IESET.
Hypotheses·distribution·redistribution_market_income_growth_poverty_exit_panel

In low- and middle-income country panels from 1995 to 2023, sustained reductions in extreme poverty are more strongly predicted by market-income growth and employment gains than by higher tax revenue or government consumption shares alone.

The mechanism tests whether durable poverty reduction comes primarily through productivity and work attachment rather than redistribution of a fixed income stock.

PARTIALengine/runs/redistribution_market_income_growth_poverty_exit_panel

PARTIAL — coef=-1.178e-17, p=0.872; effect magnitude effectively zero

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

policy briefMixed or noisy

In ordinary language

Over a long period, do more market-oriented institutions translate into higher income or productivity, once the comparison looks beyond a single success story?

plain answer

The evidence is suggestive but not decisive. coef=-1.178e-17, p=0.872; effect magnitude effectively zero

why it matters

Distributional claims often sound morally clear but are empirically complex. This test asks whether the proposed channel explains real differences across places.

how the test works

It compares 35 country or place units from 1995 to 2023, using a panel fe design, with fixed effects for country and year.

what was measured
What changed
  • Real income per capita growth
  • Employment to population ratio
What we checked
  • Extreme 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/redistribution_market_income_growth_poverty_exit_panel
1007550250199520092023ARGBGDBOLBRACHLCHNCOL
illustrative sketch · run pending
No coefficients yet. When the model fires, this chart will show extreme_poverty_headcount across 35 sampled countries over 1995–2023.
The shapes above are stylised — none of the lines are real data.
Placeholder for redistribution_market_income_growth_poverty_exit_panel. Published chart will be generated from engine/runs/redistribution_market_income_growth_poverty_exit_panel/chart_data.json.

Pre-registration

pre-registered
first-spec commit e29141a · 2026-05-22T17:36:53Z
run generated · 2026-06-29T17:51:14Z

In low- and middle-income country panels from 1995 to 2023, sustained reductions in extreme poverty are more strongly predicted by market-income growth and employment gains than by higher tax revenue or government consumption shares alone. The mechanism tests whether durable poverty reduction comes primarily through productivity and work attachment rather than redistribution of a fixed income stock.

Falsification criterion — what would disprove this

set before the run · honoured after

This hypothesis is considered falsified if:

Supported if standardized coefficients for real_gdp_per_capita_growth and employment_to_population_ratio jointly predict larger poverty reductions than tax_revenue_share and government_consumption_share, with at least one market channel significant at p <= 0.10. Refuted if fiscal redistribution proxies jointly dominate the market channels or if growth and employment have wrong-signed significant coefficients.

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

Method

Template
panel_fe
Fixed effects
country, year
Clustering
country
Sample
35 countries · 1995 – 2023
Evidence type
associational

Regress five-year changes in extreme poverty on five-year means or changes in growth, employment, tax revenue, and government consumption. Coefficients are standardized before relative-strength comparisons.

Data

VariableSourceTransform
extreme_poverty_headcount
outcome
world_bank_wdi:SI.POV.DDAYtier 2
five_year_change
real_gdp_per_capita_growth
treatment
world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.PCAP.KD.ZGtier 2
five_year_mean
employment_to_population_ratio
treatment
world_bank_wdi:SL.EMP.TOTL.SP.ZStier 2
five_year_change
tax_revenue_share
treatment
world_bank_wdi:GC.TAX.TOTL.GD.ZStier 2
five_year_mean
government_consumption_share
treatment
world_bank_wdi:NE.CON.GOVT.ZStier 2
five_year_mean
initial_extreme_poverty
control
world_bank_wdi:SI.POV.DDAYtier 2
lagged_level
log_gdp_per_capita_ppp
control
world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.KDtier 2
log
human_capital_index
control
pwt:hctier 3
level
inflation
control
world_bank_wdi:FP.CPI.TOTL.ZGtier 2
level
trade_openness
control
world_bank_wdi:NE.TRD.GNFS.ZStier 2
level

● ready  · ● pending  · ● reconstruct-needed

Detailed result card

Result card — redistribution_market_income_growth_poverty_exit_panel

Verdict: PARTIAL — coef=-1.178e-17, p=0.872; effect magnitude effectively zero

Pre-registration

  • Claim: In low- and middle-income country panels from 1995 to 2023, sustained reductions in extreme poverty are more strongly predicted by market-income growth and employment gains than by higher tax revenue or government consumption shares alone. The mechanism tests whether durable poverty reduction comes primarily through productivity and work attachment rather than redistribution of a fixed income stock.
  • Falsification rule: Supported if standardized coefficients for real_gdp_per_capita_growth and employment_to_population_ratio jointly predict larger poverty reductions than tax_revenue_share and government_consumption_share, with at least one market channel significant at p <= 0.10. Refuted if fiscal redistribution proxies jointly dominate the market channels or if growth and employment have wrong-signed significant coefficients.
  • Falsification test: panel_fe_market_growth_vs_redistribution_poverty_exit

Estimate

  • Method: linearmodels.PanelOLS
  • Coefficient (treatment): -1.178e-17
  • Std error: 7.295e-17
  • p-value: 0.872
  • Observations: 295, countries: 26
  • Within R²: 1
  • Fixed effects: entity=True, time=True
  • Clustering: country

Variables resolved

  • world_bank_wdi:SI.POV.DDAY → extreme_poverty_headcount (outcome, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=2862)
  • world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.PCAP.KD.ZG → real_gdp_per_capita_growth (treatment, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=13897)
  • world_bank_wdi:SL.EMP.TOTL.SP.ZS → employment_to_population_ratio (treatment, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=8071)
  • world_bank_wdi:GC.TAX.TOTL.GD.ZS → tax_revenue_share (treatment, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=4787)
  • world_bank_wdi:NE.CON.GOVT.ZS → government_consumption_share (treatment, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=9133)
  • world_bank_wdi:SI.POV.DDAY → initial_extreme_poverty (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=2862)
  • world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.KD → log_gdp_per_capita_ppp (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=8325)
  • pwt:hc → human_capital_index (controls, publisher=pwt, n=8637)
  • world_bank_wdi:FP.CPI.TOTL.ZG → inflation (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=7550)
  • world_bank_wdi:NE.TRD.GNFS.ZS → trade_openness (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=10714)

Generated by scripts/run_panel_fe.py at 2026-06-29T17:51:14+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

Mechanism target: Marxian and redistribution-first accounts often treat poverty as primarily a distribution problem. This candidate asks whether poverty exit empirically tracks production and work channels more strongly.

Authored framework. Read the transparency note.