Weights in Multidimensional Indices of Wellbeing: An Overview

By Koen Decancq, Maria Ana Lugo. 2013

824 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/63e2b88848b7da2c32403479f32a6dd4de282857

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

On the Methodological Framework of Composite Indices: A Review of the Issues of Weighting, Aggregation, and Robustness (2018, background): “…a lack of theoretical structure to justify a differential weighting scheme, (3) no agreement between decision makers, (4) inadequate statistical and/or empirical knowledge, and, finally, (5) alleged objectivity (see Freudenberg 2003; OECD 2008; Maggino and Ruviglioni 2009; Decancq and Lugo 2013).”
Multidimensional Poverty Analysis : Looking for a Middle Ground (2012, neutral): “There are various approaches to setting these weights; some are based exclusively on the observed distribution of attributes, others are based on people’s opinions, and others use both sorts of information (Decancq and Lugo, 2013).”
Dynamics of Multidimensional Poverty and Uni-dimensional Income Poverty: An Evidence of Stability Analysis from China (2019, background): “As Decancq and Lugo (2013) argue, there are advantages and disadvantages in using each weighting structure.”
Stochastic multi-attribute acceptability analysis (SMAA): an application to the ranking of Italian regions (2018, background): “These have been conceptually criticized for being disoriented from the objective at hand, or that they provide non-reasonable weight vectors (Decancq and Lugo, 2013), while at the same time they have a few methodology-related drawbacks that need to be addressed (Greco et al.”
Measurement of Regional Green Economy Sustainable Development Ability Based on Entropy Weight-Topsis-Coupling Coordination Degree—A Case Study in Shandong Province, China (2019, neutral): “[31] summarized eight methods for setting indicator weights and highlight their strengths and weaknesses.”
Multidimensional Poverty and Material Deprivation with Discrete Data (2013, neutral): “A survey on the use of weights in multidimensional indices of well-being can be found in Decancq and Lugo (2011).”
Understandings and misunderstandings of multidimensional poverty measurement (2011, neutral): “20 On the choice of dimensions see Alkire [1, 2]; on the choice of weights see Decancq and Lugo [ 25 ], Alkire [3]; on the choice of poverty cutoffs see Alkire and Foster [7].”
Multidimensional poverty and inequality (2014, neutral): “It is generally tackled by employing procedures of standardization that, for instance, transform the original variable by taking its (normalised) distance from benchmark values (for some examples of these transformations, see Decancq and Lugo, 2013, p. 12).”