Skip to main content

Multidimensional Almost Dominance: Child Wellbeing in Egypt

Abstract

A major drawback of First Order Stochastic Dominance approach is dominance indetermination. Levy and Leshno in 2002 suggested Almost Stochastic Dominance as a remedy in the uni-dimensional case. We introduce a Generalization of Almost First and second Order Dominance (MAFOD and MASOD) to the multidimensional case with application on child wellbeing in Egypt. We perform a multidimensional (FOD) analysis on seven deprivation indicators for three age-groups of children from Egypt 2014 Demographic and Health Survey (EDHS14). This methodology allows the ordinal ranking of regions and governorates of Egypt in terms of their children wellbeing based on their probability of domination. To solve the dominance indetermination we apply MAFOD and MASOD.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Notes

  1. The human poverty index measures deprivation in basic human development in the same dimensions as the HDI. HDI measures basic achievements in three dimensions: health, education and living standards. While the HPI measures deprivations in these three dimensions (UlHaq 2003; UNDP 1997).

  2. If dimensions are substitutes the marginal utility of one attribute decreases as the quantity of the other increases. If attributes are complements, an increase in the amount of one raises the marginal utility of the other (Njong 2010).

  3. The Bristol indicators were originally developed by a team at the University of Bristol and presented in the report “The Distribution of Child Poverty in the Developing World”. These indicators are based on the “deprivation approach” to poverty (Gordon et al. 2003).

  4. Net domination is the difference between row and column mean domination.

  5. Unpublished.

  6. Could be provided upon request.

  7. Results for the other two age-groups could be provided upon request.

References

  • Alkire, S., & Santos, M. E. (2010). Acute Multidimensional poverty: A new index for developing countries. OPHI working paper 38, Oxford University.

  • Arndt, C., Distante, R., Hussain, M. A., Østerdal, L. P., Huong, P. L., & Ibraimo, M. (2011). Ordinal welfare comparisons with multiple discrete indicators: A first order dominance approach and application to child poverty. World Development, 40, 2290–2301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, A. B. (1970). On the measurement of inequality. Journal of Economic Theory, 2(3), 244–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, A. B. (1987). On the measurement of poverty. Econometrica, 55(4), 749–764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atkinson, A. B., & Bourguignon, F. (1982). The comparison of multi-dimensioned distributions of economic status. Review of Economic Studies, 49(2), 183–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bibi, S. (2004). Comparing Multidimensional Poverty between Egypt and Tunisia. In CIRPEE working paper number 0416, the annual conference of the center for the study of African economies. University of Oxford. http://www.cirpee.org/fileadmin/documents/Cahiers_2004/CIRPEE04-16.pdf.

  • Duclos, J. Y., Sahn, D. E., & Younger, S. D. (2006). Robust multidimensional poverty comparisons. The Economic Journal, 116(514), 943–968.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • El Laithy, H., & Armanious, D. Towards a new definition of child poverty indicators in Egypt (sensitivity analysis) (unpublished).

  • Elton, E., Gruber, M., Brown, S., & Goetzmann, W. (2003). Modern portfolio theory and investment analysis (6th ed.). New Jersey: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, D., Nandy, S., Pantazis, C., Pemberton, S., & Townsend, P. (2003). The distribution of poverty in the developing world. Report to UNICEF, University of Bristol, UK, Centre for International Poverty Research.

  • Hadar, J., & Russell, W. (1969). Rules for ordering uncertain prospects. American Economic Review, 59, 25–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kohler, U., & Luniak, M. (2005). Data inspection using biplots. The STATA Journal, 5(2), 208–223.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leshno, M., & Levy, H. (2002). Preferred by all” and preferred by “most” decision makers: Almost stochastic dominance. Management Science, 48, 1074–1085.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy, M. (2012). Almost stochastic dominance and efficient investment sets. American Journal of Operations Research, 2, 313–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipkovich, I., & Smith, E. P. (2002). Biplot and singular value decomposition macros for Excel. Journal of Statistical Software, 7(5), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mabughi, N., & Selim, T. (2006). Poverty as social deprivation: A survey. Review of Social Economy, 64(2), 181–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of Health and Population [Egypt], El-Zanaty and Associates [Egypt], and ICF International. (2014). Egypt demographic and health survey 2014. Retrieved from http://www.dhsprogram.com/data/available-datasets.cfm.

  • Nanivazo, M. (2015). First order dominance analysis: Child wellbeing in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Social Indicators Research, 122, 235–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Njong, A. M. (2010), Multidimensional spatial poverty comparisons in Cameroon. In African Economic Research Consortium (AERC), Nairobi, Research Paper 198.

  • Smith, W. F., Jr., & Cornell, J. A. (1993). Biplot displays for looking at multiple response data in mixture experiments. Technometrics, 35(4), 337–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A., & Townsend, B. P. (1965). “The poor and the poorest”, a new analysis of the ministry of labour’s family expenditure surveys of 1953–54 and 1960 (p. 2). London: G. Bell& Sons Ltd., York House.

    Google Scholar 

  • UlHaq, M. (2003). The birth of the human development index. In Readings in human development (pp. 127–137). Oxford University Press.

  • UNDP (United Nation Development Programme) (1997). Egypt human development report.

  • Verme, P., Milanovic, B., Al-Shawarby, S., El-Tawila, S., Gadallah, M., & El-Majeed, E. A. (2014). Inside inequality in the Arab Republic of Egypt: Facts and perceptions across people, time, and space. Washington, DC: World Bank Studies, World Bank.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. R. Zahran.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

El Sayed, T., Zahran, A.R. Multidimensional Almost Dominance: Child Wellbeing in Egypt. Soc Indic Res 136, 283–304 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-016-1541-9

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-016-1541-9

Keywords

  • Stochastic dominance
  • Multidimensional poverty
  • Wellbeing indicators
  • MAFOD
  • MASOD