The best
method to measure economic development depends on the specific aspect of
development you wish to capture. Both the Human Development Index (HDI)
and the Physical Quality of Life Index (PQLI) are valuable, but they
have different strengths and limitations. Here’s an analysis:
1. Human Development Index (HDI)
- Components:
- Life expectancy at birth
(health). - Education (mean years of
schooling and expected years of schooling). - Gross National Income (GNI)
per capita (adjusted for purchasing power parity, PPP).
- Life expectancy at birth
***(Gross National Income(GNI) per capita is the dollar value of a
country’s final income in a year divided by its population )
- Strengths:
-
- Broad Coverage: Captures health,
education, and income dimensions, giving a holistic view of development. - Income Dimension: Includes economic well-being
(GNI per capita), which is crucial for assessing living standards. - Global Comparability: Widely used by
organizations like the UNDP, allowing consistent international
comparisons. - Dynamic Adjustments: Updated methodologies
ensure it reflects contemporary priorities (e.g., inequality-adjusted
HDI).
- Broad Coverage: Captures health,
- Limitations:
- Simplification: Aggregates data into a
single index, potentially obscuring disparities. - Income Bias: Heavily influenced by
GNI, potentially overemphasizing economic growth over social outcomes. - Exclusion of Environmental
Factors:
Does not directly account for sustainability or ecological concerns.
- Simplification: Aggregates data into a
2. PhysicalQuality of Life Index (PQLI)
- Components:
- Life expectancy.
- Infant mortality rate.
- Basic literacy rate.
- Strengths:
-
- Focus on Basic Needs: Concentrates on
fundamental human welfare, prioritizing health and education outcomes
over income. - Simplicity: Easy to calculate and
interpret, making it accessible for developing countries with limited
data. - Direct Indicators: Focuses on tangible
aspects of human well-being.
- Focus on Basic Needs: Concentrates on
- Limitations:
- Exclusion of Income: Omits economic indicators
like income or consumption, limiting its scope in capturing overall
development. - Outdated Framework: Developed in the 1970s,
it does not address modern development concerns like inequality,
environmental sustainability, or gender disparities. - Narrow Scope: Focuses on basic outcomes
without considering higher-level development factors like tertiary
education or economic empowerment.
- Exclusion of Income: Omits economic indicators
Comparison
|
Criterion |
||
|
Dimensions |
Health, |
Health, |
|
Economic |
Included |
Excluded |
|
Global |
High |
Limited |
|
Modern |
High |
Moderate |
|
Simplicity |
Moderate |
High |
Which is Better?
- HDI is generally better for
capturing broader aspects of development because it includes both social
(health and education) and economic (income) dimensions. Its global
acceptance and regular updates make it more relevant for contemporary
analysis. - PQLI is more suited for contexts
where the focus is exclusively on basic human needs and income data is
unreliable or irrelevant.
Why Choose HDI Over PQLI?
- Comprehensive Scope: HDI provides a
multidimensional perspective by combining economic and social indicators. - Modern Applicability: It reflects current
development priorities, including inequality and gender disparities (via
extensions like the Gender Development Index). - Policy Insights: HDI offers actionable
insights for policymakers by highlighting areas needing improvement (e.g.,
education vs. health vs. income).
In
summary, HDI is the more robust and widely applicable tool for measuring
economic development, while PQLI is useful in specific contexts
emphasizing basic needs.