Sensitivity of environmental performance index based on stochastic dominance

被引:16
作者
Pinar, Mehmet [1 ]
机构
[1] Edge Hill Univ, Business Sch, Ormskirk L39 4QP, Lancs, England
关键词
Composite index; Environmental performance; Indicators; Stochastic dominance; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; COMPOSITE INDEX; RISK INDEX; POVERTY; TESTS; CONSTRUCTION; DEGRADATION; UNCERTAINTY; EFFICIENCY; WEIGHTS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.114767
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
The Environmental Performance Index (EPI) is a popular sustainability index. It is a composite index which ranks 180 countries based on their environmental performance in 32 indicators. Using the EPI data and stochastic dominance efficiency methodology, this paper examines the sensitivity to the subjective weights assigned to the indicators and categories of environmental performance. The findings show a remarkable variation in environmental performance based on alternative weights which are selected using Stochastic Dominance criteria. Except for 2020, the environmental health category in EPI gets relatively higher importance in the optimal scenario, and ecosystem vitality gets relatively higher weights in the inferior scenario, suggesting that the environmental health category achievements have been relatively higher for most countries over time. The ranking analysis also shows major variations in country rankings with alternative weights. Two countries, Maldives and Gabon, would have experienced more than 100 position changes in their rankings with alternative weights. Furthermore, 67 countries would have experienced 30 or more position changes in their rankings and 37 countries experienced an EPI score change of more than 50 (out of 100) with alternative weights. Overall, the results illustrate the importance of sensitivity analysis of composite indices to increase reliability and transparency.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Performance evaluation of portfolio insurance strategies using stochastic dominance criteria
    Annaert, Jan
    Van Osselaer, Sofieke
    Verstraete, Bert
    JOURNAL OF BANKING & FINANCE, 2009, 33 (02) : 272 - 280
  • [22] Composite ecotourism potential index based on an integrated stochastic CRITIC-weighted sum method
    Ocampo, Lanndon
    Aro, Joerabell Lourdes
    Evangelista, Samantha Shane
    Maturan, Fatima
    Casinillo, Leomarich
    Yamagishi, Kafferine
    Selerio, Egberto
    CURRENT ISSUES IN TOURISM, 2023, 26 (15) : 2513 - 2542
  • [23] The performance of ESG portfolios: A stochastic dominance approach
    Zhou, Zihan
    Wang, Shaolin
    Wang, Hongxia
    FINANCE RESEARCH LETTERS, 2025, 72
  • [24] LP active benchmarking strategies based on performance measures and stochastic dominance constraints
    Cassader, Marco
    Ortobelli, Sergio
    Tichy, Tomas
    FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT OF FIRMS AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS: 10TH INTERNATIONAL SCIENTIFIC CONFERENCE, PTS I-IV, 2015, : 145 - 154
  • [25] How Did the Elimination of the Window Guidance Policy Affect IPO Performance in China? A Stochastic Dominance Analysis
    Guo, Haifeng
    Ge, Yuanjing
    Hsu, Chuan-Hao
    Fung, Hung-Gay
    EMERGING MARKETS FINANCE AND TRADE, 2021, 57 (03) : 824 - 838
  • [26] Mispricing of Index Options with Respect to Stochastic Dominance Bounds? A Reply
    Constantinides, George M.
    Czerwonko, Michal
    Jackwerth, Jens Carsten
    Perrakis, Stylianos
    CRITICAL FINANCE REVIEW, 2021, 10 (01): : 57 - 63
  • [27] Stochastic Dominance Approach to OECD’s Better Life Index
    Tahsin Mehdi
    Social Indicators Research, 2019, 143 : 917 - 954
  • [28] Portfolio Choice Based on Third-Degree Stochastic Dominance
    Post, Thierry
    Kopa, Milos
    MANAGEMENT SCIENCE, 2017, 63 (10) : 3381 - 3392
  • [29] A New Stochastic Dominance Degree Based on Almost Stochastic Dominance and Its Application in Decision Making
    Wu, Yunna
    Sun, Xiaokun
    Xu, Hu
    Xu, Chuanbo
    Xu, Ruhang
    ENTROPY, 2017, 19 (11):
  • [30] Performance-based environmental index weights: Are all metrics created equal?
    Bellenger, Moriah J.
    Herlihy, Alan T.
    ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS, 2010, 69 (05) : 1043 - 1050