BEGIN:VCALENDAR VERSION:2.0 PRODID:-//jEvents 2.0 for Joomla//EN CALSCALE:GREGORIAN METHOD:PUBLISH BEGIN:VEVENT UID:05731dd4742520b7081146855b29f982 CATEGORIES:Lecture / Reading / Talk CREATED:20250828T164834 SUMMARY:A talk on "Comparing the Incomparable: The Evolving Domain for Wellbeing Indicators" by Prof. Udaya Shankar Mishra DESCRIPTION:Abstract\nThe current SDG environment has enabled good progress in generati ng indicators across varying wellbeing dimensions as well as disaggregation . Most of the indicators are of a headcount construct and guided by a likel ihood principle that poses difficulty in their comparison, valuation, and i nterpretation. Further, many of these indicators are sample estimates obtai ned through periodic surveys, which have their complexity in temporal and c ross-sectional comparison, given their reliability conditioned by the frequ ency of the event. On this premise, I ask a question `Are we comparing the incomparable?’. In a headcount construct, comparability of a phenomenon nee ds a compositional/characteristic equivalence of the denominator, and we se e them often overlooked. This is otherwise termed as standardisation. Besid es standardisation, in case there is a characteristic risk association of t he denominator population with the phenomenon in the numerator, head count measures and their comparison can be misleading. Head count measures and it s guiding principle of likelihood make it qualified for comparison, but wit h a contradiction with the whole numbers that calls for consideration of fr actions and whole numbers together. When indicators are sample estimates wi th their reliability depending on the width of the confidence interval, it poses another difficulty in comparative reading of the more reliable, along with the less reliable. There are indicators formulated in terms of qualif ication/disqualification of a benchmark, like deprivation, poverty, nourish ment, etc. wherein the distribution on either side of the benchmark is igno red while comparing changes in the indicator. This makes one apprehensive o f the distribution blind comparison. Another limitation of measures with a head count construct could be the mere addition paradox, wherein the denomi nator is added with numbers without any share in the numerator, and similar ly, there can be addition in the numerator which is entirely anti-phenomena l, giving rise to a change that is not associated with the phenomenon. Fina lly, valuation and comparison being the fundamental motivation of conceptua lising a measure, attention needs to be paid towards its robustness and the trade-off made between simplicity and adequacy.\n Speaker Bio\nProf. Udaya Shankar Mishra is currently a Professor at the International Institute of Population Studies, Mumbai and a former Professor at the Centre for Develop ment Studies, Kerala. He is engaged in research and teaching on population and development issues and has several national and international publicati ons to his credit. In recent times, he has served in various capacities in guiding scientific research in the social sciences. During the two-and-a-ha lf decades of his teaching and research experience, he has contributed rese arch to the areas of ageing, health, and nutrition as well as population po licy and programme evaluation. He holds a PhD from IIPS. He also served as a Temporary technical advisor for the World Health Organization for a while .\n X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:

Abstract
The current SDG environment has enabled g ood progress in generating indicators across varying wellbeing dimensions a s well as disaggregation. Most of the indicators are of a headcount constru ct and guided by a likelihood principle that poses difficulty in their comp arison, valuation, and interpretation. Further, many of these indicators ar e sample estimates obtained through periodic surveys, which have their comp lexity in temporal and cross-sectional comparison, given their reliability conditioned by the frequency of the event. On this premise, I ask a questio n `Are we comparing the incomparable?’. In a headcount construct, comparabi lity of a phenomenon needs a compositional/characteristic equivalence of th e denominator, and we see them often overlooked. This is otherwise termed a s standardisation. Besides standardisation, in case there is a characterist ic risk association of the denominator population with the phenomenon in th e numerator, head count measures and their comparison can be misleading. He ad count measures and its guiding principle of likelihood make it qualified for comparison, but with a contradiction with the whole numbers that calls for consideration of fractions and whole numbers together. When indicators are sample estimates with their reliability depending on the width of the confidence interval, it poses another difficulty in comparative reading of the more reliable, along with the less reliable. There are indicators formu lated in terms of qualification/disqualification of a benchmark, like depri vation, poverty, nourishment, etc. wherein the distribution on either side of the benchmark is ignored while comparing changes in the indicator. This makes one apprehensive of the distribution blind comparison. Another limita tion of measures with a head count construct could be the mere addition par adox, wherein the denominator is added with numbers without any share in th e numerator, and similarly, there can be addition in the numerator which is entirely anti-phenomenal, giving rise to a change that is not associated w ith the phenomenon. Finally, valuation and comparison being the fundamental motivation of conceptualising a measure, attention needs to be paid toward s its robustness and the trade-off made between simplicity and adequacy.

Speaker Bio
Prof. Udaya Shankar Mishra is current ly a Professor at the International Institute of Population Studies, Mumbai and a former Professor at the Centre for Development Studies, Kerala. He i s engaged in research and teaching on population and development issues and has several national and international publications to his credit. In rece nt times, he has served in various capacities in guiding scientific researc h in the social sciences. During the two-and-a-half decades of his teaching and research experience, he has contributed research to the areas of agein g, health, and nutrition as well as population policy and programme evaluat ion. He holds a PhD from IIPS. He also served as a Temporary technical advi sor for the World Health Organization for a while.

DTSTAMP:20260414T181636 DTSTART;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20250829T120000 DTEND;TZID=Asia/Kolkata:20250829T131500 SEQUENCE:0 TRANSP:OPAQUE END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR