{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01713796058269066, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.488888888888889, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
On Procedures for Measuring Deprivation and Living Standards of Societies in a Multi-Attribute Framework

When a society's overall deprivation or living standard is assessed in a multi-attribute framework, the following procedure is often used. First, for each attribute, a summary index is constructed to reflect a society's performance in relation to this attribute. Then, an indicator of the overall performance of the society in terms of all the attributes together is constructed. This paper discusses a difficulty associated with this procedure. We show that the difficulty lies in its inability to reconcile two highly attractive ethical principles - the first reflecting a requirement of treating individuals symmetrically and the second reflecting a requirement for equity-sensitivity. This problem implies that this widely-used procedure must lead to possibly untenable conclusions, and that it is necessary to adopt alternative procedures. The alternative procedure must permit describing a society's overall deprivation or living standard as an aggregate of the comprehensive deprivations or living standards experienced by the individuals in the society.