EREGIE PERFORMANCE GAP INDEX (e-PGI): AN INNOVATIVE COMPUTED MULTI-DOMAIN TOOL FOR DEVELOPMENT RANKING OF NATIONS BASED ON RESOURCE UTILIZATION FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

 

PROFESSOR CHARLES OSAYANDE EREGIE, Professor of Child Health and Neonatology, Institute of Child Health, University of Benin, Consultant Paediatrician and Neonatologist, University of Benin Teaching Hospital, Benin City, Nigeria.

ABSTRACT

Most Development Ranking Tools (DRTs) do not reflect comprehensively Governance Variables for Sustainable Development and do not influence Development Improvement Process (DIP). The extant DRTs are briefly but critically reviewed. A new DRT is presented to reflect Governance Variables in several unique Domains for Sustainable Development. Considering Resource Utilization for Development as a Stochastic Process and „Performance Gap „with an assumed imperfect Linear Relationship with Resource Endowment and Generation (REG), the Eregie Performance Gap Index (e-PGI) is denominated as a Mathematical Equation reflecting 8 Domains and 20 Indicators for the computation of Performance Gap Score (PGS). The Domains are Resource Endowment and Generation, Leadership, Followership, Corruption Level, Electoral Credibility, Mortality of Women and Children, Inequalities and Sustainable Development. For comparison, the e-PGI and Human Development Index (HDI) for some 10 selected countries are USA with the highest GNIpc (highest HDI 0.910 and Highest e-PGI 0.674) while Nigeria with the seventh GNIpc (least HDI 0.471 and also the least e-PGI of 0.137) reflecting the comparative level s of Optimal Resource Utilization and possible study reliability and validity of the e-PGI for Development Ranking. The e-PGI also had a better EPHISTLE-fit Index (EFI) of 0.96 (HDI was 0.46) and, therefore, more TEA TRIAD-Compliant (TTC) for Development Ranking of countries. The e-PGI also had a better MDGs-Fit Index (MFI) of 0.88 (HDI was 0.50) also implying better MDGs-Compliance (MC). These indicate that the e-PGI is a better DRT with Sustainable Development as the Goal. The comparative relationships of several DRTs (HDI, e-PGI, Global Competitiveness Index (GCI) etc) were also evaluated and the observations suggested possible validity and reliability for the e-PGI but with some reservations and critical query on the logic and science of validity and reliability issues with DRTs. However, e-PGI and GCI appear to have better agreement in the higher Human Development Category while the e-PGI and HDI had better agreement in the lower Human Development Category. Considering the small sample evaluated, a scaled-up Global Survey of ALL countries is advocated and could possibly be commissioned by UNDP and the resultant data for Development Ranking by e-PGI included in future Human Development Reports as e-PGI has comparative superiority over other DRTs and is also more user-friendly.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *