IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How robust are estimated country welfare? An investigation of welfare ranking, based on indices calculated using random weights


  • Michael Olsson



We measure country welfare by an index number calculated from welfare components like GDP per capita and expected length of life. We rank countries from high to low welfare using such estimated welfare indices. In such calculation the chosen welfare components, the procedures used to normalize them, and the weight structure are important. Changing the components, the normalization procedures, or the weight structure change the welfare indices and it may in the next step also alter the rank order. In this paper, I present information about the importance of the weight structure, taking the components and the normalization procedures as given. I draw one million random weight structures and from the welfare indices I extract the rank order for each structure. The result of this procedure is a rank order distribution for each country. In this paper, I present the rank order distribution for some countries. For example: According to the human development index Sweden is ranked at 7th place. With random weights Sweden is ranked as high as fifth place in 5.1 per cent of the cases, and as low as 14th in 13.6 per cent of the cases, with the mean rank equal to 9.8.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Olsson, 2011. "How robust are estimated country welfare? An investigation of welfare ranking, based on indices calculated using random weights," ERSA conference papers ersa10p1520, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa10p1520

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Per-Olof Bjuggren & Johan Eklund & Daniel Wiberg, 2007. "Ownership structure, control and firm performance: the effects of vote-differentiated shares," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(16), pages 1323-1334.
    2. Mike Burkart & Fausto Panunzi & Andrei Shleifer, 2003. "Family Firms," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(5), pages 2167-2202, October.
    3. Cronqvist, Henrik & Nilsson, Mattias, 2003. "Agency Costs of Controlling Minority Shareholders," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 38(04), pages 695-719, December.
    4. Villalonga, Belen & Amit, Raphael, 2006. "How do family ownership, control and management affect firm value?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(2), pages 385-417, May.
    5. repec:hrv:faseco:30728046 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1986. "Large Shareholders and Corporate Control," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(3), pages 461-488, June.
    7. Anderson, Ronald C. & Mansi, Sattar A. & Reeb, David M., 2003. "Founding family ownership and the agency cost of debt," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 263-285, May.
    8. Gugler, Klaus & Yurtoglu, Burcin B., 2003. "Average q, marginal q, and the relation between ownership and performance," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 78(3), pages 379-384, March.
    9. Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1997. " A Survey of Corporate Governance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(2), pages 737-783, June.
    10. Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-De-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer, 1999. "Corporate Ownership Around the World," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 54(2), pages 471-517, April.
    11. Klaus Gugler & Dennis C. Mueller & B. Burcin Yurtoglu, 2004. "Corporate Governance and Globalization," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 129-156, Spring.
    12. Roberto Barontini & Lorenzo Caprio, 2006. "The Effect of Family Control on Firm Value and Performance: Evidence from Continental Europe," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 12(5), pages 689-723.
    13. Anderson, Ronald C & Reeb, David M, 2003. "Founding-Family Ownership, Corporate Diversification, and Firm Leverage," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 46(2), pages 653-684, October.
    14. Stijn Claessens & Simeon Djankov & Joseph P. H. Fan & Larry H. P. Lang, 2002. "Disentangling the Incentive and Entrenchment Effects of Large Shareholdings," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(6), pages 2741-2771, December.
    15. Andres, Christian, 2008. "Large shareholders and firm performance--An empirical examination of founding-family ownership," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 14(4), pages 431-445, September.
    16. Francisco Pérez-González, 2006. "Inherited Control and Firm Performance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1559-1588, December.
    17. repec:hrv:faseco:30747162 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. Paul A. Gompers & Joy Ishii & Andrew Metrick, 2004. "Incentives vs. Control: An Analysis of U.S. Dual-Class Companies," NBER Working Papers 10240, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Gugler, Klaus & Mueller, Dennis C & Yurtoglu, B Burcin, 2004. "Corporate Governance and the Returns on Investment," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 47(2), pages 589-633, October.
    20. Marianne Bertrand & Antoinette Schoar, 2006. "The Role of Family in Family Firms," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 20(2), pages 73-96, Spring.
    21. Miller, Danny & Le Breton-Miller, Isabelle & Lester, Richard H. & Cannella Jr., Albert A., 2007. "Are family firms really superior performers?," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 829-858, December.
    22. Hagelin, Niclas & Holmen, Martin & Pramborg, Bengt, 2006. "Family ownership, dual-class shares, and risk management," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 16(3), pages 283-301, March.
    23. repec:hrv:faseco:30747196 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa10p1520. 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: (Gunther Maier). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    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.