Pre-registration
India's demographic transition 1990-2050 was projected (UN-DESA 1990s/2000s) to deliver a large dividend to per-capita growth. The hypothesis tests whether realised per-capita growth 1990-2023 has tracked the Bloom-Williamson predicted dividend or has fallen short. Specifically, the hypothesis predicts realised per-capita growth attributable to working- age share gains is below the predicted dividend by at least 30 percent, suggesting India has under-utilised the window relative to East-Asian comparators.
Falsification criterion — what would disprove this
This hypothesis is considered falsified if:
SUPPORTED if India's realised per-capita growth attributable to working-age channel is at least 30% below the comparator Asian-tiger benchmark for similar working-age share rises. REFUTED if India tracks within 20% of the Asian-tiger benchmark or exceeds it.
formal test & threshold
test: descriptive_india_dividend_vs_asia_benchmark threshold: india_dividend_underperformance >= 0.30
Method
- Template
descriptive- Sample
- 8 countries · 1990 – 2023
- Evidence type
- descriptive
Decompose India's per-capita growth into working-age-share component vs per-worker productivity growth; benchmark working-age-share contribution against comparator Asian-tiger trajectories. Report counterfactual per-capita growth had India matched Asian-tiger working-age-to-employment translation.
Data
| Variable | Source | Transform |
|---|---|---|
real_gdp_per_capita_growth outcome | world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.PCAP.KD.ZGtier 2 | level |
working_age_population_share treatment | world_bank_wdi:SP.POP.1564.TO.ZStier 2 | level |
lfp_total control | ilostat:EAP_2WAP_SEX_AGE_RTtier 2 | level |
gross_capital_formation_share control | world_bank_wdi:NE.GDI.TOTL.ZStier 2 | level |
● ready · ● pending · ● reconstruct-needed
Strongest opposing argument
Every hypothesis ships with its charitable opposing argument. The framework earns credibility by handling objections at their strongest, not weakest.