Let me move on. And I know that we all know that HDR
also publishes various other indices in addition to HDI,
some of which are also equally widely used in policy circles.
So can you just briefly describe
the different other indices that you have and the dimensions that they cover,
and also at the same time possibly state the reason why
UNDP or HDR chose to present these indices separately,
and not combine the different dimensions into let's say,
a single multidimensional index of well-being?
Let me take the first part of your question first.
The other indices that we have in the Human Development Report,
and there are three sets of indices.
Composite indices, first is the Inequality-Adjusted Human Development Index.
And basically that is a distribution adjusted index where we adjust life expectancy,
the knowledge dimension, decent standard of living in terms of inequalities that exist.
So as a result, we try to look at societies that
how there is a loss in Human Development Achievements because of inequalities.
And the beauty of that particular index is that we are talking
about inequalities not only in terms of income which is frequently talked about,
but also inequalities in terms of life expectancy, and educational achievements.
So it is a broader measure of inequality adjustment in terms of human well-being.
The second set of composite index,
actually relate to gender equality.
And there, we have two,
one is the disparities in achievements of men and women in terms of human development.
The other one is basically taking into consideration the gender inequality.
So therefore, I think those two indices actually
look at the disparities and inequalities as well as women's empowerment,
and that is important.
And the third one is the Multidimensional Poverty Index where we look at income poverty,
but also poverty in other areas of human lives.
So those are the kind of the other composite indices that
the Human Development Report has in addition to the Human Development Index.
Now, coming back to the second part of your question,
why don't we put them together?
Putting them together would be something like putting apples and oranges,
but then it doesn't make any sense.
Because when you construct a composite index I think the basic point is,
what are you trying to measure?
And I think the composite indices that we have try
to measure different dimensions of human lives,
different dimensions of development results.
For example, the inequality adjusted HDI tries
to look at the whole question of the distribution in this society in terms of outcomes,
whether it is life expectancy,
whether it is knowledge.
Similarly, the gender indices are
actually looking at women's empowerment and gender inequality.
The Multidimensional Poverty Index actually tries to focus on
the whole issue of the multidimensional deprivations that the society suffers.
All those indices individually and separately have their own value,
they have their own value in terms of research,
they have their own value in terms of assessing development results,
they have their own value for the advocacy purposes.
If we try to pull them all together,
then we are basically adding more and more unique index which is already composite.
And adding together actually would lose some of the purposes of this index,
but also would actually deplete the value of the index because you are
losing the robustness of the index as well as it's predictive ability.
In fact, yeah.
The reason I asked is because there are
other indices of well-being that are out on the market as you know.
And a lot of them combine also inequality and
gender empowerment and these issues along with health and education,
so that you get an overall picture of where
the development level is that includes these things into the index,
and whether a country how it fares compared to others.
But of course you're right in saying that there is also
a justification of presenting them separately
and having simple indices rather than combining
them and kind of the big picture getting lost in all of that.
What do you see now as the future for
the Human Development Reports and the indices for let's say,
now talk about the next decade, or 15 years?
I think that's a very good question because we have to be forward looking.
For the last quarter of a century,
the Human Development Report,
and the Human Development Index,
as well as other indicators have made an impact I think in three ways.
One is that, it actually changed the development discourse,
and the development debate,
and dialogue all around the world.
And secondly, it also has changed the way we look at development.
It has changed the lens through which we try to assess development results.
And thirdly, it has an impact on policy making,
on research in terms of academic thinking,
in terms of extending the frontiers of our knowledge on different issues.
But when I look forward I think after 25 years,
the time has come because we are also living in a changing world.
The world in 1990 was different from the world of 2016.
We live in a more globalized digitally revolutionized world,
there are lots of opportunities but there are lots of
challenges and new challenges there.
Sorry. So in that context,
the Human Development Report and the Human Development Index become even more important.
But in order to be relevant to these challenges in a better way,
I think the time has come to think about extending the frontiers of
our knowledge in terms of the concept and
the framework itself as well as in terms of the measure.
So for the next 25 years,
if I may say,
two decades and more not only one decade as you refer to,
I think at this particular juncture of time the challenge would be,
how we can extend our knowledge and the frontiers of our knowledge,
about the human development framework and the human development concepts.
Which are the areas that remain uncharted,
or which are the issues in
the basic notion of human development which we have not made very explicit?
For example, we have talked about individual choices but we did
not address the issue of individual versus social choices.
The question of hierarchy of choices is something that we have to look at it.
The interconnectedness of choices,
the choice of one has an impact on
the choice of the other either positively or negatively.
We also have to look at some of the issues
that we have occasionally focused on but did not pick it up.
Later on, the issue of human security,
human rights, environmental sustainability.
And particularly, I think the whole question of the environment
and sustainability needs to be revisited
in the context of the paradigm of human development,
that's something that we have have not done.
And finally, I think there are also requirements.
Because as we are talking about transformational changing development,
to look at issues like social justice and fairness,
issues of inclusion and exclusion,
non-violence for example, and tolerance,
the diversity and equality.
So some of these normative issues,
ethical issues have to be brought in the framework,
and we are trying to do that.
In terms of measurement, some of the issues that we have already covered earlier,
but also the whole issue of quality of human development [inaudible]
the quantity of it is important in many societies.
Currently, the whole discussion is also going on,
can we measure the human development for the future?
What is the best way of addressing the issue of
environmental sustainability in the human development measures?
There are also lots of talks about dashboard approach that going
beyond a single number which has its strength but also its weaknesses,
can we have a dashboard approach where we present different indicators of
human development to have a better and comprehensive measure of human development?
Finally, the presentation of indicators and the data,
can we have more interesting presentation
of data using the new technologies that we have?
We have the data visualization through social media,
and other things, can we take advantage of it?
One of the challenges would also be the new events of the big data for example,
how do we deal with that particular issue,
the big data, real-time data in the human development indicators and the measurements?
So these are some of the issues that we are going
to take up in the next two, three reports.
And if we can do it successfully,
I think there will be again
more than two dozens of Human Development Reports for the next 25 years.
Okay. Now let me take a time horizon or
a fixed very precise time horizon of the next 15 years.
The reason I say this,
as we all know that,
193 countries have recently reached a consensus on how to
take the world forward with these so-called Sustainable Development Goals,
and they have also come up and they're in the process of doing it
with hundreds of indicators to monitor progress.
So do you have any idea of linking your indices,
the ones that you currently have or the ones that you're going to develop in the future,
with some of these sustainable development goals?
And I will not say monitor,
but at least comment on the progress made towards one or more of
these goals in your future forthcoming reports.
I think your last point is very important and that's where I want to start.
I think the role of the Human Development Report or the mandate of
the Human Development Report is not to monitor
the progress of the Sustainable Development Goals,
I think there are other instruments,
other mechanisms to do it.
But we also recognize the fact that
the Sustainable Development Goals or SDGs are going to dominate,
inform, and influence the development discourse,
debate, and dialogue for the next 15 years.
And the Human Development Reports have to be linked to that particular process.
And I see a two-way relationship in that particular linkage.
One is that, the Sustainable Development Goals can also
benefit from the different dimensions of human development paradigm.
The dimensions that we talk about in the human development paradigm can also
inform the discussions on the Sustainable Development Goals particularly,
the goals and some of the areas within that goals.
The Sustainable Development Goal Framework can also
see which other Human Development Indicators and
their measurements can be
useful for tracking the progress of Sustainable Development Goals.
On the other hand, the Human Development Reports can also
benefit from the Sustainable Development Goals,
the indicators, the targets, and so on.
For example, a lot of the background discussions of
the Sustainable Development Goals can also influence and
inform us in extending our knowledge on human development,
and extending the frontiers of different dimensions of human development.
We can also take some of the indicators
as well as the targets of the Sustainable Development Goals,
and try to integrate them into our own thinking in terms of measurements,
in terms of indicators.
For example, for the next two,
three years what we can do is to take some of
the Sustainable Development Goals targets and indicators,
and then discuss some of those issues in the Human Development Reports,
and also try to see what are the best ways of measuring it.
So the basic point I'm trying to make is that;
(a) we are not going to progress on
Sustainable Development Goals either at the country-level or are at the national-level,
and because that's not our mandate.
(b) we recognize the importance of
the Sustainable Development Goals in the present context
and for the next 15 years in terms of influencing development all around the world.
And (c) we want to be linked into the process.
We want to contribute to that process,
but we also want to benefit from that framework and the process.
And that's how we see the linkages between SDGs and the Human Development Report.
Thank you very much, Selim.
Thank you.
Thank you for your contribution to our course. Thank you.
Stefan Andreas SperlichProfessor
Juan Manuel Rodriguez Poo (in Partnership with UNIGE)Professor
