IESET.
Hypotheses·labour·demo_life_expectancy_lfp_panel

Cross-country panel evidence 1990-2023: gains in life expectancy at age 60 are associated with rising labour force participation rates among the 55-64 and 65+ age brackets, controlling for statutory pension age.

The effect is hypothesised to be roughly 1 additional year of life expectancy at 60 mapping to a 1-2 percentage-point rise in 55-64 LFP within 10 years, holding pension reforms constant.

PARTIALengine/runs/demo_life_expectancy_lfp_panel

PARTIAL — coef=-0.4826, p=0.331 (above α=0.05); 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 life expectancy at 60 is actually linked to better or worse lfp 55 64 from 1990 to 2023.

plain answer

The evidence is suggestive but not decisive. coef=-0.4826, p=0.331 (above α=0.05); 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 30 country or place units from 1990 to 2023, using a panel fe design, with fixed effects for country and year.

what was measured
What changed
  • Life expectancy at 60
What we checked
  • Lfp 55 64
  • Lfp 65 plus
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/demo_life_expectancy_lfp_panel
1007550250199020072023USAGBRDEUFRAITAESPJPN
illustrative sketch · run pending
No coefficients yet. When the model fires, this chart will show lfp_55_64 across 30 sampled countries over 1990–2023.
The shapes above are stylised — none of the lines are real data.
Placeholder for demo_life_expectancy_lfp_panel. Published chart will be generated from engine/runs/demo_life_expectancy_lfp_panel/chart_data.json.

Who has skin in the game — schools predicting on this

2 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.

Empirical Pragmatist (the framework's house position)wins 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 · 2026-06-29T17:53:35Z
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.

Cross-country panel evidence 1990-2023: gains in life expectancy at age 60 are associated with rising labour force participation rates among the 55-64 and 65+ age brackets, controlling for statutory pension age. The effect is hypothesised to be roughly 1 additional year of life expectancy at 60 mapping to a 1-2 percentage-point rise in 55-64 LFP within 10 years, holding pension reforms constant.

Falsification criterion — what would disprove this

set before the run · honoured after

This hypothesis is considered falsified if:

SUPPORTED if coefficient on life expectancy at 60 (lagged 10 years) on 55-64 LFP is positive at p<0.05, magnitude between 0.5 and 3 pp per year of life-expectancy gain. REFUTED if coefficient insignificant or magnitude outside that window, OR if controlling for pension age fully absorbs the effect (suggesting no health-channel residual).

formal test & threshold
test:      panel_fe_le60_to_lfp5564_with_pension_control
threshold: 0.5 <= coef_le60 <= 3.0 AND p < 0.05

Method

Template
panel_fe
Fixed effects
country, year
Clustering
country
Sample
30 countries · 1990 – 2023
Evidence type
associational

Data

VariableSourceTransform
lfp_55_64
outcome
ilostat:EAP_2WAP_SEX_AGE_RTtier 2
level
lfp_65_plus
outcome
world_bank_wdi:SL.TLF.ACTI.65UP.ZStier 2
level
life_expectancy_at_60
treatment
who_gho:WHOSIS_000015tier 1
level
gdp_per_capita_ppp
control
world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.KDtier 2
log
statutory_pension_age
control
oecd:OECD.ELS.SAEtier 2
level

● ready  · ● pending  · ● reconstruct-needed

Detailed result card

Result card — demo_life_expectancy_lfp_panel

Verdict: PARTIAL — coef=-0.4826, p=0.331 (above α=0.05); direction inconclusive

Pre-registration

  • Claim: Cross-country panel evidence 1990-2023: gains in life expectancy at age 60 are associated with rising labour force participation rates among the 55-64 and 65+ age brackets, controlling for statutory pension age. The effect is hypothesised to be roughly 1 additional year of life expectancy at 60 mapping to a 1-2 percentage-point rise in 55-64 LFP within 10 years, holding pension reforms constant.
  • Falsification rule: SUPPORTED if coefficient on life expectancy at 60 (lagged 10 years) on 55-64 LFP is positive at p<0.05, magnitude between 0.5 and 3 pp per year of life-expectancy gain. REFUTED if coefficient insignificant or magnitude outside that window, OR if controlling for pension age fully absorbs the effect (suggesting no health-channel residual).
  • Falsification test: panel_fe_le60_to_lfp5564_with_pension_control

Estimate

  • Method: linearmodels.PanelOLS
  • Coefficient (treatment): -0.4826
  • Std error: 0.4962
  • p-value: 0.331
  • Observations: 660, countries: 30
  • Within R²: 0.113
  • Fixed effects: entity=True, time=True
  • Clustering: country

Variables resolved

  • ilostat:EAP_2WAP_SEX_AGE_RT → lfp_55_64 (outcome, publisher=ilostat, n=10464)
  • who_gho:WHOSIS_000015 → life_expectancy_at_60 (treatment, publisher=who_gho, n=4070)
  • world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.KD → gdp_per_capita_ppp (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=8325)

Variables missing data

  • world_bank_wdi:SL.TLF.ACTI.65UP.ZS (outcome, name=lfp_65_plus) — vintage not on disk
  • oecd:OECD.ELS.SAE,DSD_PAG_LM@DF_PAG_LM,1.0 (controls, name=statutory_pension_age) — vintage not on disk

Generated by scripts/run_panel_fe.py at 2026-06-29T17:53:35+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.

Authored framework. Read the transparency note.