Number of the records: 1
Transparency of Composite Indicators of Development
Title statement Transparency of Composite Indicators of Development [rukopis] / Fabiola Canas magana Additional Variant Titles Transparency of Composite Indicators of Development Personal name Canas magana, Fabiola, (dissertant) Translated title Transparency of Composite Indicators of Development Issue data 2021 Phys.des. 53 p. : il., tab. Note Ved. práce Miroslav Syrovátka Oponent Pedro Enrique Arriaza aldana Another responsib. Syrovátka, Miroslav, 1978- (thesis advisor) Arriaza aldana, Pedro Enrique, (opponent) Another responsib. Univerzita Palackého. Katedra rozvojových studií (degree grantor) Keywords development * composite indicator * transparency * human development * prosperity * social progress * development * composite indicator * transparency * human development * prosperity * social progress Form, Genre diplomové práce master's theses UDC (043)378.2 Country Česko Language angličtina Document kind PUBLIKAČNÍ ČINNOST Title Mgr. Degree program Navazující Degree program Geography Degreee discipline International Development Studies book
Kvalifikační práce Downloaded Size datum zpřístupnění 00274201-235725627.pdf 10 956.4 KB 31.05.2021 Posudek Typ posudku 00274201-ved-646942809.pdf Posudek vedoucího 00274201-opon-680795615.pdf Posudek oponenta
Development is a multidimensional concept that has been tried to be captured through various types of measures, one of them being composite indicators. These indicators are praised for their ability to comprise complex concepts into a single number; however, they face significant criticism since they are created through a series of subjective decisions, leaving significant scope for arbitrariness. To present a credible measure, authors should procure a transparent disclosure of the construction process and its results, thus contributing to avoid misinterpretation and misuse of the proposed measure. Therefore, the present study explores the transparency with which the construction process of three composite indicators of development is disclosed, with the purpose of highlighting aspects that require improvement. The studied composite indicators are the Social Progress Index, the Human Development Index, and the Legatum Prosperity Index. For the most recent version of the methodology of each index, the analysis finds that authors disclose their methodological decisions, though justifications, discussions of alternatives, and the implications of such decisions are often omitted. Therefore, the study advocates for improving the transparency in communicating the methodology and properties of each index, and to explain them in adherence to the adopted theoretical framework.Development is a multidimensional concept that has been tried to be captured through various types of measures, one of them being composite indicators. These indicators are praised for their ability to comprise complex concepts into a single number; however, they face significant criticism since they are created through a series of subjective decisions, leaving significant scope for arbitrariness. To present a credible measure, authors should procure a transparent disclosure of the construction process and its results, thus contributing to avoid misinterpretation and misuse of the proposed measure. Therefore, the present study explores the transparency with which the construction process of three composite indicators of development is disclosed, with the purpose of highlighting aspects that require improvement. The studied composite indicators are the Social Progress Index, the Human Development Index, and the Legatum Prosperity Index. For the most recent version of the methodology of each index, the analysis finds that authors disclose their methodological decisions, though justifications, discussions of alternatives, and the implications of such decisions are often omitted. Therefore, the study advocates for improving the transparency in communicating the methodology and properties of each index, and to explain them in adherence to the adopted theoretical framework.
Number of the records: 1