There are various hypotheses as to why some nations are more developed than others, including political instability, corruption, and exclusive institutions. However, one hypothesis that has not been extensively studied is the impact of 'bad behavior' on development. To test the validity of such hypothesis, a composite index must be developed to quantify such behavior, and facilitate for the study of its impact on development. This study aims to lay the foundation for the development of such index by conducting a bibliometric analysis of Scopus and Web of Science databases to determine if a quantitative measure of this concept already exists. This study employs a bibliometric and content analysis of these databases using Excel, VOSviewer, and R software. The results of such analysis indicate the absence of such a composite measure, thereby providing sufficient evidence that the construction of a 'Bad Behavior Index' is justified. Regarding the research contribution, the study offers an improved methodology for conducting bibliometric analysis by integrating and analyzing two journal databases instead of one, and using three different mediums and methods to identify the absence of knowledge, and provide a justification for the creation of such knowledge.

Composite indices are a great tool for researchers and policymakers alike as they provide a simplification of reality of complex phenomena, as well as their enabling ability for cross-country comparisons. A troublesome issue with constructing composite indices is the selection of the weighting system as it can greatly influence the results of the index developed. One of the most reliable weighting systems is the expert weighting system, where experts on the topic being studied are delegated the weight selection process, and the average of their responses are then transformed into weights. The limitation of this method, however, is the high subjectivity, uncertainty, and inconsistency of the expert responses. This paper seeks to address this limitation by providing a guide to researchers on how to improve the expert weights by subjecting them to the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (FAHP) method for multicriteria decision making (MCDM) to compute the fuzzy weights, a more objective and reliable weights relative to expert weights. That said, and despite the benefits of the FAHP method, it can produce weights that can skew the composite index results. To address this limitation, the study introduces the interval weights, which are calculated by finding the midpoint between the expert weights and the fuzzy weights. The resulting interval weights exhibit the benefits of both principal component analysis (PCA) and the FAHP process, the difference being that PCA cannot be applied for noncompensatory indices.

Due to theoretical shortcomings, most of the literature that examines the impact of religion on economic well-being fails to distinguish between the religion and the religion constituents. Moreover, the current framework has a narrow focus on economic well-being, does not facilitate for empirical testing, and is troubled by the problem of endogeneity. This paper introduces a framework for the empirical and descriptive study of the impact of religion on socio-economic development. The framework introduced facilitates for the adoption of both inductive and deductive approaches, allowing one to operationalize and analyze the religion itself, to test whether it embodies any principles that might hinder development by facilitating for the construction of a quantitative measure, which seeks to differentiate between the religion and the behavior of its constituents, as well as facilitate for a descriptive study of the religion itself. An example of how to utilize the framework developed is provided for the case of Islam, where the concept of Mafsada, public harm, in the Maqasid of Shariah, the purpose of Islamic jurisprudence, is operationalized, alongside Adam Smith’s Worthless Fellow in the Theory of Moral Sentiments, to develop a composite measure whose corollaries represent behavior a worthless fellow might engage in and would subsequently lead to societal harm. These corollaries can also be adopted in an empirical study as independent variables. Moreover, Ibn Khuldon’s Theory of Development is also utilized along with Max Weber’s Protestant Ethic to facilitate for the study as to why Muslim countries are underdeveloped, and whether their poor development is attributable to Islam, or due to factors relating to culture, justice, politics, and others. This study utilizes a causal research design as it facilitates for better understanding the nature and the extent of the relationship between variables in poorly understood phenomena—behavior, religion, and how, and whether, they can impact development.

Why do people engage in bad behavior? Are people inherently evil? Is human nature inclined towards unethical behavior? Or are the causes of bad behavior external to the self? This paper employs an explanatory research design to provide descriptive explanations as to why people might engage in bad behavior by examining views from different disciplines such as philosophy, psychology, ethics, theology, and economics. The paper finds that people engage in bad behavior due to the duality of human nature, cognitive inefficiencies, psychological tendencies, bounded rationality, and having a poor regulatory focus. In summary, consensus is lacking among scholars within and across disciplines as to what constitutes bad behavior, as well as a lack of consensus as to why people might engage in such behavior – this in turn contributes to a lack of a theoretical framework which properly defines what constitutes bad behavior and how, and whether, it is quantifiable.   Received: 30 August 2022 / Accepted: 14 October 2022 / Published: 5 November 2022

Composite indices have become a popular tool for providing a quantitative, simplified, and visualized representation of complex phenomena. An example of such is the Human Development Index (HDI) which ranks countries by their level of development. The primary limitation of the HDI is its narrow scope, which hinders its effectiveness at explaining why some nations are more developed than others. The discussion as to why some nations are more developed than others goes back as far as the 14th century, where Ibn Khaldun developed a theory which aims to explain why civilizations rise and fall. Some of the hypotheses which seek to answer this question point to the importance of economic freedoms, absence of corruption, high investment in human capital, and the importance of institutions etc. to development. One hypothesis which has not been properly studied regards the culpability of individual and institutional behavior. The purpose of this study is to introduce a composite measure of the development hindering behavior of individuals and institutions, i.e., the Bad Behavior Index (BBI). The methodology of this study is influenced by the Mazziotta & Pareto framework for composite indices. The index weights have been computed by integrating expert opinion with the Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP). The findings of this study suggest that African countries engage in the highest level of bad behavior, which subsequently leads to their poor socio-economic development, whereas Northern countries engage in the least level of bad behavior. The study also finds that the most important drivers for socio-economic development are low levels of corruption, high levels of knowledge creation, strict application of the rule of law, high levels of social cohesion, and high levels of political stability.