Advertisement

A Robust Approach to Composite Indicators Exploiting Interval Data: The Interval-Valued Global Gender Gap Index (IGGGI)

  • Carlo Drago
  • Andrea GattoEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics book series (SPBE)

Abstract

Gender equality is a pillar of the sustainable development agenda. Women empowerment and gender mainstreaming are the bases of sound gender policies, especially in countries where greater gender gaps are observed, e.g. rural areas. This issue becomes particularly relevant in least developed countries, where an effective regulation is compelling. It is convened that gender equality is a powerful driver of economic development and social change, especially for its capacity of facilitating entrepreneurship. The appropriate gauging of the legal, economic, social and cultural factors determining or underlying a potential gender gap is crucial to shape and define such gender policies. Thus, it turns fundamental to attribute more robust bases to measure such phenomenon. With the scientific purpose of measuring gender gap in a more reliable way, this work aims to furnish a robust framework to compute composite indicators in the field of gender economics. We consider the weights of the different components. Thus, we apply an interval data analysis to the World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Index. The results show consistent differences among the rankings of the two indexes, translatable in diverse policy implications.

Keywords

Gender economics Development policy Interval data Composite indicators Sensitivity analysis Rural entrepreneurship 

JEL Classification

J16 C43 C82  O18 O19 

References

  1. Agovino, M., Cerciello, M., & Gatto, A. (2018). Policy efficiency in the field of food sustainability. The adjusted food agriculture and nutrition index. Journal of Environmental Management, 218, 220–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Billard, L., & Diday, E. (2003). From the statistics of data to the statistics of knowledge: symbolic data analysis. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 98(462), 470–487.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Briganti, R., & Gatto, A. (2015). Agribusiness e alimentazione: prospettive per il lavoro e lo sviluppo economico nel mondo. Futuri, 5.Google Scholar
  4. Busato, F., & Gatto, A. (2017). Defining and Measuring energy vulnerability worldwide. The global energy vulerability index (GEVI). Presented on November 22nd, 2017, at ICEFM 2017—International Conference on Energy, Finance & Macroeconomics, Montpellier, France.Google Scholar
  5. Cleveland, W. S. (1979). Robust locally weighted regression and smoothing scatterplots. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74(368), 829–836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Doni, F., Drago, C., & Paoloni, P. (2018). Interval-based gender diversity composite indicators in gender studies. In Gender Issues in Business and Economics (pp. 175–184). Cham: Springer.Google Scholar
  7. Donovan, J., Franzel, S., Cunha, M., Gyau, A., & Mithöfer, D. (2015). Guides for value chain development: A comparative review. Journal of Agribusiness in Developing and Emerging Economies, 5(1), 2–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Drago, C. (2017). Interval based composite indicators. FEEM Working Paper No. 42.2017. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3038751 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3038751.
  9. Drago, C., & Gatto, A. (2017). Modeling and measuring energy resilience. Presented on November 30, 2017 at AIQUAV 2017—Associazione Italiana per gli studi sulla Qualità della Vita—National Conference on Quality of Life.Google Scholar
  10. FAO. (2017). The future of food and agriculture. Trends & challenges.Google Scholar
  11. Floridi, M., Pagni, S., Falorni, S., & Luzzati, T. (2011). An exercise in composite indicators construction: Assessing the sustainability of Italian regions. Ecological Economics, 70(8), 1440–1447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gatto, A. (2018). Historical roots of microcredit and usury: the role of Monti di Pietà in Italy and in the kingdom of Naples in XV–XX centuries. Journal of International Development, 30(5), 911–914.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gatto A., Polselli N., & Bloom G. (2016). Empowering gender equality through rural development: Rural markets and micro-finance in Kyrgyzstan. In L’Europa e la Comunità Internazionale Difronte alle Sfide dello Sviluppo.Google Scholar
  14. IFAD. (2011). Rural poverty report.Google Scholar
  15. Luzzati, T., & Gucciardi, G. (2015). A non-simplistic approach to composite indicators and rankings: an illustration by comparing the sustainability of the EU Countries. Ecological Economics, 113, 25–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Maggino, F., & Ruviglioni, E. (2009). Obtaining weights: From objective to subjective approaches in view of more participative methods in the construction of composite indicators. In Proceedings NTTS: New Techniques and Technologies for Statistics, pp. 37–46.Google Scholar
  17. Mazziotta, M., & Pareto, A. (2011). Un indice sintetico non compensativo per la misura della dotazione infrastrutturale: un’applicazione in ambito sanitario. Rivista di Statistica Ufficiale, 1, 63–79.Google Scholar
  18. Nardo, M., Saisana, M., Saltelli, A., Tarantola, S., Hoffman, A., & Giovannini, E. (2005). Handbook on constructing composite indicators.Google Scholar
  19. OECD. (2008). Handbook on constructing composite indicators: Methodology and user guide. Paris: OECD publishing.Google Scholar
  20. Saisana, M., Saltelli, A., & Tarantola, S. (2005). Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis techniques as tools for the quality assessment of composite indicators. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 168(2), 307–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Saltelli, A. (2007). Composite indicators between analysis and advocacy. Social Indicators Research, 81(1), 65–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. United Nations. (2015). A/RES/70/1—Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development.Google Scholar
  23. World Economic Forum. (2013). Global gender gap report.Google Scholar
  24. World Economic Forum. (2017). Global gender gap report.Google Scholar
  25. World Bank. (2009). Gender in agriculture sourcebook.Google Scholar
  26. Yunus, M. (1999). Banker to the poor: Micro-lending and the battle against world poverty.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Rome “N. Cusano”RomeItaly
  2. 2.CED—Center for Economic Development & Social ChangeNaplesItaly
  3. 3.Department of Economic and Legal Studies (DISEG), Palazzo Pacanowski, University of Naples “Parthenope”NaplesItaly
  4. 4.Department of Economics and Business Economics, CREATES, Center for Research in Econometric Analysis of Time Series, Aarhus BSS, Aarhus UniversityAarhus VDenmark

Personalised recommendations