Stochastic Dominance Approach to OECD’s Better Life Index
Ever since the inception of OECD’s Better Life Index in 2011, a string of literature have emerged offering different aggregation procedures for the 11 dimensions of the index encompassing the broad categories of material living standards and quality of life. What is the most optimistic weighting scheme that allows more countries to achieve better measured well-being outcomes? What is the most pessimistic weighting scheme that worsens outcomes for more countries? Stochastic dominance efficiency is a data driven aggregation method that allows us to answer such questions which may be beneficial to policy makers and researchers. We offer rankings of countries across dimensions as well as rankings based on a single composite index aggregating all dimensional indicators. This type of analysis not only presents an opportunity to examine the sensitivity associated with re-weighting indicators, but this approach also reveals which indicators are driving overall improvement in measured well-being and which ones are hindering it. We find that the worst-case scenario rankings are generally more correlated with the equal-weighting scheme. And the best-case scenario weights offer a far more equal distribution of achievements across countries.
KeywordsBetter Life Index Stochastic dominance Multidimensional welfare
- Biswas, B., & Caliendo, F. (2002). A multivariate analysis of the Human Development Index. Indian Economic Journal, 49, 96–100.Google Scholar
- Boarini, R., Comola, M., Smith, C., Manchin, R., & de Keulenaer, F. (2012). What makes for a better life? The determinants of subjective well-being in OECD countries—Evidence from the Gallup World Poll. OECD statistics working papers no. 1815-2031, ParisGoogle Scholar
- Bravo, H. C., & Theussl, S. (2016). Rcplex: R interface to CPLEX. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=Rcplex.
- Irwin, L. G., Siddiqi, A., & Hertzman, C. (2007). Early child development: A powerful equalizer. World Health Organization. http://www.who.int/maternal_child_adolescent/documents/ecd_final_m30/en/.
- Maasoumi, E. (1999). Multidimensional approaches to welfare analysis. In J. Silber (Ed.), Handbook of income inequality measurement. Dordrecht: Klewer.Google Scholar
- Monika, G. T. (2018). The weight of weighting: An empirical study based on the OECD Better Life Index. The Business and Management Review, 9, 443–450.Google Scholar
- Nikolaev, B. (2014). Economic freedom and quality of life: Evidence from the OECD’s Your Better Life Index. The Journal of Private Enterprise, 29, 61–96.Google Scholar
- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2013). How’s life? 2013: Measuring well-being. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
- Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2017). How’s life? 2017: Measuring well-being. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
- R Core Team. (2018). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/.
- Stiglitz, J. E., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J. P. (2009). The measurement of economic performance and social progress revisited. Reflections and overview Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress, ParisGoogle Scholar
- von Reumont, L., Schob, R., & Hetschko, C. (2017). Embedding effects in the OECD Better Life Index. Beitrage zur Jahrestagung des Vereins fur Socialpolitik 2017: Alternative Geld-und Finanzarchitekturen—Session: Political Economy II, No. E20-V1Google Scholar
- World Bank. (2017). World Bank open data. Data retrieved from https://data.worldbank.org.