Methodological choices for reflecting strong sustainability in composite indices

Abstract

Composite indicators are widely used to represent sustainability or its underlying dimensions. Nonetheless, an alignment between the multiple choices made during their construction and the underlying conceptual framework is often lacking. This reduces the relevance of the composite indicator. This paper provides an overview of the theoretical implications of the choices made during the construction of strong sustainability indices, particularly focusing on reflecting environmental sustainability and the limited substitution capacity between different types of capitals. The theoretical perspective is complemented through an uncertainty analysis of the Strong Environmental Sustainability Index and the Sustainable Human Development Index in which the quantitative implications of choices made in the indicator selection, normalisation, weighting and aggregation processes are assessed. The results show that different choices significantly affect country scores. Given the conceptual implications of these choices in relation to strong sustainability, we conclude that the choices made during the construction of a composite indicator need to be aligned with the underlying conceptual framework. In a context in which a growing number of composite indicators is produced every year, it becomes of utmost importance to make sure that those that percolate to the decision-making process monitor what they are intended to monitor. © 2023