Revision as of 21:25, 23 May 2009 editBeno1000 (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers3,659 editsm →Criticisms← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 02:41, 28 December 2024 edit undo2600:1001:b148:ec5b:9926:e33c:ca1e:7916 (talk) →In each original HDITag: Manual revert | ||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Composite statistic of life expectancy, education, and income indices}} | |||
{{otheruses4|the Human Development Index (HDPI)|other uses of HDI|HDI}} | |||
{{Redirect|HDI}} | |||
{{Refimprove|date=January 2008}} | |||
{{For|the complete ranking of countries|List of countries by Human Development Index}} | |||
{{Pp-pc}} | |||
[[Image:UN Human Development Report 2008.png|thumb|right|400px|World map indicating Human Development Index (2008 Update) | |||
{{Use dmy dates|date=November 2021}} | |||
] | |||
The '''Human Development Index''' ('''HDI''') is a statistical composite index of ], ] (mean years of schooling completed and expected years of schooling upon entering the ]), and ] indicators, which is used to rank countries into four tiers of ]. A country scores a higher level of HDI when the ] is higher, the ] level is higher, and the gross national income ] is higher. It was developed by Pakistani economist ] and was further used to measure a country's development by the ] (UNDP)'s Human Development Report Office.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=A. Stanton|first=Elizabeth|date=February 2007|title=The Human Development Index: A History|url=https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1101&context=peri_workingpapers |publisher=ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst |journal=PERI Working Papers|pages=14–15|access-date=28 February 2019|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190228191918/https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1101&context=peri_workingpapers|archive-date=28 February 2019|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Human Development Index|url=https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/definition/human-development-index|website=Definition of 'Human Development Index' |access-date=29 November 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171201030929/https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/definition/human-development-index|archive-date=1 December 2017|url-status=dead }}</ref><ref name="auto">{{cite web|title=About Human Development |url=http://hdr.undp.org/en/humandev/|publisher=UNDP|access-date=29 July 2011|website=HDR |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120415134936/http://hdr.undp.org/en/humandev/|archive-date=15 April 2012|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Human development index |url=https://www.who.int/data/nutrition/nlis/info/human-development-index |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220103061653/https://www.who.int/data/nutrition/nlis/info/human-development-index |archive-date=2022-01-03 |access-date=2024-06-26 |website=World Health Organization}}</ref> | |||
The 2010 ] introduced an ] (IHDI). While the simple HDI remains useful, it stated that "the IHDI is the actual level of human development (accounting for this ]), while the HDI can be viewed as an index of 'potential' human development (or the maximum level of HDI) that could be achieved if there was no inequality."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/understanding/indices |title= Composite indices — HDI and beyond |website=Human Development Reports |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160810022820/http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/understanding/indices |archive-date=10 August 2016 |access-date=16 January 2021}}</ref> | |||
The index is based on the human development approach, developed by Mahbub ul-Haq, anchored in ]'s work on human capabilities, and often framed in terms of whether people are able to "be" and "do" desirable things in life. Examples include — being: well-fed, sheltered, and healthy; doing: work, education, voting, participating in community life. The freedom of choice is considered central — someone choosing to be hungry (e.g. when ]) is considered different from someone who is hungry because they cannot afford to buy food, or because the country is going through a ].<ref name="auto1">{{cite web|title=What is Human Development|url=http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/what-human-development|publisher=UNDP|access-date=27 October 2017|date=February 19, 2015 |website=HDR |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171027132851/http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/what-human-development|archive-date=27 October 2017|url-status=live|quote=... human development approach, developed by the economist Mahbub Ul Haq ... }}</ref> | |||
The index does not take into account several factors, such as the ] or the relative ] in a country. This situation tends to lower the ranking of some of the most ], such as the ] members and others.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=R2D0AAAAMAAJ|title=The Courier|date=1994|publisher=Commission of the European Communities|language=en}}</ref> | |||
== Origins == | |||
The origins of the HDI are found in the annual Human Development Reports produced by the Human Development Report Office of the ] (UNDP). These annual reports were devised and launched by Pakistani economist ] in 1990, and had the explicit purpose "to shift the focus of development economics from ] accounting to ]". He believed that a simple composite measure of human development was needed to convince the public, academics and politicians that they can, and should, evaluate development not only by economic advances but also improvements in human ]. | |||
] | |||
{{Break}} | |||
== Dimensions and calculation == | |||
=== New method (2010 HDI onwards) === | |||
[[File:Human Development Index regions evolution 1990-2021-fr.svg|thumb|right|upright=1.5|HDI trends between 1990 and 2021 | |||
{| style="width:100%;" | {| style="width:100%;" | ||
|- | |- | ||
| valign=top | | | valign=top | | ||
{{legend|# |
{{legend|#7f7f7f|]}} | ||
{{legend|# |
{{legend|#1f77b4|] countries}} | ||
{{legend|#00d000|0.850–0.899}} | |||
{{legend|#00ff00|0.800–0.849}} | |||
{{legend|#e0ff00|0.750–0.799}} | |||
| valign=top | | | valign=top | | ||
Developing countries: | |||
{{legend|#ffff00|0.700–0.749}} | |||
{{legend|# |
{{legend|#ff7f0e|]}} | ||
{{legend|# |
{{legend|#2ca02c|] and the Pacific}} | ||
{{legend|# |
{{legend|#d62728|] and ]}} | ||
{{legend|# |
{{legend|#9467bd|] and the ]}} | ||
{{legend|#8c564b|]}} | |||
| valign=top | | |||
{{legend|# |
{{legend|#e377c2|]}} | ||
{{legend|#a00000|0.400–0.449}} | |||
{{legend|#800000|0.350–0.399}} | |||
{{legend|#400000|under 0.350}} | |||
{{legend|#c0c0c0|not available}} | |||
|} | |} | ||
]] | |||
]]] | |||
Published on 4 November 2010 (and updated on 10 June 2011), the 2010 Human Development Report calculated the HDI combining three dimensions:<ref>{{cite web |title=Human Development Report 2010 |date=4 November 2010 |publisher=UNDP |url=http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-report-2010 |access-date=15 December 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151222145515/http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-report-2010 |archive-date=22 December 2015 |url-status=live |last1=Nations |first1=United }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=Technical notes |year=2013 |publisher=UNDP |url=http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr_2013_en_technotes.pdf |access-date=15 December 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150616130523/http://hdr.undp.org/sites/default/files/hdr_2013_en_technotes.pdf |archive-date=16 June 2015 |url-status=live }}</ref> | |||
The '''Human Development Index''' ('''HDI''') is an index used to rank countries by level of "human development", which usually also implies whether a country is a ], ], or ]. | |||
* A long and healthy life: ] | |||
==Summary== | |||
* ]: Mean years of schooling and expected years of schooling | |||
* A decent standard of living: ] per capita (] ]s) | |||
In its 2010 Human Development Report, the UNDP began using a new method of calculating the HDI. The following three indices are used: | |||
1.{{anchor|Life Expectancy Index}} Life Expectancy Index (LEI) <math>= \frac{\textrm{LE} - 20}{85-20} = \frac{\textrm{LE} - 20}{65}</math> | |||
The HDI combines normalized measures of ], ], ], and ] for countries worldwide. It is claimed as a standard means of measuring ]—a concept that, according to the ] (UNDP), refers to the process of widening the options of persons, giving them greater opportunities for education, health care, income, employment, etc. The basic use of HDI is to measure a country's development. | |||
::LEI is equal to 1 when ] is 85 years, and 0 when life expectancy at birth is 20 years. | |||
2. ] (EI) <math>= \frac{{\textrm{MYSI} + \textrm{EYSI}}} {2}</math><ref>{{Cite news|url=http://www.indiastudychannel.com/resources/141517-New-method-of-calculation-of-Human-Development-Index-HDI.aspx|title=New method of calculation of Human Development Index (HDI)|date=1 June 2011|work=India Study Channel|access-date=19 November 2017|language=en|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171110171412/http://www.indiastudychannel.com/resources/141517-New-method-of-calculation-of-Human-Development-Index-HDI.aspx|archive-date=10 November 2017|url-status=live}}</ref> | |||
:2.1 Mean Years of Schooling Index (MYSI) <math>= \frac{\textrm{MYS}}{15}</math><ref>Mean years of schooling (of adults) (years) is a calculation of the average number of years of education received by people ages 25 and older in their lifetime based on education attainment levels of the population converted into years of schooling based on theoretical duration of each level of education attended. Source: {{cite journal |last1=Barro |first1=R. J. |author-link=Robert Barro |first2=J.-W. |last2=Lee |year=2010 |title=A New Data Set of Educational Attainment in the World, 1950–2010 |journal=NBER Working Paper No. 15902 |series=Working Paper Series |url=http://www.nber.org/papers/w15902 |doi=10.3386/w15902 |access-date=29 July 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110807191234/http://www.nber.org/papers/w15902 |archive-date=7 August 2011 |url-status=live |doi-access=free }}</ref> | |||
:: Fifteen is the projected maximum of this indicator for 2025. | |||
:2.2 Expected Years of Schooling Index (EYSI) <math>= \frac{\textrm{EYS}}{18}</math><ref>(ESYI is a calculation of the number of years a child is expected to attend school, or university, including the years spent on repetition. It is the sum of the age-specific enrollment ratios for primary, secondary, post-secondary non-tertiary and tertiary education and is calculated assuming the prevailing patterns of age-specific enrollment rates were to stay the same throughout the child's life. Expected years of schooling is capped at 18 years. (Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics (2010). Correspondence on education indicators. March. Montreal.)</ref> | |||
:: Eighteen is equivalent to achieving a ] in most countries. | |||
3. Income Index (II) <math>= \frac{\ln(\textrm{GNIpc}) - \ln(100)}{\ln(75,000) - \ln(100)} = \frac{\ln(\textrm{GNIpc}) - \ln(100)}{\ln(750)}</math> | |||
::II is 1 when GNI per capita is $75,000 and 0 when GNI per capita is $100. | |||
Finally, the HDI is the ] of the previous three normalized indices: | |||
: <math>\textrm{HDI} = \sqrt{\textrm{LEI}\cdot \textrm{EI} \cdot \textrm{II}}.</math> | |||
The index was developed in 1990 by ]i economist ], Sir Richard Jolly, with help from Gustav Ranis of ] and Lord ] of the ]. It has been used since then by UNDP in its annual ]. It is claimed that ideas of ]n Nobel prize winner ] were influential in the development of the HDI. The HDI now serves as a path towards a wide variety of more detailed measures contained in the '''Human Development Reports'''. | |||
<small>LE: ]<br /> | |||
The HDI combines three basic dimensions: | |||
MYS: Mean years of schooling (i.e. years that a person aged 25 or older has spent in formal education)<br /> | |||
* ] at birth, as an index of population health and longevity | |||
EYS: Expected years of schooling (i.e. total expected years of schooling for children under 18 years of age, incl. young men and women aged 13–17)<br /> | |||
* Knowledge and education, as measured by the adult ] rate (with two-thirds weighting) and the combined primary, secondary, and tertiary ] (with one-third weighting). | |||
GNIpc: ]</small> | |||
{{Break}} | |||
=== Old method (HDI before 2010) === | |||
From the time it was created, the HDI has been criticized as a redundant measure that adds little to the value of the individual measures composing it; as a means to provide legitimacy to arbitrary weightings of a few aspects of social development; and as a number producing a relative ranking which is useless for inter-temporal comparisons, and difficult to interpret because the HDI for a country in a given year depends on the levels of, say, life expectancy or GDP per capita of other countries in that year.<ref>Rao VVB, 1991. Human development report 1990: review and assessment. World Development, Vol 19 No. 10, pp. 1451–1460.</ref><ref> McGillivray M. The Human Development Index: Yet Another Redundant Composite Development Indicator? World Development, 1991, vol 18, no. 10:1461-1468.</ref><ref>Hopkins M. Human development revisited: A new UNDP report. World Development, 1991. vol 19, no. 10, 1461-1468.</ref><ref>Tapia Granados JA. Algunas ideas críticas sobre el índice de desarrollo humano. Boletín de la Oficina Sanitaria Panamericana, 1995 Vol 119, No. 1, pp. 74-87.</ref> However, each year, ] according to the computed HDI. If high, the rank in the list can be easily used as a means of national aggrandizement; alternatively, if low, it can be used to highlight national insufficiencies. Using the HDI as an absolute index of social welfare, some authors have used panel HDI data to measure the impact of economic policies on ].<ref></ref> | |||
The HDI combined three dimensions last used in its 2009 report: | |||
* ] at birth, as an index of population health and longevity to HDI | |||
An alternative measure, focusing on the amount of poverty in a country, is the ]. | |||
* Knowledge and education, as measured by the adult ] rate (with two-thirds weighting) and the combined primary, secondary, and tertiary ] (with one-third weighting). | |||
* ], as indicated by the ] of ] ] at ]. | |||
[[File:Human Development Index trends.svg|thumb|right|upright=1.25|HDI trends between 1975 and 2004 | |||
==Methodology== | |||
[[Image:Evolució de l'IDH.png|thumb|right|280px|HDI trends between 1975 and 2004 | |||
{| style="width:100%;" | {| style="width:100%;" | ||
|- | |- | ||
| valign=top | | | valign=top | | ||
{{legend|black|]}} | {{legend|black|]}} | ||
{{legend|#FF0000|] |
{{legend|#FF0000|] (not in the OECD), and ]}} | ||
{{legend|#E45600|] and the ]}} | {{legend|#E45600|] and the ]}} | ||
{{legend|#D09B00|]}} | {{legend|#D09B00|]}} | ||
| valign=top | | | valign=top | | ||
{{legend|#00FF00|]}} | {{legend|#00FF00|]}} | ||
{{legend|#003FD9|]}} | {{legend|#003FD9|]}} | ||
{{legend|#C600FF|]}} | {{legend|#C600FF|]}} | ||
Line 59: | Line 90: | ||
]] | ]] | ||
This methodology was used by the UNDP until their 2011 report. | |||
In general, to transform a raw ], say <math>x</math>, into a unit-free ] between 0 and 1 (which allows different indices to be added together), the following ] is used: | |||
* <math>x</math>-index = <math>\frac{x - \min\left(x\right)}{\max\left(x\right)-\min\left(x\right)}</math> | |||
The formula defining the HDI is promulgated by the United Nations Development Programme (]).<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/faq/question,68,en.html|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071220162154/http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/faq/question%2C68%2Cen.html|url-status=dead|title=Definition, Calculator, etc. at UNDP site|archive-date=20 December 2007|access-date=26 May 2020}}</ref> In general, to transform a raw ], say <math>x</math>, into a unit-free ] between 0 and 1 (which allows different indices to be added together), the following ] is used: | |||
where <math>\min\left(x\right)</math> and <math>\max\left(x\right)</math> are the ] the variable <math>x</math> can attain, respectively.<br /> | |||
* <math>x\text{ index} = \frac{x - a}{b - a}</math> | |||
The Human Development Index (HDI) then represents the average of the following three general indices: | |||
* ] = <math>\frac{LE - 25} {85-25}</math> | |||
* ] = <math>\frac{2} {3} \times ALI + \frac{1} {3} \times GEI</math> | |||
** ] (ALI) = <math>\frac{ALR - 0} {100 - 0}</math> | |||
** ] (GEI) = <math>\frac{CGER - 0} {100 - 0}</math> | |||
* ] = <math>\frac{\log\left(GDPpc\right) - \log\left(100\right)} {\log\left(40000\right) - \log\left(100\right)}</math> | |||
where <math>a</math> and <math>b</math> are the ] the variable <math>x</math> can attain, respectively. | |||
==2008 statistical update== | |||
{{main|List of countries by Human Development Index}} | |||
The Human Development Index (HDI) then represents the uniformly weighted sum with {{frac|1|3}} contributed by each of the following factor indices: | |||
A new index was released on December 18, 2008. This so-called "statistical update" covers the period up to 2006 and was published without an accompanying report on human development. The update is relevant due to newly released estimates of ] (PPP), implying substantial adjustments for many countries, resulting in changes in HDI values and, in many cases, HDI ranks.<ref name="2008SU"></ref> | |||
* ] <math> = \frac{\text{LE} - 25} {85-25} = \frac{\text{LE} - 25} {60}</math> | |||
{{col-begin}} | |||
* ] <math> = \frac{2} {3} \times \text{ALI} + \frac{1} {3} \times \text{GEI} </math> | |||
{{col-break}} | |||
** ] (ALI) <math> = \frac{\text{ALR} - 0} {100 - 0} = \frac{\text{ALR}} {100}</math> | |||
<ol> | |||
** ] (GEI) <math> = \frac{\text{CGER} - 0} {100 - 0} =\frac{\text{CGER}} {100}</math> | |||
<li> {{ISL}} 0.968 ({{steady}})</li> | |||
* ] <math> = \frac{\log(\text{GDPpc}) - \log(100)} {\log(40000) - \log(100)} = \frac{\log(\text{GDPpc}) - \log(100)} {\log(400)}</math> | |||
<li> {{NOR}} 0.968 ({{steady}})</li> | |||
{{Break}} | |||
<li> {{CAN}} 0.967 ({{increase}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{AUS}} 0.965 ({{decrease}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{IRL}} 0.960 ({{steady}})</li> | |||
<li> {{NLD}} 0.958 ({{increase}} 3)</li> | |||
<li> {{SWE}} 0.958 ({{decrease}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{JPN}} 0.956 ({{steady}})</li> | |||
<li> {{LUX}} 0.956 ({{increase}} 9)</li> | |||
<li> {{SUI}} 0.955 ({{decrease}} 3)</li> | |||
</ol> | |||
== 2022 Human Development Index (2024 report) == | |||
{{col-break}} | |||
{{main|List of countries by Human Development Index}} | |||
<ol> | |||
{{see also|List of countries by inequality-adjusted Human Development Index}} | |||
<li value="11"> {{FRA}} 0.955 ({{increase}} 1)</li> | |||
[[File:Average annual HDI growth from 2010 to 2021 published in 2022.png|alt=World map|thumb|upright=1.6|Average annual HDI growth from 2010 to 2021 (published in 2022){{legend-col | |||
<li> {{FIN}} 0.954 ({{decrease}} 1)</li> | |||
|thumb size=wide | |||
<li> {{DEN}} 0.952 ({{increase}} 1)</li> | |||
|{{Legend|#00112B|≥ 1.4%}} | |||
<li> {{AUT}} 0.951 ({{increase}} 1)</li> | |||
|{{Legend|#08306B|1.2%…1.4%}} | |||
<li> {{USA}} 0.950 ({{decrease}} 3)</li> | |||
|{{Legend|#08519c|1%…1.2%}} | |||
<li> {{ESP}} 0.949 ({{decrease}} 3)</li> | |||
|{{Legend|#2171b5|0.8%…1%}} | |||
<li> {{BEL}} 0.948 ({{decrease}} 1)</li> | |||
|{{Legend|#4292c6|0.6%…0.8%}} | |||
<li> {{GRC}} 0.947 ({{increase}} 6)</li> | |||
|{{Legend|#6baed6|0.4%…0.6%}} | |||
<li> {{ITA}} 0.945 ({{increase}} 1)</li> | |||
|{{Legend|#9ecae1|0.2%…0.4%}} | |||
<li> {{NZL}} 0.944 ({{decrease}} 1)</li> | |||
|{{Legend|#c6dbef|0%…0.2%}} | |||
</ol> | |||
|{{Legend|#fcbba1|−0.5%…0%}} | |||
|{{Legend|#fc9272|−1%…−0.5%}} | |||
|{{Legend|#af321e|< −1%}} | |||
|{{Legend|#e3dbdb|No data}} | |||
}}]] | |||
The Human Development Report 2023/24 by the ] was released on 13 March 2024; the report calculates HDI values based on data collected in 2022. | |||
Ranked from 1 to 69 in the year 2022, the following countries are considered to be of "very high human development":<ref name="2022 components">{{cite book |url=https://hdr.undp.org/content/human-development-report-2023-24 |title=Human Development Report 2023-24: Breaking the gridlock: Reimagining cooperation in a polarized world |date=13 March 2024 |publisher=United Nations Development Programme |isbn= |pages= |access-date=16 March 2024 |archive-url= |archive-date= }}</ref> | |||
{{col-break}} | |||
<ol> | |||
<li value="21"> {{UK}} 0.942 ({{decrease}} 5)</li> | |||
<li> {{HKG}} 0.942 ({{decrease}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{GER}} 0.940 ({{decrease}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{ISR}} 0.930 ({{decrease}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{KOR}} 0.928 ({{increase}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{SLO}} 0.923 ({{increase}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{BRU}} 0.919 ({{increase}} 3)</li> | |||
<li> {{SIN}} 0.918 ({{decrease}} 3)</li> | |||
<li> {{CYP}} 0.912 ({{increase}} 4)</li> | |||
<li> {{KUW}} 0.912 ({{increase}} 4)</li> | |||
{{col-end}} | |||
{|class="wikitable sortable plainrowheaders" style="text-align:center" | |||
===Countries not included=== | |||
|+ {{sronly|Table of countries by HDI}} | |||
The following nations are not ranked in the 2008 Human Development Index, for being unable or unwilling to provide the necessary data at the time of publication. | |||
{{col-begin}} | |||
{{col-break}} | |||
<!-- Very High, High, Medium & Low HDI labels should not be added due to accessibility and sorting issues, mainly ]. See also ] for more details. -->|- | |||
''']''' | |||
!scope="colgroup"; colspan="2"; | Rank | |||
* {{SOM}} | |||
!scope="col" rowspan="2" style="width:14em; "| Nation | |||
* {{ZIM}} | |||
!scope="colgroup" colspan="2";| HDI | |||
{{col-break}} | |||
|- | |||
!scope="col" style="width:5em;" data-sort-type="number"| 2022 data (2024 report){{Zero width space}} | |||
!scope="col" style="width:5em;" data-sort-type="number"| Change since 2015{{Zero width space}} | |||
!scope="col" style="width:5em;" data-sort-type="number"| 2022 data (2024 report){{Zero width space}}<ref name="2022 components" /> | |||
!scope="col" style="width:5em;" data-sort-type="number"| Average annual growth (2010–2022){{Zero width space}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.962|1}} || {{sort|0|{{steady}}}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Switzerland}} | |||
|| 0.967 || {{sort|0.24|{{increase}} 0.24%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.961|2}} || {{sort|-1|{{decrease}} (1)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Norway}} | |||
|| 0.966 || {{sort|0.25|{{increase}} 0.25%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.959|3}} || {{sort|0|{{steady}}}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Iceland}} | |||
|| 0.959 || {{sort|0.28|{{increase}} 0.28%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.952|4}} || {{sort|2|{{increase}} (2)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Hong Kong}} | |||
|| 0.956 || {{sort|0.38|{{increase}} 0.38%}} | |||
|- | |||
| rowspan="2" | {{sort|0.951|5}} || {{sort|1|{{increase}} (1)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Denmark}} | |||
| rowspan="2"| 0.952 || {{sort|0.35|{{increase}} 0.35%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0|{{steady}}}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Sweden}} | |||
| {{sort|0.38|{{increase}} 0.38%}} | |||
|- | |||
| rowspan="2" | {{sort|0.947|7}} || {{sort|8|{{increase}} (8)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Ireland}} | |||
| rowspan="2" |0.950|| {{sort|0.38|{{increase}} 0.38%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|-3|{{decrease}} (3)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Germany}} | |||
| {{sort|0.19|{{increase}} 0.19%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.942|9}} || {{sort|-1|{{decrease}} (1)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Singapore}} | |||
|| 0.949 || {{sort|0.25|{{increase}} 0.25%}} | |||
|- | |||
| rowspan="2" | {{sort|0.941|10}} || {{sort|1|{{increase}} (1)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Netherlands}} | |||
| rowspan="2"| 0.946 || {{sort|0.26|{{increase}} 0.26%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|-1|{{decrease}} (1)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Australia}} | |||
| {{sort|0.20|{{increase}} 0.20%}} | |||
|- | |||
| rowspan="3" | {{sort|0.939|12}} || {{sort|2|{{increase}} (2)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Liechtenstein}} | |||
| rowspan="3"| 0.942 || {{sort|0.23|{{increase}} 0.23%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|3|{{increase}} (3)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Belgium}} | |||
| {{sort|0.26|{{increase}} 0.26%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0|{{steady}}}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Finland}} | |||
| {{sort|0.27|{{increase}} 0.27%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.936|15}} || {{sort|3|{{increase}} (3)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|United Kingdom}} | |||
|| 0.940 || {{sort|0.24|{{increase}} 0.24%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.935|16}} || {{sort|-7|{{decrease}} (7)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|New Zealand}} | |||
|| 0.939 || {{sort|0.13|{{increase}} 0.13%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.930|17}} || {{sort|19|{{increase}} (19)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|United Arab Emirates}} | |||
|| 0.937 || {{sort|1.04|{{increase}} 1.04%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.929|18}} || {{sort|-5|{{decrease}} (5)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Canada}} | |||
|| 0.935 || {{sort|0.22|{{increase}} 0.22%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.925|19}} || {{sort|3|{{increase}} (3)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|South Korea}} | |||
| 0.929 || {{sort|0.36|{{increase}} 0.36%}} | |||
|- | |||
| rowspan="2" |20 | |||
| {{sort|-5|{{decrease}} (5)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|United States}} | |||
| rowspan="2" |0.927 | |||
| {{sort|0.10|{{increase}} 0.10%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|-1|{{decrease}} (1)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Luxembourg}} | |||
| {{sort|0.14|{{increase}} 0.14%}} | |||
|- | |||
| rowspan="2" | {{sort|0.919|22}} || {{sort|1|{{increase}} (1)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Slovenia}} | |||
| rowspan="2"| 0.926 || {{sort|0.33|{{increase}} 0.33%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|-1|{{decrease}} (1)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Austria}} | |||
| {{sort|0.21|{{increase}} 0.21%}} | |||
|- | |||
|24 | |||
| {{sort|-4|{{decrease}} (4)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Japan}} | |||
|0.920 | |||
| {{sort|0.16|{{increase}} 0.16%}} | |||
|- | |||
| rowspan="2" | {{sort|0.916|25}} || {{sort|-1|{{decrease}} (1)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Israel}} | |||
| rowspan="2"| 0.915 || {{sort|0.26|{{increase}} 0.26%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|3|{{increase}} (3)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Malta}} | |||
| {{sort|0.50|{{increase}} 0.50%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.905|27}} || {{sort|0|{{steady}}}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Spain}} | |||
|| 0.911 || {{sort|0.40|{{increase}} 0.40%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.903|28}} || {{sort|-3|{{decrease}} (3)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|France}} | |||
|| 0.910 || {{sort|0.28|{{increase}} 0.28%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.896|29}} || {{sort|3|{{increase}} (3)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Cyprus}} | |||
|| 0.907 || {{sort|0.45|{{increase}} 0.45%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.895|30}} || {{sort|0|{{steady}}}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Italy}} | |||
|| 0.906 || {{sort|0.24|{{increase}} 0.24%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.890|31}} || {{sort|-2|{{decrease}} (2)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Estonia}} | |||
|| 0.899 || {{sort|0.33|{{increase}} 0.33%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.889|32}} || {{sort|-6|{{decrease}} (6)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Czechia}} | |||
|| 0.895 || {{sort|0.22|{{increase}} 0.22%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.887|33}} || {{sort|-3|{{decrease}} (3)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Greece}} | |||
|| 0.893 || {{sort|0.18|{{increase}} 0.18%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.876|34}} || {{sort|3|{{increase}} (3)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Bahrain}} | |||
|| 0.888 || {{sort|0.80|{{increase}} 0.80%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.875|35}} || {{sort|3|{{increase}} (3)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Andorra}} | |||
| 0.884 || {{sort|0.20|{{increase}} 0.20%}} | |||
|- | |||
|36 | |||
| {{sort|-2|{{decrease}} (2)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Poland}} | |||
|0.881 | |||
| {{sort|0.35|{{increase}} 0.35%}} | |||
|- | |||
| rowspan="2" |37 | |||
| {{sort|2|{{increase}} (2)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Latvia}} | |||
| rowspan="2" |0.879 | |||
| {{sort|0.51|{{increase}} 0.51%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|-2|{{decrease}} (2)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Lithuania}} | |||
| {{sort|0.32|{{increase}} 0.32%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.863|39}} || {{sort|6|{{increase}} (6)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Croatia}} | |||
|| 0.878 || {{sort|0.53|{{increase}} 0.53%}} | |||
|- | |||
| rowspan="2" | {{sort|0.858|40}} || {{sort|0|{{steady}}}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Qatar}} | |||
| rowspan="2"| 0.875 || {{sort|0.45|{{increase}} 0.45%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|6|{{increase}} (6)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Saudi Arabia}} | |||
| {{sort|0.70|{{increase}} 0.70%}} | |||
|- | |||
| 42 || {{sort|0|{{steady}}}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Portugal}} | |||
| 0.874 || {{sort|0.42|{{increase}} 0.42%}} | |||
|- | |||
|43 | |||
| {{sort|-10|{{decrease}} (10)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|San Marino}} | |||
|0.867 | |||
| {{sort|-0.32|{{decrease}} 0.32%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.853|44}} || {{sort|0|{{steady}}}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Chile}} | |||
|| 0.860 || {{sort|0.47|{{increase}} 0.47%}} | |||
|- | |||
| rowspan="2" | {{sort|0.848|45}} || {{sort|9|{{increase}} (9)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Turkey}} | |||
| rowspan="2"| 0.855 || {{sort|1.10|{{increase}} 1.10%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|-5|{{decrease}} (5)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Slovakia}} | |||
| {{sort|0.14|{{increase}} 0.14%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.842|47}} || {{sort|0|{{steady}}}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Hungary}} | |||
|| 0.851 || {{sort|0.22|{{increase}} 0.22%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.838|48}} || {{sort|-6|{{decrease}} (6)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Argentina}} | |||
|| 0.849 || {{sort|0.15|{{increase}} 0.15%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.832|49}} || {{sort|0|{{steady}}}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Kuwait}} | |||
|| 0.847 || {{sort|0.36|{{increase}} 0.36%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.831|50}} || {{sort|1|{{increase}} (1)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Montenegro}} | |||
|| 0.844 || {{sort|0.38|{{increase}} 0.38%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.829|51}} || {{sort|-2|{{decrease}} (2)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Saint Kitts and Nevis}} | |||
|| 0.838 || {{sort|0.49|{{increase}} 0.49%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.822|52}} || {{sort|8|{{increase}} (8)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Uruguay}} | |||
|| 0.830 || {{sort|0.47|{{increase}} 0.47%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.821|53}} || {{sort|3|{{increase}} (3)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Romania}} | |||
|| 0.827 || {{sort|0.14|{{increase}} 0.14%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.816|54}} || {{sort|1|{{increase}} (1)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Antigua and Barbuda}} | |||
|| 0.826 || {{sort|0.18|{{increase}} 0.18%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.812|55}} || {{sort|-7|{{decrease}} (7)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Brunei}} | |||
|| 0.823 || {{sort|-0.02|{{decrease}} 0.02%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.811|56}} || {{sort|-3|{{decrease}} (3)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Russia}} | |||
|| 0.821 || {{sort|0.25|{{increase}} 0.25%}} | |||
|- | |||
| rowspan="2" | {{sort|0.810|57}} || {{sort|3|{{increase}} (3)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Bahamas}} | |||
| rowspan="2"| 0.820 || {{sort|0.21|{{increase}} 0.21%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|5|{{increase}} (5)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Panama}} | |||
| {{sort|0.47|{{increase}} 0.47%}} | |||
|- | |||
|59 | |||
| {{sort|-7|{{decrease}} (7)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Oman}} | |||
|0.819 | |||
| {{sort|0.22|{{increase}} 0.22%}} | |||
|- | |||
| rowspan="2" | {{sort|0.808|60}} || {{sort|-3|{{decrease}} (3)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Trinidad and Tobago}} | |||
| rowspan="2"| 0.814 || {{sort|0.30|{{increase}} 0.30%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|4|{{increase}} (4)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Georgia}} | |||
| {{sort|0.54|{{increase}} 0.54%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.803|62}} || {{sort|2|{{increase}} (2)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Barbados}} | |||
|| 0.809 || {{sort|0.18|{{increase}} 0.18%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.802|63}} || {{sort|6|{{increase}} (6)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Malaysia}} | |||
| 0.807 || {{sort|0.41|{{increase}} 0.41%}} | |||
|- | |||
|64 | |||
| {{sort|5|{{increase}} (5)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Costa Rica}} | |||
|0.806 | |||
| {{sort|0.39|{{increase}} 0.39%}} | |||
|- | |||
|65 | |||
| {{sort|3|{{increase}} (3)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Serbia}} | |||
|0.805 | |||
| {{sort|0.39|{{increase}} 0.39%}} | |||
|- | |||
| {{sort|0.800|66}} || {{sort|6|{{increase}} (6)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Thailand}} | |||
|| 0.803 || {{sort|0.65|{{increase}} 0.65%}} | |||
|- | |||
| rowspan="2" |67 | |||
|{{sort|-1|{{decrease}} (1)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Seychelles}} | |||
| rowspan="2" |0.802 | |||
|{{sort|0.30|{{increase}} 0.30%}} | |||
|- | |||
|{{sort|-4|{{decrease}} (4)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Kazakhstan}} | |||
|{{sort|0.38|{{increase}} 0.38%}} | |||
|- | |||
|69 | |||
|{{sort|-11|{{decrease}} (11)}} | |||
! style="text-align:left" scope="row" | {{flag|Belarus}} | |||
|0.801 | |||
|{{sort|0.12|{{increase}} 0.12%}} | |||
|} | |||
== Past top countries == | |||
''']''' | |||
The list below displays the top-ranked country from each year of the Human Development Index. Norway has been ranked the highest sixteen times, Canada eight times, and Switzerland, Japan, and Iceland have each ranked twice. | |||
* {{IRQ}} | |||
* {{PRK}} | |||
{{col-break}} | |||
=== In each original HDI === | |||
''']''' | |||
The year represents the time period from which the statistics for the index were derived. In parentheses is the year when the report was published. | |||
* {{AND}} | |||
{{columns-list|colwidth=25em|* 2022 (2024): {{Flagcountry|Switzerland}} | |||
* {{LIE}} | |||
* 2021 (2022): {{Flagcountry|Switzerland}} | |||
* {{MON}} | |||
* 2019 (2020): {{Flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* {{SMR}} | |||
* 2018 (2019): {{Flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* {{VAT}} | |||
* 2017 (2018): {{Flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
{{col-break}} | |||
* 2015 (2016): {{Flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 2014 (2015): {{Flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 2013 (2014): {{Flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 2012 (2013): {{Flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 2011 (2011): {{Flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 2010 (2010): {{Flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 2007 (2009): {{Flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 2006 (2008): {{Flagcountry|Iceland}} | |||
* 2005 (2007): {{Flagcountry|Iceland}} | |||
* 2004 (2006): {{Flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 2003 (2005): {{Flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 2002 (2004): {{Flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 2001 (2003): {{Flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 2000 (2002): {{Flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 1999 (2001): {{Flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 1998 (2000): {{Flagcountry|Canada}} | |||
* 1997 (1999): {{Flagcountry|Canada}} | |||
* 1995 (1998): {{Flagcountry|Canada}} | |||
* 1994 (1997): {{Flagcountry|Canada}} | |||
* 1993 (1996): {{Flagcountry|Canada}} | |||
* 1992 (1995): {{Flagcountry|Canada}} | |||
* 1994 (1994): {{Flagcountry|Canada}} | |||
* 1993 (1993): {{Flagcountry|Japan}} | |||
* 1990 (1992): {{Flagcountry|Canada}} | |||
* 1990 (1991): {{Flagcountry|Japan}} | |||
}} | |||
{{Break}} | |||
== Geographical coverage == | |||
''']''' | |||
The HDI has extended its geographical coverage: David Hastings, of the ], published a report geographically extending the HDI to 230+ economies, whereas the UNDP HDI for 2009 enumerates 182 economies and coverage for the 2010 HDI dropped to 169 countries.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.unescap.org/publications/detail.asp?id=1308 |last=Hastings |first=David A. |year=2009 |title=Filling Gaps in the Human Development Index |work=United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, Working Paper WP/09/02 |access-date=1 December 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110430104401/http://www.unescap.org/publications/detail.asp?id=1308 |archive-date=30 April 2011 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.humansecurityindex.org/?page_id=204 |last=Hastings |first=David A. |year=2011 |title=A "Classic" Human Development Index with 232 Countries |work=HumanSecurityIndex.org |access-date=9 March 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110503210307/http://www.humansecurityindex.org/?page_id=204 |archive-date=3 May 2011 |url-status=live }} Information Note linked to data</ref> | |||
* {{KIR}} | |||
* {{MHL}} | |||
* {{MIC}} | |||
* {{NRU}} | |||
* {{PLW}} | |||
* {{TUV}} | |||
{{col-end}} | |||
==Country/region specific HDI lists== | |||
==2007/2008 report== | |||
{{Div col}} | |||
The report for 2007/2008 was launched in ], ], on ], ]. Its focus was on "Fighting climate change: Human solidarity in a divided world."<ref></ref> Most of the data used for the report are derived largely from 2005 or earlier, thus indicating an HDI for 2005. Not all ] choose to or are able to provide the necessary statistics. | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
*] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
*] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] (] (AHDR)) | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
{{Div col end}} | |||
== Criticism == | |||
The report showed a small increase in world HDI in comparison with last year's report. This rise was fueled by a general improvement in the ], especially of the ] group. This marked improvement at the bottom was offset with a decrease in HDI of ]. | |||
] | |||
The Human Development Index has been criticized on a number of grounds, including focusing exclusively on national performance and ranking, lack of attention to development from a global perspective, measurement error of the underlying statistics, and on the UNDP's changes in formula which can lead to severe misclassification of "low", "medium", "high" or "very high" human development countries.<ref name="Wolff et al. 2011">{{cite journal |last1=Wolff |first1=Hendrik |last2=Chong |first2=Howard |last3=Auffhammer |first3=Maximilian |year=2011 |title=Classification, Detection and Consequences of Data Error: Evidence from the Human Development Index |journal=Economic Journal |volume=121 |issue=553 |pages=843–870 |doi=10.1111/j.1468-0297.2010.02408.x |s2cid=18069132 |url=https://scholarship.sha.cornell.edu/articles/338 |hdl=1813/71597 |hdl-access=free |access-date=13 July 2019 |archive-date=8 August 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200808041651/https://scholarship.sha.cornell.edu/articles/338/ |url-status=live |issn=0013-0133}}</ref> | |||
There have also been various criticism towards the lack of consideration regarding sustainability<ref>{{Cite journal |last=WWF |first=WWF |title=Living Planet Report 2014 |url=http://assets.worldwildlife.org/publications/723/files/original/WWF-LPR2014-low_res.pdf?1413912230 |journal=] |volume=2014 |pages=60–62}}</ref> (which later got addressed by the ]), social inequality<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Harttgen |first1=Kenneth |last2=Klasen |first2=Stephan |date=2012-05-01 |title=A Household-Based Human Development Index |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X11002336 |journal=World Development |volume=40 |issue=5 |pages=878–899 |doi=10.1016/j.worlddev.2011.09.011 |issn=0305-750X|hdl=10419/37505 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> (which got addressed by the ]), ]<ref name="b208"/> or ].<ref name="b208">{{cite journal | last=Leiwakabessy | first=Erly | last2=Amaluddin | first2=Amaluddin | title=A Modified Human Development Index, Democracy And Economic Growth In Indonesia | journal=Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews | volume=8 | issue=2 | date=2 May 2020 | issn=2395-6518 | doi=10.18510/hssr.2020.8282 | pages=732–743| doi-access=free }}</ref> | |||
A HDI below 0.5 is considered to represent "low development". All 22 countries in that category are located in ]. The highest-scoring Sub-Saharan countries, ] and ], are ranked 119th and 121st, respectively. Nine countries departed from this category this year and joined the "medium development" group. | |||
=== Sources of data error === | |||
A HDI of 0.8 or more is considered to represent "high development". This includes all ], such as those in ], ], ], and ], as well as some ] in ], ], ], the ], and the oil-rich ]. Seven countries were promoted to this category this year, leaving the "medium development" group: ], ], ], ], ], ] and ]. | |||
Economists Hendrik Wolff, Howard Chong and ] discuss the HDI from the perspective of data error in the underlying health, education and income statistics used to construct the HDI. They have identified three sources of data error which are: (i) data updating, (ii) formula revisions and (iii) thresholds to classify a country's development status. They conclude that 11%, 21% and 34% of all countries can be interpreted as currently misclassified in the development bins due to the three sources of data error, respectively. Wolff, Chong and Auffhammer suggest that the United Nations should discontinue the practice of classifying countries into development bins because the cut-off values seem arbitrary, and the classifications can provide incentives for strategic behavior in reporting official statistics, as well as having the potential to misguide politicians, investors, charity donors and the public who use the HDI at large.<ref name="Wolff et al. 2011" /> | |||
On the following table, green arrows ({{increase}}) represent an increase in ranking over the previous study, while red arrows ({{decrease}}) represent a decrease in ranking. They are followed by the number of spaces they moved. Blue dashes ({{steady}}) represent a nation that did not move in the rankings since the previous study.{{-}} | |||
{{col-begin}} | |||
{{col-break}} | |||
<ol> | |||
<li> {{ISL}} 0.968 ({{increase}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{NOR}} 0.968 ({{decrease}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{AUS}} 0.962 ({{steady}})</li> | |||
<li> {{CAN}} 0.961 ({{increase}} 2)</li> | |||
<li> {{IRL}} 0.959 ({{decrease}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{SWE}} 0.956 ({{decrease}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{SUI}} 0.955 ({{increase}} 2)</li> | |||
<li> {{JPN}} 0.953 ({{decrease}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{NLD}} 0.953 ({{increase}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{FRA}} 0.952 ({{increase}} 6)</li> | |||
</ol> | |||
{{col-break}} | |||
<ol> | |||
<li value="11"> {{FIN}} 0.952 ({{steady}})</li> | |||
<li> {{USA}} 0.951 ({{decrease}} 4)</li> | |||
<li> {{ESP}} 0.949 ({{increase}} 6)</li> | |||
<li> {{DEN}} 0.949 ({{increase}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{AUT}} 0.948 ({{decrease}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{BEL}} 0.946 ({{decrease}} 4)</li> | |||
<li> {{UK}} 0.946 ({{increase}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{LUX}} 0.944 ({{decrease}} 6)</li> | |||
<li> {{NZL}} 0.943 ({{increase}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{ITA}} 0.941 ({{decrease}} 3)</li> | |||
</ol> | |||
{{col-break}} | |||
<ol> | |||
<li value="21"> {{HKG}} 0.937 ({{increase}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{GER}} 0.935 ({{decrease}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{ISR}} 0.932 ({{steady}})</li> | |||
<li> {{GRC}} 0.926 ({{steady}})</li> | |||
<li> {{SIN}} 0.922 ({{steady}})</li> | |||
<li> {{KOR}} 0.921 ({{steady}})</li> | |||
<li> {{SLO}} 0.917 ({{steady}})</li> | |||
<li> {{CYP}} 0.903 ({{increase}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{POR}} 0.897 ({{decrease}} 1)</li> | |||
<li> {{BRU}} 0.894 ({{increase}} 4)</li> | |||
</ol> | |||
{{col-end}} | |||
==2009 report== | |||
The 2009 report —to be launched in October 2009— will deal with the issue of ].<ref></ref> | |||
==Past top countries== | |||
The list below displays the top-ranked country from each year of the index. ] has been ranked the highest eight times, followed by ] at six times. ] has been ranked highest three times and ] twice. | |||
===In each original report=== | |||
The year represents when the report was published. In parentheses the year for which the index was calculated. | |||
It is important to notice that Norway had the same score as Iceland at their first place. Iceland(0.968), Norway (0.968) | |||
{| | |||
|- style="vertical-align:top;" | |||
| | |||
* 2008 (2006)–{{flagcountry|Iceland}} | |||
* 2007 (2005)–{{flagcountry|Iceland}} | |||
* 2006 (2004)–{{flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 2005 (2003)–{{flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 2004 (2002)–{{flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 2003 (2001)–{{flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 2002 (2000)–{{flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
| width="50px" | | |||
| | |||
* 2001 (1999)–{{flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 2000 (1998)–{{flagcountry|Canada}} | |||
* 1999 (1997)–{{flagcountry|Canada}} | |||
* 1998 (1995)–{{flagcountry|Canada}} | |||
* 1997 (1994)–{{flagcountry|Canada}} | |||
* 1996 (1993)–{{flagcountry|Canada}} | |||
* 1995 (1992)–{{flagcountry|Canada}} | |||
| width="50px" | | |||
| | |||
* 1994 (????)–{{flagcountry|Canada}} | |||
* 1993 (????)–{{flagcountry|Japan}} | |||
* 1992 (1990)–{{flagcountry|Canada}} | |||
* 1991 (1990)–{{flagcountry|Japan}} | |||
* 1990 (????)–{{flagcountry|Japan}} | |||
|} | |||
===2008 revision=== | |||
The 2008 Statistical Update calculated HDIs for past years using a consistent methodology and data series. They are not strictly comparable with those in earlier Human Development Reports. The index was calculated using data pertaining to the year shown. Also here, it is important to notice that Norway had the same score as Iceland at their first place. Iceland (0.968), Norway (0.968)<ref name="2008SU"/> | |||
{| | |||
|- style="vertical-align:top;" | |||
| | |||
* 2006–{{flagcountry|Iceland}} | |||
* 2005–{{flagcountry|Iceland}} | |||
* 2004–{{flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 2003–{{flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 2000–{{flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
| width="50px" | | |||
| | |||
* 1995–{{flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
* 1990–{{flagcountry|Canada}} | |||
* 1985–{{flagcountry|Canada}} | |||
* 1980–{{flagcountry|Norway}} | |||
|} | |||
In 2010, the UNDP reacted to the criticism by updating the thresholds to classify nations as low, medium, and high human development countries. In a comment to '']'' in early January 2011, the Human Development Report Office responded<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.economist.com/user/UNDP%2BHuman%2BDevelopment%2BReport%2BOffice/comments |title=UNDP Human Development Report Office's comments |date=January 2011 |newspaper=The Economist |access-date=12 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110211083547/http://www.economist.com/user/UNDP%2BHuman%2BDevelopment%2BReport%2BOffice/comments |archive-date=11 February 2011 |url-status=dead }}</ref> to an article published in the magazine on 6 January 2011<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.economist.com/node/17849159?story_id=17849159 |title=The Economist (pages 60–61 in the issue of Jan 8, 2011) |date=6 January 2011 |access-date=12 January 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110113063006/http://www.economist.com/node/17849159?story_id=17849159 |archive-date=13 January 2011 |url-status=live }}</ref> which discusses the Wolff ''et al.'' paper. The Human Development Report Office states that they undertook a systematic revision of the methods used for the calculation of the HDI, and that the new methodology directly addresses the critique by Wolff ''et al.'' in that it generates a system for continuously updating the human-development categories whenever formula or data revisions take place. | |||
==Criticisms== | |||
The Human Development Index has been criticized on a number of grounds, including failure to include any ] considerations, focusing exclusively on national performance and ranking, and not paying much attention to development from a global perspective. Two authors claimed that the human development reports "have lost touch with their original vision and the index fails to capture the essence of the world it seeks to portray".<ref>.</ref> The index has also been criticized as "redundant" and a "reinvention of the wheel", measuring aspects of development that have already been exhaustively studied.<ref>McGillivray, Mark, "The human development index: yet another redundant composite development indicator?", ''World Development'', Vol. 19, No. 10, pp. 1461-1468, Oct. 1991.</ref><ref></ref> The index has further been criticized for having an inappropriate treatment of income, lacking year-to-year comparability, and assessing development differently in different groups of countries.<ref></ref> | |||
In 2013, Salvatore Monni and Alessandro Spaventa emphasized that in the debate of GDP versus HDI, it is often forgotten that these are both external indicators that prioritize different benchmarks upon which the quantification of societal welfare can be predicated. The larger question is whether it is possible to shift the focus of policy from a battle between competing paradigms to a mechanism for eliciting information on well-being directly from the population.<ref name="Monni and Spaventa, 2013">{{cite journal |last1=Monni |first1=Salvatore |last2=Spaventa |first2=Alessandro |year=2013 |title=Beyond Gdp and HDI: Shifting the focus from Paradigms to Politics |journal=Development |volume=56 |issue=2 |pages=227–231 |doi=10.1057/dev.2013.30 |s2cid=84722678 }}</ref> | |||
Some authors have proposed alternative indices to address some of the index's shortcomings.<ref></ref> | |||
== See also == | |||
] ] has criticized the way scores in each of the three components are bounded between zero and one, so rich countries effectively cannot improve their ranking in certain categories, even though there is a lot of scope for economic growth and longevity left, "This effectively means that a country of immortals with infinite per-capita GDP would get a score of .666 (lower than South Africa and Tajikistan) if its population were illiterate and never went to school."<ref>http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2009/05/against_the_hum.html#comments</ref> Scandinavian countries consistently come out top on the list, because, he argues, "because the HDI is basically a measure of how Scandinavian your country is."<ref>http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2009/05/against_the_hum.html#comments</ref> | |||
{{portal|Modern history|World}} | |||
* ] | |||
==References== | |||
* ] | |||
{{reflist}} | |||
* ] (BLI) | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] (SDGs) | |||
== |
== References == | ||
{{Reflist}} | |||
{{Portal|Sustainable development|Sustainable development.svg}} | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
* ] | |||
== External links == | == External links == | ||
{{commons category|Human Development Index}} | |||
* | * | ||
* | * | ||
* {{PDFlink||5.54 MB}} | |||
* | |||
* | |||
* by Dalton Conley, ''The Nation'', March 4 2009 | |||
{{Global economic classifications}} | |||
{{Population country lists}} | |||
{{Lists of countries}} | |||
{{Quality of life country lists}} | |||
{{Deprivation Indicators}} | |||
{{Authority control}} | |||
] | ] | ||
] | ] | ||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] | |||
] |
Latest revision as of 02:41, 28 December 2024
Composite statistic of life expectancy, education, and income indices "HDI" redirects here. For other uses, see HDI (disambiguation). For the complete ranking of countries, see List of countries by Human Development Index.
The Human Development Index (HDI) is a statistical composite index of life expectancy, education (mean years of schooling completed and expected years of schooling upon entering the education system), and per capita income indicators, which is used to rank countries into four tiers of human development. A country scores a higher level of HDI when the lifespan is higher, the education level is higher, and the gross national income GNI (PPP) per capita is higher. It was developed by Pakistani economist Mahbub ul-Haq and was further used to measure a country's development by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP)'s Human Development Report Office.
The 2010 Human Development Report introduced an inequality-adjusted Human Development Index (IHDI). While the simple HDI remains useful, it stated that "the IHDI is the actual level of human development (accounting for this inequality), while the HDI can be viewed as an index of 'potential' human development (or the maximum level of HDI) that could be achieved if there was no inequality."
The index is based on the human development approach, developed by Mahbub ul-Haq, anchored in Amartya Sen's work on human capabilities, and often framed in terms of whether people are able to "be" and "do" desirable things in life. Examples include — being: well-fed, sheltered, and healthy; doing: work, education, voting, participating in community life. The freedom of choice is considered central — someone choosing to be hungry (e.g. when fasting for religious reasons) is considered different from someone who is hungry because they cannot afford to buy food, or because the country is going through a famine.
The index does not take into account several factors, such as the net wealth per capita or the relative quality of goods in a country. This situation tends to lower the ranking of some of the most developed countries, such as the G7 members and others.
Origins
The origins of the HDI are found in the annual Human Development Reports produced by the Human Development Report Office of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). These annual reports were devised and launched by Pakistani economist Mahbub ul-Haq in 1990, and had the explicit purpose "to shift the focus of development economics from national income accounting to people-centered policies". He believed that a simple composite measure of human development was needed to convince the public, academics and politicians that they can, and should, evaluate development not only by economic advances but also improvements in human well-being.
Dimensions and calculation
New method (2010 HDI onwards)
World OECD countries | Developing countries: Arab States East Asia and the Pacific Europe and Central Asia Latin America and the Caribbean South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa |
Published on 4 November 2010 (and updated on 10 June 2011), the 2010 Human Development Report calculated the HDI combining three dimensions:
- A long and healthy life: Life expectancy at birth
- Education: Mean years of schooling and expected years of schooling
- A decent standard of living: GNI per capita (PPP international dollars)
In its 2010 Human Development Report, the UNDP began using a new method of calculating the HDI. The following three indices are used:
1. Life Expectancy Index (LEI)
- LEI is equal to 1 when life expectancy at birth is 85 years, and 0 when life expectancy at birth is 20 years.
2. Education Index (EI)
- 2.1 Mean Years of Schooling Index (MYSI)
- Fifteen is the projected maximum of this indicator for 2025.
- 2.2 Expected Years of Schooling Index (EYSI)
- Eighteen is equivalent to achieving a master's degree in most countries.
3. Income Index (II)
- II is 1 when GNI per capita is $75,000 and 0 when GNI per capita is $100.
Finally, the HDI is the geometric mean of the previous three normalized indices:
LE: Life expectancy at birth
MYS: Mean years of schooling (i.e. years that a person aged 25 or older has spent in formal education)
EYS: Expected years of schooling (i.e. total expected years of schooling for children under 18 years of age, incl. young men and women aged 13–17)
GNIpc: Gross national income at purchasing power parity per capita
Old method (HDI before 2010)
The HDI combined three dimensions last used in its 2009 report:
- Life expectancy at birth, as an index of population health and longevity to HDI
- Knowledge and education, as measured by the adult literacy rate (with two-thirds weighting) and the combined primary, secondary, and tertiary gross enrollment ratio (with one-third weighting).
- Standard of living, as indicated by the natural logarithm of gross domestic product per capita at purchasing power parity.
OECD Europe (not in the OECD), and CIS Latin America and the Caribbean East Asia | Arab League South Asia Sub-Saharan Africa |
This methodology was used by the UNDP until their 2011 report.
The formula defining the HDI is promulgated by the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). In general, to transform a raw variable, say , into a unit-free index between 0 and 1 (which allows different indices to be added together), the following formula is used:
where and are the lowest and highest values the variable can attain, respectively.
The Human Development Index (HDI) then represents the uniformly weighted sum with 1⁄3 contributed by each of the following factor indices:
2022 Human Development Index (2024 report)
Main article: List of countries by Human Development Index See also: List of countries by inequality-adjusted Human Development IndexThe Human Development Report 2023/24 by the United Nations Development Programme was released on 13 March 2024; the report calculates HDI values based on data collected in 2022.
Ranked from 1 to 69 in the year 2022, the following countries are considered to be of "very high human development":
Rank | Nation | HDI | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
2022 data (2024 report) | Change since 2015 | 2022 data (2024 report) | Average annual growth (2010–2022) | |
1 | Switzerland | 0.967 | 0.24% | |
2 | (1) | Norway | 0.966 | 0.25% |
3 | Iceland | 0.959 | 0.28% | |
4 | (2) | Hong Kong | 0.956 | 0.38% |
5 | (1) | Denmark | 0.952 | 0.35% |
Sweden | 0.38% | |||
7 | (8) | Ireland | 0.950 | 0.38% |
(3) | Germany | 0.19% | ||
9 | (1) | Singapore | 0.949 | 0.25% |
10 | (1) | Netherlands | 0.946 | 0.26% |
(1) | Australia | 0.20% | ||
12 | (2) | Liechtenstein | 0.942 | 0.23% |
(3) | Belgium | 0.26% | ||
Finland | 0.27% | |||
15 | (3) | United Kingdom | 0.940 | 0.24% |
16 | (7) | New Zealand | 0.939 | 0.13% |
17 | (19) | United Arab Emirates | 0.937 | 1.04% |
18 | (5) | Canada | 0.935 | 0.22% |
19 | (3) | South Korea | 0.929 | 0.36% |
20 | (5) | United States | 0.927 | 0.10% |
(1) | Luxembourg | 0.14% | ||
22 | (1) | Slovenia | 0.926 | 0.33% |
(1) | Austria | 0.21% | ||
24 | (4) | Japan | 0.920 | 0.16% |
25 | (1) | Israel | 0.915 | 0.26% |
(3) | Malta | 0.50% | ||
27 | Spain | 0.911 | 0.40% | |
28 | (3) | France | 0.910 | 0.28% |
29 | (3) | Cyprus | 0.907 | 0.45% |
30 | Italy | 0.906 | 0.24% | |
31 | (2) | Estonia | 0.899 | 0.33% |
32 | (6) | Czechia | 0.895 | 0.22% |
33 | (3) | Greece | 0.893 | 0.18% |
34 | (3) | Bahrain | 0.888 | 0.80% |
35 | (3) | Andorra | 0.884 | 0.20% |
36 | (2) | Poland | 0.881 | 0.35% |
37 | (2) | Latvia | 0.879 | 0.51% |
(2) | Lithuania | 0.32% | ||
39 | (6) | Croatia | 0.878 | 0.53% |
40 | Qatar | 0.875 | 0.45% | |
(6) | Saudi Arabia | 0.70% | ||
42 | Portugal | 0.874 | 0.42% | |
43 | (10) | San Marino | 0.867 | 0.32% |
44 | Chile | 0.860 | 0.47% | |
45 | (9) | Turkey | 0.855 | 1.10% |
(5) | Slovakia | 0.14% | ||
47 | Hungary | 0.851 | 0.22% | |
48 | (6) | Argentina | 0.849 | 0.15% |
49 | Kuwait | 0.847 | 0.36% | |
50 | (1) | Montenegro | 0.844 | 0.38% |
51 | (2) | Saint Kitts and Nevis | 0.838 | 0.49% |
52 | (8) | Uruguay | 0.830 | 0.47% |
53 | (3) | Romania | 0.827 | 0.14% |
54 | (1) | Antigua and Barbuda | 0.826 | 0.18% |
55 | (7) | Brunei | 0.823 | 0.02% |
56 | (3) | Russia | 0.821 | 0.25% |
57 | (3) | Bahamas | 0.820 | 0.21% |
(5) | Panama | 0.47% | ||
59 | (7) | Oman | 0.819 | 0.22% |
60 | (3) | Trinidad and Tobago | 0.814 | 0.30% |
(4) | Georgia | 0.54% | ||
62 | (2) | Barbados | 0.809 | 0.18% |
63 | (6) | Malaysia | 0.807 | 0.41% |
64 | (5) | Costa Rica | 0.806 | 0.39% |
65 | (3) | Serbia | 0.805 | 0.39% |
66 | (6) | Thailand | 0.803 | 0.65% |
67 | (1) | Seychelles | 0.802 | 0.30% |
(4) | Kazakhstan | 0.38% | ||
69 | (11) | Belarus | 0.801 | 0.12% |
Past top countries
The list below displays the top-ranked country from each year of the Human Development Index. Norway has been ranked the highest sixteen times, Canada eight times, and Switzerland, Japan, and Iceland have each ranked twice.
In each original HDI
The year represents the time period from which the statistics for the index were derived. In parentheses is the year when the report was published.
- 2022 (2024): Switzerland
- 2021 (2022): Switzerland
- 2019 (2020): Norway
- 2018 (2019): Norway
- 2017 (2018): Norway
- 2015 (2016): Norway
- 2014 (2015): Norway
- 2013 (2014): Norway
- 2012 (2013): Norway
- 2011 (2011): Norway
- 2010 (2010): Norway
- 2007 (2009): Norway
- 2006 (2008): Iceland
- 2005 (2007): Iceland
- 2004 (2006): Norway
- 2003 (2005): Norway
- 2002 (2004): Norway
- 2001 (2003): Norway
- 2000 (2002): Norway
- 1999 (2001): Norway
- 1998 (2000): Canada
- 1997 (1999): Canada
- 1995 (1998): Canada
- 1994 (1997): Canada
- 1993 (1996): Canada
- 1992 (1995): Canada
- 1994 (1994): Canada
- 1993 (1993): Japan
- 1990 (1992): Canada
- 1990 (1991): Japan
Geographical coverage
The HDI has extended its geographical coverage: David Hastings, of the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, published a report geographically extending the HDI to 230+ economies, whereas the UNDP HDI for 2009 enumerates 182 economies and coverage for the 2010 HDI dropped to 169 countries.
Country/region specific HDI lists
- Afghan regions
- Angolan provinces
- African countries
- Albanian counties
- Algerian regions
- Argentine provinces
- Armenian provinces
- Australian states
- Austrian states
- Azerbaijani regions
- Baltic regions
- Bangladeshi districts and divisions
- Belgian provinces
- Bolivian departments
- Bosnia and Herzegovina regions
- Brazilian states
- Canadian provinces and territories
- Chilean regions
- Chinese administrative divisions
- Colombian departments
- Croatian counties
- Danish regions
- Dutch provinces
- Egyptian governorates
- Ethiopian regions
- European countries
- Finnish regions
- French regions
- German states
- Georgian regions
- Greek regions
- Indian states
- Tamil Nadu districts (India)
- Indonesian provinces
- Iranian provinces
- Iraqi governorates
- Italian regions
- Kazakhstan regions
- Japanese prefectures
- Latin American countries
- Malaysian states
- Mexican states
- Myanmar administrative divisions
- Nepalese provinces
- New Zealand regions
- Nigerian states
- Norwegian regions
- Pakistani administrative units
- Philippine provinces
- Palestinian regions
- Polish voivodeships
- Romanian regions
- Russian federal subjects
- Serbian Regions
- South African provinces
- South Korean regions
- Spanish communities
- Swedish regions
- Syrian governorates
- Swiss regions
- Thai regions
- Turkish regions
- UK regions
- Ukrainian regions
- U.S. states (American Human Development Report (AHDR))
- Venezuelan states
- Vietnamese regions
Criticism
The Human Development Index has been criticized on a number of grounds, including focusing exclusively on national performance and ranking, lack of attention to development from a global perspective, measurement error of the underlying statistics, and on the UNDP's changes in formula which can lead to severe misclassification of "low", "medium", "high" or "very high" human development countries.
There have also been various criticism towards the lack of consideration regarding sustainability (which later got addressed by the planetary pressures-adjusted HDI), social inequality (which got addressed by the inequality-adjusted HDI), unemployment or democracy.
Sources of data error
Economists Hendrik Wolff, Howard Chong and Maximilian Auffhammer discuss the HDI from the perspective of data error in the underlying health, education and income statistics used to construct the HDI. They have identified three sources of data error which are: (i) data updating, (ii) formula revisions and (iii) thresholds to classify a country's development status. They conclude that 11%, 21% and 34% of all countries can be interpreted as currently misclassified in the development bins due to the three sources of data error, respectively. Wolff, Chong and Auffhammer suggest that the United Nations should discontinue the practice of classifying countries into development bins because the cut-off values seem arbitrary, and the classifications can provide incentives for strategic behavior in reporting official statistics, as well as having the potential to misguide politicians, investors, charity donors and the public who use the HDI at large.
In 2010, the UNDP reacted to the criticism by updating the thresholds to classify nations as low, medium, and high human development countries. In a comment to The Economist in early January 2011, the Human Development Report Office responded to an article published in the magazine on 6 January 2011 which discusses the Wolff et al. paper. The Human Development Report Office states that they undertook a systematic revision of the methods used for the calculation of the HDI, and that the new methodology directly addresses the critique by Wolff et al. in that it generates a system for continuously updating the human-development categories whenever formula or data revisions take place.
In 2013, Salvatore Monni and Alessandro Spaventa emphasized that in the debate of GDP versus HDI, it is often forgotten that these are both external indicators that prioritize different benchmarks upon which the quantification of societal welfare can be predicated. The larger question is whether it is possible to shift the focus of policy from a battle between competing paradigms to a mechanism for eliciting information on well-being directly from the population.
See also
- Corruption Perceptions Index
- Gender Inequality Index
- OECD Better Life Index (BLI)
- World Happiness Report
- International development
- List of sovereign states by percentage of population living in poverty
- Right to an adequate standard of living
- Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
References
- A. Stanton, Elizabeth (February 2007). "The Human Development Index: A History". PERI Working Papers. ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst: 14–15. Archived from the original on 28 February 2019. Retrieved 28 February 2019.
- "Human Development Index". Definition of 'Human Development Index'. Archived from the original on 1 December 2017. Retrieved 29 November 2017.
- "About Human Development". HDR. UNDP. Archived from the original on 15 April 2012. Retrieved 29 July 2011.
- "Human development index". World Health Organization. Archived from the original on 3 January 2022. Retrieved 26 June 2024.
- "Composite indices — HDI and beyond". Human Development Reports. Archived from the original on 10 August 2016. Retrieved 16 January 2021.
- ^ "What is Human Development". HDR. UNDP. 19 February 2015. Archived from the original on 27 October 2017. Retrieved 27 October 2017.
... human development approach, developed by the economist Mahbub Ul Haq ...
- The Courier. Commission of the European Communities. 1994.
- Nations, United (4 November 2010). "Human Development Report 2010". UNDP. Archived from the original on 22 December 2015. Retrieved 15 December 2015.
- "Technical notes" (PDF). UNDP. 2013. Archived (PDF) from the original on 16 June 2015. Retrieved 15 December 2015.
- "New method of calculation of Human Development Index (HDI)". India Study Channel. 1 June 2011. Archived from the original on 10 November 2017. Retrieved 19 November 2017.
- Mean years of schooling (of adults) (years) is a calculation of the average number of years of education received by people ages 25 and older in their lifetime based on education attainment levels of the population converted into years of schooling based on theoretical duration of each level of education attended. Source: Barro, R. J.; Lee, J.-W. (2010). "A New Data Set of Educational Attainment in the World, 1950–2010". NBER Working Paper No. 15902. Working Paper Series. doi:10.3386/w15902. Archived from the original on 7 August 2011. Retrieved 29 July 2011.
- (ESYI is a calculation of the number of years a child is expected to attend school, or university, including the years spent on repetition. It is the sum of the age-specific enrollment ratios for primary, secondary, post-secondary non-tertiary and tertiary education and is calculated assuming the prevailing patterns of age-specific enrollment rates were to stay the same throughout the child's life. Expected years of schooling is capped at 18 years. (Source: UNESCO Institute for Statistics (2010). Correspondence on education indicators. March. Montreal.)
- "Definition, Calculator, etc. at UNDP site". Archived from the original on 20 December 2007. Retrieved 26 May 2020.
- ^ Human Development Report 2023-24: Breaking the gridlock: Reimagining cooperation in a polarized world. United Nations Development Programme. 13 March 2024. Retrieved 16 March 2024.
- Hastings, David A. (2009). "Filling Gaps in the Human Development Index". United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific, Working Paper WP/09/02. Archived from the original on 30 April 2011. Retrieved 1 December 2009.
- Hastings, David A. (2011). "A "Classic" Human Development Index with 232 Countries". HumanSecurityIndex.org. Archived from the original on 3 May 2011. Retrieved 9 March 2011. Information Note linked to data
- ^ Wolff, Hendrik; Chong, Howard; Auffhammer, Maximilian (2011). "Classification, Detection and Consequences of Data Error: Evidence from the Human Development Index". Economic Journal. 121 (553): 843–870. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0297.2010.02408.x. hdl:1813/71597. ISSN 0013-0133. S2CID 18069132. Archived from the original on 8 August 2020. Retrieved 13 July 2019.
- WWF, WWF. "Living Planet Report 2014" (PDF). Living Planet Report. 2014: 60–62.
- Harttgen, Kenneth; Klasen, Stephan (1 May 2012). "A Household-Based Human Development Index". World Development. 40 (5): 878–899. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2011.09.011. hdl:10419/37505. ISSN 0305-750X.
- ^ Leiwakabessy, Erly; Amaluddin, Amaluddin (2 May 2020). "A Modified Human Development Index, Democracy And Economic Growth In Indonesia". Humanities & Social Sciences Reviews. 8 (2): 732–743. doi:10.18510/hssr.2020.8282. ISSN 2395-6518.
- "UNDP Human Development Report Office's comments". The Economist. January 2011. Archived from the original on 11 February 2011. Retrieved 12 January 2011.
- "The Economist (pages 60–61 in the issue of Jan 8, 2011)". 6 January 2011. Archived from the original on 13 January 2011. Retrieved 12 January 2011.
- Monni, Salvatore; Spaventa, Alessandro (2013). "Beyond Gdp and HDI: Shifting the focus from Paradigms to Politics". Development. 56 (2): 227–231. doi:10.1057/dev.2013.30. S2CID 84722678.
External links
Economic classification of countries | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Three/Four-World Model | |||||
Gross domestic product (GDP) |
| ||||
Gross national income (GNI) | |||||
Wages | |||||
Wealth | |||||
Other national accounts | |||||
Human development | |||||
Digital divide | |||||
Net international investment position (NIIP) | |||||
Deprivation and poverty indicators | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Social | |||||
Psychological |
| ||||
Economic |
| ||||
Physical |
| ||||
Complex measures | |||||
Gender |
| ||||
Other | Categories: Income inequality metrics · Measurements and definitions of poverty · Social responsibility organizations | ||||
Commons categories: Information graphics about poverty · Poverty-related maps |