The Human Development Index with Multiple Data Envelopment Analysis Approaches: A Comparative Evaluation Using Social Network Analysis

The objective of this work is to use multiple Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA)/Benefit of the Doubt (BoD) approaches for the readjustment and exploitation of the Human Development Index (HDI). The HDI is the leading indicator for the vision of “development as freedom”; it is a Composite Index, wherein three dimensions (income, health, and education), represented by four indicators, are aggregated. The DEA-BoD approaches used in this work were: the traditional BoD; the Multiplicative BoD; the Slacks Based Measure (SBM) BoD; the Range Adjusted Model (RAM) BoD; weight restrictions; common weights; and tiebreaker methods. These approaches were applied to raw and normalized HDI data from 2018, to generate 40 different rankings for 189 countries. The resulting indexes were analyzed and compared using Social Network Analysis (SNA) and information derived from DEA itself (slacks, relative contributions, targets, relative targets and benchmarks). This paper presents useful DEA derived indexes that could be replicated in other contexts. In addition, it contributes by presenting a clearer picture of the differences between BoD models and offering a new way to appreciate the world's human development panorama.

[1]  S. M. Hatefi,et al.  A slack analysis framework for improving composite indicators with applications to human development and sustainable energy indices , 2018 .

[2]  Tom Van Puyenbroeck,et al.  Geometric mean quantity index numbers with Benefit-of-the-Doubt weights , 2017, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[3]  Abraham Charnes,et al.  Measuring the efficiency of decision making units , 1978 .

[4]  W. Cooper,et al.  Some models and measures for evaluating performances with DEA: past accomplishments and future prospects , 2007 .

[5]  Dimitris K. Despotis,et al.  Measuring human development via data envelopment analysis: the case of Asia and the Pacific , 2005 .

[6]  Laurens Cherchye,et al.  An Introduction to ‘Benefit of the Doubt’ Composite Indicators , 2007 .

[7]  Tomomi Matsui,et al.  AN INEFFICIENCY MEASUREMENT METHOD FOR MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS , 1994 .

[8]  B. W. Ang,et al.  Weighting and Aggregation in Composite Indicator Construction: a Multiplicative Optimization Approach , 2010 .

[9]  Tom Van Puyenbroeck,et al.  Benchmarking culture in Europe: A data envelopment analysis approach to identify city-specific strengths , 2021, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[10]  Naja Brandão Santana,et al.  National innovative capacity as determinant in sustainable development: a comparison between the BRICS and G7 countries , 2015 .

[11]  P. Andersen,et al.  A procedure for ranking efficient units in data envelopment analysis , 1993 .

[12]  Jens J. Krüger,et al.  Comment on "A new clustering approach using data envelopment analysis" , 2010, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[13]  Daisy Aparecida do Nascimento Rebelatto,et al.  Using data envelopment analysis to construct human development index , 2017 .

[14]  Chris Tofallis,et al.  An automatic-democratic approach to weight setting for the new human development index , 2012 .

[15]  S. Morse Stirring the pot. Influence of changes in methodology of the Human Development Index on reporting by the press , 2014 .

[16]  A. Charnes,et al.  Invariant multiplicative efficiency and piecewise cobb-douglas envelopments , 1983 .

[17]  Nicky Rogge,et al.  Composite indicators as generalized benefit-of-the-doubt weighted averages , 2017, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[18]  F. Booysen An Overview and Evaluation of Composite Indices of Development , 2002 .

[19]  Tomoe Entani,et al.  Dual models of interval DEA and its extension to interval data , 2002, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[20]  Dimitris K. Despotis,et al.  Data envelopment analysis with nonlinear virtual inputs and outputs , 2010, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[21]  S. Wasserman,et al.  Social Network Analysis: List of Illustrations , 1994 .

[22]  A. Hashimoto,et al.  Evaluating shifts in Japan's quality-of-life , 2009 .

[23]  Miin-Shen Yang,et al.  A new clustering approach using data envelopment analysis , 2009, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[24]  B. W. Ang,et al.  A mathematical programming approach to constructing composite indicators , 2007 .

[25]  Ramakrishnan Ramanathan,et al.  Evaluating the comparative performance of countries of the Middle East and North Africa: A DEA application , 2006 .

[26]  Dimitris K. Despotis,et al.  A reassessment of the human development index via data envelopment analysis , 2005, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[27]  R. Dyson,et al.  Reducing Weight Flexibility in Data Envelopment Analysis , 1988 .

[28]  Willem Moesen,et al.  Towards a synthetic indicator of macroeconomic performance: Unequal weighting when limited information is available , 1991 .

[29]  Kuang Lin,et al.  A Fuzzy Multiple Objective DEA for the Human Development Index , 2006, KES.

[30]  Hilary Risser Social Networks Analysis , 2013 .

[31]  Nicky Rogge,et al.  On aggregating Benefit of the Doubt composite indicators , 2018, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[32]  N. Rogge,et al.  Comparing regional human development using global frontier difference indices , 2020 .

[33]  Vinicius Amorim Sobreiro,et al.  Beyond the Agrarian Reform Policies in Brazil: An Empirical Study of Brazilian States from 1995 Through 2011 , 2016 .

[34]  Rajiv D. Banker,et al.  The super-efficiency procedure for outlier identification, not for ranking efficient units , 2006, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[35]  Mónica Domínguez-Serrano,et al.  A Gender Wellbeing Composite Indicator: The Best-Worst Global Evaluation Approach , 2011 .

[36]  C. Gitau,et al.  Rethinking the HDI: A More Theoretically Consistent Alternative , 2010 .

[37]  Vinicius Amorim Sobreiro,et al.  Human development and data envelopment analysis: A structured literature review , 2015 .

[38]  J. Clapp,et al.  Development as freedom , 1999 .

[39]  José H. Dulá,et al.  Enhancing standard performance practices with DEA , 2010 .

[40]  Daisy Aparecida do Nascimento Rebelatto,et al.  Transformation of wealth produced into quality of life: analysis of the social efficiency of nation-states with the DEA’s triple index approach , 2014, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[41]  Michael Obersteiner,et al.  Remeasuring the HDI by Data Envelopement Analysis , 2001 .

[42]  Rodney H. Green,et al.  Efficiency and Cross-efficiency in DEA: Derivations, Meanings and Uses , 1994 .

[43]  A. Charnes,et al.  Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis , 1984 .

[44]  John E. Beasley,et al.  Restricting Weight Flexibility in Data Envelopment Analysis , 1990 .

[45]  Cláudia S. Sarrico,et al.  Restricting virtual weights in data envelopment analysis , 2004, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[46]  Tom Van Puyenbroeck,et al.  On the Output Orientation of the Benefit-of-the-Doubt-Model , 2018 .

[47]  Peng Zhou,et al.  Constructing meaningful environmental indices: A nonparametric frontier approach , 2017 .

[48]  Eliane Gonçalves Gomes,et al.  Métodos de melhora de ordenação em DEA aplicados à avaliação estática de tornos mecânicos , 2005 .

[49]  Boaz Golany,et al.  Foundations of data envelopment analysis for Pareto-Koopmans efficient empirical production functions , 1985 .

[50]  Diogo Ferraz,et al.  Linking Human Development and the Financial Responsibility of Regions: Combined Index Proposals Using Methods from Data Envelopment Analysis , 2020 .

[51]  William W. Cooper,et al.  Evaluating Water Supply Services in Japan with RAM: a Range-adjusted Measure of Inefficiency , 1998 .

[52]  S. M. Hatefi,et al.  A common weight MCDA–DEA approach to construct composite indicators , 2010 .