Вот тоже интересная таблица для сравнения. http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/
Если кликнуть на страну, то можно видеть сравниваемые показатели.
Вот тоже интересная таблица для сравнения. http://hdr.undp.org/en/statistics/
Если кликнуть на страну, то можно видеть сравниваемые показатели.
Да, интересная статистика.
Любопытно было бы посмотреть динамику развития индекса HDI (Human Development Index) для России за последние, скажем, 10 лет.
Это бы и показало бы на цифрах, в какой динамике (положительной или отрицательной) Россия находится в последнее десятилетие, по отношению к другим странам.
Собственно, это и было бы ответом на вопрос в теме.
К сожалению, я пока не понял, как эту информацию там посмотреть.
Да расслоение общества растет, показатель называется Gini-index. Скоро по расслоению общества на бедных и богатых догоним США
https://www.cia.gov/library/publicat...elds/2172.html .
Да, уже нашел динамику развития HDI для России за последние 40 лет начиная с 1970 года.
Сильный спад начал происходить на уровне примерно 1990 года (до этого рос неплохо), когда индекс составил 0.761.
Сейчас 20 лет спустя он на уровне 0.766.
Китай за период с 1970 года развивается стремительно вверх.
Их HDI индекс вырос за это время с 0.349 до 0.718, то есть практически в два раза, но при этом они отстают от Росии.
Они на 75 месте в мире.
The Human Development Index has been criticised on a number of grounds, including failure to include any ecological 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".[12] The index has also been criticized as "redundant" and a "reinvention of the wheel", measuring aspects of development that have already been exhaustively studied.[13][14] The index has further been criticised for having an inappropriate treatment of income, lacking year-to-year comparability, and assessing development differently in different groups of countries.[15]
Economist Bryan Caplan has criticised the way HDI scores are produced; each of the three components are bounded between zero and one. As a result of that, 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."[16] He argues, "Scandinavia comes out on top according to the HDI because the HDI is basically a measure of how Scandinavian your country is."[16]
The following are common criticisms directed at the HDI: that it is a redundant measure that adds little to the value of the individual measures composing it; that it is a means to provide legitimacy to arbitrary weightings of a few aspects of social development; that it is a number producing a relative ranking which is useless for inter-temporal comparisons, and difficult to compare a country's progress or regression since 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.[17][18][19][20] However, each year, UN member states are listed and ranked 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 quality of life.[21]
Ratan Lal Basu criticises the HDI concept from a completely different angle. According to him the Amartya Sen-Mahbub ul Haq concept of HDI considers that provision of material amenities alone would bring about Human Development, but Basu opines that Human Development in the true sense should embrace both material and moral development. According to him human development based on HDI alone, is similar to dairy farm economics to improve dairy farm output. To quote: ‘So human development effort should not end up in amelioration of material deprivations alone: it must undertake to bring about spiritual and moral development to assist the biped to become truly human.’[22] For example, a high suicide rate would bring the index down.
A few authors have proposed alternative indices to address some of the index's shortcomings.[23] However, of those proposed alternatives to the HDI, few have produced alternatives covering so many countries, and that no development index (other than, perhaps, Gross Domestic Product per capita) has been used so extensively – or effectively, in discussions and developmental planning as the HDI.
However, there has been one lament about the HDI that has resulted in an alternative index: 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, where the UNDP HDI for 2009 enumerates 182 economies.[24]
(c)
Возьми лучше какой нибудь более "реальный" показатель, а не мнения "экспертов", скажем GDP на душу населения
http://hdrstats.undp.org/en/indicators/62006.html
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy |
|