and Vertical Accountability on Autonomous Agencies. Public Administration Quarterly, 34(3), 300-337. Recuperado de http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/41288351
Schillemans, T., Overman, S., Fawcett, P., Flinders, M., Fredriksson, M., Laegreid, P., … Wood, M. (2021, julho). Understanding Felt Accountability: The institutional antecedents of the felt accountability of agency-CEO's to central government. Governance, 34(3), 893-916. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1111/gove.12547
Silver, R. S. (1993). Conditions of Autonomous Action and Performance: a study of the Fonds d'Action Sociale. Administration & Society, 24(4), 487-511. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1177/009539979302400404
Sweet, A. S., & Thatcher, M. (2002). Theory and Practice of Delegation to NonMajoritarian Institutions. West European Politics, 25(1), 1-22. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1080/713601583
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using Multivariate Statistics. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
Talbot, C. (2010). Theories of Performance: organizational and service improvement in the public domain. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Tomic, S. (2018, setembro). Legal independence vs. leaders' reputation: exploring drivers of ethics commissions' conduct in new democracies. Public Administration, 96(3), 544-560. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1111/padm.12411
van Thiel, S., & Yesilkagit, K. (2011). Good Neighbours or Distant Friends? Public Management Review, 13(6), 783-802. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2010.539111
Verhoest, K., & Wynen, J. (2016). Why Do Autonomous Public Agencies Use Performance Management Techniques? Revisiting the Role of Basic Organizational Characteristics. International Public Management Journal, 21(4), 619-649. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1080/10967494.2016.1199448
Vining, A. R., Laurin, C., & Weimer, D. (2015). The longer-run performance effects of agencification: theory and evidence from Québec agencies. Journal of Public Policy, 35(2), 193-222. Recuperado de http://www.jstor.org/stable/43864141
Wu, X., Ramesh, M., & Howlet, M. (2015). Policy Capacity: a conceptual framework for understanding policy competences and capabilities. Policy and Society, 34(3-4), 165-171. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polsoc.2015.09.001
Yamamoto, K. (2006, fevereiro). Performance of Semi-autonomous Public Bodies: Linkage Between Autonomy and Performance in Japanese Agencies. Public Administration and Development, 26(1), 35-44. Recuperado de http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pad.369
Yeung, L. (2020). Measuring efficiency of Brazilian courts: one decade later. Revista de Direito Administrativo, 279(1), 111-134. Recuperado de http://dx.doi.org/10.12660/rda.v279.2020.81376