2006
DOI: 10.1080/00220380600741904
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Setting weights for aggregate indices: An application to the commitment to development index and human development index

Abstract: Aggregate indices like UNDP's Human Development Index (HDI) or the Centre for Global Development and Foreign Policy's Commitment to Development Index (CDI) are subject to multiple criticisms. This paper addresses concerns linked to the equal weights used in the HDI and the CDI and evaluates alternative weighting schemes. It relies on an opinion survey conducted electronically among researchers from 60 countries to assess whether or not professional judgment affects the use of equal weights. Results of the opin… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
78
0
2

Year Published

2011
2011
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 149 publications
(82 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
2
78
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Normative approaches, on the other hand, only depend on the value judgements to set the weights. Despite its popularity, the arbitrariness of equal weighting is far from uncontroversial (Chowdhury & Squire, 2006;Ravallion, 2011). The fundamental problem is: whose value judgements on welfare are used?…”
Section: Constructing the Sampi-oimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Normative approaches, on the other hand, only depend on the value judgements to set the weights. Despite its popularity, the arbitrariness of equal weighting is far from uncontroversial (Chowdhury & Squire, 2006;Ravallion, 2011). The fundamental problem is: whose value judgements on welfare are used?…”
Section: Constructing the Sampi-oimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The HDI was initially developed to underline that people and their capabilities should be the ultimate criteria for evaluating the development level of a country along with economic growth (UNDP, 2013a). Despite a number of authors discuss some drawbacks of the HDI (Trabold-Nübler, 1991;Hicks, 1997;Ivanova, Arcelus, & Srinivasan, 1999;Chowdhury & Squire, 2006;Klugman, Rodríguez, & Choi, 2011), and even propose some modified indices (Paul, 1996;Sharma, 1997;Noorbakhsh, 1998;Chakravarty, 2003;Mazumdar, 2003;Grimm, et al, 2008;Harttgen & Klasen, 2012;Herrero, Martínez, & Villar, 2012;Bilbao-Ubillos, 2013;Blancard & Hoarau, 2013); one of the most significant superiorities of the HDI is regarded as its usefulness that is able to represent both social and economic development through a single value between 0 and 1 (UNDP, 2013b).…”
Section: Human Development and The Hdimentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Each of the metrics and indicators was scored from 0 to 100, with higher values desirable. Various systems have been proposed for weighting indicators [15][16][17]. However, based on stakeholder feedback, we have chosen to apply equal weighting to indicators, as indicated in Table 1.…”
Section: Metrics Definitionsmentioning
confidence: 99%