filmov
tv
SRA22 - Analysing Human Development Index from MultiCriteria Decision Making point of view
Показать описание
Analysing Human Development Index from MultiCriteria Decision Making point of view
Fatma Ezzahra Hadj Ammar [1] and Meltem Öztürk [2]
1 École supérieure en sciences et technologies de l’informatique et du numérique
2 Université Paris-Dauphine, PSL Research University, CNRS, LAMSADE, Place du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, F-75775 Paris cedex 16, France
Human Development Index (HDI) [1] is a composite indicator (aggregation of three dimensions: health, education and standard of living) developed by United Nations Development Program (UNDP) to assess the level of development of a country. It orders 189 countries by proving for each country an overall score. These scores are then used to classify the countries in 4 categories : very high, high, medium and low human development [2]. UNPD hopes to use this indicator in order to stimulate debate about government policy priorities.
In this work, we analyze this indicator from MultiCriteria Decision Making (MCDM) point of view since the design of a composite indicator is a multicriteria problem. In particular, we will try to answer three questions:
- do we need a complex aggregation operator and sophisticated normalizations to deduce an order on the countries (our analysis is based on the notion of pareto dominance)?
- The computation of HDI has undergone several modifications since 1990 (arithmetic mean has been replaced by geometric mean with different types of normalization; for example, for the normalization of gross national income per capita, the Atkinson transformation has been replaced by the logarithm). What are the impacts of such modifications?
- The classification of countries in 4 categories is done in a rather arbitrary way. Can we obtain the same classification if it was based on an explicable and nonutilitarian classification method like ELECTRE TRI? If so, what would be the parameters of the model (we will show that if we want to use ELECTRE TRI which is a less compensatory but more explainable approach than the one actually used, we will not be able to obtain the current classification of the countries).
We will conclude with a discussion on contributions that multicriteria decision making can have (with it’s modeling methodologies, algorithmic tools, axiomatic analysis, …) for the design of composite indicators.
[2] For instance some data for 2020: Norway (rank1, very high), Australia (rank 8, very high), United States (17, very high), France (26, very high), Greece (32, very high), Turkey (54, very high), Tunisia (95, high), India ( 131, medium), Afghanistan (169, low)
Copyright © Fatma Ezzahra Hadj Ammar and Meltem Öztürk, 2022. All rights reserved.
Fatma Ezzahra Hadj Ammar [1] and Meltem Öztürk [2]
1 École supérieure en sciences et technologies de l’informatique et du numérique
2 Université Paris-Dauphine, PSL Research University, CNRS, LAMSADE, Place du Maréchal de Lattre de Tassigny, F-75775 Paris cedex 16, France
Human Development Index (HDI) [1] is a composite indicator (aggregation of three dimensions: health, education and standard of living) developed by United Nations Development Program (UNDP) to assess the level of development of a country. It orders 189 countries by proving for each country an overall score. These scores are then used to classify the countries in 4 categories : very high, high, medium and low human development [2]. UNPD hopes to use this indicator in order to stimulate debate about government policy priorities.
In this work, we analyze this indicator from MultiCriteria Decision Making (MCDM) point of view since the design of a composite indicator is a multicriteria problem. In particular, we will try to answer three questions:
- do we need a complex aggregation operator and sophisticated normalizations to deduce an order on the countries (our analysis is based on the notion of pareto dominance)?
- The computation of HDI has undergone several modifications since 1990 (arithmetic mean has been replaced by geometric mean with different types of normalization; for example, for the normalization of gross national income per capita, the Atkinson transformation has been replaced by the logarithm). What are the impacts of such modifications?
- The classification of countries in 4 categories is done in a rather arbitrary way. Can we obtain the same classification if it was based on an explicable and nonutilitarian classification method like ELECTRE TRI? If so, what would be the parameters of the model (we will show that if we want to use ELECTRE TRI which is a less compensatory but more explainable approach than the one actually used, we will not be able to obtain the current classification of the countries).
We will conclude with a discussion on contributions that multicriteria decision making can have (with it’s modeling methodologies, algorithmic tools, axiomatic analysis, …) for the design of composite indicators.
[2] For instance some data for 2020: Norway (rank1, very high), Australia (rank 8, very high), United States (17, very high), France (26, very high), Greece (32, very high), Turkey (54, very high), Tunisia (95, high), India ( 131, medium), Afghanistan (169, low)
Copyright © Fatma Ezzahra Hadj Ammar and Meltem Öztürk, 2022. All rights reserved.
0:20:17
SRA22 - Analysing Human Development Index from MultiCriteria Decision Making point of view
0:51:07
SRA22 Day 1 - Keynote talk with Dr Doaa Abu-Elyounes
0:47:23
SRA22 Day 2 - Discussion Panel with Amir Asadi, Meltem Öztürk and Lorenn Ruster
0:19:30
SRA22 Day 5 - Conclusion
0:14:16
SRA22 - Enabling participation in the review of algorithms: lessons from law reform
0:53:19
SRA22 Day 3 - Contribution Panel with Tim de Sousa, Caitlin Bentley and Ned Cooper
0:44:54
SRA 22 Day 4 - Keynote talk with David Ríos Insua
0:43:32
SRA22 Day 2 - Keynote Talk with Benedetta Brevini
0:24:14
SRA 22 Day 5 - Case Study Summary and Observations
1:00:23
IA2 - Meltem Ozturk - Multicriteria Decision Making / Preference Elicitation (part 2/2)
0:58:14
Regulating for algorithm accountability global trajectories, proposals and risks.
0:10:34
Paper ID: 10, HIS 2020 (Accent and Gender Recognition from English Language...)
1:21:58
Cyber Challenges to International Human Rights-Big Data & Human Rights
3:23:40
October 25, 2022 - Council Session (am)
1:28:15
Day 2 NIAP Webinar Series QMSS: Construction of Composite Index
Комментарии