Sie sind auf Seite 1von 11

Human Development Index

The Human Development Index (HDI) is a composite measure of health, education and income that was introduced in the first Human Development Report in 1990 as an alternative to purely economic assessments of national progress, such as GDP growth. It soon became the most widely accepted and cited measure of its kind, and has been adapted for national use by many countries. HDI values and rankings in the global Human Development Report are calculated using the latest internationally comparable data from mandated international data providers. Previous HDI values and rankings are retroactively recalculated using the same updated data sets and current methodologies, and are presented in Table 2 of the Statistical Annex of the 2013 Report. The HDI rankings and values in the 2013 Human Development Report cannot therefore be compared directly to HDI rankings and values published in previous Human Development Reports.

The Human Development Index (HDI) is a composite statistic of life expectancy, education, and income indices used to rank countries into four tiers of human development. It was created by the Pakistani economist Mahbub ul Haq and the Indian economist Amartya Sen in 1990[1] and was published by the United Nations Development Programme.[2]

In the 2010 Human Development Report a further Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index (IHDI) was introduced. While the simple HDI remains useful, it stated that "the IHDI is the actual level of human development (accounting for inequality)" and "the HDI can be viewed as an index of potential human development (or the maximum IHDI that could be achieved if there were no inequality)".[3]

Can the HDI alone measure a countrys level of development ?


No. The concept of human development is much broader than what can be captured in the HDI, or any other of the composite indices in the Human Development Report (Inequality-adjusted HDI, Gender Inequality Index and Multidimensional Poverty Index). The HDI, for example, does not reflect political participation or gender inequalities. The HDI and the other composite indices can only offer a broad proxy on some of the key issues of human development, gender disparity and human poverty. A fuller

1|Page

picture of a country's level of human development requires analysis of other indicators and information presented in the statistical annex of the report

What does the HDI tell us ?


The HDI was created to emphasize that people and their capabilities should be the ultimate criteria for assessing the development of a country, not economic growth alone. The HDI can also be used to question national policy choices, asking how two countries with the same level of GNI per capita can end up with such different human development outcomes. For example, the Bahamas GNI per capita is higher than New Zealands (by 17%) but life expectancy at birth is about 5 years shorter, mean years of schooling is 4 years shorter and expected years of schooling differ greatly between the two countries, resulting in New Zealand having a much higher HDI value than the Bahamas. These striking contrasts can stimulate debate about government policy priorities.

What are the criteria for a country to be included in the HDI ?


The Human Development Report Office strives to include as many UN member countries as possible in the HDI. To include a country in the HDI we need recent, reliable and comparable data for all three dimensions of the Index. For a country to be included, statistics should ideally be available from the relevant international data agencies.

Where does data from the HDI come from ?


Life expectancy at birth is provided by the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs; mean years of schooling are based on UNESCOs Institute for Statistics (UIS) educational attainment data and Barro and Lee methodology; expected years of schooling are provided by UIS; and GNI per capita by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. For a few countries, mean years of schooling are estimated from nationally representative household surveys, and for few countries GNI was obtained from the UN SNA Main Aggregates database. Many data gaps still exist in even some very basic areas of human development indicators. While actively advocating for the improvement of human development data, as a principle and for practical reasons, the Human Development Report Office does not collect data directly from countries

2|Page

3|Page

Human Development Index of Bangladesh

Years 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2000 1990 1980

HDI 0.515 0.511 0.508 0.502 0.495 0.488 0.481 0.472 0.433 0.361 0.312

HDI - Health 0.777 0.772 0.767 0.762 0.757 0.752 0.746 0.740 0.706 0.623 0.556

HDI Education 0.415 0.415 0.415 0.410 0.405 0.400 0.393 0.385 0.339 0.253 0.198

HDI - Income Comment 0.425 0.418 0.412 0.405 0.397 0.388 0.380 0.369 0.340 0.300 0.276 Medium Medium Medium Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

4|Page

Comparative HDI between Bangladesh & Zambia Zambia


HDI 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 0.448 0.443 0.438 0.431 0.420 0.411 0.405 0.399 HDI Health 0.464 0.458 0.450 0.440 0.428 0.414 0.400 0.386 HDI HDI - Income Comment Education 0.503 0.503 0.503 0.501 0.481 0.479 0.476 0.474 0.385 0.379 0.371 0.365 0.361 0.352 0.349 0.349 Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

Bangladesh
HDI 0.515 0.511 0.508 0.502 0.495 0.488 0.481 0.472 0.433 Comment Medium Medium Medium Medium Low Low Low Low Low

2000 1990 1980

0.376 0.398 0.405

0.347 0.434 0.505

0.457 0.406 0.336

0.337 0.359 0.392

Low Low Low 0.361 0.312 Low Low

Comparison of HDI: Bangladesh versus Zambia


In the above table we see that, in between 1980 to 2012, Zambia has low HDI in each & every year while Bangladesh has 4 years of medium HDI & low HDI in rest of the years which indicates Bangladesh is clearly ahead of Zambia in terms of HDI.

5|Page

Comparative HDI between Bangladesh & Mauritania

Mauritania
HDI 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2000 1990 1980 0.467 0.464 0.464 0.461 0.454 0.454 0.450 0.441 0.418 0.357 0.340 HDI Health 0.614 0.609 0.603 0.599 0.595 0.592 0.589 0.588 0.584 0.568 0.521 HDI HDI - Income Education 0.366 0.366 0.366 0.362 0.358 0.353 0.346 0.336 0.298 0.194 0.175 0.455 0.450 0.454 0.455 0.459 0.457 0.454 0.441 0.425 0.415 0.434 Comment Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

Bangladesh
HDI 0.515 0.511 0.508 0.502 0.495 0.488 0.481 0.472 0.433 0.361 0.312 Comment Medium Medium Medium Medium Low Low Low Low Low Low Low

Comparison of HDI: Bangladesh versus Mauritania


In the above table we see that, in between 1980 to 2012, Mauritania has low HDI in each & every year while Bangladesh has 4 years of medium HDI & low HDI in rest of the years which indicates Bangladesh is clearly ahead of Mauritania in terms of HDI.

Comparative HDI between Bangladesh & Mali


6|Page

Mali
HDI 2012 0.344 HDI - Health 0.502 HDI HDI - Income Comment Education 0.257 0.316 Low

Bangladesh
HDI 0.515 Comment Medium

2011

0.347

0.496

0.270

0.328

Low

0.511

Medium

2010

0.344

0.489

0.270

0.329

Low

0.508

Medium

Low 2009 0.337 0.483 0.266 0.323 0.502 Medium

Low 2008 0.332 0.476 0.256 0.323 0.495 0.488 2007 2006 2005 0.328 0.318 0.312 0.470 0.464 0.457 0.244 0.231 0.221 0.327 0.316 0.316 Low Low Low 0.481 0.481 Low Low Low Low

2000

0.270

0.431

0.160

0.296

Low

0.433 0.361

Low Low

1990

0.204

0.382

0.082

0.280

Low

1980

0.176

0.309

0.060

0.295

Low

0.312

Low

7|Page

Comparison of HDI: Bangladesh versus Mali


In the above table we see that, in between 1980 to 2012, Mali has low HDI in each & every year while Bangladesh has 4 years of medium HDI & low HDI in rest of the years which indicates Bangladesh is clearly ahead of Mali in terms of HDI.

Comparative HDI between Bangladesh & Malawi Malawi


Years HDI HDI - Health HDI - Education HDI Income Comment

Bangladesh
HDI Comment

2012

0.418

0.549

0.443

0.302

low

0.515

Medium

2011

0.415

0.540

0.443

0.300

Low

0.511

Medium

2010 2009

0.413 0.401

0.529 0.517

0.443 0.418

0.302 0.299

Low Low

0.508 0.502

Medium Medium

2008

0.392

0.503

0.409

0.293

Low

0.495

Low

2007 2006 2005 8|Page

0.381 0.373 0.363

0.488 0.472 0.457

0.400 0.393 0.382

0.285 0.280 0.274

Low Low Low

0.488 0.481 0.472

Low Low Low

2000 1990 1980

0.352 0.295 0.272

0.411 0.428 0.384

0.385 0.239 0.193

0.277 0.253 0.271

Low Low Low

0.433 0.361 0.312

Low Low Low

Comparison of HDI: Bangladesh versus Malawi


In the above table we see that, in between 1980 to 2012, Malawi has low HDI in each & every year while Bangladesh has 4 years of medium HDI & low HDI in rest of the years which indicates Bangladesh is clearly ahead of Malawi in terms of HDI.

Nota Bene:
1. Though our assignment also include comparative HDI of Maldive but we dont get enough data on this,thats why we exclude it

Conclusion
The HDI is a summary measure for assessing long-term progress in three basic dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, access to knowledge and a decent standard of living. As in the 2011 HDR a long and healthy life is measured by life expectancy. Access to knowledge is measured by: i) mean years of schooling for the adult population, which is the average number of years of education received in a life-time by people aged 25 years and older; and ii) expected years of schooling for children of school-entrance age, which is the total number of years of schooling a child of school-entrance age can expect to receive if prevailing patterns of age-specific enrolment rates stay the same throughout the child's life. Standard of living is measured by Gross National Income (GNI) per capita expressed in constant 2005 international dollars converted using purchasing power parity (PPP) rates. To ensure as much cross-country comparability as possible, the HDI is based primarily on international data from the United Nations Population Division, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Institute for Statistics (UIS) and the World Bank. As stated in the introduction, the HDI values and ranks in this years report are not comparable to those in past reports (including the 2011 HDR) because of a number of revisions done to the component indicators by the mandated agencies. To allow for assessment of progress in HDIs, the 2013 report includes recalculated HDIs from 1980 to 2012.
9|Page

10 | P a g e

11 | P a g e