Advertisement

Social Indicators Research

, Volume 142, Issue 2, pp 477–506 | Cite as

Analysis of the Better Life Index Trough a Cluster Algorithm

  • Raquel Lourenço do Carvalhal MonteiroEmail author
  • Valdecy Pereira
  • Helder Gomes Costa
Article

Abstract

This paper discusses some concepts attributed to the term well-being and different ways to measure it. Then we present an alternative approach based on clustering algorithm to measure Quality of Life considering each dimension of the OECD well-being indicator, the Better Life Index, to minimize the loss of information encountered on aggregated indicators and to obtain a consistent and solid profile, a segmentation per dimension of the countries contemplated by this indicator. To build a consistent and solid profile, first we have standardized each variable, so the influence of a variable that is measured on a much larger scale than the other ones could be removed, then a k-means algorithm was applied for each dimension and the number of clusters was validated by the Silhouette Coefficient and by a visual inspection of the first two or three principal components (PCA) for dimensions with more than two variables. The resulting clusters could be finally analysed. The profiles are considered methodologically robust, because in all dimension we have found no negative values for the Silhouette Coefficient, meaning that the countries that belong to a certain cluster have a high similarity while different clusters held a high dissimilarity and additionally the PCA visual inspection have reinforced our analysis retaining, at least, 89% of common variance for dimension with more than two variables. Although the Better Life Index it’s the most complete well-being indicator, considering 11 of the 14 well-being dimensions, only 38 countries are encompassed by the indicator, therefore inferences about countries outside this set may be not significant. Hence a detailed analysis of each dimension is necessary. The combination of the Silhouette Coefficient and the PCA visual inspection proved to be very efficient to analyse this type of data and to validate the number of cluster. Clustering each dimension and then building a profile of countries, proved to be a strong methodology that separates homogeneous elements in heterogeneous groups.

Keywords

Well-being Quality of Life indicators Clustering algorithm 

References

  1. Arbelaitz, O., Gurrutxaga, I., Muguerza, J., & Perona, I. (2013). An extensive comparative study of cluster validity indices. Pattern Recognition, Elsevier, 46(1), 243–256.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2012.07.021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arku, G. (2006). The housing and economic development debate revisited: Economic significance of housing in developing countries. Journal of Housing Built Environment, 21(4), 377–395.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-006-9056-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnott, R. (2008). Housing policy in developing countries: The importance of the informal economy (English). Commission on Growth and Development. Working paper no. 13. Washington, DC: World Bank. Available at: http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/573081468149693974/Housing-policy-in-developing-countries-the-importance-of-the-informal-economy.
  4. Barro, R., & Lee, J. W. (2013). A new data set of educational attainment in the world, 1950–2010. Journal of Development Economics, 104, 184–198.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2012.10.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Berg, R. A., Hoefsloot, H. C. J., Westerhuis, J. A., Smilde, A. K., & Werf, M. J. (2006). Centering, scaling, and transformations: Improving the biological information content of metabolomics data. BMC Genomics, 7, 142.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-7-142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Centre for Buthan Studies. (2015). Gross National Happiness Index explained in detail. Available at: http://www.grossnationalhappiness.com/docs/GNH/PDFs/Sabina_Alkire_method.pdf. Accessed May, 2017.
  7. Chaaban, J., Irani, A., & Khoury, A. (2016). The Composite Global Well-Being Index (CGWBI): A new multi-dimensional measure of human development. Social Indicators Research, 129(1), 465–487.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-015-1112-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Charrad, M., Ghazzali, N., Boiteau, V., & Niknafs, A. (2014). NbClust: An R package for determining the relevant number of clusters in a data set. Journal of Statistical Software, 61(6), 1–36.  https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v061.i06.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chouikhi, H., Charrad, M., & Ghazzali, N. (2015). A comparison study of clustering validity Indices. IEEE Global Summit on Computer & Information Technology (GSCIT).  https://doi.org/10.1109/GSCIT.2015.7353330.Google Scholar
  10. Diener, E., & Suh, E. (1997). Measuring Quality of Life: Economic, social. And Subjective Indicators. Social Indicators Research, 40(1–2), 189–216.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006859511756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Diener, E., Wirtz, D., Biswas-Diener, R., Tov, W., Kim-Prieto, C., Choi, D. W., et al. (2009). New measures of well-being. Social Indicators Research Series, 39, 247–266.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-2354-412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dubes, R., & Jain, A. K. (1980). Clustering methodologies in exploratory data analysis. Advances in Computers, 19, 113–228.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2458(08)60034-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eurostat. (2011). Multidimensional measurement of the Quality of Life. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/8131721/8131772/TF3-Final-report-Quality-of-Life.pdf. Accessed April, 2017.
  14. Gasper, D. (2010). Understanding the diversity of conceptions of well-being and Quality of Life. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 39(3), 351–360.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2009.11.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Glewwe, P. W., Hanushek, E. A., Humpage, S. D., & Ravina, R. (2011). School resources and educational outcomes in developing countries: A review of the literature from 1990 to 2010. Working paper no. 17554. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.  https://doi.org/10.3386/w17554.
  16. Golubović, D. (2008). Citizen participation in legislative processes: A short excursion through European best practices. The European Center for Non-Profit Law. Available at: http://www.ecnl.org/dindocuments/274_Brochure%20on%20citizen%20participation%20ENG.pdf.
  17. Greyling, T., & Tregenna, F. (2017). Construction and analysis of a composite Quality of Life Index for a region of South Africa. Social Indicators Research, 131(3), 887–930.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-016-1294-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hagerty, M. R., Cummins, R. A., Ferriss, A. L., Land, K., Michalos, A. C., Peterson, M., et al. (2001). Quality of Life indexes for national policy: Review and agenda for research. Social Indicators Research, 55(1), 1–96.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010811312332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hsu, A., Esty, D. C., Levy, M. A., & Sherbinin, A. (2016). 2016 environmental performance index. New Haven, CT: Yale University.  https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.19868.90249.Google Scholar
  20. Huppert, F. A., & So, T. T. C. (2013). Flourishing across Europe: Application of a new conceptual framework for defining well-being. Social Indicators Research, 110, 837–861.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-011-9966-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Johnson, R. A., & Wichern, D. W. (1998). Applied multivariate statistical analysis. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. ISBN 0-131-87715-1.Google Scholar
  22. Jolliffe, I. T. (2002). Principal component analysis (2nd ed.). New York: Springer-Verlag, NY, Inc. ISBN 0-387-95442-2.Google Scholar
  23. Lorr, M. (1983). Cluster analysis for the social sciences. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. ISBN 08-758-9566-2.Google Scholar
  24. Mcqueen, J. (1967). Some methods for classification and analysis of multivariate observations. In: Proceedings of 5th Berkeley symposium on mathematical statistics and probability. Statistics, (vol. 1, pp. 281–297). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Mathematical Reviews Number: MR0214227. Available at: https://projecteuclid.org/euclid.bsmsp/1200512992.
  25. Michalos, A. C., Smale, B., Labonté, R., Muharjarine, N., Scott, K., Moore, K., et al. (2011). The Canadian index of wellbeing. Technical Report 1.0. Waterloo, Canadian Index of Wellbeing and University of Waterloo. Available at: http://www.unesco.org/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/pdf/canadianindexofwellbeingtechnicalpaper.pdf.
  26. Milligan, G. W., & Cooper, M. C. (1988). A study of standardization of variables in cluster analysis. Journal of Classification, 5(2), 181–204.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01897163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mooi, E., & Sarstedt, M. A. (2011). Concise guide to market research: The process, data, and methods using IBM SPSS statistics. Heidelberg: Springer.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-12541-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mufti, G. B, Bertrand, P., & Moubarki, L. (2012). Decomposition of the Rand Index in Order to Assess Both the Stability and The Number of Clusters of a Partition. HAL id: hal-00707357. Available at: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00707357/document.
  29. OECD. (2014). Executive summary. Available at: http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/media/bli/documents/BLI_executive_summary_2014.pdf. Accessed July, 2017.
  30. OECD. (2016). Better Life Index 2016: Definitions and metadata. Available on: http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/about/better-life-initiative/. Accessed April, 2017.
  31. Pearson, K. (1901). On lines and planes of closest fit to systems of points in space. Philosophical Magazine, 2(11), 559–572.  https://doi.org/10.1080/14786440109462720.Google Scholar
  32. Peña, J. M., Lozano, J. A., & Larrañaga, P. (1999). An empirical comparison of four initialization methods for the K-means algorithm. Pattern Recognition Letters, 20(10), 1027–1040.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8655(99)00069-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pesta, B. J., Mcdaniel, M. A., & Bertsch, S. (2010). Toward an index of well-being for the fifty U.S. States. Intelligence, 38(1), 160–168.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2009.09.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Po, R., Guh, Y., & Yang, M. (2009). A new clustering approach using data envelopment analysis. European Journal of Operational Research, 199(1), 276–284.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2008.10.022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Romesburg, H. C. (1984). Cluster analysis for researchers. Belmont, CA: Lifet'une Learning Publications.Google Scholar
  36. Rousseeuw, P. J. (1987). Silhouettes: A graphical aid to the interpretation and validation of cluster analysis. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 20, 53–65.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-0427(87)90125-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Samoilenko, S., & Osei-Bryson, K. (2008). Increasing the discriminatory power of DEA in the presence of the sample heterogeneity with cluster analysis and decision trees. Expert Systems with Applications, 34(2), 1568–1581.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2007.01.039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sokal, R. R. (1961). Distance as a measure of taxonomic similarity. Systematic Zoology, 10(1), 70–79.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2411724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Spath, H. (1980). Cluster analysis algorithms for data reduction and classification of objects. Ellis Horwood. ISBN 04-702-6946-4Google Scholar
  40. United Nations. (2017). World happiness report. Available at: http://worldhappiness.report/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2017/03/HR17.pdf. Accessed May, 2017.
  41. Veenhoven, R. (2002). Why social policy needs subjective indicators. Social Indicators Research, 58(1–3), 33–45.  https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015723614574.Google Scholar
  42. Veenhoven, R. (2006). The four qualities of life. Ordering concepts and measures of the good life. In M. McGillivray & M. Clark (Eds.), Understanding human well-being. Tokyo: United Nations. ISBN 92-808-1130-4.Google Scholar
  43. Williams, W. T., Lambert, J. M., & Lance, G. N. (1966). Multivariate methods in plant ecology. V. Similarity analyses and information analysis. Journal of Ecology, 54(2), 427–445.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2257960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Witten, I. H., & Frank, E. (2005). Data mining: Practical machine learning tools and techniques. San Francisco: Elsevier. ISBN 01-237-4856-9.Google Scholar
  45. World Bank. (2011). 2011 World development report—Conflict security and development. Washington, D.C.: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank. Available at: https://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTWDRS/Resources/WDR2011_Full_Text.pdf.
  46. World Health Organization. (2007). Working paper no. 9: Aid effectiveness and health. Making Health Systems Work. Department for Health Policy, Development and Services Health Systems and Services WHO, Geneva. Available at: http://www.who.int/hdp/publications/aid.pdf?ua=1.
  47. World Health Organization. (2010). Social determinants of health and well-being among young people. Health Behaviour in School-Aged Children (HBSC). Study: International Report from 2009/2010 Survey. Available at: http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/163857/Social-determinants-of-health-and-well-being-among-young-people.pdf?ua=1.
  48. Wu, J. I., & Chan, C. K. (2013). Prediction of hourly solar radiation with multi-model framework. Energy Conversion and Management. Elsevier, 76, 347–355.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2013.07.067.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raquel Lourenço do Carvalhal Monteiro
    • 1
    Email author
  • Valdecy Pereira
    • 1
  • Helder Gomes Costa
    • 1
  1. 1.Escola de Engenharia, Departamento de Engenharia de ProduçãoUniversidade Federal FluminenseNiteróiBrazil

Personalised recommendations