2018 Human Development Index at 'subnational' level in Latin America

[Gauthier]

The Human Development Index, published each year by the United Nations Development Program (UNDP), is the world's most famous indicator of the level of development of societies. It shows for almost all countries in the world how they fare with regard to three key aspects of development: education, health and standard of living.

A disadvantage of this index is however that only national values are available, whereas, particularly within poor countries, there is huge subnational variation in poverty rates and in the availability of health and educational facilities. The farther one moves from capital and big cities, the weaker the educational and health facilities and the less the economic opportunities.

Advantage of the SHDI

A key step toward addressing this problem has been recently introduced. On May 31, a sub-national Human Development Index (SHDI) has been launched as a joint collaborative effort between the Center for Demographic Studies in Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona and the Global Data Lab of Radboud University. This index shows for over 1600 regions within 160 countries how they have fared regarding human development between 1995 and 2015, the last year for which the UNDP has published the index.

The SHDI is based on data from statistical offices and the Database Developing World of the Global Data Lab, which is one of the largest databases for developing countries that currently exists. At the national level, the index is exactly the same as the national Human Development Index of the UNDP. Hence,it fits very well in the current development paradigm, while at the same time, it takes a big step toward refinement of this paradigm.

"The index we developed can be seen as a telescope for identifying problems with regard to human development that magnifies 10 times as much as previous instruments," say the authors of the study. "We now can observe the areas within poor countries where poverty is highest and health and education facilities are weakest, so that policy efforts and resources can be more effectively directed to the places where they are mostly needed."

Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2018-06-indica...bnational.html

[Teutone]

Why is Chile so outstanding good on several fields? Could it be that Pinochet created a great society?

[Gauthier]

This new way of measuring the HDI just proves what I have been saying all this time; Southern Mexico makes us look bad.

[Kamal900]

This new way of measuring the HDI just proves what I have been saying all this time; Southern Mexico makes us look bad.

I thought that Southern Mexico was much more safer than the North.

[Marco94]

Why is Chile so outstanding good on several fields? Could it be that Pinochet created a great society?

Yes he did. Until Pinochet, Chile was pretty backwards compared to other Southern Cone countries (Argentina and Uruguay). He had an ultra-liberal stance and brought the best economists at the time, the “Chicago boys”, whose most prominent figure was Milton Friedman.

He liberalized the economy, opened markets, lowered taxes and inflation and privatized education (the famous voucher system). It resulted in Chile growing steadily for decades, catching up with the most developed countries in Latin America (Argentina and Uruguay), and outranking those countries in various fields.

[Gauthier]

What exactly went wrong?

[Teutone]

Yes he did. Until Pinochet, Chile was pretty backwards compared to other Southern Cone countries (Argentina and Uruguay). He had an ultra-liberal stance and brought the best economists at the time, the “Chicago boys”, whose most prominent figure was Milton Friedman.

He liberalized the economy, opened markets, lowered taxes and inflation and privatized education (the famous voucher system). It resulted in Chile growing steadily for decades, catching up with the most developed countries in Latin America (Argentina and Uruguay), and outranking those countries in various fields.

Imagine Argentina would have had the same path instead of Peronism!

[Teutone]

What exactly went wrong?

Bolivia, Peru and Venezuela? Socialism

[Gauthier]

I thought that Southern Mexico was much more safer than the North.

Most of Mexico is relatively safe. There are only certain ''hot spots'' to avoid.

[Erronkari]

Yes he did. Until Pinochet, Chile was pretty backwards compared to other Southern Cone countries (Argentina and Uruguay). He had an ultra-liberal stance and brought the best economists at the time, the “Chicago boys”, whose most prominent figure was Milton Friedman.

He liberalized the economy, opened markets, lowered taxes and inflation and privatized education (the famous voucher system). It resulted in Chile growing steadily for decades, catching up with the most developed countries in Latin America (Argentina and Uruguay), and outranking those countries in various fields.

But people here don't understand that and prefer choose again a person who stole a huge amount of public founds, closed totally the economy, jeopardized all the relations around the world (except with Venezuela) and applied the most extreme leftist policies.
That's because they give founds por people who support them as "working plans", while those people recive the money send their sons to ask for money in the street and drink or use drugs while they would be looking for a job.
This people will never learn by the mistakes, probably for that the country should be in a situation like venezuelan one.