IESET.
Hypotheses·distribution·universal_vs_meanstest_child_poverty

Child-poverty rates in EU countries with universal child-benefit systems are substantially lower than in means-tested systems at similar tax-and-transfer cost.

PARTIALengine/runs/universal_vs_meanstest_child_poverty

PARTIAL — coef=-1.721e-20, p=0.0755; 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

In plain terms, this asks whether universal child benefit dummy is actually linked to better or worse child poverty rate at 60 median from 1995 to 2023.

plain answer

The evidence is suggestive but not decisive. coef=-1.721e-20, p=0.0755; 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 18 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
  • Universal child benefit dummy
  • Family benefit spending share of income
What we checked
  • Child poverty rate at 60 median
  • Child poverty rate anchored
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/universal_vs_meanstest_child_poverty
1007550250199520092023SWEDNKFINNORNLDBELAUT
illustrative sketch · run pending
No coefficients yet. When the model fires, this chart will show child_poverty_rate_at_60_median across 18 sampled countries over 1995–2023.
The shapes above are stylised — none of the lines are real data.
Placeholder for universal_vs_meanstest_child_poverty. Published chart will be generated from engine/runs/universal_vs_meanstest_child_poverty/chart_data.json.

Who has skin in the game — schools predicting on this

1 school 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.

Social Democraticwins if SUPPORTEDpartial/no-call

Pre-registration

registration ordering unverified
first-spec commit 4c8ce8e · 2026-07-18T22:11:21Z
run generated · 2026-06-29T17:51:59Z
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.

Child-poverty rates in EU countries with universal child-benefit systems are substantially lower than in means-tested systems at similar tax-and-transfer cost.

Falsification criterion — what would disprove this

set before the run · honoured after

This hypothesis is considered falsified if:

The hypothesis is falsified if universal child-benefit regimes do not show at least a 2 percentage-point lower child-poverty rate at comparable family-benefit spending, or if the universal-regime interaction is sign-flipped at p<0.10. It is partial if the sign is favourable but the equal-cost magnitude is near zero.

formal test & threshold
test:      EU panel FE (1995-2023) of EU-SILC child poverty rate on universal-regime indicator interacted with family-benefit GDP share; country+year FE, country-clustered SEs. Refute if interaction coefficient sign-flipped at p<0.10 OR universal-regime gap <2pp at equal cost.

Method

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

EU cross-country panel comparing universal vs means-tested child- benefit regimes at equal fiscal cost. Country and year FE; clustering by country. Eurostat / EU-SILC child-poverty rates as outcomes; OECD social-expenditure breakdown for treatment classification.

Data

VariableSourceTransform
child_poverty_rate_at_60_median
outcome
world_bank_wdi:SI.POV.GINItier 2
level
child_poverty_rate_anchored
outcome
oecd:OECD.WISE.INEtier 2
level
universal_child_benefit_dummy
treatment
derived:eu_child_benefit_regimetier 4
indicator
family_benefit_spending_share_of_gdp
treatment
oecd:OECD.ELS.SOCtier 2
level
gdp_per_capita_ppp
control
world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.KDtier 2
log
unemployment_rate
control
world_bank_wdi:SL.UEM.TOTL.ZStier 2
level
female_labour_force_participation
control
world_bank_wdi:SL.TLF.CACT.FE.ZStier 2
level
gini_disposable_income
control
world_bank_wdi:SI.POV.GINItier 2
level

● ready  · ● pending  · ● reconstruct-needed

Detailed result card

Result card — universal_vs_meanstest_child_poverty

Verdict: PARTIAL — coef=-1.721e-20, p=0.0755; effect magnitude effectively zero

Pre-registration

  • Claim: Child-poverty rates in EU countries with universal child-benefit systems are substantially lower than in means-tested systems at similar tax-and-transfer cost.
  • Falsification rule: The hypothesis is falsified if universal child-benefit regimes do not show at least a 2 percentage-point lower child-poverty rate at comparable family-benefit spending, or if the universal-regime interaction is sign-flipped at p<0.10. It is partial if the sign is favourable but the equal-cost magnitude is near zero.
  • Falsification test: EU panel FE (1995-2023) of EU-SILC child poverty rate on universal-regime indicator interacted with family-benefit GDP share; country+year FE, country-clustered SEs. Refute if interaction coefficient sign-flipped at p<0.10 OR universal-regime gap <2pp at equal cost.

Estimate

  • Method: linearmodels.PanelOLS
  • Coefficient (treatment): -1.721e-20
  • Std error: 9.649e-21
  • p-value: 0.0755
  • Observations: 360, countries: 15
  • Within R²: 1
  • Fixed effects: entity=True, time=True
  • Clustering: country

Variables resolved

  • world_bank_wdi:SI.POV.GINI → child_poverty_rate_at_60_median (outcome, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=2430)
  • oecd:OECD.ELS.SOC,DSD_SOCX@DF_SOCX_AGG,1.0 → family_benefit_spending_share_of_gdp (treatment, publisher=oecd, n=1649)
  • world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.KD → gdp_per_capita_ppp (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=8325)
  • world_bank_wdi:SL.UEM.TOTL.ZS → unemployment_rate (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=6874)
  • world_bank_wdi:SL.TLF.CACT.FE.ZS → female_labour_force_participation (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=8302)
  • world_bank_wdi:SI.POV.GINI → gini_disposable_income (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=2430)

Variables missing data

  • oecd:OECD.WISE.INE,DSD_IDD@DF_CHILD_POV,1.0 (outcome, name=child_poverty_rate_anchored) — vintage not on disk
  • derived:eu_child_benefit_regime (treatment, name=universal_child_benefit_dummy) — vintage not on disk

Generated by scripts/run_panel_fe.py at 2026-06-29T17:51:59+00:00

Notes

Maps the social-democratic school's universalism-vs-meanstest claim to an EU cross-country panel using EU-SILC + OECD SOCX. Estimator and prior set; full pre-registration awaits steelman + human sign-off.

Authored framework. Read the transparency note.