ChapterPDF Available

Abstract and Figures

The aim of this study is to compare the economic performances of 20 selected countries, in terms of their growth rate, for the period 2010–2014. We include economic performance indicators as growth rate, GDP per capita, youth unemployment, inflation rate, and account balance. Firstly, AHP is used for the determination of the weights for indicators. Then, ranking is carried out with TOPSIS analyses. Results show that the best performance is showed by Germany. In addition, mean HDI (Human Development Index) scores for the period 2010–2014 are calculated and countries are ranked. To understand the effect of HDI on economic performances, we investigated the relationship between these two findings with Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient. It is clear that there is a positive correlation between HDI and economic performances.
Content may be subject to copyright.
Chapter 6
Is There a Relation Between HDI
and Economic Performances?
Efehan Ulas and Burak Keskin
Abstract The aim of this study is to compare the economic performances of 20
selected countries, in terms of their growth rate, for the period 20102014. We
include economic performance indicators as growth rate, GDP per capita, youth
unemployment, ination rate, and account balance. Firstly, AHP is used for the
determination of the weights for indicators. Then, ranking is carried out with
TOPSIS analyses. Results show that the best performance is showed by Germany.
In addition, mean HDI (Human Development Index) scores for the period 2010
2014 are calculated and countries are ranked. To understand the effect of HDI on
economic performances, we investigated the relationship between these two nd-
ings with Spearmans rank correlation coefcient. It is clear that there is a positive
correlation between HDI and economic performances.
Keywords TOPSIS AHP Economic performance HDI
6.1 Introduction
In last decades, many countries have achieved varying levels of economic devel-
opments. Furthermore, the development rate changes over time. For instance, the
rate is decreased if the country is developed. However, other factors are important
to understand the economic performance in such countries. Main indicators of
improvement play an important role for ranking in economic performance in
countries. In many countries, the conduct of a nations economic policy usually has
four goals: unemployment, trade balance, GDP per capita, and ination. The
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) generally used
E. Ulas (&)
Department of Statistics, Cankiri Karatekin University, Cankiri, Turkey
e-mail: ef_ulas@hotmail.com; efehanulas@karatekin.edu.tr
B. Keskin
Department of Business Administration, Cankiri Karatekin University, Cankiri, Turkey
e-mail: burakkeskiin@gmail.com; burakkeskin@karatekin.edu.tr
©Springer International Publishing AG 2017
D. Procházka (ed.), New Trends in Finance and Accounting,
Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-49559-0_6
61
these indicators for calculating economic performances of countries. Economic
growth has impact on nations voice on an international scale as well as competes
with the other nations in other elds such as military, politics, international treaty,
and so on.
The aim of this study is to deliver a report for economic performance in 20
European countries between the years 20102014. Our study utilises the Okuns
Misery Index, which comprises of unemployment rate and ination rate.
Furthermore, we consider OECDs magic diamond measures which are growth of
GDP, ination rate, unemployment rate, and the GDP-normalized trade balance.
Five different indicators are used in this study to evaluate economic performance for
each nation. GDP per capita is considered as one of the key indicators which is
reecting a societys welfare and improvement of global competitiveness. Youth
unemployment has impact on nations economic growth. Ination as measured by
the consumer price index reects the annual percentage change in the cost to the
average consumer of acquiring a basket of goods and services that may be xed or
changed at specied intervals, such as yearly. So that it is one of the important
factors that affect economic performance. We also consider current account balance
and growth rate for economic performance ranking.
In this study, the weights of indicators are determined with analytic hierarchy
process (AHP) between the years 20102014. Economic performances are calcu-
lated and ranked using the method called Technique for Order Preference by
Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) approach. Furthermore, results will be
compared with mean of Human Development Index (HDI) for the years
20102014.
6.2 Literature Review
There are many studies in the literature-related economic performances. Some
studies had focused on economic growth rates of developingdeveloped countries,
and some of them had focused on region of nations. Literature review on economic
performances of different countries is as follows:
Ashourian (2012) used multiple attribute decision making (MADM) method to
study the rank of performance of selected Middle East and North Africa (MANA)
countries. This approach is a management science technique that is popularly used
to rank indicated that the MENA countries achieved higher values of desirable
attributes.
Cam et al. (2015) analyzed nancial performances of textile rms publicly traded
in The Borsa Istanbul via TOPSIS method by using nancial rates in 20102013.
They calculated rates for nancial performance and measurements have been con-
verted to one single score through TOPSIS method and rms have been ranked.
After, in the next step, the TOPSIS ranking score is compared with the ranking using
traditional performance indicators. They found that TOPSIS performance scores
62 E. Ulas and B. Keskin
show variability in the term and do not match with rankings which are done using
traditional performance measurement.
Chattopadhyay and Bose (2015) studied composite indicator design to sum-
marize in a single statistic variety of different facets of macroeconomic performance
and assessed relative performances of countries with six different indicators which
are the growth rate of real GDP, real per capita GDP, unemployment rate, scal
balance, rate of ination, and current account balance. They rst calculated the
performance scores obtained from TOPSIS method and the country rankings in
each year according to those scores. Then, rankings are summarized in terms of
measures which together depict the degree of stability or disarray in country-wise
rankings over the years. Correspondence analysis (CA) is applied for providing a
graphical display of the status of rankings elegantly which summarizes the
cross-sectional variability in the relative positions of countries.
Mandic et al. (2014) proposed a multi-criteria fuzzy model that eases nancial
performance where TOPSIS approach is used to rank the banks and they used the
data collected from Serbian banks between the years 2005 and 2010.
Bao et al. (2010) investigated the application of the classical TOPSIS method,
for which crisp numerical values replace the linguistic assessments that might face
some practical problems because of vague judgment. They use the TOPSIS
approach proposed to make a more rational decision.
Gustav (2004) discussed that human development may be a necessary prereq-
uisite for long-term sustainable growth. It may exhibit threshold effects, in the sense
that nations must attain a certain HD level before future economic growth becomes
sustainable.
6.3 Methodology
Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and TOPSIS method are applied to the selected
indicators to evaluate economic performance of nations between the years 2010 and
2014. The countries are selected from their growth rate. 20 European countries
which have the highest GDP rates are included in this study. AHP is used to
determine weights of criteria that are subsequently inserted to weighted decision
matrix in TOPSIS approach. The implementation is carried out with R statistical
software and Excel Solver.
6.3.1 Analytic Hierarchical Process (AHP)
In this study, AHP approach is used to determine weighting of the components of
the economic performance. Table 6.1 presents possible classication of the strength
of preferences. This nine fundamental scale is introduced by Saaty and Alexander in
1981. The calculation procedure is clearly explained by Wabalickis (1987). Firstly,
6 Is There a Relation Between HDI and Economic Performances? 63
each element of the pairwise comparison matrix is divided by the sum of the
column. Then, obtained new matrix rows are summed and mean of the rows is
taken. Same process is repeated for each column and nal matrix is found as
weighted matrix. This process is done for countries and indicators separately. Then,
nal weighted matrix is obtained by multiplying country and indicator matrix.
6.3.2 TOPSIS
After weights are calculated with AHP approach, TOPSIS is used to rank the
economic performances of nations. It is a distance-based approach and TOPSIS is a
method that is used for multi-attribute decision making by ranking the alternatives
according to the closest between the alternative and ideal. TOPSIS has four
assumptions (Opricovic and Tzend 2004);
1. A quantitative value, xi, can be assigned to each criterion, Ki, representing its
importance.
2. For each Ki, a quantitative value, Vij , can be assigned to each alternative, aj,
representing the performance of ajon the basis of Ki.
3. The performance of each alternative relative to each criterion can be evaluated
on the basis of a common scale.
4. The criteria are different and mutually independent.
Table 6.1 The fundamental AHP scale
Intensity of
importance
Denition Explanation
1 Equal importance Two activities contribute equally
3 Moderate importance Experience and judgement slightly
favor
5 Strong importance Experience and judgement strongly
favor
7 Very strong importance An activity is strongly favored
9 Absolute importance Highest possible order
2, 4, 6, 8 Intermediate values When compromise is needed
Reciprocals If activity ihas one of the above
numbers assigned to it when compared
with activity, then jhas the reciprocal
value when compared with i
Rationals Ratios arising from the scale If consistency were to be forced by
obtaining a numerical values to
span the matrix
Source Saaty (1987)
64 E. Ulas and B. Keskin
The computational procedure of TOPSIS method is provided by Mahmoodzadeh
et al. (2007) as follows:
1. An n×qmatrix contains the raw consequence data for all alternatives against
all criteria.
2. Vector normalization: Each ajis assigned a quantitative value, each Kirepre-
senting the performance of aj:
V
_
IJ ¼Vij
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Pn
i¼1V2
ij
qð6:1Þ
3. Assign weights to criteria:
X
n
i¼1
xi¼1:ð6:2Þ
4. Dene the ideal and anti-ideal point: Set the ideal point, aþ, and anti-ideal
point, a. For a benet criterion cj,vjðaþÞ¼max vi
jand vjðaÞ= min vi
j; for a
cost criterion, ck,vjðaÞ= max vi
jand vjðaþÞ= min vi
j.
5. Calculate the separation measures using Euclidean distance, where UðvijÞis a
weighted value:
dþ
j¼ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
X
n
1
Uv
ij

Uþ
i

Uv
ij

Uþ
i

sð6:3Þ
d
j¼ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
X
n
1
Uv
ij

U
i

Uv
ij

U
i

sð6:4Þ
6. Calculate the relative closeness to the ideal solution. The overall value, UðajÞ,of
each ajis calculated using the following:
UðajÞ¼
dþ
j
dþ
jd
j
ð6:5Þ
6.4 Implementation and Results
The dataset is obtained directly from World Bank Web site for the period 2010
2014. So that dataset which is used in this study is reliable. Some countries are
eliminated from the dataset due to their growth rate because rst 20 countries with
the highest growth rate are included in this study. The analysis was carried out with
the statistical software R and Excel. The weights are calculated with AHP approach.
6 Is There a Relation Between HDI and Economic Performances? 65
Then, ranking is done with TOPSIS method. Five important indicators that are
affecting the economic performances are selected. The selected indicators are GDP
per capita, youth unemployment, ination, account balance, and growth rate.
Indicators were selected based on the survey literature mentioned at the previous
section.
The weights and descriptive statistics for indicators can be seen in the Table 6.2.
Table 6.3 gives the mean scores of countries for the years 20102014. The
analysis was carried out with these mean scores. The rst 20 countries with the
highest growth rate in Europe are included in this study. Countries included in this
paper can be seen in the table below. AHP approach is used to determine weights
for indicators. Calculated weights for each indicator are given in Table 6.1. These
Table 6.2 Descriptive statistics
Growth
rate
Youth
unemployment
Ination GDP per
capita
Account
balance
Weights 0.2833 0.1806 0.2024 0.1826 0.1511
Mean 0.2 21.88 1.74 47.80 16.51
S.D 1.7278 12.3130 0.7924 19.2604 63.3008
Max 3.16 51.78 4.10 97.09 239
Min 4.89 8.26 0 21.90 99.62
Table 6.3 Mean scores of countries between 2010 and 2014
Country Growth rate Youth
unemployment
Ination GDP per
capita
Current
balance
1. England 1.96 19.62 2.92 41.43 99.62
2. France 1.01 23.18 1.39 43.51 32.48
3. Germany 2.01 8.32 1.52 46.57 239.0
4. Luxembourg 3.16 17.00 2.14 75.70 3.30
5. Netherland 0.51 9.58 1.91 52.90 84.53
6. Spain 0.78 51.78 1.74 30.42 20.42
7. Italy 0.54 35.18 1.76 36.21 18.06
8. Slovenia 0.23 18.92 1.64 23.80 1.37
9. Denmark 0.54 13.58 1.76 61.21 20.51
10. Switzerland 1.91 8.26 0.00 82.34 63.40
11. Norway 1.45 8.80 1.71 97.09 57.81
12. Austria 1.23 8.80 2.23 49.95 6.34
13. Sweden 2.39 23.84 0.96 58.32 38.52
14. Belgium 1.20 21.50 2.00 47.26 1.25
15. Ireland 1.95 28.00 0.80 44.20 7.20
16. Portugal 0.84 32.90 1.57 21.90 7.82
17. Finland 0.52 19.18 1.99 49.08 0.33
18. Greece 4.89 48.62 1.46 24.80 12.28
19. Cyprus 0.96 18.32 1.68 19.08 3.06
20. Iceland 2.97 25.30 2.33 13.22 19.62
21. World 2.81 13.86 3.45 10.21 15.71
66 E. Ulas and B. Keskin
scores are 0.2833, 0.1806, 0.2024, 0.1826, and 0.1511 for growth rate, youth
unemployment, ination, GDP per capita, and account balance, respectively. The
mean score for worldis added to data for the purpose of comparison.
After weights are calculated, the decision matrix is created and normalized
decision matrix is obtained from formula (6.1). Then, the normalized values are
multiplied by weights and weighted normalized decision matrix is obtained which
is shown in Table 6.3. Furthermore, positive ideal and negative ideal scores are
calculated. Maximum value in each column of matrix is selected for positive ideal
set and minimum value in each column of matrix is selected for negative ideal set.
Positive Ideal: {0.0962, 0.0147, 0.000, 0.0632, 0.1225}
Negative Ideal: {0.1489, 0.0922, 0.1197, 0.0143, 0.0511} (Table 6.4).
Separation measures from the ideal positive and ideal negative for each country
are calculated. Formula (6.5) is used for calculating relative closeness. Ranking of
countries in terms of their economic performance can be seen in Table 6.5.
Germany is found as the country that shows the best economic performance.
Table 6.4 Weighted normalized decision matrix of countries
Country Growth rate Youth unemployment Ination GDP per capita Current balance
1. England 0.0597 0.0349 0.0853 0.0270 0.0511
2. France 0.0308 0.0413 0.0406 0.0283 0.0167
3. Germany 0.0612 0.0148 0.0444 0.0303 0.1225
4. Luxembourg 0.0962 0.0303 0.0625 0.0493 0.0017
5. Netherland 0.0155 0.0171 0.0558 0.0344 0.0433
6. Spain 0.0238 0.0922 0.0508 0.0198 0.0105
7. Italy 0.0164 0.0627 0.0514 0.0236 0.0095
8. Slovenia 0.0070 0.0337 0.0479 0.0155 0.0007
9. Denmark 0.0164 0.0242 0.0514 0.0398 0.0105
10. Switzerland 0.0582 0.0147 0.0000 0.0536 0.0325
11. Norway 0.0442 0.0157 0.0499 0.0632 0.0296
12. Austria 0.0375 0.0157 0.0651 0.0325 0.0033
13. Sweden 0.0728 0.0425 0.0280 0.0380 0.0197
14. Belgium 0.0365 0.0383 0.0584 0.0308 0.0006
15. Ireland 0.0594 0.0499 0.0234 0.0288 0.0037
16. Portugal 0.0256 0.0586 0.0458 0.0143 0.0040
17. Finland 0.0158 0.0342 0.0581 0.0319 0.0002
18. Greece 0.1489 0.0866 0.0426 0.0161 0.0063
19. Cyprus 0.0509 0.0487 0.0368 0.0189 0.0007
20. Iceland 0.0323 0.0235 0.1197 0.0262 0.0000
21. World 0.0856 0.0247 0.0604 0.0066 0.0081
6 Is There a Relation Between HDI and Economic Performances? 67
Switzerland, Sweden, Norway, and Luxembourg are followed, respectively. If we
include world as a country in this study, it takes the rank of 4th place. In order to
make comparison for economic performances, Human Development Index values
are ranked and compared with economic performance ranking which is found in
this study.
Human development has important effects on economic growth. More speci-
cally, each of the components of human development is likely to have a distinct
impact on economic growth. Thus, to understand its effect on economic perfor-
mances, we compared mean HDI scores with economic performances found using
TOPSIS analysis. Mean scores of HDI values for 20102014 can be seen in
Table 6.6. The rst 20 countries in ranking of economic performances and the rst
20 countries which get the highest HDI scores are compared. To see the correlation
between HDI and economic performances, Spearmans rank correlation is calcu-
lated. Correlation coefcient is found as 0.804 and p-value is 1.09e05. It is clear
that there is a strong correlation between HDI and economic performances. Also,
we observed that 8 countries which are Germany, Switzerland, Sweden, Norway,
Ireland, Netherland, Belgium, and Denmark appeared in the rst 10 countries for
both HDI ranking and economic performance ranking.
Table 6.5 Topsis S+, S,C*
scores Country S+ S- C* Ranking
1. England 0.2012 0.2194 0.5217 14
2. France 0.1650 0.2062 0.5555 11
3. Germany 0.0654 0.2936 0.8178 1
4. Luxembourg 0.1376 0.2668 0.6597 5
5. Netherland 0.1293 0.2147 0.6241 7
6. Spain 0.2063 0.1486 0.4188 18
7. Italy 0.1914 0.1578 0.4518 16
8. Slovenia 0.1665 0.1886 0.5311 13
9. Denmark 0.1490 0.2027 0.5764 10
10. Switzerland 0.0982 0.2678 0.7317 2
11. Norway 0.1176 0.2386 0.6698 4
12. Austria 0.1512 0.2165 0.5887 8
13. Sweden 0.1154 0.2561 0.6895 3
14. Belgium 0.1531 0.2098 0.5781 9
15. Ireland 0.1358 0.2401 0.6387 6
16. Portugal 0.1931 0.1550 0.4453 17
17. Finland 0.1620 0.1929 0.5435 12
18. Greece 0.2930 0.0893 0.2336 20
19. Cyprus 0.2032 0.1447 0.4160 19
20. Iceland 0.1868 0.2007 0.5180 15
68 E. Ulas and B. Keskin
6.5 Conclusion
In this study, economic performances of 20 European countries for the period
20102014 are analyzed. Indicators used to measure the economic performances of
those countries have been identied. Indicators that are included in these analyses
are growth rate, youth unemployment, ination, GDP per capita, and account
balance. The weights are determined with the criteria by using AHP. Weights for
growth rate, youth unemployment, ination, GDP per capita, and account balance
are found as 0.2833, 0.1806, 0.2024, 0.1826, and 0.1511, respectively.
Furthermore, TOPSIS is used to evaluate ranking of 20 European countries. Highest
and lowest economic performance rank is highlighted.
After mean HDI scores are calculated and ranked for the years 20102014,
ranking of economic performances and HDI scores are compared. We found
association between HDI and economic performance measured by Spearmans rank
correlation coefcient (value of 0.804). Furthermore, 8 countries appeared in the top
10 countries for both HDI ranking and economic performance ranking. For the
following studies, different indicators and more countries will be analyzed.
Table 6.6 Mean HDI values and rankings for 20102014
Country 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Mean Ranking
1. England 0.906 0.901 0.901 0.902 0.907 0.903 8
2. France 0.881 0.884 0.886 0.887 0.888 0.885 12
3. Germany 0.906 0.911 0.915 0.915 0.916 0.913 5
4. Luxembourg 0.738 0.751 0.756 0.759 0.761 0.889 11
5. Netherland 0.909 0.919 0.92 0.920 0.922 0.918 4
6. Spain 0.867 0.870 0.874 0.874 0.876 0.8722 16
7. Italy 0.869 0.873 0.872 0.873 0.873 0.872 17
8. Slovenia 0.783 0.79 0.795 0.797 0.798 0.878 15
9. Denmark 0.908 0.920 0.921 0.923 0.923 0.92 3
10. Switzerland 0.924 0.925 0.927 0.928 0.93 0.927 2
11. Norway 0.94 0.941 0.942 0.942 0.944 0.942 1
12. Austria 0.879 0.881 0.884 0.884 0.885 0.882 13
13. Sweden 0.901 0.903 0.904 0.905 0.907 0.904 7
14. Belgium 0.883 0.886 0.899 0.888 0.89 0.889 10
15. Ireland 0.908 0.909 0.91 0.912 0.916 0.911 6
16. Portugal 0.819 0.825 0.827 0.828 0.830 0.826 20
17. Finland 0.878 0.881 0.882 0.882 0.883 0.881 14
18. Greece 0.866 0.864 0.865 0.863 0.865 0.865 18
19. Cyprus 0.863 0.866 0.867 0.868 0.87 0.85 19
20. Iceland 0.829 0.833 0.838 0.84 0.843 0.897 9
6 Is There a Relation Between HDI and Economic Performances? 69
References
Ashourian M (2012) Evaluating the rank of performance of countries of the middle east and north
Africa with MADM. J Inf Mathematical Sciences 3:285292
Bao Q et al (2010) Improved hierarchical fuzzy group decision making for selection of supplier
with TOPSIS method. Knowl Based Syst 8498
Cam AV, Cam H, Ulutas S, Sayin OB (2015) The role of TOPSIS method on determining the
nancial performance ranking of rms: an application in the Borsa Istanbul. Int J Econ and Res
6(3):2938
Chattopadhyay S, Bose S et al (2015) Global macroeconomic performance: a comparative study
based on composite scores. J Rev Glob Econ 4:5168
Gustav R (2004) Human development and economic growth. Economic Growth Center discussion
paper no. 887
Mahmoodzadeh S, Shahrabi J, Pariazar M, Zaeri MS (2007) Project selection by using fuzzy AHP
and TOPSIS technique. In: Proceedings of world academy of science, engineering and
technology, 24 Oct 2007. ISSN 13076884 (Title of the Paper)
Mandic K, Delibasic B, Knezevic S, Benkovic S (2014) Analysis of the nancial parameters of
Serbian banks through the application of the fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS methods. Econ Model
43:3037
Opricovic S, Tzeng GH (2004) Compromise solution by MCDM methods: a comparative analysis
of VIKOR and TOPSIS. Eur J Oper Res 156:445455
Saaty RW (1987) The analytic hierarchy processwhat it is and how it is used. Math Model 9
(3):161176. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0270-0255(87)90473-8
Wabalickis RN (1987) Justication of FMS with the analytic hierarchy process. J. Manuf Syst
7:175182
70 E. Ulas and B. Keskin
... HDI showed the level of welfare of society as a whole so that if welfare increases, it will reduce unemployment. The results were in accordance with Ulas & Keskin (2017), which analyzes the relationship between HDI and economic growth. ...
Article
This study aims to analyze the factors influencing unemployment and determine the role of stakeholders in reducing unemployment in Central Java Province, Indonesia. Data encompasses 35 regencies and municipalities of the Central Province from 2007 to 2020, with the total sample being 490. The employed sequential mixed method includes two analytical tools, namely panel data and vector regression with mactor software; the latter is used to examine the convergence among actors. Six main actors in reducing unemployment are identified, namely Regional Development Planning Agency (Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah/Bappeda), Department of Labor, Department of Education, community leaders; job training center, and Indonesian Chamber of Commerce (Kamar Dagang dan Industri Indonesia/Kadin). The results of the first analysis show that the variables of economic growth, Human Development Index (HDI) and school enrollment have negative and significant effect on unemployment. The results of convergence analysis highlight the importance of the Department of Labor in linking the supply and demand sides of labor in Central Java.
... As institutional variables, four different indices as well as scores are chosen that describe the human development, political and civil liberties, and corruption in a given nation. Utilizing the Human Development Index ( ) as an institutional variable follows the research by Zhang & Danish (2019) and Ulas & Keskin (2017), who determine it to be a significant variable in explaining economic growth. Concerning political and civil liberties, Zeaiter and Kassem (2017) show in their research that political freedoms have a significant and positive impact on economic growth. ...
Preprint
Full-text available
Against the background of the current political developments in Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries, like Ukraine, Poland, and Romania, the question arises what role the transformation of the economy and the resulting innovation linkages have played in these countries. This paper addresses this issue by exploring the impact of economic and institutional dimensions on the development of CEE countries, thereby explicitly distinguishing between European Union (EU) members and non-members. First of all, the performance development of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the CEE countries and Western European countries is observed. In a further analysis step, the development of EU members is compared with that of CEE countries that are non-members of the EU. This paper estimates the impact of such factors as innovation, institutions, and political practices on the economic development of 37 European countries for the period from 2000 until 2020 by using a panel regression. The results of the analysis show that institutions matter, especially for non-EU-member CEE countries. Stable institutions-such as freedom of the press, freedom of expression, but also high levels of the Human Development Index-help countries to achieve a higher income development over time. The role of the innovative ability of countries is also decisive for a positive development.
... The results of this study are the same as Rahman et al. (2020), who conducted research in 25 developed and 25 developing countries from 2000 to 2014 and found that HDI has a significant positive effect on economic growth in the case of developed and developing countries. Ulas & Keskin (2017) concluded a positive correlation between HDI and economic performance. The FDI variable has a P-value of 0.05 and a coefficient of 0.021, implying that foreign investment or from abroad has a positive and significant effect on GRDP. ...
Article
Full-text available
This study empirically examines and analyzes the impact of several macroeconomic indicators on economic growth, namely the extent to which the variables of poverty, human development index (HDI), foreign direct (FDI) and domestic investments (DMI) affect gross regional domestic product (GRDP) at constant prices in 2010 according to expenditure in Indonesia. By using panel data regression and data sourced from 32 provinces throughout Indonesia, the results show that poverty has a negative but not significant effect, FDI has a positive and significant effect, and HDI has a positive and significant effect. On the other hand, Domestic Investment has a positive but not significant effect on GRDP. In an effort to increase the value of GRDP, HDI, and investment (FDI and HDI) that can reduce poverty, the government, the private sector, and the community play an active role in cooperating in planning and implementing effective and efficient strategic program activities, including maintaining social security stability and politics, sustainable reform in all sectors by encouraging the use of domestic products, empowering elements of society including Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises, facilitating various vocational skills training for productive workers and drafting investment-friendly licensing governance regulations. The development of human resources must accompany economic development to reduce the negative impact of economic growth.
... For instance, some have argued that the HDI depicts an oversimplified view of social development via a few indicators with poor data quality [42]. Additionally, the three components of HDI are strongly correlated with each other, and thus HDI does not reveal anything new beyond GDP or life expectancy [43,44]. Moreover, Sagar and Najam [45] claimed that HDI presents a distorted picture of the world, similar to GDP, and ignores the environmental dimensions of development. ...
Article
Full-text available
What social progress is and how to measure it are seemingly plain but essentially intri-cate questions that have not been clarified to date, which has led to various social problems and development failures. Designed after the Great Depression in the 1930s, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) has been, on the one hand, regarded as the greatest invention of the 20th century and is widely accepted as the primary indicator for social progress, but on the other hand, it has been criticized as knowing the price of everything but the value of nothing. The Beyond GDP Movement that has been active since the 2010s has inspired global interest in designing indicators to replace or supplement GDP, but none of them stands out as GDP’s successor. We take 12 influential indicators that consider beyond GDP and carry out a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) to investigate their correlations. The results indicate that GDP per capita (GDPP) can explain 65.61% of the information in the first principal component (PC) and account for 51.10% of the information related to the total 13 indicators, indicating its major role in social progress. Most indicators have strong correlations with GDPP, not beyond, and only the Ecological Footprint per capita (EFP) and Happy Planet Index (HPI) that have negative and weak correlations with GDPP, respectively, can provide new perspectives and values beyond GDP. Social progress is based upon various public values, and the indicators are the measurements of these values. Although GDP and economic values play major roles during social development, other indicators and their potential public values cannot be ignored. Prioritizing these public values and monitoring their indicators are essential to achieving sustainable and comprehensive social progress.
Article
Full-text available
The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) adopted by the United Nations in 2015 represent the current perceptions of humans regarding understanding and monitoring development. Achieving all 17 goals simultaneously is unrealistic. Considering the interconnected nature of SDGs, identifying their critical dimensions, goals, indicators, and mutual relationships is necessary. In addition, with increasing reservations about the sustainability of SDGs, it is crucial to explore consistency across different dimensions to ensure policy coherence in maximizing synergies and minimizing trade-offs. Our study employed multiple factor analysis (MFA) and hierarchical clustering on principal components (HCPC) to investigate these issues and analyze the results based on the public value (PV) theory. The results indicated that the Human Development Index (HDI) and gross domestic product per capita (GDPP) constitute the first principal component (PC) and are determinants in differentiating country clusters. However, they contradict environmental indicators such as CO2 emissions per capita and ecological footprint gha per person (EFP) and have low synergy with the Happy Planet Index (HPI). Additionally, the relationships between income level, inequality, and environmental quality correspond to a combined Kuznets curve and an environmental Kuznets curve (EKC). Moreover, governance capacity has become increasingly crucial in sustainable development, particularly in the capability to prioritize different PVs in a timely and strategic manner. Finally, despite the novelty of EFP and HPI, they cannot reveal the entire development story. SDGs require embracing more such indicators to enrich the value bases of development and achieve a sustainable future.
Research
Full-text available
Development is the key to surviving any new change in our way, be it biological or economical. Bangladesh, as a developing country has also been focusing on the human development policies to face the challenges of a growing economy. The aim of this research paper is to empirically test the significance and direction of the impact of human development measured with Human Development Index (HDI) on economic growth, measured with Gross Domestic Product (GDP)-in Bangladesh. 30 years (1990-2019) of time series data for the country, has been used to achieve the objective empirically. Using secondary data from World Bank, Macrotrends, and Country Economy, we have used the ordinary least squares (OLS) model for the test. Based on the research of Harrod (1939), we were anticipating a positive and significant impact of HDI on GDP. We tried to answer the question, how much and how significantly HDI is affecting the growth of GDP in Bangladesh. The rationale behind conducting this study is to contribute to making better policies directed toward economic growth and human development, so that it can eventually improve human welfare in Bangladesh. This research found a positive and significant effect of HDI on GDP. Though it is limited to only OLS regression models without further tests, this study can be further used by carrying out unit root tests to get better results.
Article
Against the backdrop of the current political developments in Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries, such as Ukraine, Poland, and Romania, the question arises as to the role played by economic transformation and the resulting innovation linkages in these countries over the last 20 years. The main purpose of this paper is to explore the impact of economic and institutional dimensions on the development of CEE countries, explicitly distinguishing between European Union (EU) members and non‐members, and thus reflecting the differences in institutions and path dependency. Furthermore, the paper contrasts the performance of CEE countries with that of Western European countries. To achieve these objectives, the impact of factors such as innovation, institutions, and political practices on the economic development of 37 European countries from 2000 until 2020 is followed using fixed effects regression and Ordinary least squares (OLS) regression. The results of the analysis show the importance of institutional factors such as low levels of corruption, political freedoms, and intellectual property. The effect of institutional variables was particularly pronounced in the case of non‐EU countries, which indicates the particular importance of the development of stable institutions for achieving higher levels of economic development for this category of countries.
Article
Full-text available
The economic slowdown is an issue that the global economy still faces since the 2007-2009 Great Recession. The decline in physical and natural capital will further exacerbate this slowdown. This study analyzes the factors driving growth based on endogenous growth theory using a case study of four country categories based on the Human Development Index (HDI) level to solve the economic slowdown problem and realize sustained economic growth as Goal 8 of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The variables used in this study are HDI, Global Innovation Index (GII), labor force, and Gross Fixed Capital Formation (GFCF). This study analyzed 98 countries in 2011-2018 using Fixed Effect and Random Effect Model. The estimation results show that HDI, labor force, GII, and GFCF significantly affect economic growth in the very high, high, and medium HDI country categories. This study found that GII did not affect economic growth in the low HDI countries category.
Article
Full-text available
Implementation of the sustainable socio-economic development goals is an important task for any country, which is why researchers pay attention to the analysis of factors that influence development. Human development is one of the components of development in a wide context. The level of human development largely depends on the quality of the institutional environment in a society. The article examines the relationship between the human development level and the institutional environment quality. Human Development Index (HDI) and Worldwide Governance Indicators (WGI) are used. The analysis includes data for 188 countries for the period from 2017 to 2019. Three clusters are obtained as a result of cluster analysis. The Spearman Rank Order and Kendall Tau Correlations are calculated for each cluster. The link between HDI and WDI is found to be directly positive. Moreover, the strength of the relationship depends on the quality of indicators in groups of countries - the higher the quality of indicators, the stronger the link between them. The results are obtained using the Statistica application package.
Chapter
In the long term, a sustainable economy can only be built on renewable resources. A sustainable economy must therefore be a bioeconomy in terms of its resource base. The UN Sustainable Development Goals highlight the close connection between the bioeconomy and sustainability in various respects. However, large-scale biomass cultivation can have negative impacts on the environment and food security, which need to be taken into account in order not to jeopardise the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals. Different governmental and civil society actors need to work together to ensure that the transformation of our current fossil-based economy to a sustainable bioeconomy is successful.
Article
Full-text available
It is very important for decision makers to determine the financial status of firms correctly, so correct and on time measurement of firms’ financial performances is necessary. TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution) method, especially for the advantages it provides to parties in decision making process, is frequently used in finance literature. In this study, financial performances of textile firms publicly traded in The Borsa İstanbul have been analyzed via TOPSIS method by using financial rates in 2010-2013 terms. Rates calculated for financial performance measurement have been converted to one single score through TOPSIS method and firms have been ranked. Then, ranking done via TOPSIS method and ranking via firms’ traditional performance indicators (Return on Assets, Return on Equity, Return on Sales and Market Value) have been compared. As a result of analysis, it is found out that TOPSIS performance scores have shown variability in the term and do not match with rankings done through traditional performance measurement.
Article
Full-text available
Here we introduce the Analytic Hierarchy Process as a method of measurement with ratio scales and illustrate it with two examples. We then give the axioms and some of the central theoretical underpinnings of the theory. Finally, we discuss some of the ideas relating to this process and its ramifications. In this paper we give special emphasis to departure from consistency and its measurement and to the use of absolute and relative measurement, providing examples and justification for rank preservation and reversal in relative measurement.
Article
This paper proposes a composite indicator designed to summarise in a single statistic a variety of different facets of macroeconomic performance and assesses relative performances of countries with respect to six macroeconomic variables, viz., the growth rate of real GDP, real per capita GDP, unemployment rate, fiscal balance, rate of inflation, and current account balance. An appropriate mathematical model to aggregate these variables to form composite scores has been implemented by adopting the MCDM (Multiple Criteria Decision Making) technique of TOPSIS (Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution). This allows a parsimonious representation of a variety of different facets of macroeconomic performance and its inter-temporal comparison across countries. The distinctive features of the indicator relate to the domains covered, the normalisation methodology and the weights used for aggregation. Some existing indices like the Okun index and the Calmfors index turn out to be special cases of our proposed index. The data comprising a wide spectrum of countries and spanning the pre- and post- crisis years allow us to capture the effect of the recent global financial and economic crisis on the overall macroeconomic performance of countries relative to others. Not only do the relative performance scores show tremendous variability during the postcrisis years, but the measures of disarray are also at their highest, despite there being overall stability in the country rankings in terms of indicators, which are traditionally relied on, like GDP growth or per-capita GDP. A single graphical plot easily identifies countries that have performed consistently over time, and those whose overall macroeconomic performances have deteriorated sharply relative to others during the post-crisis years.
Article
Developing a justification methodology for an FMS requires the use of traditional engineering economy tools and innovative ranking procedures to fully evaluate all the benefits of the technology. This paper gives an overview of the potential benefits derived from a FMS implementation and a method to quantify these benefits for use in engineering economy studies. The analytic hierarchy process is recommended for this application. An example of its use is given to determine the best manufacturing system.
Article
In this article, by using fuzzy AHP and TOPSIS technique we propose a new method for project selection problem. After reviewing four common methods of comparing alternatives investment (net present value, rate of return, benefit cost analysis and payback period) we use them as criteria in AHP tree. In this methodology by utilizing improved Analytical Hierarchy Process by Fuzzy set theory, first we try to calculate weight of each criterion. Then by implementing TOPSIS algorithm, assessment of projects has been done. Obtained results have been tested in a numerical example.
Article
The multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) methods VIKOR and TOPSIS are based on an aggregating function representing “closeness to the ideal”, which originated in the compromise programming method. In VIKOR linear normalization and in TOPSIS vector normalization is used to eliminate the units of criterion functions. The VIKOR method of compromise ranking determines a compromise solution, providing a maximum “group utility” for the “majority” and a minimum of an individual regret for the “opponent”. The TOPSIS method determines a solution with the shortest distance to the ideal solution and the greatest distance from the negative-ideal solution, but it does not consider the relative importance of these distances. A comparative analysis of these two methods is illustrated with a numerical example, showing their similarity and some differences.
Evaluating the rank of performance of countries of the middle east and north Africa with MADM
  • M Ashourian
Ashourian M (2012) Evaluating the rank of performance of countries of the middle east and north Africa with MADM. J Inf Mathematical Sciences 3:285-292
Economic Growth Center discussion paper no
  • R Gustav
Gustav R (2004) Human development and economic growth. Economic Growth Center discussion paper no. 887
Improved hierarchical fuzzy group decision making for selection of supplier with TOPSIS method
  • Q Bao
Bao Q et al (2010) Improved hierarchical fuzzy group decision making for selection of supplier with TOPSIS method. Knowl Based Syst 84-98