by Naresh Jotwani

Soon after the previous post was published on this blog, we came across the definition of a so-called Social Well-being Index (SWI), introduced by a group within Russia. Briefly, the SWI index is based on these criteria: life expectancy, infant mortality rate, homicide rate, total fertility, income inequality, education level.

Country-wise SWI ranking of 146 countries is available on the SWI website linked above, and many interesting observations can be made on that basis.

For example, Singapore, Malaysia and Indonesia are located within the same part of tropical Southeast Asia. On per capita income basis, Singapore is definitely ahead of the other two. In the SWI ranking, however, Malaysia and Indonesia are slightly ahead, with ranks 44 and 42, respectively, whereas Singapore ranks at 46.

India is at rank 79, the US at 48, China at 51, and Russia at 33.

The range of SWI across countries is quite modest; the highest index (Kuwait) is 90.1, while the lowest (Lesotho) is 29.4. As against this, the ratio of largest and smallest per capita GDP globally must be around 100:1 (US$ 100,000 versus US$1000).

The highest ranked country is Kuwait, and many Middle East countries do well [but see also Note 1]. One suspects that some so-called ‘advanced’ economies lose out on SWI due to their lower fertility rates and higher wealth inequalities.

---

The fact is that any such index is not — and cannot ever be! — objective or scientific. An index reflects the values, priorities and goals of a particular group of economists, sociologists or other scholars. But there is no substitute for lived experience. No scholar on earth can describe — let alone quantify! — what it is to be a farmer, a worker, a manager or a banker. Scholars make up theories merely so that others would continue to treat them as scholars. Ivory towers are made of such theories, and these towers are rife with never-ending disputes among scholars.

Suppose a person, after having lived in both India and the US, finds life to be ‘better’ in the former. Clearly, if the person were to articulate his reasons, he would list out criteria that explain or reflect his preference and other related aspects of his life. Any claim that an economic or socio-economic index is ‘objective’ does not stand up to scrutiny. An index is at best a glimpse into socio-economic conditions.

Per Dollar?

Neither SWI nor the two ‘happiness indexes’ mentioned in the previous post calculate the ‘per Dollar‘ ratio, whereas HDD of the previous post is defined as a ‘per Dollar‘ ratio. The idea behind HDD is to assess how wisely — or otherwise! — a society is spending its resources.

This is a valid question, since a negative trend in human development implies, in effect, that societal wealth is ‘going up in smoke’! If the ‘per Dollar‘ ratio is applied to SWI, and the resulting rankings re-calculated, Lesotho would likely rank ahead of Kuwait.

Notes:

[1] The effect of the latest war in the Middle East is not reflected in the 2025 SWI rankings. Today, one imagines that some countries in the region would have lower ranks. Clearly, violence works against human development and social well-being.