IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v11y2024i1d10.1057_s41599-024-03891-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Experimenting with a strong dual necessity approach to social progress

Author

Listed:
  • Shiri Cohen Kaminitz

    (The Hebrew University)

  • Nathan Sussman

    (Graduate Institute)

Abstract

Different social progress indices assess well-being and development differently and thus reflect distinct conceptions of social progress. Broadly, these conceptions fall into two categories: ‘subjective’—the attitudes of individuals; and ‘objective’—external standards. Our starting point is a strong ‘dual necessity’ claim, namely that the two categories of conception have joint-special significance. Such a strong dual necessity conception, when operationalized, demands very low compensability/degree of substitution between the two independent indices, objective and subjective. Experimenting with this idea, we hypothesize that implementing low substitution empirically influences outcomes. Previous research presented this concept and exemplified initial empirical outcomes. The present work enhances and broadens this research by employing the constant elasticity of substitution (CES) function, which allows for the adjustment of substitution levels and comparison of resulting rankings. Furthermore, we demonstrate the results using two different well-known and commonly used indices: Human Development Index (HDI) and Sustainable Development Goals Index (SDGI). Our findings show that using a low substitution approach alters the social progress rankings of many countries in comparison to the original components’ rankings and to a high substitution combination of the two. This holds particularly true for countries in the middle of the original rankings. The paper’s original contribution is that it establishes the CES function as a useful device for implementing the idea of ‘dual necessity.’ Importantly, by experimenting with low substitution, and exemplifying its empirical significance with the CES function, the paper also contributes to further validating a strong dual necessity conception and justifies its own measurement. Such measurement should be of value to social scientists, practitioners and policymakers who care for balanced social progress: social progress that does not neglect either of the two aspects (subjective or objective).

Suggested Citation

  • Shiri Cohen Kaminitz & Nathan Sussman, 2024. "Experimenting with a strong dual necessity approach to social progress," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-9, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-03891-9
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-024-03891-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-024-03891-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-024-03891-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Busseri & Michael Busseri & Stanley Sadava & Nancy DeCourville, 2007. "A Hybrid Model for Research on Subjective Well-being: Examining Common- and Component-specific Sources of Variance in Life Satisfaction, Positive Affect, and Negative Affect," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 83(3), pages 413-445, September.
    2. Martin Ravallion, 2011. "On multidimensional indices of poverty," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 9(2), pages 235-248, June.
    3. Fleurbaey, Marc & Blanchet, Didier, 2013. "Beyond GDP: Measuring Welfare and Assessing Sustainability," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199767199.
    4. Jaya Krishnakumar & A. Nagar, 2008. "On Exact Statistical Properties of Multidimensional Indices Based on Principal Components, Factor Analysis, MIMIC and Structural Equation Models," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 86(3), pages 481-496, May.
    5. Frijters, Paul & Clark, Andrew E. & Krekel, Christian & Layard, Richard, 2020. "A happy choice: wellbeing as the goal of government," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 126-165, July.
    6. Daniel J. Benjamin & Ori Heffetz & Miles S. Kimball & Nichole Szembrot, 2014. "Beyond Happiness and Satisfaction: Toward Well-Being Indices Based on Stated Preference," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(9), pages 2698-2735, September.
    7. Christian Kroll, 2015. "Global Development and Happiness: How Can Data on Subjective Well-Being Inform Development Theory and Practice?," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(3), pages 281-309, September.
    8. Koen Decancq & María Ana Lugo, 2013. "Weights in Multidimensional Indices of Wellbeing: An Overview," Econometric Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(1), pages 7-34, January.
    9. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/5l6uh8ogmqildh09h4687h53k is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Adcock, Robert & Collier, David, 2001. "Measurement Validity: A Shared Standard for Qualitative and Quantitative Research," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 95(3), pages 529-546, September.
    11. Joseph Chan & Ho-Pong To & Elaine Chan, 2006. "Reconsidering Social Cohesion: Developing a Definition and Analytical Framework for Empirical Research," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 75(2), pages 273-302, January.
    12. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/5l6uh8ogmqildh09h4687h53k is not listed on IDEAS
    13. Koen Decancq & Marc Fleurbaey & Erik Schokkaert, 2015. "Happiness, Equivalent Incomes and Respect for Individual Preferences," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 82, pages 1082-1106, December.
    14. Giuseppe Munda & Michela Nardo, 2009. "Noncompensatory/nonlinear composite indicators for ranking countries: a defensible setting," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(12), pages 1513-1523.
    15. Ed Diener & Eunkook Suh, 1997. "Measuring Quality Of Life: Economic, Social, And Subjective Indicators," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 40(1), pages 189-216, January.
    16. Shiri Cohen Kaminitz, 2020. "Looking Good or Feeling Well? Understanding the Combinations of Well-Being Indicators Using Insights from the Philosophy of Well-Being," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 150(1), pages 1-16, July.
    17. Salvatore Greco & Alessio Ishizaka & Menelaos Tasiou & Gianpiero Torrisi, 2019. "On the Methodological Framework of Composite Indices: A Review of the Issues of Weighting, Aggregation, and Robustness," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 141(1), pages 61-94, January.
    18. Gasper, Des, 2010. "Understanding the diversity of conceptions of well-being and quality of life," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 351-360, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cohen Kaminitz, Shiri, 2024. "The Strong 'Dual-Necessity’ principle for ranking social progress," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 33(C).
    2. Cantone, Giulio Giacomo & Tomaselli, Venera, 2024. "On the Coherence of Composite Indexes: Multiversal Model and Specification Analysis for an Index of Well-Being," MetaArXiv d5y26, Center for Open Science.
    3. Kristen Cooper & Mark Fabian & Christian Krekel, 2023. "New approaches to measuring welfare," Fiscal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 44(2), pages 123-135, June.
    4. Koen Decancq & Dirk Neumann, 2014. "Does the Choice of Well-Being Measure Matter Empirically?: An Illustration with German Data," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 717, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    5. Luisa Corrado & Giuseppe De Michele, 2016. "Mind the Gap: Identifying Latent Objective and Subjective Multi-dimensional Indices of Well-Being," CEIS Research Paper 386, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 24 Jun 2016.
    6. Luisa Corrado & Giuseppe De Michele, 2019. "Are governments matching citizens’ demand for better lives? A new approach comparing subjective and objective welfare measures," Working Papers 39, European Stability Mechanism.
    7. Andrew E. Clark, 2015. "SWB as a Measure of Individual Well-Being," Working Papers halshs-01134483, HAL.
    8. Fusco, Elisa, 2023. "Potential improvements approach in composite indicators construction: The Multi-directional Benefit of the Doubt model," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    9. Yang, Lin, 2018. "Measuring well-being: a multidimensional index integrating subjective well-being and preferences," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 87789, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    10. Koen Decancq & Erik Schokkaert, 2016. "Beyond GDP: Using Equivalent Incomes to Measure Well-Being in Europe," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 126(1), pages 21-55, March.
    11. Giuliano Resce & Fritz Schiltz, 2021. "Sustainable Development in Europe: A Multicriteria Decision Analysis," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 67(2), pages 509-529, June.
    12. Mehmet Pinar & Thanasis Stengos & Nikolas Topaloglou, 2022. "Stochastic dominance spanning and augmenting the human development index with institutional quality," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 315(1), pages 341-369, August.
    13. Paola Annoni & Manuela Scioni, 2022. "The Unbalance Penalisation Method for Metrics of Social Progress," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 162(3), pages 1093-1115, August.
    14. Decancq, Koen & Nys, Annemie, 2021. "Non-parametric well-being comparisons," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    15. Daniel J. Benjamin & Kristen Cooper & Ori Heffetz & Miles S. Kimball, 2023. "From Happiness Data to Economic Conclusions," NBER Working Papers 31727, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Paolo Liberati & Giuliano Resce, 2022. "Regional Well-Being and its Inequality in the OECD Member Countries," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 20(3), pages 671-700, September.
    17. Bacchini Fabio & Baldazzi Barbara & De Carli Rita & Di Biagio Lorenzo & Savioli Miria & Sorvillo Maria Pia & Tinto Alessandra, 2021. "The Evolution of the Italian Framework to Measure Well-Being," Journal of Official Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 37(2), pages 317-339, June.
    18. Pasha, Atika, 2017. "Regional Perspectives on the Multidimensional Poverty Index," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 268-285.
    19. Raffaele Lagravinese & Paolo Liberati & Giuliano Resce, 2020. "Measuring Health Inequality in US: A Composite Index Approach," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 147(3), pages 921-946, February.
    20. Enrico Ivaldi & Guido Bonatti & Riccardo Soliani, 2016. "The Construction of a Synthetic Index Comparing Multidimensional Well-Being in the European Union," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 125(2), pages 397-430, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-03891-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.