Journals / Trends in Business and Economics / 2020 / Cilt: 34 Sayı: 3

Recalculation and Evaluation of Human Development Classifciation of Countries via UTADIS Approach

Ülkelerin İnsani Gelişmişlik Sınıflamalarının UTADIS Yaklaşımı Aracılığıyla Yeniden Hesaplanması ve Değerlendirilmesi

Pages
1153–1180
Publication Date
2020-07-15
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

According to the results of UTADIS analysis, observed that the classification of many countries has to be updated.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Developed by Amartya Sen who is asserting that countries’ level of development cannot be explained with only increase in national income, The Human Development Index incorporates components of health, education and income in calculation.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Human Development Index values of countries, first presented with Development Reports prepared by United Nations Development Program (UNDP) in the year 1990, are measured using four criteria: “Life Expectancy at Birth”, “Expected Years of Schooling”, “Mean Years of Schooling” and “Gross national income per capita” In this study, in order to classify countries according to their level of development a model based on above-mentioned four criteria and consisting of 188 alternatives is presented.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:According to the results of UTADIS analysis, observed that the classification of many countries has to be updated.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:İnsani Gelişmişlik İndeksi · Çok Kriterli Karar Verme · UTADIS

Abstract

Developed by Amartya Sen who is asserting that countries’ level of development cannot be explained with only increase in national income, The Human Development Index incorporates components of health, education and income in calculation. Human Development Index values of countries, first presented with Development Reports prepared by United Nations Development Program (UNDP) in the year 1990, are measured using four criteria: “Life Expectancy at Birth”, “Expected Years of Schooling”, “Mean Years of Schooling” and “Gross national income per capita” In this study, in order to classify countries according to their level of development a model based on above-mentioned four criteria and consisting of 188 alternatives is presented. It is aimed to detect the proper grouping of countries with UTADIS approach. This study represents a first attempt in terms of applying UTADIS technique, which has a limited application in literature, for Human Development Index values of the countries. With the applied UTADIS model, 111 of the 188 alternatives are classified as the same grouping by UNDP, while 77 are classified in a different group. According to the results of UTADIS analysis, observed that the classification of many countries has to be updated.

Özet

Ülkelerin gelişmişlik düzeyini tek başına milli gelirdeki artışla açıklamanın mümkün olmadığını ileri süren Amartya Sen tarafından geliştirilen İnsani Gelişmişlik İndeksi, hesaplamaya sağlık, eğitim ve gelir bileşenlerini de dahil etmektedir. Birleşmiş Milletler Kalkınma Programı (UNDP) tarafından ilk kez 1990 yılında hazırlanan İnsani Gelişmişlik Raporları ile sunulmaya başlanan ülkelerin İnsani Gelişmişlik İndeksi değerleri; Doğumda Yaşam Beklentisi”, “Beklenen Okullaşma Yılı”, “Ortalama Okullaşma Yılı” ve “Kişi Başına Düşen Gayri Safi Milli Gelir” olmak üzere dört kriter kullanılarak ölçülmektedir. Çalışmada, ülkeleri gelişmişlik düzeylerine göre sınıflandırmak için yukarıda belirtilen dört kritere dayalı ve 188 alternatiften oluşan bir model sunulmuştur. Ülkelerin doğru gruplamasının UTADIS yaklaşımıyla tespit edilmesi hedeflenmiştir. Çalışma literatürde az bir uygulama alanına sahip UTADIS tekniğinin ülkelerin İnsani Gelişmişlik İndeksi değerlerine uygulanması açısından bir ilki temsil etmektedir. Uygulanan UTADIS modeli ile 188 alternatifin 111’i UNDP’nin yaptığı gruplama ile aynı sınıflandırılırken, 77’si farklı bir grupta sınıflandırılmıştır. UTADIS analizi sonuçlarına göre birçok ülkenin sınıflandırmasının güncellenmesi gerektiği gözlemlenmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÖZCAN, K. A., OKTAY, E. (2020). Recalculation and Evaluation of Human Development Classifciation of Countries via UTADIS Approach. Trends in Business and Economics, Cilt: 34 Sayı: 3, 1153–1180. https://ajindex.com/articles/916187

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Aguña, C. G., Kovacevic, M. (2010). Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analysis of the Human Development Index Human Development Research Paper (Vol. 47). Altaş, D., Arikan, G. (2015). “The Analysis of Human Development Index with Cluster Analysis Techniques”. Social Sciences Research Journal, 6 (3), 126-138.
  2. Bagolin, I., Comim, F. (2008). “Human Development Index (HDI) and its Family of Indexes: An Evolving Critical Review”. Revista de Economia, 34 (2), 7-28.
  3. Balla, V., Gaganis, C., Pasiouras, F., Zopounidis, C. (2014). “Multicriteria Decision Aid Models for the Prediction of Securities Class Actions: Evidence from the Banking Sector”. OR spectrum, 36 (1), 57-72. doi: 10.1007/s00291-013-0333-8
  4. Çolak, M., Ulucan, A. (2012). “Mobilya Endüstrisinde Kârlılığı Etkileyen Faktörlerin UTADIS Yaklaşımı ile Belirlenmesi”. Sosyoekonomi, 17 (17), 249-262.
  5. Demir, S. (2006). Birleşmiş Milletler Kalkınma Programı İnsani Gelişme Endeksi ve Türkiye Açısından Değerlendirme. Ankara:
  6. DPT. Devaud, J., Groussaud, G., Jacquet-Lagreze, E. (1980). “UTADIS: Une méthode de construction de fonctions d’utilité additives rendant compte de jugements globaux”. European Working Group on Multicriteria Decision Aid, 94. Diakoulaki, D., Zopounidis, C., Mavrotas, G., Doumpos, M. (1999). “The Use of a Preference Disaggregation Method in Energy Analysis and Policy Making”. Energy, 24 (2), 157-166. doi: 10.1016/S0360-5442(98)00081-4
  7. Dimitras, A. (2001). Multicriteria Evaluation of Greek Construction Companies' Securities. Working Paper Series. do Carvalhal Monteiro, R. L., Pereira, V., Costa, H. G. (2018). “A Multicriteria Approach to the Human Development Index Classification”. Social Indicators Research, 136 (2), 417-438.
  8. Doumpos, M., Zopounidis, C. (2002). “Business Failure Prediction: A Comparison of Classification Methods”. Operational Research, 2 (3), 303-319. doi: 10.1007/BF02936387 Duman, A. (2010). Multiple Criteria Sorting Methods Based on Support Vector Machines. (Yüksek Lisans Tezi).Ankara: The Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences of Middle East Technical University. Gaganis, C., Pasiouras, F., Zopounidis, C. (2006). “External Auditors’ Decisions in Eu Credit Institutions: A Multicriteria Approach”. International Journal of Auditing, 10 (2), 163-182. doi: 10.1111/j.1099-1123.2006.00348.x Herrero, C., Martínez, R., Villar, A. (2012). “A Newer Human Development Index”. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 13 (2), 247-268.
  9. Hou, J., Walsh, P. P., Zhang, J. (2015). “The Dyn