IESET.
Hypotheses·labour·bargaining_coverage_low_wage_poverty_employment_panel

Higher collective-bargaining coverage lowers in-work poverty and low-wage incidence with no youth-employment penalty in coordinated systems, but is refuted if coverage mainly prices out young or low-skill workers.

PARTIALengine/runs/bargaining_coverage_low_wage_poverty_employment_panel

PARTIAL — coef=-0.03644, p=0.104 (above α=0.1); direction inconclusive

confidence cueThe result is useful, but not decisive. Treat it as a clue, not a settled conclusion.

policy briefMixed or noisy

In ordinary language

In plain terms, this asks whether collective bargaining coverage is actually linked to better or worse poverty headcount from 1990 to 2024.

plain answer

The evidence is suggestive but not decisive. coef=-0.03644, p=0.104 (above α=0.1); direction inconclusive

why it matters

Labor-market rules often help some workers while risking job loss or slower hiring for others. This test looks for that tradeoff in observable employment or unemployment data.

how the test works

It compares 1 country or place units from 1990 to 2024, using a panel fe design, with fixed effects for country and year.

what was measured
What changed
  • Collective bargaining coverage
What we checked
  • Poverty headcount
what this does not prove

A single test is not the whole truth. It narrows the claim under a specific sample, time period, and method. Strong policy conclusions need the pattern to survive nearby tests, alternative data, and serious objections.

verification

No evidence packet has been generated yet.

Results

engine/runs/bargaining_coverage_low_wage_poverty_employment_panel
1007550250199020072024OECD
illustrative sketch · run pending
No coefficients yet. When the model fires, this chart will show poverty_headcount across 1 sampled countries over 1990–2024.
The shapes above are stylised — none of the lines are real data.
Placeholder for bargaining_coverage_low_wage_poverty_employment_panel. Published chart will be generated from engine/runs/bargaining_coverage_low_wage_poverty_employment_panel/chart_data.json.

Who has skin in the game — schools predicting on this

17 schools list this hypothesis as a test of their position. The chips below are school-level scoreboard outcomes, not a second hypothesis verdict.

hypothesis verdict vs scoreboard outcome

The banner verdict judges this hypothesis as written. The scoreboard asks whether each school's polarity-corrected prediction was right. Raw status is not a school win: SUPPORTED supports schools that needed SUPPORTED, but refutes schools that needed REFUTED.

Austrian Business Cycle Theory (ABCT)wins if REFUTEDpartial/no-callChicago School Monetarismwins if REFUTEDpartial/no-callClassical Liberalwins if REFUTEDpartial/no-callDegrowth / Ecological Macroeconomicswins if MIXEDpartial/no-callDemocratic Socialism (Bernsteinian revisionism + modern)wins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callStructuralist / Developmentalistwins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callEco-Socialism / Red-Greenwins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callEmpirical Pragmatist (the framework's house position)wins if MIXEDpartial/no-callNew Institutional Economicswins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callMarket Socialism (Lange-Lerner tradition)wins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callMarxian Political Economywins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callMarxism-Leninism (central-planning implementation)wins if MIXEDpartial/no-callModern Monetary Theorywins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callNew Keynesian (mainstream synthesis)wins if MIXEDpartial/no-callOrdoliberalism (Freiburg School)wins if MIXEDpartial/no-callPost-Keynesianwins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callSocial Democraticwins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-call

Pre-registration

registration ordering unverified
first-spec commit 4c8ce8e · 2026-07-18T22:11:21Z
run generated · 2026-06-29T17:53:26Z
Run timestamp predates this path's first git-add commit (rebase, rename, or pre-git local run). Spec hash is still the path's first-add commit — not repository HEAD — but ordering is not a clean pre-registration proof.

Higher collective-bargaining coverage lowers in-work poverty and low-wage incidence with no youth-employment penalty in coordinated systems, but is refuted if coverage mainly prices out young or low-skill workers.

Falsification criterion — what would disprove this

set before the run · honoured after

This hypothesis is considered falsified if:

SUPPORTED if the primary treatment coefficient has the pre-registered - sign at p<=0.10 with minimum sample gates. REFUTED if the coefficient has the opposite sign at p<=0.10. Otherwise PARTIAL; missing data or failed sample gates are INCONCLUSIVE_DATA_PENDING.

formal test & threshold
test:      panel_fe_bargaining_coverage_low_wage_poverty_employment_panel
threshold: [object Object]

Method

Template
panel_fe
Fixed effects
country, year
Clustering
country
Sample
1 countries · 1990 – 2024
Evidence type
associational

Alias-batch panel fixed effects screen. The proxy source is explicitly local and runnable, but exact policy semantics should be upgraded before scoreboard conversion.

Data

VariableSourceTransform
poverty_headcount
outcome
world_bank_wdi:SI.POV.DDAYtier 2
level
collective_bargaining_coverage
treatment
oecd:DSD_TUtier 2
level_lagged_one_year
log_gdp_pc
control
world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.PCAP.KDtier 2
log
trade_openness
control
world_bank_wdi:NE.TRD.GNFS.ZStier 2
level
government_effectiveness
control
wgi:GE.ESTtier 4
level

● ready  · ● pending  · ● reconstruct-needed

Detailed result card

Result card — bargaining_coverage_low_wage_poverty_employment_panel

Verdict: PARTIAL — coef=-0.03644, p=0.104 (above α=0.1); direction inconclusive

Pre-registration

  • Claim: Higher collective-bargaining coverage lowers in-work poverty and low-wage incidence with no youth-employment penalty in coordinated systems, but is refuted if coverage mainly prices out young or low-skill workers.
  • Falsification rule: SUPPORTED if the primary treatment coefficient has the pre-registered - sign at p<=0.10 with minimum sample gates. REFUTED if the coefficient has the opposite sign at p<=0.10. Otherwise PARTIAL; missing data or failed sample gates are INCONCLUSIVE_DATA_PENDING.
  • Falsification test: panel_fe_bargaining_coverage_low_wage_poverty_employment_panel

Estimate

  • Method: linearmodels.PanelOLS
  • Coefficient (treatment): -0.03644
  • Std error: 0.02237
  • p-value: 0.104
  • Observations: 401, countries: 31
  • Within R²: -0.0651
  • Fixed effects: entity=True, time=True
  • Clustering: country

Variables resolved

  • world_bank_wdi:SI.POV.DDAY → poverty_headcount (outcome, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=2862)
  • oecd:DSD_TU@DF_CBC → collective_bargaining_coverage (treatment, publisher=oecd, n=1076)
  • world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.PCAP.KD → log_gdp_pc (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=12104)
  • world_bank_wdi:NE.TRD.GNFS.ZS → trade_openness (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=10714)
  • wgi:GE.EST → government_effectiveness (controls, publisher=wgi, n=5168)

Generated by scripts/run_panel_fe.py at 2026-06-29T17:53:26+00:00

Strongest opposing argument

Every hypothesis ships with its charitable opposing argument. The framework earns credibility by handling objections at their strongest, not weakest.

Notes

Source shard: engine/audits/swarm_2026-05-22_200_hypotheses_worker_B_left_intervention.md. Backlog source families: OECD CBC/TUD, OECD earnings, OECD low-education unemployment, Eurostat `ilc_iw01`.. Alias proxy used: oecd:DSD_TU@DF_CBC -> world_bank_wdi:SI.POV.DDAY. Initial promotion pass left scoreboard mapping empty; mapped by the 2026-05-22 swarm scoreboard conversion v1.

Authored framework. Read the transparency note.