C3.5 Composite indices

Humanitarian risk index methodology [7]

What it requires. Any score built from several indicators brings every indicator to a common scale of zero to ten before combining; aggregates the dimensions geometrically, so that a zero in one dimension zeroes the score and strength in one cannot mask extremity in another; publishes a reliability index beside every score, computed from how much of the input was missing and how old it was; and runs on a cadence matched to what it measures, with structural risk, a situation in progress and a forward-looking warning as three separate clocks.

Where it comes from. The humanitarian index [7] is a tree from some fifty open indicators through components and six categories to three dimensions, hazard and exposure, vulnerability, and lack of coping capacity, normalized to zero to ten and multiplied at the root. Each country score carries a reliability index and a trend, and the family runs on three cadences: annual for structural risk, monthly for crises under way, one to twelve months ahead for warning.

What it reconciles. Composite scores are everywhere, country ratings, vendor tiers, conduct heatmaps, and almost all are weighted sums agreed in a committee with no record of how much data was missing. The component imports the one open method that is honest about itself and places the index inside the triplet of C3.1, with its reliability as the uncertainty field. What it does not settle, and the framework lists as open, is how the geometric rule and the likelihood of missing an objective in C1.6 combine into one enterprise view.