Popular, influential but flawed:TEST OF THE CREDIBILITY OF GLOBAL REPORTS and INDICES

Kutlu MERİH,Phd

Fatma ÇINAR, MBA

Trend of Reporting and Indexing

A new trend during the

last two decades in the

global system has been

the release of some

reports and related

indices based on socio-

political and economic

issues of respective

countries.

These studies are

considered and carried

out by eminent global

institutions.

Indices Effects Global Flows

This is not merely

a simple

intellectual

consideration of

the issue.

Based on the rankings of these reports and indices, countries receive more or less foreign investment or become subjected to more or less interest rates in terms of spread.

Hence, it will not be an

exaggeration to define

these reports and

indices as well- masked

global manipulation

tools.

Many sources introducing those

indices ignore the technical

infrastructure and reinforce the

belief that they are based on

sound scientific basis.

Unfortunately, the truth is not

so.

Reports and Indices Are not Consistent

The majority of the indices are bounded with logical and mathematical errors.

On the other hand, the eminence of the global organizations which provide those indices shadows the inconsistencies found in indices.

Flaws of These Reports and Indices

In these indices produced by preeminent providers, some or all

of the following four basic errors can be observed are;

Ethical (deontological) Error: It is unethical to define such an

index (HDI)

Logical (epistemological) Error: It is irrelevant/ meaningless/vain to

define such an index (HDI)

Technical (Mathematics) Error: The index calculation technique is

incorrect and inconsistent. (HDI)

Informatics (Statistics) Error: The index is based on incomplete,

inadequate and inconsistent data source. (HDI)

As an Example, "Human

Development Index - HDI"

Developed By UNDP Exhibit

Those Four Errors.

Using these indices as an

input to one another in

critical analysis makes

prescription more difficult.

Here too we come across with an illusion technique that

is used to create a perception:

Indices Creates The Consistency Illusion

These indices are based on a seemingly comprehensive and robust report.

However, on the contrary to the findings mentioned in the reports, these indices are full of errors.

We try to describe why those indices are defective andwhy they lead problematic misconceptions

Human Development Index (HDI)

Human Development Index is a measure prepared by the

UNDP that shows life expectancy literacy rate education

and income per capita in countries all over the world.

This index indicates how developed orunderdeveloped a country is claimed inrelation to this index.

The world authorities accept it without

any dispute or objection. Distribution was initially

developed by a

Pakistani economist

MahbubulHaq in 1990

and since 1993, it has

been presented within

the annual

Development Report by

UN Development

Program.

Human Development Index (HDI)

HDI INDEX 2014 COUNTRIES

HDI Made Up Inadequate Criteria

It is obvious that labelling

‘Humanitarian Development’ as

being based on the three

conventional criteria is

inadequate.

Thus, disregarding major differences

between countries concerning

history, geography, culture, political

system, economic system, legal

system, health system, education

system and the status of women will

take us nowhere.

Unfortunately, this issue has not been pointed out by anyone in our country.

Relatively, only a small number of global critics have pointed it out this issue.

It is obvious that labelling ‘Humanitarian Development’as being based on the three conventional criteria is inadequate.

Thus, disregarding major differences between countries concerning history, geography, culture, political system, economic system, legal system, health system, education system and the status of women will take us nowhere.

Unfortunately, this issue has not been pointed out by anyone in our country.

Relatively, only a small number of global critics have pointed it out this issue.

HDI Made Up Inadequate Criteria

Human Development Report 2014

The Human Development Report Office (HDRO)

is pleased to inform that the 2014 Human

Development Report 'Sustaining Human

Progress: Reducing Vulnerability and BuildingResilience' was launched in Tokyo, on 24 July

2014. The 2014

Report highlights the need for both promoting

people's choices and protecting human

development achievements.

The HDI is The Geometric Mean Of 3 Other Normalized Indices

The Human Development Index (HDI) is a

summary measure of average achievement in

key dimensions of human development:

1. A long and healthy life, (LifeExpectancy)

2. Being knowledgeable (MeanSchooling)

3. Have a decent standard of living (GNI ppp)

The HDI is the geometric mean of normalized

indices for each of the three (3) dimensions.

HDRI Top Countries

Turkey’s Position on HDI

Gender Inequality Index (GII)

Gender Inequality was not on the agenda within the limits of the original version of this index.

However, the political and economic situation of the female gender should have been shown as a significant indicator of human development.

The deficit in the findings was detected and consequently, in 2010, GII index was added.

Structurally, it is compatible with the HDI and assumed to reflect the disparity within the three criteria.

New Indices GDI and GEM

On the other hand, the

relation of this metrics with

gender inequality is quite

dubious.

The three ordinary criteria

which vary from country to

country are maternal health,

political and economic

contributions.

UNDP created other gender

indices such as the GDI and

GEM to cover the issue.

However, each of the indices

is insignificant.

Debates on Indices Gradually, as these measures

(the GDI and the GEM) have

been applied year after year,

a debate on whether or not

they have been as influential

in promoting gender-sensitive

development as was

estimated initially arose.

Some of the major

criticisms on both

measures include the

following points: First,

they are highly

specialized and difficult

to interpret.

Consequently, they are,

often misinterpreted.

Debates on Indices

Both of them suffer from large data gaps. In other words, they do not provide accurate comparisons across countries.

Second, too many developmental factors have been integrated into a single measure.

Graphical Datamining Analysis of HDI

The criteria which made up the structure of HDI

are mentally inconsistent.

But they are analytically inconsistent as well

Each component index should contribute

meaningful effect on the structure of the HDI

Graphical Datamining Analysis reflects that they

are fail to do this.

LifeExpectancy Against HDRI RankWe can see that LifeExpectancy gets lower in Lower

Segments But!

LifeExpectancy DensityGraph Factorized withSegments

We can see that there is no clear distinctions among

segments related with LifeExpectancy. Higher segments

represents peaks around higher LifeExpectancies

LifeExpectancy x HDRI Rank

MeanSchooling Against HDRI RankWe can see that Mean Schooling gets lower in

Lower Segments But!

MeanSchooling DensityGraphFactorized with Segments

We can see that there is no clear distinctions among

segments related with MeanSchooling. Higher segments

represents peaks around higher MeanSchoolings

Effect of The Mean Schooling

GNIPERCAP2011 Against HDRI RankIncome quite onviously overcome the HDI

GNIPERCAP2011 DensityGraph Factorizedwith Segments

Still There İs No Clear Distinction Between

Segments But Polarity Quite Obvious

Indices Overdependent on Income

As a result, if these indices fall short, then we can

estimate that the figures might hide more than they

reveal.

Additionally, the GEM has also been criticized for being

far too dependent on the income component of the

measure for determining the overall GEM score and this is

an overall defect of all UNDP indices.

Effect of The Income

GDP(PPP) Per Capita Income of The

G20 Countries

Women Seats Percent of The

Parliaments

Women Seats At Parliaments Against HDRI Rank

Women Seats with SegmentsWe can see that there is no clear distinctions among

segments related with Women Seats. Here higher

segments doesn’t represents peaks around higher

Parliament Seats

Matermort Effect on The HDI

First published by the World Economic Forum in 2006, the 2014 report covers 142 major and emerging economies.

The Global Gender Gap Index is an index produced in addition to the proposed metric and report based on gender equality.

14 variables used to calculate the index are provided by international organizations such as ILO, UNDP and WHO. Hence, resources and technical deficiencies are also being imported.

However, global community considers the findings significant as if being published via serious indices.

Global Gendergap By Wef

The Global Gender Gap Index 2014

Its structure is similar to the

UNDP Gender Inequality

Index (GDII).

It indicates the situation of

women in 142 countries

which represents 93% of

the world population with

respect to four aspects.

1. Economic

participation and

facilities

2. Utilizing educational

facilities

3. Participation in the

political system

4. Health and survival

Gendergap Structure

Source inconsistencies

When the 2014 report is analysed with respect to ranking

index, it can be observed that even the countries which

cannot provide the required Data/ statistics, are ranked

ahead of Turkey. Turkey is Ranked # 125 among 142

countries.

It is important to note that the ratio of female ranking

with respect to professions have not been taken into

account.

Conclusion

It is quite clear that those

indices fail to serve their

purposes.

They are semantically wrong,

mathematically wrong and

their data resources are

insufficient.

But they still serve to discredit

some countries like Turkey.

These indices and similar ones

are implicitly employed in the

sovereign ratings of countries.

The issue affects the

behaviour of foreign investors

and funding rates interest

rates.

We think this is quite unfair.

http://hdr.undp.org/en

http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-report-2014

http://www.weforum.org/issues/global-gender-gap

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_Inequality_Index

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_Empowerment_Measure

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Gender_Gap_Report

INTERNET RESOURCES

Küçüközmen, C. C. and Çınar F., (2014). “New Sectoral Incentive System and Credit Defaults: Graphic-Data Mining Analysis”, Submitted to the ICEF 2014 Conference, Yıldız Technical University in İstanbul, Turkeyon 08-09 Sep. 2014.

Küçüközmen, C. C. and Çınar F., (2014). “Banking Sector Analysis of Izmir Province: A Graphical Data Mining Approach”, Submitted to the 34th National Conference for Operations Research and IndustrialEngineering (YAEM 2014), Görükle Campus of Uludağ University in Bursa, Turkey on 25-27 June 2014.

Küçüközmen, C. C. ve Çınar F., (2014). “Finansal Karar Süreçlerinde Grafik-Datamining Analizi”, TROUGBI/DW SIG, Nisan 2014 İstanbul, http://www.troug.org/?p=684

Küçüközmen, C. C. ve Çınar F., (2014). “Görsel Veri Analizinde Devrim” Söyleşi, Ekonomik Çözüm, Temmuz 2014, http://ekonomik-cozum.com.tr/gorsel-veri-analizinde-devrim-mi.html.

Küçüközmen, C. C. ve Merih K., (2014). “Görsel Teknikler Çağı" Söyleşi, Ekonomik Çözüm, Temmuz 2014, http://ekonomik-cozum.com.tr/gorsel-teknikler-cagi.html

"Economist Online: Performance indices - International comparisons are popular, influential and sometimes flawed". http://www.economist.com Retrieved 2014-11-16.

RESOURCES

Global Indices of Gender Inequalityand Turkey’s Positions

INDEX KOD INSTITUTION #TR

Human Development Index HDRI UNDP 69/187

GenderInequality Index GII UNDP 114/187

TheGender Empowerment Measure

GEM UNDP 2014 removed

Global Gendergap Index GGI WEF 125/142

Contact

@CORTEXIEN

@Riskonometri

@Riskonomi

@datanalitik

@Riskanalitigi

@globinx

@fatma_cinar_ftm

@ckucukozmen

@RiskLabTurkey

tr.linkedin.com/in/fatmacinar/

tr.linkedin.com/in/coskunkucukozmen

tr.linkedin.com/pub/kutlu-merih/9b/921/25a

coskun.kucukozmen@ieu.edu.tr

http://www.ieu.edu.tr/tr

coskunkucukozmen@gmail.com

http://www.coskunkucukozmen.com

kutmerih@gmail.com

kutlu@merih.net

fatma.cinar@spk.gov.tr

http://www.spk.gov.tr/

http://www.riskonomi.com