Life expectancy is a statistical measure of the average time an organism is expected to live, based on the year of its birth, its current age and other demographic factors including gender. The most used measure of life expectancy is at birth, which can be defined in two ways. Cohort LEB is the mean length of life of an actual birth cohort and can be computed only for cohorts born many decades ago, so that all their members have died. Period LEB is the mean length of life of a hypothetical cohort assumed to be exposed, from birth through death, to the mortality rates observed at a given year. National LEB figures reported by statistical national agencies and international organizations are indeed estimates of period LEB. In the Bronze Age and the Iron Age, LEB was 26 years. For recent years, LEB in Swaziland is about 49, while LEB in Japan is about 83; the combination of high infant mortality and deaths in young adulthood from accidents, plagues and childbirth before modern medicine was available lowers LEB.
For example, a society with a LEB of 40 may have few people dying at 40: most will die before 30 or after 55. In populations with high infant mortality rates, LEB is sensitive to the rate of death in the first few years of life; because of this sensitivity to infant mortality, LEB can be subjected to gross misinterpretation, leading one to believe that a population with a low LEB will have a small proportion of older people. Another measure, such as life expectancy at age 5, can be used to exclude the effect of infant mortality to provide a simple measure of overall mortality rates other than in early childhood. Aggregate population measures, such as the proportion of the population in various age groups, should be used along individual-based measures like formal life expectancy when analyzing population structure and dynamics. However, pre-modern societies still had universally higher mortality rates and universally lower life expectancies at every age for both genders, this example was rare.
In societies with life expectancies of 30, for instance, a 40 year remaining timespan at age 5 may not be uncommon, but a 60 year one was. Mathematically, life expectancy is the mean number of years of life remaining at a given age, assuming age-specific mortality rates remain at their most measured levels, it is denoted by e x, which means the mean number of subsequent years of life for someone now aged x, according to a particular mortality experience. Longevity, maximum lifespan, life expectancy are not synonyms. Life expectancy is defined statistically as the mean number of years remaining for an individual or a group of people at a given age. Longevity refers to the characteristics of the long life span of some members of a population. Maximum lifespan is the age at death for the longest-lived individual of a species. Moreover, because life expectancy is an average, a particular person may die many years before or many years after the "expected" survival; the term "maximum life span" is more related to longevity.
Life expectancy is used in plant or animal ecology. The term life expectancy may be used in the context of manufactured objects, but the related term shelf life is used for consumer products, the terms "mean time to breakdown" and "mean time between failures" are used in engineering. Records of human lifespan above age 100 are susceptible to errors. For example, the previous world-record holder for human lifespan, Carrie White, was uncovered as a simple typographic error after more than two decades. Therefore, the capacity for equivalent hidden errors make maximum lifespan records dubious; the oldest confirmed recorded age for any human is 122 years, reached by Jeanne Calment who lived between 1875 and 1997. This is referred to as the "maximum life span", the upper boundary of life, the maximum number of years any human is known to have lived. A theoretical study shows that the maximum life expectancy at birth is limited by the human life characteristic value δ, around 104 years. According to a study by biologists Bryan G. Hughes and Siegfried Hekimi, there is no evidence for limit on human lifespan.
However, this view has been questioned on the basis of error patterns. The following information is derived from the 1961 Encyclopædia Britannica and other sources, some with questionable accuracy. Unless otherwise stated, it represents estimates of the life expectancies of the world population as a whole. In many instances, life expectancy varied according to class and gender. Life expectancy at birth takes account of infant mortality but not prenatal mortality. Life expectancy increases with age as the individual survives the higher mortality rates associated with childhood. For instance, the table above listed the life expectancy at birth among 13th-century English nobles at 30. Having survived until the age of 21, a male member of the English aristocracy in this period could expect to live: 1200–1300: to age 64 1300–1400: to age 45 1400–1500: to age 69 1500–1550: to age 71In a similar way, the life expectancy of scholars in the Medieval Islamic world was 59–84.3 years.17th-century English life expectancy was only about 35 years because infant and child mortality remained high.
Life expectancy was under 25 years in the early Colony of Virginia, in seventeenth-century New England, about 40 percent died befor
Human Development Index
The Human Development Index is a statistic composite index of life expectancy and per capita income indicators, which are used to rank countries into four tiers of human development. A country scores a higher HDI when the lifespan is higher, the education level is higher, the GNI per capita is higher, it was developed by Pakistani economist Mahbub ul Haq, with help from Gustav Ranis of Yale University and Meghnad Desai of the London School of Economics, was further used to measure a country's development by the United Nations Development Program's Human Development Report Office. The 2010 Human Development Report introduced an Inequality-adjusted Human Development Index. While the simple HDI remains useful, it stated that "the IHDI is the actual level of human development", "the HDI can be viewed as an index of'potential' human development"; the index does not take into account several factors, such as the net wealth per capita or the relative quality of goods in a country. This situation tends to lower the ranking for some of the most advanced countries, such as the G7 members and others.
The index is based on the human development approach, developed by ul Haq framed in terms of whether people are able to "be" and "do" desirable things in life. Examples include—Being: well fed, healthy; the freedom of choice is central—someone choosing to be hungry is quite different from someone, hungry because they cannot afford to buy food, or because the country is in a famine. The origins of the HDI are found in the annual Human Development Reports produced by the Human Development Report Office of the United Nations Development Programme; these were devised and launched by Pakistani economist Mahbub ul Haq in 1990, had the explicit purpose "to shift the focus of development economics from national income accounting to people-centered policies". To produce the Human Development Reports, Mahbub ul Haq formed a group of development economists including Paul Streeten, Frances Stewart, Gustav Ranis, Keith Griffin, Sudhir Anand, Meghnad Desai. Nobel laureate Amartya Sen utilized Haq's work in his own work on human capabilities.
Haq believed that a simple composite measure of human development was needed to convince the public and politicians that they can and should evaluate development not only by economic advances but improvements in human well-being. Published on 4 November 2010, the 2010 Human Development Report calculated the HDI combining three dimensions: A long and healthy life: Life expectancy at birth Education index: Mean years of schooling and Expected years of schooling A decent standard of living: GNI per capita In its 2010 Human Development Report, the UNDP began using a new method of calculating the HDI; the following three indices are used: 1. Life Expectancy Index = LE − 20 85 − 20 LEI is 1 when Life expectancy at birth is 85 and 0 when Life expectancy at birth is 20.2. Education Index = MYSI + EYSI 2 2.1 Mean Years of Schooling Index = MYS 15 Fifteen is the projected maximum of this indicator for 2025. 2.2 Expected Years of Schooling Index = EYS 18 Eighteen is equivalent to achieving a master's degree in most countries.3.
Income Index = ln − ln ln − ln II is 1 when GNI per capita is $75,000 and 0 when GNI per capita is $100. The HDI is the geometric mean of the previous three normalized indices: HDI = LEI ⋅ EI ⋅ II 3. LE: Life expectancy at birth MYS: Mean years of schooling EYS: Expected years of schooling GNIpc: Gross national income at purchasing power parity per capita The HDI combined three dimensions last used in its 2009 Report: Life expectancy at birth, as an index of population health and longevity to HDI Knowledge and education, as measured by the adult literacy rate and the combined primary and tertiary gross enrollment ratio. Standard of living, as indicated by the natural logarithm of gross domestic product per capita at purchasing power parity; this methodology was used by the UNDP until their 2011 report. The formula defining the HDI is promulgated by the United Nations Development Programme. In general, to transform a raw variable, say x, into a unit-free index between 0 and 1 (which allo
Economics is the social science that studies the production and consumption of goods and services. Economics focuses on the behaviour and interactions of economic agents. Microeconomics analyzes basic elements in the economy, including individual agents and markets, their interactions, the outcomes of interactions. Individual agents may include, for example, firms and sellers. Macroeconomics analyzes the entire economy and issues affecting it, including unemployment of resources, economic growth, the public policies that address these issues. See glossary of economics. Other broad distinctions within economics include those between positive economics, describing "what is", normative economics, advocating "what ought to be". Economic analysis can be applied throughout society, in business, health care, government. Economic analysis is sometimes applied to such diverse subjects as crime, the family, politics, social institutions, war and the environment; the discipline was renamed in the late 19th century due to Alfred Marshall, from "political economy" to "economics" as a shorter term for "economic science".
At that time, it became more open to rigorous thinking and made increased use of mathematics, which helped support efforts to have it accepted as a science and as a separate discipline outside of political science and other social sciences. There are a variety of modern definitions of economics. Scottish philosopher Adam Smith defined what was called political economy as "an inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations", in particular as: a branch of the science of a statesman or legislator a plentiful revenue or subsistence for the people... to supply the state or commonwealth with a revenue for the publick services. Jean-Baptiste Say, distinguishing the subject from its public-policy uses, defines it as the science of production and consumption of wealth. On the satirical side, Thomas Carlyle coined "the dismal science" as an epithet for classical economics, in this context linked to the pessimistic analysis of Malthus. John Stuart Mill defines the subject in a social context as: The science which traces the laws of such of the phenomena of society as arise from the combined operations of mankind for the production of wealth, in so far as those phenomena are not modified by the pursuit of any other object.
Alfred Marshall provides a still cited definition in his textbook Principles of Economics that extends analysis beyond wealth and from the societal to the microeconomic level: Economics is a study of man in the ordinary business of life. It enquires how he uses it. Thus, it is on the one side, the study of wealth and on the other and more important side, a part of the study of man. Lionel Robbins developed implications of what has been termed "erhaps the most accepted current definition of the subject": Economics is a science which studies human behaviour as a relationship between ends and scarce means which have alternative uses. Robbins describes the definition as not classificatory in "pick out certain kinds of behaviour" but rather analytical in "focus attention on a particular aspect of behaviour, the form imposed by the influence of scarcity." He affirmed that previous economists have centred their studies on the analysis of wealth: how wealth is created and consumed. But he said that economics can be used to study other things, such as war, that are outside its usual focus.
This is because war has as the goal winning it, generates both cost and benefits. If the war is not winnable or if the expected costs outweigh the benefits, the deciding actors may never go to war but rather explore other alternatives. We cannot define economics as the science that studies wealth, crime and any other field economic analysis can be applied to; some subsequent comments criticized the definition as overly broad in failing to limit its subject matter to analysis of markets. From the 1960s, such comments abated as the economic theory of maximizing behaviour and rational-choice modelling expanded the domain of the subject to areas treated in other fields. There are other criticisms as well, such as in scarcity not accounting for the macroeconomics of high unemployment. Gary Becker, a contributor to the expansion of economics into new areas, describes the approach he favours as "combin assumptions of maximizing behaviour, stable preferences, market equilibrium, used relentlessly and unflinchingly."
One commentary characterizes the remark as making economics an approach rather than a subject matter but with great specificity as to the "choice process and the type of social interaction that analysis involves." The same source reviews a range of definitions included in principles of economics textbooks and concludes that the lack of agreement need not affect the subject-matter that the texts treat. A
Capital formation is a concept used in macroeconomics, national accounts and financial economics. It is used in corporate accounts, it can be defined in three ways: It is a specific statistical concept used in national accounts statistics and macroeconomics. In that sense, it refers to a measure of the net additions to the capital stock of a country in an accounting interval, or, a measure of the amount by which the total physical capital stock increased during an accounting period. To arrive at this measure, standard valuation principles are used, it is used in economic theory, as a modern general term for capital accumulation, referring to the total "stock of capital", formed, or to the growth of this total capital stock. In a much broader or vaguer sense, the term "capital formation" has in more recent times been used in financial economics to refer to savings drives, setting up financial institutions, fiscal measures, public borrowing, development of capital markets, privatization of financial institutions, development of secondary markets.
In this usage, it refers to any method for increasing the amount of capital owned or under one's control, or any method in utilising or mobilizing capital resources for investment purposes. Thus, capital could be "formed" in the sense of "being brought together for investment purposes" in many different ways; this broadened meaning is not related to the statistical measurement concept nor to the classical understanding of the concept in economic theory. Instead, it originated in credit-based economic growth during the 1990s and 2000s, accompanied by the rapid growth of the financial sector, the increased use of finance terminology in economic discussions. In the national accounts gross capital formation is the total value of the gross fixed capital formation, plus net changes in inventories, plus net acquisitions less disposals of valuables for a unit or sector."Total capital formation" in national accounting equals net fixed capital investment, plus the increase in the value of inventories held, plus lending to foreign countries, during an accounting period.
Capital is said to be "formed" when savings are utilized for investment purposes investment in production. In the USA, statistical measures for capital formation were pioneered by Simon Kuznets in the 1930s and 1940s, from the 1950s onwards the standard accounting system devised under the auspices of the United Nations to measure capital flows was adopted by the governments of most countries. International bodies such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank have been influential in revising the system; the use of the term "capital formation" and "investment" can be somewhat confusing because the concept of capital itself can be understood in different ways. Firstly, capital formation is thought of as a measure of total "investment", in the sense of that portion of capital used for investment purposes and not held as savings or consumed, but in fact, in national accounts, the concept of gross capital formation refers only to the accounting value of the "additions of non-financial produced assets to the capital stock less the disposals of these assets".
"Investment" is a broader concept that includes investment in all kinds of capital assets, whether physical property or financial assets. In its statistical meaning, capital formation does not include financial assets such as stocks and securities. Secondly, capital formation may be used synonymously with the notion of capital accumulation in the sense of a reinvestment of profits into capital assets, but "capital accumulation" is not an accounting concept in modern accounts, contains the ambiguity that an amassment of wealth could occur either through a redistribution of capital assets from one person or institution to another, or through a net addition to the total stock of capital in existence. As regards capital accumulation, it can flourish, so that some people become wealthier, although society as a whole becomes poorer, the net capital formation decreases. In other words, the gain could be a net total gain, or a gain at the expense of loss by others that cancels out the gain in aggregate.
Thirdly, gross capital formation is used synonymously with gross fixed capital formation but speaking this is an error because gross capital formation refers to more net asset gains than just fixed capital. Capital formation measures were designed to provide a picture of investment and growth of the "real economy" in which goods and services are produced using tangible capital assets; the measures were intended to identify changes in the growth of physical wealth across time. However, the international growth of the financial sector has created many structural changes in the way that business investments occur, in the way capital finance is organized; this not only affects the definition of the measures, but how economists interpret capital formation. The most recent alterations in national accounts standards mean that capital measures and many other measures are no longer comparable with the data of the past, except where the old data series have been revised to align them with the new concepts and definitions.
US government statisticians have admitted frankly that "Unfortunately, the finance sector is one of the more poorly measured sectors in national accounts". The m
The Great Depression was a severe worldwide economic depression that took place during the 1930s, beginning in the United States. The timing of the Great Depression varied across nations, it was the longest and most widespread depression of the 20th century. In the 21st century, the Great Depression is used as an example of how intensely the world's economy can decline; the Great Depression started in the United States after a major fall in stock prices that began around September 4, 1929, became worldwide news with the stock market crash of October 29, 1929. Between 1929 and 1932, worldwide gross domestic product fell by an estimated 15%. By comparison, worldwide GDP fell by less than 1% from 2008 to 2009 during the Great Recession; some economies started to recover by the mid-1930s. However, in many countries the negative effects of the Great Depression lasted until the beginning of World War II; the Great Depression had devastating effects in countries both poor. Personal income, tax revenue and prices dropped, while international trade plunged by more than 50%.
Unemployment in the U. S. rose to 25% and in some countries rose as high as 33%. Cities around the world were hit hard those dependent on heavy industry. Construction was halted in many countries. Farming communities and rural areas suffered as crop prices fell by about 60%. Facing plummeting demand with few alternative sources of jobs, areas dependent on primary sector industries such as mining and logging suffered the most. Economic historians attribute the start of the Great Depression to the sudden devastating collapse of U. S. stock market prices on October 29, 1929, known as Black Tuesday. However, some dispute this conclusion and see the stock crash as a symptom, rather than a cause, of the Great Depression. After the Wall Street Crash of 1929 optimism persisted for some time. John D. Rockefeller said "These are days. In the 93 years of my life, depressions have gone. Prosperity has always returned and will again." The stock market turned upward in early 1930. This was still 30% below the peak of September 1929.
Together and business spent more in the first half of 1930 than in the corresponding period of the previous year. On the other hand, many of whom had suffered severe losses in the stock market the previous year, cut back their expenditures by 10%. In addition, beginning in the mid-1930s, a severe drought ravaged the agricultural heartland of the U. S. By mid-1930, interest rates had dropped to low levels, but expected deflation and the continuing reluctance of people to borrow meant that consumer spending and investment were depressed. By May 1930, automobile sales had declined to below the levels of 1928. Prices in general began to decline, although wages held steady in 1930. A deflationary spiral started in 1931. Farmers faced a worse outlook. At its peak, the Great Depression saw nearly 10% of all Great Plains farms change hands despite federal assistance; the decline in the U. S. economy was the factor. Frantic attempts to shore up the economies of individual nations through protectionist policies, such as the 1930 U.
S. Smoot–Hawley Tariff Act and retaliatory tariffs in other countries, exacerbated the collapse in global trade. By 1933, the economic decline had pushed world trade to one-third of its level just four years earlier. Change in economic indicators 1929–32 The two classical competing theories of the Great Depression are the Keynesian and the monetarist explanation. There are various heterodox theories that downplay or reject the explanations of the Keynesians and monetarists; the consensus among demand-driven theories is that a large-scale loss of confidence led to a sudden reduction in consumption and investment spending. Once panic and deflation set in, many people believed they could avoid further losses by keeping clear of the markets. Holding money became profitable as prices dropped lower and a given amount of money bought more goods, exacerbating the drop in demand. Monetarists believe that the Great Depression started as an ordinary recession, but the shrinking of the money supply exacerbated the economic situation, causing a recession to descend into the Great Depression.
Economists and economic historians are evenly split as to whether the traditional monetary explanation that monetary forces were the primary cause of the Great Depression is right, or the traditional Keynesian explanation that a fall in autonomous spending investment, is the primary explanation for the onset of the Great Depression. Today the controversy is of lesser importance since there is mainstream support for the debt deflation theory and the expectations hypothesis that building on the monetary explanation of Milton Friedman and Anna Schwartz add non-monetary explanations. There is consensus that the Federal Reserve System should have cut short the process of monetary deflation and banking collapse. If they had done this, the economic downturn would have been much shorter. British economist John Maynard Keynes argued in The General Theory of Employment and Money that lower aggregate expenditures in the economy contributed to a massive decline in income and to employment, well below the average.
In such a situation, the economy reached equilibrium at low levels of economic activity and high unemployment. Keynes' basic idea was simple
Gross National Happiness
Gross National Happiness is a philosophy that guides the government of Bhutan. It includes an index, used to measure the collective happiness and well-being of a population. Gross National Happiness is instituted as the goal of the government of Bhutan in the Constitution of Bhutan, enacted on 18 July 2008; the term Gross National Happiness was coined in 1972 during an interview by a British journalist for the Financial Times at Bombay airport when the king of Bhutan, Jigme Singye Wangchuck, said "Gross National Happiness is more important than Gross National Product."In 2011, The UN General Assembly passed Resolution "Happiness: towards a holistic approach to development" urging member nations to follow the example of Bhutan and measure happiness and well-being and calling happiness a "fundamental human goal."In 2012, Bhutan's Prime Minister Jigme Thinley and the Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon of the United Nations convened the High Level Meeting: Well-being and Happiness: Defining a New Economic Paradigm to encourage the spread of Bhutan's GNH philosophy.
At the High Level meeting, the first World Happiness Report was issued. Shortly after the High Level meeting, 20 March was declared to be International Day of Happiness by the UN in 2012 with resolution 66/28. Bhutan's Prime Minister Tshering Tobgay proclaimed a preference for focus on more concrete goals instead of promoting GNH when he took office, but subsequently has protected the GNH of his country and promoted the concept internationally. Other Bhutanese officials promote the spread of GNH at the UN and internationally. GNH is distinguishable from Gross Domestic Product by valuing collective happiness as the goal of governance, by emphasizing harmony with nature and traditional values as expressed in the 9 domains of happiness and 4 pillars of GNH; the four pillars of GNH's are 1) sustainable and equitable socio-economic development. The nine domains of GNH are psychological well-being, time use, cultural diversity and resilience, good governance, community vitality, ecological diversity and resilience, living standards.
Each domain is composed of objective indicators. The domains weigh but the indicators within each domain differ by weight; the Gross National Happiness Commission is charged with implementing GNH in Bhutan. The GNH Commission is composed of the Secretaries each of the ministries of the government, the Prime Minister, the Secretary of the GNH Commission; the GNH Commission's tasks include conceiving and implementing the nation's 5-year plan and promulgating policies. The GNH Index is used to measure the well-being of Bhutan's population. A GNH Policy Screening Tool and a GNH Project Screening Tool is used by the GNH commission to determine whether to pass policies or implement projects; the GNH Screening tools used by the Bhutanese GNH Commission for anticipating the impact of policy initiatives upon the levels of GNH in Bhutan. In 2008, the first GNH survey was conducted, it was followed by a second one in 2010. The third nationwide survey was conducted in 2015; the GNH survey covers all twenty districts and results are reported for varying demographic factors such as gender, age and occupation.
The first GNH surveys consisted of long questionnaires that polled the citizens about living conditions and religious behavior, including questions about the times a person prayed in a day and other Karma indicators. It took several hours to complete one questionnaire. Rounds of the GNH Index were shortened, but the survey retained the religious behavioral indicators; the Bhutan GNH Index was developed by the Centre for Bhutan Studies with the help of the researchers from Oxford University researchers to help measure the progress of Bhutanese society. The Index function was based on Alkire & Foster method of 2011. After the creation of the national GNH Index, the government used the metric to measure national progress and inform policy; the Bhutan GNH Index is considered to measure societal progress to other models such as the Gross National Well-being of 2005, the OECD Better Life Index of 2011, SPI Social Progress Index of 2013. One distinguishing feature of Bhutan GNH Index from the other models is that the other models are designed for secular governments and do not include religious behavior measurement components.
The data is used to compare the happiness between different groups of citizens, changes over time. According to the World Happiness Report 2018, Bhutan is 97th out of 156 countries. In Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, a shortened version of Bhutan's GNH survey was used by the local government, local foundations and governmental agencies under the leadership of Martha and Michael Pennock to assess the population of Victoria. In the state of São Paulo, Susan Andrews, through her organization Future Vision Ecological Park, used a version of Bhutan's GNH at a community level in some cities. In Seattle, United States, a version of the GNH Index was used by the Seattle City Council and Sustainable Seattle to assess the happiness and well-being of the Seattle Area population. Other cities and areas in North America, including Eau Claire, Creston, British Columbia and the U. S. state of Vermont used a version of the GNH Index. At the University of Oregon, United States, a behavioral model of GNH based on the use of positive and negative words in social network status updates was developed by Adam Kramer.
In 2016, Thailand launched its own GNH center. The former king of Thailand, Bhumibol Adulyadej, was a close friend of King Jigme Singye Wangchuck, conceived the similar philosophy of Sufficiency Economy. In t