Abstract
In the last two decades, data-driven policymaking has gained more and more importance due to the larger availability of data (and, more recently, Big Data) for designing proper and timely economic and social policies. This larger availability of data has let decision makers have a deeper insight of complex socio-economic phenomena (e.g. unemployment, deprivation, crime, social care, healthcare) but, at the same time, it has drastically increased the number of indicators that can be used to monitor these phenomena. Decision makers are now often in the condition of taking decisions with large batteries of indicators whose interpretation is not always easy or concordant. In order to simplify the decisional process, a large body of literature suggests to use synthetic indicators to produce single measures of vast, latent phenomena underlying groups of indicators. Unfortunately, although simple, this solution has a number of drawbacks (e.g. compensation between components of synthetic indicators could be undesirable; subjective weighting of the components could lead to arbitrary results; mixing information about different phenomena could make interpretation harder and decision-making opaque). Moreover, with operational decisions, it is necessary to distinguish between those situations when decisions can be embedded in automated processes, and those that require human intervention. Under certain conditions, the use of synthetic indicators may bring to a misleading interpretation of the real world and to wrong policy decisions. In order to overcome all these limitations and drawbacks of synthetic indicators, the use of multi-indicator systems is becoming more and more important to describe and characterize many phenomena in every field of science, as they keep the valuable information, inherent to each indicator, distinct (see, for a review: Bruggemann and Patil 2011).
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
All the POSAC plots given in this chapter were done in R environment using squared POSAC (x, y) coordinates from SYSTAT 11.0 output.
- 2.
Each point is plotted accordingly to the (x, y) POSAC coordinates and the labels represent the indicators ranking from 1 (the lowest) to 4 (the highest). So point 111 represents the profile associated to the lowest scores in the three indicators and 444 to the highest.
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
- 6.
References
Annoni P, Bruggemann R (2009) Exploring partial order of European countries. Social Indic Res 92(3):471–487
Bruggemann R, Patil G (2011) Ranking and prioritization for multi-indicator systems. Springer, New York
Canter D (2004) A partial order scalogram analysis of criminal network structures. Behaviormetrika 31(2):131–152
di Bella E, Corsi M, Leporatti L (2015) A multi-indicator approach for smart security policy making. Soc Indic Res 122(3):653–675
di Bella E, Corsi M, Leporatti L, Cavalletti B (2016) Wellbeing and sustainable development: a multi-indicator approach. Agric Agric Sci Procedia 8:784–791
Eisenberg E, Dowsett T (1990) Student drop‐out from a distance education project course: a new method of analysis. Dist Educ 11(2):231–253
Fulton M, Mellquist N, Bluestein J (2011) Comparing life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions from natural gas and coal. Environ Prot 6:1–29
Pagani RN, Kovaleski JL, Resende LM (2015) Methodi Ordinatio: a proposed methodology to select and rank relevant scientific papers encompassing the impact factor, number of citation, and year of publication. Scientometrics 105:2109–2135
Raveh A, Landau S (1993) Partial order scalogram analysis with base coordinates (POSAC): its application to crime patterns in all the states in the United States. J Quant Criminol 9(1):83–99
Sabbagh C, Cohen EH, Levy S (2003) Styles of social justice judgments as portrayed by partial-order scalogram analysis: a cross-cultural example. Acta Sociol 46(4):323–338
Schneider V, Fink S, Tenbücken M (2005) Buying out the state: a comparative perspective on the privatization of infrastructures. Comp Pol Stud 38(6):704–727
Shye S (1985) Multiple scaling. The theory and application of partial order scalogram analysis. Elsevier, New York
Shye S, Amar R (1985) Partial order scalogram analysis by base coordinates and lattice mapping of items by their scalogram roles. In: Canter D (ed) Facet theory: approaches to social research. Springer, New York, pp 277–298
Tzfati E, Sein M, Rubinov A, Raveh A, Bick A (2011) Pretreatment of wastewater: optimal coagulant selection using partial order scaling analysis (POSA). J Hazard Mater 190(1–3): 51–59
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
di Bella, E., Corsi, M., Leporatti, L. (2017). POSET Analysis of Panel Data with POSAC. In: Fattore, M., Bruggemann, R. (eds) Partial Order Concepts in Applied Sciences. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45421-4_11
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45421-4_11
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-45419-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-45421-4
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)