IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1608.04556.html

Rank-optimal weighting or "How to be best in the OECD Better Life Index?"

Author

Listed:
  • Jan Lorenz
  • Christoph Brauer
  • Dirk A. Lorenz

Abstract

We present a method of rank-optimal weighting which can be used to explore the best possible position of a subject in a ranking based on a composite indicator by means of a mathematical optimization problem. As an example, we explore the dataset of the OECD Better Life Index and compute for each country a weight vector which brings it as far up in the ranking as possible with the greatest advance of the immediate rivals. The method is able to answer the question "What is the best possible rank a country can achieve with a given set of weighted indicators?" Typically, weights in composite indicators are justified normatively and not empirically. Our approach helps to give bounds on what is achievable by such normative judgments from a purely output-oriented and strongly competitive perspective. The method can serve as a basis for exact bounds in sensitivity analysis focused on ranking positions. In the OECD Better Life Index data we find that 19 out the 36 countries in the OECD Better Life Index 2014 can be brought to the top of the ranking by specific weights. We give a table of weights for each country which brings it to its highest possible position. Many countries achieve their best rank by focusing on their strong dimensions and setting the weights of many others to zero. Although setting dimensions to zero is possible in the OECD's online tool, this contradicts the idea of better life being multidimensional in essence. We discuss modifications of the optimization problem which could take this into account, e.g. by allowing only a minimal weight of one. Methods to find rank-optimal weights can be useful for various multidimensional datasets like the ones used to rank universities or employers.

Suggested Citation

  • Jan Lorenz & Christoph Brauer & Dirk A. Lorenz, 2016. "Rank-optimal weighting or "How to be best in the OECD Better Life Index?"," Papers 1608.04556, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1608.04556
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1608.04556
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Jesús Peiró-Palomino & Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo, 2018. "OECD: One or Many? Ranking Countries with a Composite Well-Being Indicator," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 139(3), pages 847-869, October.
    2. 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.
    3. Peiró-Palomino, Jesús & Picazo-Tadeo, Andrés J. & Tortosa-Ausina, Emili, 2021. "Measuring well-being in Colombian departments. The role of geography and demography," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    4. Jose Manuel Cordero & Cristina Polo & Javier Salinas-Jiménez, 2021. "Subjective Well-Being and Heterogeneous Contexts: A Cross-National Study Using Semi-Nonparametric Frontier Methods," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 867-886, February.
    5. Jesús Peiró‐Palomino & Andrés J. Picazo‐Tadeo & Vicente Rios, 2020. "Well‐being in European regions: Does government quality matter?," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 99(3), pages 555-582, June.
    6. Shunichi Hienuki & Kazuhiko Noguchi & Tadahiro Shibutani & Takahiro Saigo & Atsumi Miyake, 2019. "The Balance of Individual and Infrastructure Values in Decisions Regarding Advanced Science and Technology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(12), pages 1-15, June.
    7. Tahsin Mehdi, 2019. "Stochastic Dominance Approach to OECD’s Better Life Index," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 143(3), pages 917-954, June.
    8. Koronakos, Gregory & Smirlis, Yiannis & Sotiros, Dimitris & Despotis, Dimitris K., 2020. "Assessment of OECD Better Life Index by incorporating public opinion," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    9. Jesús Peiró-Palomino, 2019. "Regional well-being in the OECD," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 17(2), pages 195-218, June.
    10. Jesús Peiró-Palomino & Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo & Vicente Rios, 2020. "Social Progress Around the World: Measurement, Evolution and Convergence," Working Papers 2006, Department of Applied Economics II, Universidad de Valencia.
    11. Resce, Giuliano & Maynard, Diana, 2018. "What matters most to people around the world? Retrieving Better Life Index priorities on Twitter," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 61-75.
    12. Ilya Solntsev & Anatoly Vorobyev & Elnura Irmatova & Nikita Osokin, 2016. "Rating evaluation of sports development efficiency using statistical analysis: evidence from Russian football," Papers 1612.07543, arXiv.org.
    13. Jesús Peiró-Palomino & Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo, 2018. "Assessing well-being in European regions. Does government quality matter?," Working Papers 2018/06, Economics Department, Universitat Jaume I, Castellón (Spain).
    14. Jordi Paniagua & Jesús Peiró-Palomino & Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo, 2021. "Asylum Migration in OECD Countries: In Search of Lost Well-Being," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 153(3), pages 1109-1137, February.
    15. Jesús Peiró-Palomino & Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo & Emili Tortosa-Ausina, 2020. "The Geography of Well-being in Colombia," Working Papers 2020/03, Economics Department, Universitat Jaume I, Castellón (Spain).
    16. Luis César Herrero-Prieto & Iván Boal-San Miguel & Mafalda Gómez-Vega, 2019. "Deep-Rooted Culture and Economic Development: Taking the Seven Deadly Sins to Build a Well-Being Composite Indicator," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 144(2), pages 601-624, July.
    17. Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio & Resce, Giuliano & Torrisi, Gianpiero, 2017. "Is the Grass Always Greener on the Other Side of the fence? Composite Index of Well-Being Taking into Account the Local Relative Appreciations in Better Life Index," MPRA Paper 82718, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Thananon Buathong & Anna Dimitrova & Paolo Miguel M. Vicerra & Montakarn Chimmamee, 2021. "Years of Good Life: An illustration of a new well-being indicator using data for Thailand," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 19(1), pages 547-583.
    19. Justin Ehrlich & Simon Medcalfe & Shane Sanders, 2021. "Composite Index Ranking of Economic Well-Being in U.S. Metropolitan Areas: How Prevalent are Rank Anomalies?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 157(2), pages 543-562, September.
    20. Fusco, Elisa, 2023. "Potential improvements approach in composite indicators construction: The Multi-directional Benefit of the Doubt model," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).

    More about this item

    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:arx:papers:1608.04556. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.