Search results

ABSTRACT* * *The empirical evidence on the determinants of sentencing outcomes has been increasingly utilized in debates on the nature of sentencing. Often the characterization of the impact of a variable as "appropriate" or "inappropriate" is controversial, and consequently there is wide disagreement as to the meaning of disparity. This article presents a method of clarifying this debate by developing aggregate measures of disparity. The value of such aggregate measures is illustrated using data from California. The exemplary models suggest that, given relevant data sets, it is possible to develop viable measures of disparity and that an estimation of the extent of disparity is highly dependent on normative beliefs about disparity.

Most of the current debate on the effective provision of legal services ignores the centrality of information costs. It is argued that conventional controls do not address this issue, especially where clients are infrequent users of legal services and the services required are nonroutine. In this segment of the market for legal services there is an "adverse selection" problem that will drive down the quality of legal services. Existing methods of ensuring quality legal services to this segment of the market are unlikely to be effective. It is suggested that only legal agents with incentives and opportunities to acquire information can mitigate the adverse selection problem. The English bifurcation of lawyers into barristers and solicitors partly performs such a function and provides a model for possible innovations in the North American context.