Critics argue that the HDI assigns weights to certain factors that are equal trade-offs, when these measurements may not always be equally valuable. The HDI was implemented in and the values it assesses are determined as follows:. For example, countries could achieve the same HDI through different combinations of life expectancy and GNI per capita. This would imply that a person's life expectancy has an economic value.
An additional year of life would add to the GNI and would thus be different in countries with different GNI per capita. It also correlates factors that are more common in developed economies. For example, a higher level of education would tend to lead to higher GNI per capita. Critics argue the benefit or lack thereof of including two highly correlated values when perhaps one would be a better indicator of a country's well-being. The HDI also fails to take into account factors such as inequality, poverty , and gender disparity.
A country with a high value for GNI per capita would indicate a developed country, but what if that GNI is reached by marginalizing certain genders or ethnic classes? And what if that GNI is achieved by a small percentage of the population that is wealthy and therefore ignores the poor? Furthermore, the values of the factors that make up the HDI are bounded between 0 and 1. This means that certain countries that already have high GNIs, for example, have little room to improve in terms of GNI score even if their GNI continues to grow and improve.
This same parameter affects the logic of the life expectancy score. Though the HDI is designed to consider other factors besides wealth, allowing a multifaceted examination of global prosperity and emerging market nations, the weaknesses of this measurement lead some critics to challenge its practicality for use in establishing foreign policy.
Other factors that influence prosperity are not sufficiently captured by this measurement either. United Nations Development Programme. The HDRO offers the other composite indices as broader proxy on some of the key issues of human development, inequality, gender disparity and poverty. A fuller picture of a country's level of human development requires analysis of other indicators and information presented in the statistical annex of the report.
Skip to main content. New Zealand 0. Chad 0. Mozambique 0. Burundi 0. Niger 0. It remains the preferred indicator of politicians. However, even as a measurement of wealth, GDP leaves a lot to be desired. It does not consider levels of inequality within a country — whether it be the gap between the rich and poor or any instances of social or political discrimination.
It also does not consider the methods of the creation or accumulation of wealth, such as the detrimental effects of the exploitation of natural resources. In this regard, GDP does not measure a standard of living at all — it should instead be seen as a measure of economic activity. Human development, on the other hand, concentrates on qualitative outcomes. These relatively simple forms of data are very important indicators of social welfare and freedom.
Unexpected results When looking for the factors determining quality of life outside of GDP, some specific instances can shed light on just how differently data is perceived when compared to the HDI. Taking a capability approach to development, as described by Sabina Alkire p. With the exceptions of and , Norway has topped the HDI chart in every year since So why has it been so successful?
0コメント