Current outcomes measures of Extension Service base program effectiveness tend to be initiative specific. These diverse indicators do not provide an encompassing view of a base program\u27s efficacy. This article proposes the use of an overall index that would incorporate existing outcomes measures to evaluate base program progress. Specific emphasis is placed on the development of an index for the community resources and economic development base program

Estrada, Joselito K

English

Clemson University: TigerPrints

The Journal of Extension Volume 43 Number 2 Article 18 4-1-2005 Assessing Community Resources and Economic Development Programming Efforts Using a Modified Human Development Index Joselito K. Estrada University of Texas at Brownsville, jkestrada@utb.edu This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 License. Recommended Citation Estrada, J. K. (2005). Assessing Community Resources and Economic Development Programming Efforts Using a Modified Human Development Index. The Journal of Extension, 43(2), Article 18. https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/joe/vol43/iss2/18 This Ideas at Work is brought to you for free and open access by the Conferences at TigerPrints. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Journal of Extension by an authorized editor of TigerPrints. For more information, please contact kokeefe@clemson.edu. 	 JOEHOME JOURNAL GUIDELINES ABOUT	JOE CONTACT NATIONAL	JOB	BANKCurrent	Issues Back	IssuesApril	2005	//	Volume	43	//	Number	2	//	Ideas	at	Work	//	2IAW10Assessing	Community	Resources	and	Economic	DevelopmentProgramming	Efforts	Using	a	Modified	Human	DevelopmentIndexAbstractCurrent	outcomes	measures	of	Extension	Service	base	program	effectiveness	tend	to	beinitiative	specific.	These	diverse	indicators	do	not	provide	an	encompassing	view	of	a	baseprogram's	efficacy.	This	article	proposes	the	use	of	an	overall	index	that	would	incorporateexisting	outcomes	measures	to	evaluate	base	program	progress.	Specific	emphasis	is	placed	onthe	development	of	an	index	for	the	community	resources	and	economic	development	baseprogram.	IntroductionAs	one	of	the	base	programs	of	the	Cooperative	Extension	System,	the	goal	of	communityresources	and	economic	development	is	to	provide	research-based	educational	programs	andtechnical	assistance	that	lead	to	the	long-term	well-being	of	communities	(CSREES,	2003).	How	dowe	measure	an	extensive	goal	such	as	community	well-being?At	present,	community	well-being	is	measured	within	the	confines	of	various	programs	ofexcellence	such	as	workforce	preparation,	business	retention	and	expansion,	community	planning,and	small	and/or	home-based	businesses	(Southern	Rural	Development	Center,	2004).	Each	ofthese	programs	of	excellence	has	its	own	outcomes	indicators.	Workforce	preparation	may	useindicators	such	as	number	of	youth	in	the	labor	force	or	number	of	welfare	recipients,	while	thesmall	and/or	home-based	business	program	may	use	number	of	new	business	start-ups/expansionsand	number	of	jobs	created	from	business	start-ups/expansions.	Although	these	indicators	provideuseful	information	regarding	program	efficacy,	such	measures	do	not	necessarily	provide	anencompassing	view	of	well-being.This	article	presents	a	measure	that	would	provide	a	holistic	indicator	of	community	resources	andeconomic	development's	goal	of	community	well-being.	The	proposed	measure	is	based	upon	theUnited	Nations'	human	development	index	(HDI).The	Human	Development	IndexThe	United	Nations	Development	Programme	introduced	the	HDI,	which	has	served	as	a	compositemeasure	of	human	development,	in	1990	with	the	publication	of	the	first	Human	DevelopmentReport	(UNDP,	2001).	At	the	heart	of	these	human	development	reports	is	the	promotion	of	analternative	means	of	viewing	human	development	or	well-being.	These	reports	have	called	for	ashift	in	the	development	paradigm	from	a	focus	on	economic	growth	towards	a	more	evenhandedinterest	in	equity,	sustainability,	productivity,	and	empowerment.In	its	original	form,	the	HDI	measures	a	nation's	overall	achievement	based	on	three	basicdimensions.	The	first	dimension,	which	is	longevity,	is	measured	based	on	life	expectancy.	Thesecond	dimension,	which	is	knowledge,	is	measured	based	on	a	set	of	variables	pertaining	toeducational	attainment.	The	final	dimension,	which	is	decent	standard	of	living,	is	measured	usingadjusted	income	per	capita	in	purchasing	power	parity	U.S.	dollars.	Indexes	are	developed	for	eachof	these	dimensions.	The	average	of	these	dimension	indexes	forms	the	HDI.	The	resulting	HDIJoselito	K.	Estrada	Assistant	Professor,	Department	of	Business	AdministrationThe	University	of	Texas	at	BrownsvilleBrownsville,	Texasjkestrada@utb.eduprovides	a	value	between	zero	and	one.	Nations	with	HDI	values	closer	to	one	(zero)	representhigher	(lower)	levels	of	development.National,	state/provincial,	and	local	government	decision	makers	have	used	results	from	theestimation	of	HDIs	as	policy	assessment	tools.	Comparisons	across	borders	and	time	have	led	tothe	appraisal	and	adjustment	of	policy	initiatives	towards	human	development.While	the	initial	applications	of	the	HDI	have	been	to	compare	achievements	in	humandevelopment	among	nations,	a	number	of	studies	have	been	conducted	using	the	HDI	to	compareachievements	at	the	city	level	or	county	level	(Agostini	&	Richardson,	1997;	Felder,	2002;	Hanham,Berhanu,	&	Loveridge,	2002).	On	the	other	hand,	the	HDI	has	been	used	to	assess	humandevelopment	for	population	groups	(Corrie,	1994).Developing	a	Modified	Human	Development	Index	for	Use	in	Program	Evaluation:	Evaluating	theImpact	of	the	Empowerment	Zone	ProgramModified	HDIAs	a	potential	measurement	tool	for	community	resources	and	economic	developmentprogramming	at	the	county-level,	a	modified	version	of	the	HDI	can	be	developed.	Rather	thanutilize	the	original	dimensions	established	by	the	United	Nations,	this	modified	index	willincorporate	dimensions	or	indicators	that	are	program-specific.	The	general	formulation	of	theindex	is	as	follows.County-Level	Index	=	(Xi	-	min	X)	/	(max	X	-	min	X)WhereXi	-	County's	value	for	a	specific	indicator;Min	X	-	the	lowest	observed	value	among	all	counties	for	the	indicator;	and,Max	X	-	the	highest	observed	value	among	all	counties	for	the	indicator.Use	as	a	Program	Evaluation	ToolLet	us	look	at	an	example	of	how	this	index	could	be	used	as	a	program	evaluation	tool.Specifically,	this	example	investigates	the	effects	of	the	Empowerment	Zone	program	on	CameronCounty,	Texas	(Estrada	&	Allen,	2004).The	Rio	Grande	Valley	of	Texas	received	a	rural	empowerment	zone	designation	from	the	FederalGovernment	in	December	1994.	In	its	application	for	designation,	the	empowerment	zonecorporation	sought	to	improve	the	quality	of	life	for	valley	residents	by	addressing	a	number	ofdevelopment	concerns	(RGVEZC,	no	date).	Most	notable	of	these	concerns	was	the	creation	ofsustainable	jobs	paying	livable	wages	(economic	opportunity);	educational	opportunities	that	leadto	high	skills	training	(education);	and	increased	capacity	in	housing	development	(housing).In	general,	evaluating	quality	of	life	by	using	the	indicators	cited	above	could	take	on	the	form	ofpresented	in	Table	1.	While	the	data	presented	in	the	table	provides	useful	information,	it	does	notpresent	an	encompassing	view	of	well-being	in	the	county.Table	1.2000	Socioeconomic	Indicators	for	Cameron	County,	TexasEducation	Dimension	IndicatorsVariableName ValuePercent	of	Persons	Aged	25	and	older	who	are	High	SchoolGraduates XE1 55.2	%Percent	of	Persons	Aged	25	and	Older	who	are	CollegeGraduates XE2 13.4	%Percent	of	Total	Population	that	are	enrolled	in	Elementaryand	High	School XE3 23.3	%Economic	Opportunity	Dimension	Indicators 	1999	Median	Household	Income YE1 $26,155Percent	of	Families	Living	Below	the	Poverty	Level	in	1999 YE2 28.2	%Average	Monthly	Unemployment	Rate YE3 8.7	%Housing	Dimension	Indicators 	Total	Number	of	Housing	Units ZH1 119,654Number	of	Owner-occupied	Housing	Units ZH2 65,875Median	Value	of	Owner-occupied	Housing	Units ZH3 $53,000Sources:	Texas	State	Data	Center	&	Texas	Workforce	Commission	(2004).Using	the	index	listed	above,	a	series	of	dimension/indicator	indexes	could	be	developed	to	showhow	the	county	has	progressed	vis-à-vis	other	counties	in	the	state.	These	indexes	are	calculatedbelow.Education	Index	=	(XE1	+	XE2	+	XE3)	/	3WhereXE1	Index	=	(XE1i	-	min	XE1)	/	(max	XE1	-	min	XE1)XE2	Index	=	(XE2i	-	min	XE2)	/	(max	XE2	-	min	XE2)XE3	Index	=	(XE3i	-	min	XE3)	/	(max	XE3	-	min	XE3)Economic	Opportunity	Index	=		(YE1	+	YE2	+	YE3)	/	3WhereYE1	Index	=	(YE1i	-	min	YE1)	/	(max	YE1	-	min	YE1)YE2	Index	=	1	-	[(YE2i	-	min	YE2)	/	(max	YE2	-	min	YE2)]YE3	Index	=	1	-	[(YE3i	-	min	YE3)	/	(max	YE3	-	min	YE3)]Housing	Index	=	(ZH1	+	ZH2	+	ZH3)	/	3WhereZH1	Index	=	(ZH1i	-	min	ZH1)	/	(max	ZH1	-	min	ZH1)ZH2	Index	=	(ZH2i	-	min	ZH2)	/	(max	ZH2	-	min	ZH2)ZH3	Index	=	(ZH3i	-	min	ZH3)	/	(max	ZH3	-	min	ZH3)Overall	Well-Being	Index	=		(Education	Index	+	Employment	Opportunity	Index	+	HousingIndex)	/	3The	min	(max)	value	for	each	variable	represents	values	for	counties	in	the	state	with	the	lowest(highest)	value	for	the	variable	under	consideration.	Estimated	values	for	these	indexes	arepresented	in	Table	2.Table	2.Dimension	and	Overall	Well-Being	Indexes	for	Cameron	CountyDimension Index County	RankEducation 0.46 153Economic 0.43 244Housing 0.18 53Overall	Well-Being	Index 0.35 218Source:	Estrada	&	Allen	(2004).Note:	The	state	of	Texas	is	comprised	of	254	counties.	The	County	Rankcolumn	shows	how	Cameron	County	ranks	in	relation	to	other	counties	withrespect	to	the	dimensions	listed	above.SummaryIn	a	period	where	accountability	and	effectiveness	are	imperative,	outcomes	measures	ofExtension	Service	education	programs	are	crucial.	Given	the	extensive	nature	of	most	ExtensionService	base	programs,	especially	community	resources	and	economic	development,	outcomesindicators	tend	to	be	program	specific	rather	than	encompassing.This	article	has	introduced	the	development	of	a	measure,	based	on	the	human	developmentindex,	that	would	allow	for	the	evaluation	of	the	effectiveness	of	the	community	resources	andeconomic	development	base	program	in	achieving	its	goal	of	improving	community	well-being.Rather	than	discarding	existing	outcomes	indicators,	these	are	utilized	in	the	development	of	anoverall	index	that	could	be	used	to	assess	community	well-being.	Similar	indexes	could	bedeveloped	for	other	Extension	Service	base	programs.ReferencesAgostini,	S.	J.,	&	Richardson,	S.	J.	(1997).	A	human	development	index	for	U.S.	cities:Methodological	issues	and	preliminary	findings.	Real	Estate	Economics.	Volume	25	(1):	13-41.Cooperative	State	Research,	Education,	and	Extension	Service	(2003).	Community	resources	andeconomic	development.	Available	at:http://www.csrees.usda.gov/nea/economics/sri/publicpolicy_sri_cred.htmlCorrie,	B.	P.	(1994).	A	human	development	index	for	the	black	child	in	the	United	States.Challenge.	January-February:	53-55.Estrada,	J.	K.,	&	Allen,	A.	J.	(2004).	An	assessment	of	the	impact	of	the	rural	empowerment	zoneand	enterprise	community	program	on	Texas'	Rio	Grande	Valley.	Paper	presented	at	the	2004Annual	Meeting	of	the	Southern	Agricultural	Economics	Association,	Tulsa,	OK,	February	2004.Felder,	J.	(2002).	Assessing	recent	socio-economic	factors	for	the	counties	of	the	State	ofMississippi.	Paper	presented	at	the	29th	Annual	Meeting	of	the	Academy	of	Economics	andFinance.	Pensacola,	Florida.	February	2002.Hanham,	A.	C.,	Brehanu,	S.,	&	Leveridge,	S.	(2002).	A	human	development	index	for	West	Virginiacounties.	Research	Paper	2005.	Center	for	Community,	Economic,	and	Workforce	Development.West	Virginia	University	Extension	Service.Rio	Grande	Valley	Empowerment	Zone	Corporation.	(2004).	Strategic	plan	summary	buildingcommunities:	together.	Available	at:	http://www.ezec.gov/ezec/tx/riogrande.htmlSouthern	Rural	Development	Center	(2004).	Community	resources	and	economic	development:Programs	of	excellence.	Available	at:	http://srdc.msstate.edu/cred/programs/programs.htmTexas	State	Data	Center.	Education,	housing,	poverty,	and	income	data	(2004).	Texas	A	&	MUniversity.	Retrieved	February	10.	2004	from	http://txsdc.tamu.eduTexas	Workforce	Commission	(2004).	Labor	market	information.	State	of	Texas.	Available	at:http://www.tracer2.comUnited	Nations	Development	Programme.	(2001).	Human	development	reports:	Measuringdevelopment	and	influencing	policy.	New	York:	Oxford	University	Press.Copyright	©	by	Extension	Journal,	Inc.	ISSN	1077-5315.	Articles	appearing	in	the	Journal	become	the	property	of	theJournal.	 Single	 copies	 of	 articles	 may	 be	 reproduced	 in	 electronic	 or	 print	 form	 for	 use	 in	 educational	 or	 trainingactivities.	Inclusion	of	articles	in	other	publications,	electronic	sources,	or	systematic	large-scale	distribution	may	bedone	only	with	prior	electronic	or	written	permission	of	the	Journal	Editorial	Office,	joe-ed@joe.org.If	you	have	difficulties	viewing	or	printing	this	page,	please	contact	JOE	Technical	Support©	Copyright	by	Extension	Journal,	Inc.	ISSN	1077-5315.	Copyright	Policy

Assessing Community Resources and Economic Development Programming Efforts Using a Modified Human Development Index

https://tigerprints.clemson.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4612&context=joe

Assessing Community Resources and Economic Development Programming Efforts Using a Modified Human Development Index

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Clemson University: TigerPrints