Paper Titles in Periodical
International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences
Volume 47


Subscribe to our Newsletter and get informed about new publication regulary and special discounts for subscribers!

ILSHS > Volume 47 > Assessment of Relative Efficiency of Countries in...
< Back to Volume

Assessment of Relative Efficiency of Countries in Attaining Human Development Sub Indexes

Full Text PDF


Competitiveness and human development are two major aspects of nations’ performance. However, the main objective of competitiveness should be to improve human development. In the current study, we aimed to examine the relative efficiency of countries in achieving the aforementioned target. In other words, the question is whether competitiveness has led to human development. To this end, we selected 31 countries with the same category in human development (high human development) and also with available data on competitiveness and its components. Due to the nature of the study, we used Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) method. The model used in this study employed three subindexes of global competitiveness including basic requirements, efficiency enhancers, and innovation and sophistication factors as input variables and three subindexes of human development including life expectancy at birth, mean years of schooling, and per capita national income as output variables. Since, as noted, the goal of countries (DMUs) is to improve human development; this study employed an output-oriented DEA model. Though, a DEA model with either constant or variable return to scale could be used, this paper employs DEA with constant return to scale because variable case has extended to accommodate scale effects while in our case (where countries in the role of units under assessment are large enough) intrinsic scale effects do not exist and also CRS models have higher separable power for differentiating efficient and inefficient units. And finally after running the model we found that 9 out of 31 assessed countries are technically efficient which implies that these 9 countries have used competitiveness subindexes to attain expected values of human development sub-indexes. In 2012 Iran is an inefficient unit, having a technical efficiency rank of 19th among the assessed countries. As in this paper there are two kinds of variables, i.e. input and output variables, the most effective subindex which have lowered Iran’s rank are life expectancy at birth for input variables and efficiency enhancers for output variables. Moreover, Albania and Venezuela have been introduced as reference set for Iran in this year.


International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences (Volume 47)
M. Mehrara et al., "Assessment of Relative Efficiency of Countries in Attaining Human Development Sub Indexes", International Letters of Social and Humanistic Sciences, Vol. 47, pp. 63-76, 2015
Online since:
Feb 2015

Andersen, Per, and Niels Christian Petersen. 1993. A Procedure for Ranking Efficient Units in Data Envelopment Analysis., Management Science 39(10): 1261-64. http: /dx. doi. org/10. 1287/mnsc. 39. 10. 1261.

Banker, R D, A Charnes, and W W Cooper. 1984. Some Models for Estimating Technical and Scale Inefficiencies in Data Envelopment Analysis., Management Science 30(9): 1078-92. http: /dx. doi. org/10. 1287/mnsc. 30. 9. 1078.

Boltho, A. 1996. The Assessment: International Competitiveness., Oxford Review of Economic Policy 12 (3 ): 1-16. http: /oxrep. oxfordjournals. org/content/12/3/1. short.

Charnes, A, W. w Cooper, and E Rhodes. 1978. Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units., 2: 429-44.

Davies, Antony. 2009. Human Development and the Optimal Size of Government., Journal of Socio-Economics 38(2): 326-30. http: /linkinghub. elsevier. com/retrieve/pii/S1053535708001236 (August 1, 2014).

Dyson, R.G. et al. 2001. Pitfalls and Protocols in DEA., European Journal of Operational Research 132(2): 245-59. http: /linkinghub. elsevier. com/retrieve/pii/S0377221700001491.

Önsel, Şule et al. 2008. A New Perspective on the Competitiveness of Nations., SocioEconomic Planning Sciences 42(4): 221-46. http: /www. sciencedirect. com/science/article/pii/S0038012108000025 (August 11, 2014).

Ranis, Gustav, and Alejandro Ramirez. 2000. Economic Growth and Human Development., 28(2).

Reiter, S.L., and H. Kevin Steensma. 2010. Human Development and Foreign Direct Investment in Developing Countries: The Influence of FDI Policy and Corruption., World Development 38(12): 1678-91. http: /linkinghub. elsevier. com/retrieve/pii/S0305750X10000926 (October 16, 2014).

Report, Insight, Klaus Schwab, and World Economic Forum. 2013. The Global Competitiveness Report.

UNDP, Human Development Report, (2013).

Sadeghi, Hossein, Soulmaz Abollahi Haghi, and Leila Abdollah Zadeh. 2007. Human Development in Iran (Persian Text)., Social Walfare (24): 281-304. http: /www. noormags. ir/view/fa/articlepage/947694.

Ülengin, Füsun et al. 2011. The Competitiveness of Nations and Implications for Human Development., Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 45(1): 16-27. http: /www. sciencedirect. com/science/article/pii/S0038012110000467 (October 16, 2014).

Ulengin, Fusun, Burç Ulengin, and Sule Onsel. 2002. A Power-Based Measurement Approach to Specify Macroeconomic Competitiveness of Countries., Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 36(3): 203-26. http: /www. sciencedirect. com/science/article/pii/S0038012101000210 (November 26, 2014).

Wang, Tai-Yue, Shih-Chien Chien, and Chiang Kao. 2007. The Role of Technology Development in National Competitiveness - Evidence from Southeast Asian Countries., Technological Forecasting and Social Change 74(8): 1357-73. http: /www. sciencedirect. com/science/article/pii/S0040162507000029 (October 9, 2014).

WEF, Global Competitiveness Report, 2013. ( Received 27 November 2014; accepted 10 January 2015 ).

Show More Hide