Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Some Considerations on Well-Being Evaluation Procedures, Taking the Cue from “Exploring Multidimensional Well-Being in Switzerland: Comparing Three Synthesizing Approaches”

  • Published:
Social Indicators Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this short paper, we outline some considerations on three different procedures for the statistical evaluation of multidimensional well-being, taking the cue from a recent paper of Iglesias et al. There, the authors apply and compare Confirmatory Factor Analysis, the Alkire–Foster counting approach and the Partial Order Approach on real data, pointing out limitations and potentialities of each procedure. To deepen, and partially correct, some of their (albeit interesting) remarks, here we review the fundamental features of those approaches, so as to shed light on their structural differences and to show that they move from, and may lead to, alternative views on well-being.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. More generally, there are also partial order approaches where no benchmarks are introduced (see Bruggemann and Patil 2011; Fattore 2008).

  2. Here, k is the number of attributes considered in the evaluation exercise.

  3. Here, we refer to CFA in general, not to specific ways to estimate scores, like that used in Iglesias’s paper.

  4. The achievement poset is the set of the achievement profiles, partially ordered in such a way that if profile a has “better” scores than profile b on the same attributes, than a is globally “better” than b (see Fattore (2016) for details).

References

  • Alkire, S., & Foster, J. (2011). Counting and multidimensional poverty measurement. Journal of Public Economics, 95(7–8), 476–487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alkire, S., & Foster, J. (2011). Understandings and misunderstandings of multidimensional poverty measurement. Journal of Economic Inequality, 9(2), 289–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bubley, R., & Dyer, M. (1999). Faster random generation of linear extensions. Discrete Mathematics, 201, 81–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruggemann, R., & Patil, G. P. (2011). Ranking and prioritization for multi-indicator systems. New York: Springer-Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bruggemann, R., Restrepo, G., Voigt, K., & Annoni, P. (2013). Weighting intervals and ranking. Exemplified by leaching potential of pesticides. MATCH Communications in Mathematical and in Computer Chemistry, 69, 413–432.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruggemann, R., & Carlsen, L. (2017). Incomparable: What now, IV. Incomparabilities: A Modelling challenge. In M. Fattore & R. Bruggemann (Eds.), Partial order concepts in applied sciences (pp. 35–47). Cham, Switzerland: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Fattore, M. (2008). Hasse diagrams, poset theory and fuzzy poverty measures, Rivista Internazionale di Scienze Sociali 1/2008.

  • Fattore, M., Maggino, F., & Greselin, F. (2011). Socio-economic evaluation with ordinal variables: Integrsting counting and poset approaches. Statistica & applicazioni, Special Issue 2011, 31–42.

  • Fattore, M., & Maggino, F. (2014). Partial orders in socio-economics: A practical challenge for poset theorists or a cultural challenge for social scientists? In R. Bruggemann, L. Carlsen, & J. Wittmann (Eds.), Multi-indicator systems and modelling in partial order. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fattore, M. (2016). Partially ordered sets and the measurement of multidimensional ordinal deprivation. Social Indicators Research, 128(2), 835–858.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fattore, M., & Arcagni, A. (2016). A reduced posetic approach to the measurement of multidimensional ordinal deprivation. Social Indicators Research. doi:10.1007/s11205-016-1501-4.

  • Iglesias, K., Suter, C., Beycan, T., & Vani, B. P. (2016). Exploring multidimensional well-being in Switzerland. Social Indicators Research. doi:10.1007/s11205-016-1452-9.

  • Madden, D. (2010). Ordinal and cardinal measures of health inequality: An empirical comparison. Health Economics, 19, 243–250.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schoenemann, P. H., & Steiger, J. H. (1978). On the validity of indeterminate factor scores. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 12(4), 287–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy

    Marco Fattore

  2. University of Rome - Sapienza, Rome, Italy

    Filomena Maggino

Authors
  1. Marco Fattore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Filomena Maggino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marco Fattore.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fattore, M., Maggino, F. Some Considerations on Well-Being Evaluation Procedures, Taking the Cue from “Exploring Multidimensional Well-Being in Switzerland: Comparing Three Synthesizing Approaches”. Soc Indic Res 137, 83–91 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1634-0

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1634-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation