Making development simple. The genetic deterministic hypothesis for economic development

This paper discusses the dangers inherent in allempting to simplify something as complex as development. It does this by exploring the Lynn and Vanhanen theory of deterministic development which asserts that varying levels of economic development seen between countries can be explained by differences in 'national intelligence' (national IQ). Assuming that intelligence is genetically determined, and as different races have been shown to have different IQ, then they argue that economic development (measured as GDP/capita) is largely a function of race and interventions to address imbalances can only have a limited impact. The paper presents the Lynne and Vanhanen case and critically discusses the data and analyses (linear regression) upon which it is based. It also extends the cause-effect basis of Lynne and Vanhanen's theory for economic development into human development by using the Human Development Index (HDI). It is argued that while there is nothing mathematically incorrect with their calculations, there are concerns over the data they employ. Even more fundamentally it is argued that statistically significant correlations between the various components of the HDI and national IQ can occur via a host of cause-effect pathways, and hence the genetic determinism theory is far from proven. The paper ends by discussing the dangers involved in the use of over-simplistic measures of development as a means of exploring cause-effect relationships. While the creators of development indices such as the HDI have good intentions, simplistic indices can encourage simplistic explanations of under-development. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Making 'dirty' nations look clean? The nation state and the problem of selecting and weighting indices as tools for measuring progress towards sustainability

Pressing global environmental problems highlight the need to develop tools to measure progress towards "sustainability." However, some argue that any such attempt inevitably reflects the views of those creating such tools and only produce highly contested notions of "reality." To explore this tension, we critically assesses the Environmental Sustainability Index (ESI), a well-publicized product of the World Economic Forum that is designed to measure 'sustainability' by ranking nations on league tables based on extensive databases of environmental indicators. By recreating this index, and then using statistical tools (principal components analysis) to test relations between various components of the index, we challenge ways in which countries are ranked in the ESI. Based on this analysis, we suggest (1) that the approach taken to aggregate, interpret and present the ESI creates a misleading impression that Western countries are more sustainable than the developing world; (2) that unaccounted methodological biases allowed the authors of the ESI to over-generalize the relative 'sustainability' of different countries; and, (3) that this has resulted in simplistic conclusions on the relation between economic growth and environmental sustainability. This criticism should not be interpreted as a call for the abandonment of efforts to create standardized comparable data. Instead, this paper proposes that indicator selection and data collection should draw on a range of voices, including local stakeholders as well as international experts. We also propose that aggregating data into final league ranking tables is too prone to error and creates the illusion of absolute and categorical interpretations. (c) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Mathematical modelling of decision making processes in construction projects

Many different individuals, who have their own expertise and criteria for decision making, are involved in making decisions on construction projects. Decision-making processes are thus significantly affected by communication, in which a dynamic performance of human intentions leads to unpredictable outcomes. In order to theorise the decision making processes including communication, it is argued here that the decision making processes resemble evolutionary dynamics in terms of both selection and mutation, which can be expressed by the replicator-mutator equation. To support this argument, a mathematical model of decision making has been made from an analogy with evolutionary dynamics, in which there are three variables: initial support rate, business hierarchy, and power of persuasion. On the other hand, a survey of patterns in decision making in construction projects has also been performed through self-administered mail questionnaire to construction practitioners. Consequently, comparison between the numerical analysis of mathematical model and the statistical analysis of empirical data has shown a significant potential of the replicator-mutator equation as a tool to study dynamic properties of intentions in communication.