用偏序方法分析“失败国家指数”

Q2 Social Sciences Journal of Social Structure Pub Date : 2013-01-01 DOI:10.21307/JOSS-2019-025
L. Carlsen, R. Brüggemann
{"title":"用偏序方法分析“失败国家指数”","authors":"L. Carlsen, R. Brüggemann","doi":"10.21307/JOSS-2019-025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Often objects are to be ranked. However, there is no measurable quantity available to express the ranking aim and to quantify it. The consequence is that indicators are selected, serving as proxies for the ranking aim. Although this set of indicators is of great importance for its own right, the most commonly used practice to obtain a ranking is an aggregation method. Any aggregation, however suffers from the effect of compensation, because the aggregation technique is in the broadest sense an averaging method. Here an alternative is suggested which avoids this averaging and which is derived from simple elements of the theory of partially ordered sets (posets). The central concept in partial order is the ‘concept of comparison’ and the most general outcome is a web of relations between objects according to their indicator values, respecting the ranking aim. As an example the ‘Failed State Index’ (FSI), annually prepared by the Fund of Peace is selected. The FSI is based on twelve individual contextual different indicators, subsequently transformed into a single composite indicator, by simple addition of the single indicator values. Such an operation leaves space for compensation effects, where one or more indicators level out the effect of others. Hence, a comparison between the single states (in total 177) based on their mutual FSI ranking has its limitations as the comparisons are made based on the composite indicator. We show that brain drain is one of the indicators in the FSI-study that plays a crucial role in the ranking, whereby the ranking aim is the stabilization of nations.","PeriodicalId":35236,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Social Structure","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"21","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Analysis of the ‘Failed States Index’ by Partial Order Methodology\",\"authors\":\"L. Carlsen, R. Brüggemann\",\"doi\":\"10.21307/JOSS-2019-025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Often objects are to be ranked. However, there is no measurable quantity available to express the ranking aim and to quantify it. The consequence is that indicators are selected, serving as proxies for the ranking aim. Although this set of indicators is of great importance for its own right, the most commonly used practice to obtain a ranking is an aggregation method. Any aggregation, however suffers from the effect of compensation, because the aggregation technique is in the broadest sense an averaging method. Here an alternative is suggested which avoids this averaging and which is derived from simple elements of the theory of partially ordered sets (posets). The central concept in partial order is the ‘concept of comparison’ and the most general outcome is a web of relations between objects according to their indicator values, respecting the ranking aim. As an example the ‘Failed State Index’ (FSI), annually prepared by the Fund of Peace is selected. The FSI is based on twelve individual contextual different indicators, subsequently transformed into a single composite indicator, by simple addition of the single indicator values. Such an operation leaves space for compensation effects, where one or more indicators level out the effect of others. Hence, a comparison between the single states (in total 177) based on their mutual FSI ranking has its limitations as the comparisons are made based on the composite indicator. We show that brain drain is one of the indicators in the FSI-study that plays a crucial role in the ranking, whereby the ranking aim is the stabilization of nations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":35236,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Social Structure\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"21\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Social Structure\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21307/JOSS-2019-025\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Social Structure","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21307/JOSS-2019-025","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 21

摘要

对象通常需要排序。然而,没有可测量的数量来表达排名目标并对其进行量化。其结果是,指标被选定,作为排名目标的代理。虽然这组指标本身非常重要,但获得排名最常用的做法是汇总方法。然而,任何聚合都会受到补偿的影响,因为聚合技术在最广泛的意义上是一种平均方法。这里提出了一种替代方法,它可以避免这种平均,并且可以从部分有序集(偏序集)理论的简单元素中得到。部分排序的中心概念是“比较概念”,最一般的结果是根据其指标值在尊重排名目标的情况下形成物体之间的关系网络。作为一个例子,和平基金每年编制的“失败国家指数”(FSI)被选中。金融稳定指数是基于12个独立的上下文不同的指标,随后通过简单地将单个指标值相加,转化为一个单一的综合指标。这样的操作为补偿效应留下了空间,其中一个或多个指标抵消了其他指标的影响。因此,基于相互FSI排名的单个州(总共177个)之间的比较有其局限性,因为比较是基于综合指标进行的。我们表明,人才流失是fsi研究中的一个指标,在排名中起着至关重要的作用,因此排名的目标是国家的稳定。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
An Analysis of the ‘Failed States Index’ by Partial Order Methodology
Abstract Often objects are to be ranked. However, there is no measurable quantity available to express the ranking aim and to quantify it. The consequence is that indicators are selected, serving as proxies for the ranking aim. Although this set of indicators is of great importance for its own right, the most commonly used practice to obtain a ranking is an aggregation method. Any aggregation, however suffers from the effect of compensation, because the aggregation technique is in the broadest sense an averaging method. Here an alternative is suggested which avoids this averaging and which is derived from simple elements of the theory of partially ordered sets (posets). The central concept in partial order is the ‘concept of comparison’ and the most general outcome is a web of relations between objects according to their indicator values, respecting the ranking aim. As an example the ‘Failed State Index’ (FSI), annually prepared by the Fund of Peace is selected. The FSI is based on twelve individual contextual different indicators, subsequently transformed into a single composite indicator, by simple addition of the single indicator values. Such an operation leaves space for compensation effects, where one or more indicators level out the effect of others. Hence, a comparison between the single states (in total 177) based on their mutual FSI ranking has its limitations as the comparisons are made based on the composite indicator. We show that brain drain is one of the indicators in the FSI-study that plays a crucial role in the ranking, whereby the ranking aim is the stabilization of nations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Social Structure
Journal of Social Structure Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊最新文献
Living in Networks: The Dynamics of Social Relations A Network Analysis of Twitter's Crackdown on the QAnon Conversation An Analysis of Relations Among European Countries Based on UEFA European Football Championship Syndicate Women: Gender and Networks in Chicago Organized Crime Advances in Network Clustering and Blockmodeling
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1