A Comparison of Canonical Correlation Analysis Results on 2015-2016 Social Progress Indexes

Year 2019, Volume: 21 Issue: 2, 185 - 204, 26.08.2019

Ebru Özgür Güler , Sera Şanlı

Abstract

Social Progress Index aims to form a systematic basis to guide strategy for
inclusive growth which requires achieving both economic and social progress.
This study has aimed to compare the relations among “Basic Human Needs” and
“Foundations of Wellbeing” dimensions of 2015 and 2016 Social Progress Indexes
through “Canonical Correlation Analysis” for 130 countries. The first (and the
highest) canonical correlation coefficients which are 0.926 and 0.935 for 2015
and 2016 respectively imply that there is a high relationship between “Basic
Human Needs” and “Foundations of Wellbeing” dimensions. In case the Wilk’s Lambda statistics are
considered, the whole model has been regarded as statistically significant with a considerably high overall
effect size of 0.89 and 0,896 values for 2015 and 2016 respectively. Besides, according to the findings associated with canonical loadings, the largest
contribution to “Basic Human Needs” set has come from “Nutrition and Basic
Medical Care” variable and the most effective variable in “Foundations of
Wellbeing” has been revealed to be “Access to Basic Knowledge”. The best
performance for both the year 2015 and 2016 has been observed in “Basic Human
Needs” dimension with “Nutrition and Basic Medical Care” and “Water and
Sanitation” components which lie at the core of the United Nations Millennium
Development Goals. Having evaluated
two dimensions together, it can be inferred that “Personal Safety” and “Health
and Wellness” fields should be prioritized in order to trigger social progress.

Keywords

Social Progress Index, Basic Human Needs, Foundations of Wellbeing, Canonical Correlation Analysis

Supporting Institution

TÜBİTAK

Project Number

2211

Thanks

This study has been supported by TUBITAK (The Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey) - BIDEB (Scientist Support Department) within the scope of 2211-E Direct National Scholarship Program for PhD students.

2015-2016 Sosyal Gelişim Endekslerine İlişkin Kanonik Korelasyon Analizi Sonuçlarının Karşılaştırılması

Abstract

Sosyal
Gelişme Endeksi hem ekonomik hem de sosyal anlamda gelişmeyi başarmayı
gerektiren içsel büyüme stratejisine öncülük etmek için sistematik bir temel
oluşturmayı amaçlar. Bu çalışma, sosyal gelişme endeksinin içinde yer alan
“Temel İnsani İhtiyaçlar” ve “Refahın Temelleri” boyutları arasındaki
ilişkileri, 130 ülke için kanonik korelasyon analizi kullanarak 2015 ve 2016
yılları için karşılaştırmayı amaçlamaktadır. 2015 ve 2016 yılları için
sırasıyla 0.926 ve 0.935 olarak elde edilen birinci (ve en yüksek) kanonik
korelasyon katsayıları, bu iki değişken kümesi arasında yüksek bir ilişkinin
olduğuna dikkat çekmektedir. Wilk’s Lambda istatistiklerinin ele alındığı
durumda, tüm model 2015 ve 2016 yılları için sırasıyla 0.89 ve 0.896 değerleri
ile oldukça yüksek bir genel etki büyüklüğü göstererek istatistiksel olarak
anlamlı kabul edilmiştir. Ayrıca kanonik yüklerle ilişkili bulgulara göre,
“Temel İnsani İhtiyaçlar” kümesine en fazla katkı “Beslenme ve Temel Tıbbi
Bakım” değişkeninden gelmiş olup, “Refahın Temelleri” kümesine en fazla
katkının ise “Temel Bilgiye Erişim” değişkeni tarafından sağlandığı ortaya
konmuştur. Hem 2015, hem de 2016 yılı
için en iyi performans “Temel İnsani İhtiyaçlar” boyutunda, Birleşmiş Milletler Milenyum Kalkınma Hedefleri’nin de temelinde yatan “Beslenme ve
Temel Tıbbi Bakım” ile “Su ve Temizlik” bileşenlerinde gözlenmiştir. Endeksin
iki boyutu birlikte değerlendirildiğinde ise, sosyal gelişmeyi harekete
geçirmek için “Kişisel Güvenlik” ve “Sağlıklı Yaşam” alanlarının
önceliklendirilmesi gerektiği sonucuna varılabilir.

Keywords

Sosyal Gelişme Endeksi, Temel İnsani İhtiyaçlar, Refahın Temelleri, Kanonik Korelasyon Analizi

Project Number

2211

References

• Alpar, R. (2011) Uygulamalı çok değişkenli istatistiksel yöntemler, 3th edition, Ankara: Detay.
• Altafin, I. (1991) “Participatory communication in social development evaluation”, Community Development Journal, 26(4), 312-314.
• Anderson, T. W. (2003) An introduction to multivariate statistical analysis, 3th edition, New York: John Wiley and Sons.
• Bartlett, M. S. (1941) “The statistical significance of canonical correlations”, Biometrika, 32, 29-38.
• Bland, J. M. and Douglas A. (1997) “Statistics notes: Cronbach's Alpha”, BMJ, 314(7080), 572.
• Bonair, A., Rosenfield, P., and Tengvald, K. (1989) “Medical technologies in developing countries: issues of technology development, transfer, diffusion and use”, Social Science and Medicine, 28(8), 769–781.
• Braveman, P. A., Cubbin, C., Egerter, S., Williams D. R., and Pamuk, E. (2010) “Socioeconomic disparities in health in the United States: what the patterns tell us”, American Journal of Public Health, 100, 186-196.
• Brocklehurst, C. (2011) “Water, sanitation and hygiene: foundations of development”, https://www.interactioncouncil.org/sites/default/files/Clarissa%20Brocklehurst%20paper.pdf,Retrie-val date: 16 April 2019.
• Chatfield, C. and Collins, A. (1980) Introduction to Multivariate Analysis, Boston: Springer.
• CSDH (Commission on Social Determinants of Health) (2008) “Closing the gap in a generation: health equity through action on the social determinants of health”, http://www.who.int/social_determinants/thecommission/finalreport/en/, Retrieval date: 11 April 2014.
• Çankaya, S. (2005) Kanonik korelasyon analizi ve hayvancılıkta kullanımı, Doctoral Thesis, Adana: Cukurova University, Institute of Natural and Applied Sciences – Department of Animal Science.
• Gazzola, P. and Querci, E. (2017) “The Connection between the Quality of Life and Sustainable Ecological Development”, European Scientific Journal, ESJ, 13(12), 361-375.
• Hediger, W. (2000) “Sustainable development and social welfare”, Ecological Economics, 32(3), 481-492.
• Hotelling, H. (1936) “Relations between two sets of variates”, Biometrika, 28(3/4), 321-377.
• Jung, K. M. (2000) “Local influence assessment in canonical correlation analysis”, Journal of Applied Statistics, 27(3), 293-301.
• Kahn, A. (1995) “Sustainable development: the key concepts, issues and implications”, keynote paper given at the international sustainable development research conference, 27-29 March 1995, Manchester, UK.
• Keskin, S. and Özsoy, A. N. (2004) “Kanonik korelasyon analizi ve bir uygulaması”, Journal of Agricultural Science, 10(1), 67-71.
• Kuznets, S. (1955) “Economic growth and income inequality”, The American Economic Review, 45(1), 1–28.
• Madu, C. N. (1992) Strategic planning in technology transfer to less developed countries, New York, NY: Quorum Books.
• Manly, B. (1994) Multivariate statistical methods: A primer, New York, USA: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
• Marcoulides, G. and Hershberger, S. (1997) Multivariate Statistical Methods: A First Course, New York: Psychology.
• Munro, B. H. (2005) Statistical Methods for Health Care Research, 5th edition, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
• Porter, M., Stern, S., and Green, M. (2015) “Social progress index 2015 by social progress imperative”, http://www.socialprogressimperative.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/2015-SOCIAL-PROGRESS INDEX_FINAL.pdf, Retrieval date: 6 August 2016.
• Porter, M., Stern, S., and Green, M. (2016) “Social progress index 2016 by social progress imperative”, https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/mx/Documents/about-deloitte/Social-Progress-Index-2016-Report.pdf, Retrieval date: 6 August 2016.
• Rao, N. D. and Min, J. (2018) “Decent living standards: material prerequisites for human wellbeing”, Social Indicators Research, 138(1), 225-244.
• Reyes, G. E. and Useche, A. J. (2019) “Competitiveness, economic growth and human development in Latin American and Caribbean Countries 2006 - 2015: A performance and correlation analysis”, Competitiveness Review: An International Business Journal, 29(2), 139-159.
• Sharma, S. (1996) Applied Multivariate Techniques, New York: John Wiley & Sons.
• Sherry, A. and Henson, R. (2005) “Conducting and interpreting canonical correlation analysis in personality research: A user friendly primer”, Journal of Personality Assessment, 84(1), 37-48.
• Sökmen, A. (2014) “Sosyal gelişme endeksi Türkiye için ne ifade ediyor? Assessment note economic policy research foundation of Turkey”, http://www.tepav.org.tr/upload/files/1403700250, 6. Sosyal gelisme endeksi Turkiye icin ne ifade ediyor.pdf, Retrieval date: 6 August 2016.
• Stern, S. , Wares, A., and Orzell, S. (2015) “Social progress index 2015: Methodological report by social progress imperative”, http://www.socialprogressimperative.org/wp-content/uploads /2016/04/2015-Methodology-Report.pdf, Retrieval date: 6 August 2016.
• Stern, S., Wares, A., and Hellman, T. (2016) “Social progress index 2016: Methodological report by social progress imperative”, http://13i8vn49fibl3go3i12f59gh.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/SPI-2016-Methodological-Report.pdf, Retrieval date: 6 August 2016.
• Ünal, C. and Tatlıdil, H. (2018) “AB ve diğer gelişmiş ülkeler ile Türkiye için sosyal ve ekonomik göstergeler arasındaki ilişkinin kanonik korelasyon ve kısmi kanonik korelasyon analizi ile araştırılması”, Mehmet Akif Ersoy University Faculty of Economics and Administrative Sciences Journal, 5(3), 597-614.
• Vikram, K. (2018) “Social capital and child nutrition in India: The moderating role of development”, Health & Place, 50, 42-51.
• Wang, Y., Xiao, W., Wang, Y., Hou, B., Yang, H., Zhang, X., Yang, M., and Zhu, L. (2018) "Exploring city development modes under the dual control of water resources and energy related CO2 emissions: The case of Beijing, China," Sustainability, 10(9), 1-16.
• Zimmerman, E. and Woolf, S. H. (2014) “Understanding the relationship between education and health”, https://nam.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/BPH-UnderstandingThe Relationship1 .pdf, Retrieval date: 26 March 2019.