Level Dependence of the Adjustment for Unbalance and Inequality for the Human Development Index

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Enrico Casadio Tarabusi ; Giulio Guarini
• 关键词：Human Development Index ; Aggregation ; Unbalance and inequality adjustment ; O15 ; C43 ; D63
• 刊名：Social Indicators Research
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：March 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：126
• 期：2
• 页码：527-553
• 全文大小：585 KB
• 参考文献：Abramowitz, M., & Stegun, I. A. (1964). Handbook of mathematical functions with formulas, graphs, and mathematical tables. National Bureau of Standards Applied Mathematics Series, vol. 55, for sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
  Anand, S., & Sen. A. (1995). Gender inequality in human development: Theories and measurement. Human Development Report Office Occasional Paper no. 19, United Nations Development Programme, New York.
  Anand, S., & Sen. A. (1997). Concepts of human development and poverty: A multidimensional perspective. Human Development Report 1997 background paper.
  Atkinson, A. B. (1970). On the measurement of inequality. Journal of Economic Theory, 2(3), 244–263.CrossRef
  Bubbico, R. L., & Dijkstra. L. (2011). The European regional Human Development and Human Poverty Indices. Regional Focus paper no. 2, European Commission Directorate-General for Regional Policy.
  Casadio Tarabusi, E., & Guarini, G. (2013). An unbalance adjustment method for development indicators. Social Indicators Research, 112, 19–45.CrossRef
  Casadio Tarabusi, E., & Palazzi, P. (2004). An index for sustainable development. BNL Quarterly Review, 229, 185–206; Italian transl., Casadio Tarabusi, E., & Palazzi, P. (2004). Un indice per lo sviluppo sostenibile. Moneta e Credito, 226, 123–149.
  Chakravarty, S. R. (2003). A generalized human development index. Review of Development Economics, 7(1), 99–114.CrossRef
  Corsi, M., & Guarini, G. (2011). Measuring progress of Italian regions: A classical approach. Ekonomiaz, Basque Economic Journal, 78, 340–367.
  Foster, J. E., López-Calva, L. F., & Székely, M. (2005). Measuring the distribution of human development: Methodology and an application to Mexico. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 6(1), 5–25.CrossRef
  Foster, J. E., & Shneyerov, A. A. (2000). Path independent inequality measures. Journal of Economic Theory, 91, 199–222.CrossRef
  Grimm, M., Harttgen, K., Klasen, S., & Misselhorn, M. (2008). A human development index by income groups. World Development, 36(12), 2527–2546.CrossRef
  Grimm, M., Harttgen, K., Stephan, S., Misselhorn, M., Munzi, T., & Smeeding, T. (2010). Inequality in human development: An empirical assessment of 32 countries. Social Indicators Research, 97(2), 191–211.CrossRef
  Hardy, G. H., Littlewood, J. E., & Pólya, G. (1988). Inequalities. Cambridge: Cambridge Mathematical Library, Cambridge University Press. Reprint of the 1952 edition.
  Hicks, D. A. (1997). The inequality-adjusted human development index: A constructive proposal. World Development, 25(8), 1283–1298.CrossRef
  Klugman, J., Rodríguez, F., & Choi, H.-J. (2011). The HDI 2010: New controversies, old critiques. Journal of Economic Inequality, 9, 249–288.CrossRef
  OECD (2008). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: Methodology and user guide.
  Palazzi, P., & Lauri, A. (1998). The human development index: Suggested corrections. BNL Quarterly Review, 205, 193–221.
  Ravallion, M. (2012). Troubling tradeoffs in the Human Development Index. Journal of Development Economics, 99, 201–209.CrossRef
  Sengupta, A., & Ghosh, A. (2010). Negative and positive partial mobility: A study of the relative changes in human development. Social Indicators Research, 99, 249–268.CrossRef
  Sengupta, A., & Ghosh, A. (2013). Dynamics in human development: Partial mobility and jump. Asia-Pacific Development Journal, 20(1), 33–62.CrossRef
  Seth, S. (2009). Inequality, interactions, and human development. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 10(3), 375–396.CrossRef
  Stanton, E. (2006). Accounting for inequality: A proposed revision of the Human Development Index. Workingpaper Series paper no. 119, Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
  ul Haq, M. (1995). Reflections on human development. New York: Oxford University Press.
  UNDP (1993). Human development report 1993. New York: Oxford University Press.
  UNDP (2010). Human development report 2010: The real wealth of nations: Pathways to human development. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  UNDP (2014). Human development report 2014: Sustaining human progress: Reducing vulnerabilities and building resilience. New York: United Nations Development Programme.
  
• 作者单位：Enrico Casadio Tarabusi (1)
  Giulio Guarini (2)
  
  1. Dipartimento di Matematica, Sapienza Università di Roma, Piazzale A. Moro 5, 00185, Rome, Italy
  2. Dipartimento di Economia e impresa, Università degli studi della Tuscia, Via del Paradiso 47, 01100, Viterbo, Italy
  
• 刊物类别：Humanities, Social Sciences and Law
• 刊物主题：Social Sciences
  Sociology
  Quality of Life Research
  Microeconomics
  Public Health
  Human Geography
  
• 出版者：Springer Netherlands
• ISSN：1573-0921

文摘

As remarked by Ravallion (J Dev Econ 99:201–209, 2012), the recent switch from arithmetic to geometric mean in the aggregation of the United Nations’ Human Development Index has caused a more severe inequality penalization of the index for less developed countries, with outlying consequences. We clarify and explain this fact and propose an aggregation function, the Trichotomy Mean, that depends on two parameters: one regulates the overall penalization of disequilibria (among or within dimensions) in analogy with Atkinson’s inequality aversion parameter for power means; the other modulates the Level Dependence of the Adjustment, a novel concept describing the behavior—decreasing, increasing, or constant—of penalization of given disequilibria for increasing index level. Unlike the geometric mean (which, incidentally, has decreasing LDA type), the TM remains valid for zero or negative—and does not distort for small positive—values of the input variables, thus permitting less restrictive raw-variable normalizations and to overcome the need for exogenous lower bounds. We compare the three versions of TM with the geometric mean in an empirical analysis on the HDI 2014 data. We finally illustrate the contributions of the TM to the development literature debate. Keywords Human Development Index Aggregation Unbalance and inequality adjustment