IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eec/wpaper/1311.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Weighting life domains with Data Envelopment Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Jorge Guardiola

    () (University of Granada)

  • Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo

    () (University of Valencia)

Abstract

The specialised literature has frequently addressed the relationship between life domains and people’s satisfaction with life. Some researchers have posed questions regarding the importance of domains, therefore interpreting them as weights and creating domain satisfaction indices. This paper employs Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) and Multi-Criteria-Decision-Making (MCDM) techniques to obtain a series of computer-based weightings for life domains from a sample of 178 people living in a rural community in Yucatan (Mexico). The main feature of these weightings is that they might differ from one individual or domain to another. Consequently, several weighting schemes are used to compute different DEA-based life satisfaction indices and also a constant equally-weighted index. Based on the goodness-of-fit criteria commonly employed in this literature, our main result is that computer DEA-based indicators do not improve the relationship with selfreported life satisfaction in comparison to the equally-weighted index of life satisfaction.

Suggested Citation

  • Jorge Guardiola & Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo, 2013. "Weighting life domains with Data Envelopment Analysis," Working Papers 1311, Department of Applied Economics II, Universidad de Valencia.
  • Handle: RePEc:eec:wpaper:1311
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: ftp://147.156.210.157/RePEc/pdf/eec_1311.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2013
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Akihiro Hashimoto & Migaku Kodama, 1997. "Has Livability of Japan Gotten Better for 1956–1990?: a Dea Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 40(3), pages 359-373, May.
    2. Pilar Murias & Fidel Martinez & Carlos Miguel, 2006. "An Economic Wellbeing Index for the Spanish Provinces: A Data Envelopment Analysis Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 77(3), pages 395-417, July.
    3. Eduardo Wills, 2009. "Spirituality and Subjective Well-Being: Evidences for a New Domain in the Personal Well-Being Index," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 49-69, March.
    4. Li, Xiao-Bai & Reeves, Gary R., 1999. "A multiple criteria approach to data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 115(3), pages 507-517, June.
    5. Ernest Reig‐Martínez & José A. Gómez‐Limón & Andrés J. Picazo‐Tadeo, 2011. "Ranking farms with a composite indicator of sustainability," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 42(5), pages 561-575, September.
    6. Mònica González & Germà Coenders & Marc Saez & Ferran Casas, 2010. "Non-linearity, Complexity and Limited Measurement in the Relationship Between Satisfaction with Specific Life Domains and Satisfaction with Life as a Whole," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 335-352, June.
    7. Per Andersen & Niels Christian Petersen, 1993. "A Procedure for Ranking Efficient Units in Data Envelopment Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(10), pages 1261-1264, October.
    8. Valerie Møller & Willem Saris, 2001. "The Relationship between Subjective Well-being and Domain Satisfactions in South Africa," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 55(1), pages 97-114, July.
    9. Osman Zaim & Rolf Färe & Shawna Grosskopf, 2001. "An Economic Approach to Achievement and Improvement Indexes," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 91-118, October.
    10. Jorge Guardiola & Francisco González-Gómez & Ángel Lendechy Grajales, 2013. "The Influence of Water Access in Subjective Well-Being: Some Evidence in Yucatan, Mexico," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 110(1), pages 207-218, January.
    11. Chia-huei Wu & Grace Yao, 2007. "Importance has been Considered in Satisfaction Evaluation: an Experimental Examination of Locke’s Range-of-affect Hypothesis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 81(3), pages 521-541, May.
    12. Bruce Headey & Ruut Veenhoven & Alex Wearing, 1991. "Top-down versus bottom-up theories of subjective well-being," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 81-100, February.
    13. Laurens Cherchye & Willem Moesen & Nicky Rogge & Tom Puyenbroeck, 2007. "An Introduction to ‘Benefit of the Doubt’ Composite Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 82(1), pages 111-145, May.
    14. Mónica Domínguez-Serrano & Francisco Blancas, 2011. "A Gender Wellbeing Composite Indicator: The Best-Worst Global Evaluation Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 102(3), pages 477-496, July.
    15. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Huang, Z. M. & Sun, D. B., 1990. "Polyhedral Cone-Ratio DEA Models with an illustrative application to large commercial banks," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1-2), pages 73-91.
    16. Knox Lovell, C. A. & Pastor, Jesus T. & Turner, Judi A., 1995. "Measuring macroeconomic performance in the OECD: A comparison of European and non-European countries," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 87(3), pages 507-518, December.
    17. Chia-Huei Wu, 2008. "Can We Weight Satisfaction Score with Importance Ranks Across Life Domains?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 86(3), pages 469-480, May.
    18. Robert Cummins, 1996. "The domains of life satisfaction: An attempt to order chaos," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 303-328, January.
    19. Chang-ming Hsieh, 2004. "To Weight or not to Weight: The Role of Domain Importance in Quality of Life Measurement," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 68(2), pages 163-174, September.
    20. Rojas, Mariano, 2008. "Experienced Poverty and Income Poverty in Mexico: A Subjective Well-Being Approach," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 1078-1093, June.
    21. van Praag, B. M. S. & Frijters, P. & Ferrer-i-Carbonell, A., 2003. "The anatomy of subjective well-being," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 29-49, May.
    22. Zhou, P. & Ang, B.W. & Poh, K.L., 2007. "A mathematical programming approach to constructing composite indicators," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 291-297, April.
    23. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    24. Chang-ming Hsieh, 2003. "Counting Importance: The Case of Life Satisfaction and Relative Domain Importance," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 227-240, February.
    25. Fare, Rolf & Knox Lovell, C. A., 1978. "Measuring the technical efficiency of production," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 150-162, October.
    26. André, Francisco J. & Herrero, Inés & Riesgo, Laura, 2010. "A modified DEA model to estimate the importance of objectives with an application to agricultural economics," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 371-382, October.
    27. Mariano Rojas, 2006. "Life satisfaction and satisfaction in domains of life: is it a simple relationship?," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 467-497, November.
    28. Tone, Kaoru, 2001. "A slacks-based measure of efficiency in data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(3), pages 498-509, May.
    29. Cristina Bernini & Andrea Guizzardi & Giovanni Angelini, 2013. "DEA-Like Model and Common Weights Approach for the Construction of a Subjective Community Well-Being Indicator," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 114(2), pages 405-424, November.
    30. Allen, R. & Thanassoulis, E., 2004. "Improving envelopment in data envelopment analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(2), pages 363-379, April.
    31. Antonio Jurado & Jesus Perez-Mayo, 2012. "Construction and Evolution of a Multidimensional Well-Being Index for the Spanish Regions," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 107(2), pages 259-279, June.
    32. Chia-Huei Wu & Grace Yao, 2006. "Do We Need to Weight Item Satisfaction by Item Importance? A Perspective from Locke’s Range-Of-Affect Hypothesis," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 79(3), pages 485-502, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Data Envelopment Analysis; domains of life satisfaction; life satisfaction indicators; Multi-Criteria-Decision-Making; weightings;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:eec:wpaper:1311. 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: (Vicente Esteve). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/dsvales.html .

    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.