IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/italej/v2y2016i3d10.1007_s40797-016-0041-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Data Versus Survey-based Normalisation in a Multidimensional Analysis of Social Inclusion

Author

Listed:
  • Ludovico Carrino

    (Ca’ Foscari University of Venice
    Ca’ Foscari University of Venice)

Abstract

In the context of the multidimensional measurement of complex phenomena, the major focus of the recent literature has been on the choice of the dimensions’ weights and the shape of the aggregation function, while few studies have concentrated on how normalisation influences the results. With the aim of building a measure of Social Inclusion for 63 European regions between 2004 and 2012, we adopt a standard linear aggregation framework and compare two alternative normalisation approaches: a data-driven min–max function, whose parameters depend solely on the available data, and an expert-based function, whose parameters are elicited through a survey at the University of Venice Ca’ Foscari. Regardless of the adopted strategy, we show that normalisation plays a crucial part in defining variables’ weighting. The data-driven strategy allocates a large relative weight to the longevity dimension, whereas the survey-driven results in a rather equal distribution of weights. The data-driven approach produces trade-offs that are hard to interpret in economic terms and debatable from a social desirability perspective, thus constituting a positive analysis of Social Inclusion. Moreover, it softens the aftermaths of the recent economic crisis on Social Inclusion, by putting a consistent weight on the longevity variable. Conversely, the expert-based normalisation is heavily affected by elicitation techniques, and allows for a normative interpretation of the resulting index. Furthermore, it emphasizes the worsening trends in long-term unemployment and the relevance of early school leaving in the Social Inclusion measure. The two strategies lead to substantially different conclusions in terms of levels (both between and within countries) and distribution of Inclusion: numerous rank-reversals occur when switching the normalisation methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Ludovico Carrino, 2016. "Data Versus Survey-based Normalisation in a Multidimensional Analysis of Social Inclusion," Italian Economic Journal: A Continuation of Rivista Italiana degli Economisti and Giornale degli Economisti, Springer;Società Italiana degli Economisti (Italian Economic Association), vol. 2(3), pages 305-345, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:italej:v:2:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s40797-016-0041-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s40797-016-0041-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40797-016-0041-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40797-016-0041-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rita Silva & Alexandra Ferreira-Lopes, 2014. "A Regional Development Index for Portugal," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 118(3), pages 1055-1085, September.
    2. Pierre Pestieau, 2009. "Assessing The Performance Of The Public Sector," Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 80(1), pages 133-161, March.
    3. Patrick Meyer & Grégory Ponthière, 2011. "Eliciting Preferences on Multiattribute Societies with a Choquet Integral," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 37(2), pages 133-168, February.
    4. Martin Ravallion, 2011. "On multidimensional indices of poverty," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 9(2), pages 235-248, June.
    5. Mathieu Lefebvre & Tim Coelli & Pierre Pestieau, 2010. "On the Convergence of Social Protection Performance in the European Union," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo, vol. 56(2), pages 300-322, June.
    6. Maria Ana Lugo & Koen Decancq, 2009. "Measuring Inequality of Well-Being with a Correlation-Sensitive Multidimensional Gini Index," Economics Series Working Papers 459, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    7. Atkinson, Tony & Cantillon, Bea & Marlier, Eric & Nolan, Brian, 2002. "Social Indicators: The EU and Social Inclusion," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199253494.
    8. Cruciani, Caterina & Giove, Silvio & Pinar, Mehmet & Sostero, Matteo, 2012. "Constructing the FEEM Sustainability Index: A Choquet-Integral Application," Climate Change and Sustainable Development 130550, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei (FEEM).
    9. Romina Boarini & Marco Mira D'Ercole, 2013. "Going beyond GDP: An OECD Perspective," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 34, pages 289-314, September.
    10. Bryony Hoskins & Massimiliano Mascherini, 2009. "Measuring Active Citizenship through the Development of a Composite Indicator," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 90(3), pages 459-488, February.
    11. Cherchye, Laurens & Knox Lovell, C.A. & Moesen, Wim & Van Puyenbroeck, Tom, 2007. "One market, one number? A composite indicator assessment of EU internal market dynamics," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 749-779, April.
    12. Anthony B. Atkinson & Eric Marlier & Brian Nolan, 2004. "Indicators and Targets for Social Inclusion in the European Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(1), pages 47-75, February.
    13. Koen Decancq & María Ana Lugo, 2013. "Weights in Multidimensional Indices of Wellbeing: An Overview," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1), pages 7-34, January.
    14. Shyamal Chowdhury & Lyn Squire, 2006. "Setting weights for aggregate indices: An application to the commitment to development index and human development index," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(5), pages 761-771.
    15. Jeni Klugman & Francisco Rodríguez & Hyung-Jin Choi, 2011. "The HDI 2010: new controversies, old critiques," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 9(2), pages 249-288, June.
    16. Blackorby, Charles & Donaldson, David, 1982. "Ratio-Scale and Translation-Scale Full Interpersonal Comparability without Domain Restrictions: Admissible Social-Evaluation Functions," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 23(2), pages 249-268, June.
    17. Georges Nguefack-Tsague & Stephan Klasen & Walter Zucchini, 2011. "On Weighting the Components of the Human Development Index: A Statistical Justification," Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(2), pages 183-202.
    18. Pilar Murias & Simone Novello & Fidel Martinez, 2012. "The Regions of Economic Well-being in Italy and Spain," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(6), pages 793-816, June.
    19. Yunji Kim & Youngwha Kee & Seung Lee, 2015. "An Analysis of the Relative Importance of Components in Measuring Community Wellbeing: Perspectives of Citizens, Public Officials, and Experts," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 121(2), pages 345-369, April.
    20. M. Saisana & A. Saltelli & S. Tarantola, 2005. "Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis techniques as tools for the quality assessment of composite indicators," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 168(2), pages 307-323, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marco Cinelli & Matteo Spada & Wansub Kim & Yiwen Zhang & Peter Burgherr, 2021. "MCDA Index Tool: an interactive software to develop indices and rankings," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 41(1), pages 82-109, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ludovico Carrino, 2015. "The weighting role of normalisation in a multidimensional analysis of Social Inclusion," Working Papers 2015:32, Department of Economics, University of Venice "Ca' Foscari".
    2. Giovanni Bertin & Ludovico Carrino & Silvio Giove, 2018. "The Italian Regional Well-Being in a Multi-expert Non-additive Perspective," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 135(1), pages 15-51, January.
    3. Paola Annoni & Dorota Weziak-Bialowolska, 2016. "A Measure to Target Antipoverty Policies in the European Union Regions," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 11(1), pages 181-207, March.
    4. Mehmet Pinar, 2019. "Multidimensional Well-Being and Inequality Across the European Regions with Alternative Interactions Between the Well-Being Dimensions," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 144(1), pages 31-72, July.
    5. Pasha, Atika, 2017. "Regional Perspectives on the Multidimensional Poverty Index," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 268-285.
    6. Panagiotis Ravanos & Giannis Karagiannis, 2021. "A VEA Benefit-of-the-Doubt Model for the HDI," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 155(1), pages 27-46, May.
    7. Rogge, Nicky, 2018. "Composite indicators as generalized benefit-of-the-doubt weighted averages," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 267(1), pages 381-392.
    8. Suman Seth & Antonio Villar, 2014. "Human Development, Inequality and Poverty: empirical findings," Working Papers 14.11, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Economics.
    9. Eni Dardha & Nicky Rogge, 2020. "How's Life in Your Region? Measuring Regional Material Living Conditions, Quality of Life and Subjective Well-Being in OECD Countries Using a Robust, Conditional Benefit-of-the-Doubt Model," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 1015-1073, October.
    10. Deniz Sevinc, 2020. "How Poor is Poor? A novel look at multidimensional poverty in the UK," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 149(3), pages 833-859, June.
    11. Eni Dardha & Nicky Rogge, 0. "How's Life in Your Region? Measuring Regional Material Living Conditions, Quality of Life and Subjective Well-Being in OECD Countries Using a Robust, Conditional Benefit-of-the-Doubt Model," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-59.
    12. Luca Farnia, 2019. "On the Use of Spectral Value Decomposition for the Construction of Composite Indices," Working Papers 2019.08, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    13. Espinoza-Delgado, José & Silber, Jacques, 2018. "Multi-dimensional poverty among adults in Central America and gender differences in the three I’s of poverty: Applying inequality sensitive poverty measures with ordinal variables," MPRA Paper 88750, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    14. Mariano Luque & Salvador Pérez-Moreno & Beatriz Rodríguez, 2016. "Measuring Human Development: A Multi-criteria Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 125(3), pages 713-733, February.
    15. Chris Tofallis, 2013. "An automatic-democratic approach to weight setting for the new human development index," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 26(4), pages 1325-1345, October.
    16. Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio & Tasiou, Menelaos & Torrisi, Gianpiero, 2018. "σ-µ efficiency analysis: A new methodology for evaluating units through composite indices," MPRA Paper 83569, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Sabina Alkire & Maria Emma Santos, 2010. "Acute Multidimensional Poverty: A New Index for Developing Countries," Human Development Research Papers (2009 to present) HDRP-2010-11, Human Development Report Office (HDRO), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
    18. Alkire, Sabina & Santos, Maria Emma, 2014. "Measuring Acute Poverty in the Developing World: Robustness and Scope of the Multidimensional Poverty Index," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 251-274.
    19. Giulia Greco, 2018. "Setting the Weights: The Women’s Capabilities Index for Malawi," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 457-478, January.
    20. Espinoza-Delgado, José & Klasen, Stephan, 2018. "Gender and multidimensional poverty in Nicaragua: An individual based approach," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 466-491.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    CES; Normalisation; Aggregation; Weighting; Experts; Multidimensionality; Social inclusion;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C43 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Index Numbers and Aggregation
    • D63 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
    • I32 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Welfare, Well-Being, and Poverty - - - Measurement and Analysis of Poverty

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:italej:v:2:y:2016:i:3:d:10.1007_s40797-016-0041-z. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.