journal article·2026-04-21Open access

The LESG Index for Assessing Structural Coherence in National Development Systems

Panagiotis Karountzos, Damianos P. Sakas, Kanellos S. Toudas, Pandora P. Nika, Nikolaos T. Giannakopoulos

Applied Sciences· Volume 16· Issue 8

Abstract

This study introduces the LESG index, a composite analytical framework designed to assess the structural coherence of national development systems by integrating logistics capability, governance quality, and sustainability performance. Traditional development metrics evaluate these dimensions separately, limiting their ability to capture systemic interactions. Using cross-country data for 123 countries, the LESG index is constructed through normalization procedures and Principal Component Analysis (PCA) to derive a composite indicator reflecting the multivariate structure of the selected dimensions. Cluster analysis is subsequently applied to identify distinct structural development regimes. The results indicate a consistent empirical association between the LESG index and broader development outcomes, while also highlighting heterogeneous configurations of logistics capability, institutional quality, and sustainability performance across countries. These findings suggest that composite indicators can provide useful diagnostic tools for examining the structural alignment of development conditions beyond single-dimension metrics. The LESG framework contributes an integrated perspective for analyzing national development systems and offers a basis for future research on the structural conditions supporting sustainable economic transformation.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Economic and Technological Innovation · Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy · Quality of Life Measurement

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

BICTEVAC Laboratory—Business Information and Communication Technologies in Value Chains Laboratory, Department of Agribusiness and Supply Chain Management, School of Applied Economics and Social Sciences, Agricultural University of Athens, 11855 Athens, Greece

Department of Agribusiness and Supply Chain Management, School of Applied Economics and Social Sciences, Agricultural University of Athens, 11855 Athens, Greece

References (75)

Show source-provided references
1. Kuznets, S. (1934). National Income, 1929–1932, NBER.
2. Beyond GDP: The quest for a measure of social welfare10.1257/jel.47.4.1029 ↗
3. Stiglitz, J.E., Sen, A., and Fitoussi, J.-P. (2009). Report by the Commission on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress, OECD.
4. Understanding PPPs and PPP-based national accounts10.1257/mac.2.4.1 ↗
5. The subjectivity inherent in objective measures of well-being10.1007/s10902-007-9084-z ↗
6. Arvis, J.-F., Ojala, L., Wiederer, C., Shepherd, B., Raj, A., Dairabayeva, K., and Kiiski, T. (2018). Connecting to Compete 2018: Trade Logistics in the Global Economy, World Bank.
7. The role of logistics in economic growth and global competitiveness10.18045/zbefri.2023.2.499 ↗
8. The logistics performance effect in international trade10.1016/j.ajsl.2017.12.012 ↗
9. Karountzos, P., Sakas, D.P., Nasiopoulos, D.K., and Toudas, K. (2025). Redefining development through logistics performance and ESG metrics. Account. Audit., 1.10.20944/preprints202507.1916.v1 ↗
10. OECD (2008). Handbook on Constructing Composite Indicators, OECD.
11. Ning, L., and Yao, D. (2023). The impact of digital transformation on supply chain capabilities and supply chain competitive performance. Sustainability, 15.10.3390/su151310107 ↗
12. Taking the pulse of the economy: Measuring GDP10.1257/jep.22.2.193 ↗
13. The relativity of poverty and income: How reliable are African economic statistics?10.1093/afraf/adp064 ↗
15. An inquiry into the analysis of the transport and logistics sectors’ role in economic development10.1016/j.trpro.2017.05.317 ↗
16. The relationship between economic growth and the logistics sector in the case of G-7 countries10.1016/j.trpro.2021.06.038 ↗
17. Distance, time, and specialization: Lean retailing in general equilibrium10.1257/0002828053828590 ↗
18. Time as a trade barrier10.1257/aer.103.7.2935 ↗
19. On the issue of subjectivity of the logistics performance index10.1016/j.trpro.2022.01.046 ↗
20. Evaluating the public investment mix in US freight transportation infrastructure10.1016/j.tra.2007.06.012 ↗
21. Jüriado, R. (2016). Tango without the dancefloor? The forgotten role of the public sector on logistics. Sustainable Logistics and Supply Chains: Innovations and Integral Approaches, Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-17419-8_8 ↗
22. The mediator effect of foreign direct investments on the relation between logistics performance and economic growth
23. Modelling and quantifying the effects of trade facilitation on trade and international transport costs using the logistics performance index10.1504/IJSTL.2020.109888 ↗
24. Transport infrastructure quality and logistics performance in exports
25. Rodrik, D. (2008). Normalizing Industrial Policy, World Bank. Commission on Growth and Development Working Paper No. 3.10.1596/28009 ↗
26. Acemoglu, D., and Robinson, J.A. (2012). Why Nations Fail: The Origins of Power, Prosperity, and Poverty, Profile Books.10.1355/ae29-2j ↗
27. World Bank (2019). World Development Report 2019: The Changing Nature of Work, World Bank.
28. North, D.C. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511808678 ↗
29. Monkelbaan, J. (2019). Governance for the Sustainable Development Goals, Springer.10.1007/978-981-13-0475-0 ↗
30. The Competitiveness of Nations: Why Some Countries Prosper While Others Fall Behind10.1016/j.worlddev.2007.01.004 ↗
31. Korinek, J., and Sourdin, P. (2011). To What Extent Are High-Quality Logistics Services Trade Facilitating?, OECD Publishing.
32. Life without trucks: The impact of a temporary disruption of road freight transport on a national economy10.1002/j.2158-1592.2006.tb00224.x ↗
33. Samuels, A. (2025). Digital transformation in supply chains: Improving resilience and sustainability through AI, blockchain, and IoT. Front. Sustain., 6.10.3389/frsus.2025.1584580 ↗
34. Samuels, A. (2025). Examining the integration of artificial intelligence in supply chain management from Industry 4.0 to 6.0: A systematic literature review. Front. Artif. Intell., 7.10.3389/frai.2024.1477044 ↗
35. Ali, A.A.A., Sharabati, A.-A.A., Allahham, M., and Nasereddin, A.Y. (2024). The relationship between supply chain resilience and digital supply chain and the impact on sustainability. Sustainability, 16.10.3390/su16073082 ↗
36. Supply chain resilience and digital transformation: Perspectives from a supply chain network
37. Digital transformation: Unlocking supply chain resilience through adaptability and innovation10.1016/j.techfore.2025.124234 ↗
38. Industry 4.0 adoption in supply chain operations: A systematic literature review10.14716/ijtech.v15i3.5958 ↗
39. Lu, X., and Taghipour, A. (2025). A review of supply chain digitalization and emerging research paradigms. Logistics, 9.10.3390/logistics9020047 ↗
40. Transformative supply chains: The enabling role of digital technologies10.1016/j.ijpe.2025.109562 ↗
41. The convergence of IoT and sustainability in global supply chains: Patterns, trends, and future directions10.1016/j.cie.2024.110631 ↗
42. Quynh, T.N.N., and Buics, L. (2024). The evolution of digitalization transformation and Industry 4.0 in supply chain management: A systematic literature review. Eng. Proc., 79.10.3390/engproc2024079065 ↗
43. World Bank (2025). Logistics Performance Index, 2025 Update, World Bank. Available online: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/LP.LPI.OVRL.XQ.
44. Block, S., Emerson, J.W., Esty, D.C., de Sherbinin, A., and Wendling, Z.A. (2024). 2024 Environmental Performance Index, Yale Center for Environmental Law & Policy. Available online: https://epi.yale.edu.
45. Sachs, J.D., Lafortune, G., and Fuller, G. (2024). The SDGs and the UN Summit of the Future: Sustainable Development Report 2024, Dublin University Press.
46. World Bank (2024). Worldwide Governance Indicators, 2025 Update, World Bank. Available online: https://www.worldbank.org/en/publication/worldwide-governance-indicators.
47. Jayathilaka, R., Jayawardhana, C., Embogama, N., Jayasooriya, S., Karunarathna, N., Gamage, T., and Kuruppu, N. (2022). Gross domestic product and Logistics Performance Index drive the world’s foreign direct investment: Robustness evidence. PLoS ONE, 17.10.1371/journal.pone.0264474 ↗
48. The impact of international logistics performance on import and export trade: Evidence from Belt and Road countries
49. Competitiveness and the Logistics Performance Index: ANOVA application across regions10.1016/j.scs.2021.102845 ↗
50. Competitiveness based logistics performance index: Evidence from OECD countries
51. Corporate governance as a channel between public governance and logistics performance: International evidence10.1016/j.tranpol.2021.05.023 ↗
52. Thu, H.V.T., and Thu, T.N. (2025). The impact of logistics performance and green logistics performance on intra-ASEAN goods exports. Asian J. Shipp. Logist., in press.
53. Stević, Ž., Ersoy, N., Başar, E.E., and Baydaş, M. (2024). Addressing the Global Logistics Performance Index rankings with methodological insights and a decision-support framework. Appl. Sci., 14.10.3390/app142210334 ↗
54. An alternative assessment approach to global logistics performance evaluation: Common weight H-DEA approach10.1111/itor.13360 ↗
55. Wan, B., Wan, W., Hanif, N., and Ahmed, Z. (2022). Logistics performance and environmental sustainability: Do green innovation, renewable energy, and economic globalization matter?. Front. Environ. Sci., 10.10.3389/fenvs.2022.996341 ↗
56. The trilemma of innovation, logistics performance, and environmental quality in 25 topmost logistics countries: A quantile regression evidence10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129050 ↗
57. Green logistics performance index as a benchmarking tool for EU countries’ environmental sustainability10.1016/j.ecolind.2023.111396 ↗
58. Effect of logistics performance on transport environmental quality: Comparative insight from Sub-Saharan Africa and OECD markets10.1016/j.ajsl.2025.10.001 ↗
59. Does logistics performance foster sustainable development? A moderated mediation effect10.1108/IJSE-05-2024-0392 ↗
60. Digital transformation and supply chain resilience10.1016/j.iref.2025.104033 ↗
61. Alquraish, M. (2025). Digital transformation, supply chain resilience, and sustainability: A comprehensive review with implications for Saudi Arabian manufacturing. Sustainability, 17.10.3390/su17104495 ↗
62. Ye, H., Ding, Y., Zhang, R., and Zou, Y. (2025). A Study on the Correlation Between Urbanization and Agricultural Economy Based on Efficiency Measurement and Quantile Regression: Evidence from China. Sustainability, 17.10.3390/su17135908 ↗
63. A sensitivity analysis of composite indicators: Min/max thresholds
64. Extending and understanding: An application of machine learning to the World Bank’s Logistics Performance Index10.1108/IJPDLM-06-2022-0180 ↗
65. Composite indicators between analysis and advocacy10.1007/s11205-006-0024-9 ↗
66. A state-of-the-art review and meta-analysis on sustainable supply chain management: Future research directions10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.123357 ↗
67. Towards a cleaner and sustainable Europe and Central Asia: An investigation of the logistics–environment nexus10.1002/sd.3055 ↗
68. On corporate social responsibility, sensemaking, and the search for meaningfulness
69. ESG performance and firm value: The moderating role of disclosure
70. Aggregate confusion: The divergence of ESG ratings10.1093/rof/rfac033 ↗
71. How to SHIFT consumer behaviors to be more sustainable: A literature review and guiding framework10.1177/0022242919825649 ↗
72. On the methodological framework of composite indicators: A review of the issues of weighting, aggregation and robustness10.1007/s11205-017-1832-9 ↗
73. Lost in translation: Exploring the ethical consumer intention–behavior gap10.1016/j.jbusres.2012.09.022 ↗
74. What determines consumers’ use of eco-labels? Taking a close look at label trust10.1016/j.ecolecon.2021.107173 ↗
75. Towards closing the attitude–intention–behavior gap in green consumption: A narrative review of the literature and an overview of future research directions10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.122556 ↗