IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/soinre/v126y2016i1d10.1007_s11205-015-0879-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Iterative Multivariate Post Hoc I-Distance Approach in Evaluating OECD Better Life Index

Author

Listed:
  • M. Marković

    () (University of Belgrade)

  • S. Zdravković

    () (University of Belgrade)

  • M. Mitrović

    () (University of Belgrade)

  • A. Radojičić

    () (University of Belgrade)

Abstract

Abstract With the growing interest in evaluation of quality of life, emerging number of methods are presented. Each contribution varies depending on the matter of interest, and all of them address the issue of subjective weighting factors. The objective of this paper is to explore possibilities to enhance Better Life ranking methodology, available from the Better Life initiative website, using I-distance method. The result was twofold: firstly, we pointed out potential shortcomings of subjectively chosen weights of Better Life ranking methodology by employing our I-distance approach. Secondly, we provided detailed information on how each Better Life indicator contributes to the final position and emphasize the essential indicators in the process of ranking. We have collected the latest available data for 2014, including all 24 indicators of the Better Life composite index. After that we have compared the two ways of rankings, i.e. the I-distance ranking and the Better Life ranking, emphasizing the improvement offered by the I-distance methodology. Further, through iterative exclusion of indicators based on the level of their significance, we have reached the highest quality of the model. That model includes the following six indicators: personal earnings, water quality, life satisfaction, household net adjusted disposable income, employment rate, rooms per person. Hereby, we have compared and presented ranking changes at each iteration for the top 10 countries, which offer a level of consistency in their rank. In addition, one of the objectives is to help policymakers focus on the key indicators in order to improve the ranking of the country, showing governments and administrations which indicators are the most important to invest into. Moreover, our approach could be the foundation for impartial framework of the quality of life’s assessment, independent of subjectively formed weighting factors.

Suggested Citation

  • M. Marković & S. Zdravković & M. Mitrović & A. Radojičić, 2016. "An Iterative Multivariate Post Hoc I-Distance Approach in Evaluating OECD Better Life Index," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 126(1), pages 1-19, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:soinre:v:126:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s11205-015-0879-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11205-015-0879-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11205-015-0879-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    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. Andrew Clark & Fabien Postel-Vinay, 2009. "Job security and job protection," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 61(2), pages 207-239, April.
    2. Hideyuki Mizobuchi, 2014. "Measuring World Better Life Frontier: A Composite Indicator for OECD Better Life Index," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 118(3), pages 987-1007, September.
    3. Koen Caminada & Kees Goudswaard & Olaf Van Vliet, 2010. "Patterns of Welfare State Indicators in the EU: Is there Convergence?," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48, pages 529-556, June.
    4. Smeeding, Timothy M, et al, 1993. "Poverty, Inequality, and Family Living Standards Impacts across Seven Nations: The Effect of Noncash Subsidies for Health, Education and Housing," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 39(3), pages 229-256, September.
    5. Ed Diener & Eunkook Suh, 1997. "Measuring Quality Of Life: Economic, Social, And Subjective Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 189-216, January.
    6. Piazzesi, Monika & Schneider, Martin & Tuzel, Selale, 2007. "Housing, consumption and asset pricing," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(3), pages 531-569, March.
    7. Michael Gerfin & Michael Lechner, 2002. "A Microeconometric Evaluation of the Active Labour Market Policy in Switzerland," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(482), pages 854-893, October.
    8. Kwok Tong Soo, 2013. "Does anyone use information from university rankings?," Education Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 176-190, March.
    9. Lago-Peñas, Santiago & Cantarero-Prieto, David & Blázquez-Fernández, Carla, 2013. "On the relationship between GDP and health care expenditure: A new look," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 32(C), pages 124-129.
    10. Andrew Sharpe & Jeremy Smith, 2005. "Measuring the Impact of Research on Well-being: A Survey of Indicators of Well-being," CSLS Research Reports 2005-02, Centre for the Study of Living Standards.
    11. Anurag Sharma & Preety Srivastava, 2011. "Does Disaggregation Affect The Relationship Between Health Care Expenditure And Gdp? An Analysis Using Regime Shifts," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 50(1), pages 27-39, March.
    12. Barro, Robert J. & Lee, Jong Wha, 2013. "A new data set of educational attainment in the world, 1950–2010," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 184-198.
    13. Beça, Pedro & Santos, Rui, 2010. "Measuring sustainable welfare: A new approach to the ISEW," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(4), pages 810-819, February.
    14. Paresh Kumar Narayan & Russell Smyth, 2004. "Crime rates, male youth unemployment and real income in Australia: evidence from Granger causality tests," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(18), pages 2079-2095.
    15. Bruce Headey & Gary Marks & Mark Wooden, 2005. "The Structure and Distribution of Household Wealth in Australia," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 38(2), pages 159-175, June.
    16. Dolan, Paul & Peasgood, Tessa & White, Mathew, 2008. "Do we really know what makes us happy A review of the economic literature on the factors associated with subjective well-being," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 94-122, February.
    17. Daria Mendola & Raffaele Scuderi & Valerio Lacagnina, 2013. "Defining and measuring the development of a country over time: a proposal of a new index," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 2473-2494, August.
    18. Horst Siebert, 1997. "Labor Market Rigidities: At the Root of Unemployment in Europe," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 37-54, Summer.
    19. Osberg, Lars & Sharpe, Andrew, 2002. "An Index of Economic Well-Being for Selected OECD Countries," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 48(3), pages 291-316, September.
    20. Saisana, Michaela & d'Hombres, Béatrice & Saltelli, Andrea, 2011. "Rickety numbers: Volatility of university rankings and policy implications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 165-177, February.
    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. Clemens Hetschko & Louisa von Reumont & Ronnie Schöb, 2017. "Embedding as a Pitfall for Survey-Based Welfare Indicators: Evidence from an Experiment," CESifo Working Paper Series 6419, CESifo Group Munich.

    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:soinre:v:126:y:2016:i:1:d:10.1007_s11205-015-0879-8. 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: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). 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 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.

    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.