IESET.
Hypotheses·trade·unilateral_tariff_liberalisation_growth_20yr

Countries that undertake unilateral tariff liberalisation — defined as an autonomous, non-FTA-driven reduction in the applied weighted-mean tariff of at least 5 percentage points sustained for at least 5 consecutive years — experience stronger subsequent 20-year growth in real GDP per worker and real private consumption per capita than matched protectionist peers, in a global panel 1970-2020.

The test compares treated liberalisers against synthetic controls and against a matched donor pool of economies with similar pre-reform income levels, tariffs, and growth trajectories.

PARTIALengine/runs/unilateral_tariff_liberalisation_growth_20yr

PARTIAL — mean_gap=+4.317e+05, |gap|/pre_sd=4.9, p_perm=0.4 (gap below 0.5×pre_sd or placebo p≥0.10)

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. mean_gap=+4.317e+05, |gap|/pre_sd=4.9, p_perm=0.4 (gap below 0.5×pre_sd or placebo p≥0.10)

why it matters

This matters because trade claims should change belief only when they survive a pre-declared empirical test.

how the test works

It compares 66 country or place units from 1970 to 2020, using a synthetic control design.

what was measured
What changed
  • Unilateral tariff cut indicator
  • Applied weighted mean tariff
What we checked
  • Real income per worker growth 20yr
  • Real private consumption per capita growth 20yr
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/unilateral_tariff_liberalisation_growth_20yr
1007550250197019952020ARGAUSAUTBELBGDBOLBRA
illustrative sketch · run pending
No coefficients yet. When the model fires, this chart will show real_gdp_per_worker_growth_20yr across 66 sampled countries over 1970–2020.
The shapes above are stylised — none of the lines are real data.
Placeholder for unilateral_tariff_liberalisation_growth_20yr. Published chart will be generated from engine/runs/unilateral_tariff_liberalisation_growth_20yr/chart_data.json.

Who has skin in the game — schools predicting on this

11 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 SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callChicago School Monetarismwins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callClassical Liberalwins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callDemocratic Socialism (Bernsteinian revisionism + modern)wins if REFUTEDpartial/no-callStructuralist / Developmentalistwins if MIXEDpartial/no-callEmpirical Pragmatist (the framework's house position)wins if MIXEDpartial/no-callNew Institutional Economicswins if MIXEDpartial/no-callMarxism-Leninism (central-planning implementation)wins if REFUTEDpartial/no-callOrdoliberalism (Freiburg School)wins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-callPost-Keynesianwins if REFUTEDpartial/no-callSocial Democraticwins if REFUTEDpartial/no-call

Pre-registration

pre-registered
first-spec commit 5ce4495 · 2026-05-02T19:11:20Z
run generated · 2026-05-03T06:04:22Z

Countries that undertake unilateral tariff liberalisation — defined as an autonomous, non-FTA-driven reduction in the applied weighted-mean tariff of at least 5 percentage points sustained for at least 5 consecutive years — experience stronger subsequent 20-year growth in real GDP per worker and real private consumption per capita than matched protectionist peers, in a global panel 1970-2020. The test compares treated liberalisers against synthetic controls and against a matched donor pool of economies with similar pre-reform income levels, tariffs, and growth trajectories.

Falsification criterion — what would disprove this

set before the run · honoured after

This hypothesis is considered falsified if:

SUPPORTED if the average synthetic-control gap for treated countries is positive and statistically distinguishable from zero (permutation p<0.10) for real GDP per worker growth over the 20-year post-reform window, AND the same holds for private consumption per capita. PARTIAL if the GDP per worker effect is positive and significant but consumption is insignificant (growth without welfare gains). REFUTED if the synthetic-control gap is negative and significant at p<0.10 for either outcome. INFORMATIVE: exclusion of commodity-exporter liberalisations should not eliminate the result — if it does, the effect is a terms-of-trade story, not a trade-policy story.

formal test & threshold
test:      synthetic_control_unilateral_tariff_liberalisation_20yr_growth
threshold: Synthetic-control ATT (GDP per worker, 20yr) > 0 at permutation p<=0.10  AND Synthetic-control ATT (consumption per capita, 20yr) > 0 at permutation p<=0.10  AND Ex-commodity-exporter robustness retains >=50% of baseline ATT magnitude.

Method

Template
synthetic_control
Clustering
country
Sample
66 countries · 1970 – 2020
Evidence type
causal

Primary: synthetic control for each identified liberalisation episode, matching on pre-reform GDP per worker, investment share, institutional quality, and population growth over a 10-year donor window. Donor pool: all non-reforming countries in same income decile and region. Secondary: Callaway-Sant'Anna staggered DiD across all episodes, with robustness to never-treated and not-yet-treated controls. Tertiary: local projections (Jordà method) to trace dynamic response without imposing functional form.

Data

VariableSourceTransform
real_gdp_per_worker_growth_20yr
outcome
pwt:rgdpotier 3
cumulative_log_growth_per_worker_20yr
real_private_consumption_per_capita_growth_20yr
outcome
world_bank_wdi:NE.CON.PRVT.ZStier 2
cumulative_log_growth_per_capita_20yr
unilateral_tariff_cut_indicator
treatment
constructed:indicator = 1 for 5yr post-reform window and 15yr follow-up after sustained tariff cuttier 5
indicator
applied_weighted_mean_tariff
treatment
wits:weighted_mean_applied_tarifftier 2
level
initial_log_gdp_per_worker
control
pwt:rgdpotier 3
log_pre_reform_level
institutional_quality
control
wgi:RL.ESTtier 4
pre_reform_mean
investment_share
control
world_bank_wdi:NE.GDI.TOTL.ZStier 2
pre_reform_mean
terms_of_trade_index
control
world_bank_wdi:NE.TRM.TRAD.XD.WDtier 2
level
population_growth
control
world_bank_wdi:SP.POP.GROWtier 2
level

● ready  · ● pending  · ● reconstruct-needed

Detailed result card

Result card — unilateral_tariff_liberalisation_growth_20yr

Verdict: PARTIAL — mean_gap=+4.317e+05, |gap|/pre_sd=4.9, p_perm=0.4 (gap below 0.5×pre_sd or placebo p≥0.10)

Pre-registration

  • Claim: Countries that undertake unilateral tariff liberalisation — defined as an autonomous, non-FTA-driven reduction in the applied weighted-mean tariff of at least 5 percentage points sustained for at least 5 consecutive years — experience stronger subsequent 20-year growth in real GDP per worker and real private consumption per capita than matched protectionist peers, in a global panel 1970-2020. The test compares treated liberalisers against synthetic controls and against a matched donor pool of economies with similar pre-reform income levels, tariffs, and growth trajectories.
  • Falsification rule: SUPPORTED if the average synthetic-control gap for treated countries is positive and statistically distinguishable from zero (permutation p<0.10) for real GDP per worker growth over the 20-year post-reform window, AND the same holds for private consumption per capita. PARTIAL if the GDP per worker effect is positive and significant but consumption is insignificant (growth without welfare gains). REFUTED if the synthetic-control gap is negative and significant at p<0.10 for either outcome. INFORMATIVE: exclusion of commodity-exporter liberalisations should not eliminate the result — if it does, the effect is a terms-of-trade story, not a trade-policy story.

Synthetic-control estimate

  • shape: synth_did
  • treated_country: ARG
  • event_year: 1996
  • n_donors: 59
  • donor_weights (top): {'JAM': 0.6357, 'EGY': 0.3498, 'CHL': 0.0094, 'KOR': 0.0051, 'AUS': 0.0}
  • pre_rmse: 142690.45164091088
  • pre_period_sd: 88240.75
  • mean_post_gap: 431739.5849980754
  • end_period_gap: 523002.9271649453
  • post_period_years: [1996, 2019]
  • placebo_p_value: 0.4
  • n_placebos: 59
  • method: synthetic-control via NNLS, permutation inference

Variables resolved

  • pwt:rgdpo → real_gdp_per_worker_growth_20yr (outcome, n=10399)
  • world_bank_wdi:NE.CON.PRVT.ZS → real_private_consumption_per_capita_growth_20yr (outcome, n=10515)
  • pwt:rgdpo → initial_log_gdp_per_worker (controls, n=10399)
  • wgi:RL.EST → institutional_quality (controls, n=5296)
  • world_bank_wdi:NE.GDI.TOTL.ZS → investment_share (controls, n=10428)
  • world_bank_wdi:SP.POP.GROW → population_growth (controls, n=16672)

Generated by scripts/run_synth_did.py at 2026-05-03T06:04:22+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

Data readiness: - World Bank WITS applied weighted-mean tariff (ready) - PWT rgdpo, persons engaged (ready) - WDI NE.CON.PRVT.ZS, NE.GDI.TOTL.ZS, SP.POP.GROW, NE.TRM.TRAD.XD.WD (ready) - WGI RL.EST (ready from 1996) - FTA dating from WTO RTA-IS (ready, used to exclude FTA-driven cuts)

Authored framework. Read the transparency note.