Skip to main content
. 2020 Oct 7;94:201–220. doi: 10.1016/j.econmod.2020.09.023

Table D.1.

Quantile regression: Effect of congestion on different quantiles of investment rate.

(1)
(2)
(3)
Percentile 5D Percentile 75 Percentile 90
Congestion declarative −0.0018∗∗∗
(0.0002)
−0.0104∗∗∗
(0.0015)
−0.0397∗∗∗
(0.0044)
Cash flow 0.0038∗∗∗
(0.0001)
0.0512∗∗∗
(0.0013)
0.1423∗∗∗
(0.0035)
EBIT/Assets 0.0121∗∗∗
(0.0002)
0.0916∗∗∗
(0.0011)
0.1650∗∗∗
(0.0028)
Debt Burden −0.0005∗∗∗
(0.0000)
−0.0142∗∗∗
(0.0002)
−0.0349∗∗∗
(0.0007)
Debt/Assets 0.0000
(0.0000)
0.0042∗∗∗
(0.0004)
0.0064∗∗∗
(0.0014)
Sales growth
0.0034∗∗∗
(0.0001)
0.0484∗∗∗
(0.0007)
0.0923∗∗∗
(0.0014)
Year FE YES YES YES
Firm FE NO NO NO
Observations 3,523,890 3,523,890 3,523,890
Pseudo R-squared 0.0232 0.0338 0.0344

Standard errors in parentheses.

∗∗∗p ​< ​0.01, ∗∗p ​< ​0.05, ∗p ​< ​0.1.

Note: This table reports the correlation between judicial inefficacy and different percentiles of the investment rate distribution, based on a quantile regression. The dependent variable is the investment rate. We account for year and province fixed effects. Firm-level controls include cash flows, EBIT/assets, debt burden, Debt/assets, and sales growth. Province-level controls include number of lawyers, the number courts over the total population, population growth, credit over GDP and unemployment rate. In column 1 we study the correlation between judicial inefficacy and the median investment rate. In column 2 we focus on the effect of congestion on the 75 percentile of the investment rate while column 3 considers the 90 percentile. All variables are lagged by one year. The considered sample covers the period 2002–2016.