IESET.
Hypotheses·growth·poland_market_transition_30yr_growth

Poland’s sustained market transition — shock therapy stabilisation in 1990, competition-policy enforcement, mass privatisation, and EU regulatory adoption — generated a cumulative log GDP-per-capita growth advantage of at least 10 percentage points over 1990–2024 relative to CEE peers with weaker competition and slower privatisation (Bulgaria, Romania, Croatia).

The test is whether Poland outperforms a synthetic counterfactual or whether a panel treatment coefficient is positive and significant.

INCONCLUSIVEengine/runs/poland_market_transition_30yr_growth

INCONCLUSIVE_DATA_PENDING — treatment 'poland_post_1990' has no within-country variation under country fixed effects

confidence cueResult card produced; verdict unclassified.

policy briefCoverage too thin

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

This test cannot make a firm call yet. treatment 'poland_post_1990' has no within-country variation under country fixed effects

why it matters

Growth claims can look convincing in single success stories. This test asks whether the pattern survives a broader comparison.

how the test works

It compares 11 country or place units from 1990 to 2024, using a panel fe design, with fixed effects for country and year.

what was measured
What changed
  • Poland post 1990
What we checked
  • Real income pc
  • Labour productivity
  • Productivity index
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

1 input datasets, 0 unresolved missing series, provenance status: reproducible hash verified.

Results

engine/runs/poland_market_transition_30yr_growth
1007550250199020072024POLCZESVKHUNSVNHRVBGR
illustrative sketch · run pending
No coefficients yet. When the model fires, this chart will show real_gdp_pc across 11 sampled countries over 1990–2024.
The shapes above are stylised — none of the lines are real data.
Placeholder for poland_market_transition_30yr_growth. Published chart will be generated from engine/runs/poland_market_transition_30yr_growth/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 · 2026-06-29T17:52:59Z

Poland’s sustained market transition — shock therapy stabilisation in 1990, competition-policy enforcement, mass privatisation, and EU regulatory adoption — generated a cumulative log GDP-per-capita growth advantage of at least 10 percentage points over 1990–2024 relative to CEE peers with weaker competition and slower privatisation (Bulgaria, Romania, Croatia). The test is whether Poland outperforms a synthetic counterfactual or whether a panel treatment coefficient is positive and significant.

Falsification criterion — what would disprove this

set before the run · honoured after

This hypothesis is considered falsified if:

Refuted if the panel-FE coefficient on Poland × post-1990 is negative and significant at p<0.05, or if Poland’s cumulative log GDP-pc gap vs synthetic counterfactual is negative over 1990–2024.

formal test & threshold
test:      panel_fe_poland_transition
threshold: beta_poland_post1990 > 0 AND p < 0.10; synthetic_gap > 0.

Method

Template
panel_fe
Fixed effects
country, year
Clustering
country
Sample
11 countries · 1990 – 2024
Evidence type
causal

Primary: panel FE with POL × post-1990 interaction. Secondary: synthetic control for Poland using CEE donor pool.

Data

VariableSourceTransform
real_gdp_pc
outcome
world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.PCAP.KDtier 2
log_level
labour_productivity
outcome
world_bank_wdi:SL.GDP.PCAP.EM.KDtier 2
level
tfp_index
outcome
pwt:rtfpnatier 3
level
poland_post_1990
treatment
constructed:1 for POL from 1990 onwardtier 5
binary
initial_gdp_pc_1990
control
world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.PCAP.KDtier 2
level_at_1990
eu_membership_dummy
control
constructed:1 from 2004 for EU accession countriestier 5
binary
trade_openness
control
world_bank_wdi:NE.TRD.GNFS.ZStier 2
level
wgi_rule_of_law
control
wgi:RL.ESTtier 4
level
human_capital
control
pwt:hctier 3
level

● ready  · ● pending  · ● reconstruct-needed

Detailed result card

Result card — poland_market_transition_30yr_growth

Verdict: INCONCLUSIVE_DATA_PENDING — treatment 'poland_post_1990' has no within-country variation under country fixed effects

Pre-registration

  • Claim: Poland’s sustained market transition — shock therapy stabilisation in 1990, competition-policy enforcement, mass privatisation, and EU regulatory adoption — generated a cumulative log GDP-per-capita growth advantage of at least 10 percentage points over 1990–2024 relative to CEE peers with weaker competition and slower privatisation (Bulgaria, Romania, Croatia). The test is whether Poland outperforms a synthetic counterfactual or whether a panel treatment coefficient is positive and significant.
  • Falsification rule: Refuted if the panel-FE coefficient on Poland × post-1990 is negative and significant at p<0.05, or if Poland’s cumulative log GDP-pc gap vs synthetic counterfactual is negative over 1990–2024.
  • Falsification test: panel_fe_poland_transition

Estimate

  • Error: treatment 'poland_post_1990' has no within-country variation under country fixed effects

Variables resolved

  • world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.PCAP.KD → real_gdp_pc (outcome, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=12104)
  • world_bank_wdi:SL.GDP.PCAP.EM.KD → labour_productivity (outcome, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=7444)
  • pwt:rtfpna → tfp_index (outcome, publisher=pwt, n=6407)
  • constructed: 1 for POL from 1990 onward → poland_post_1990 (treatment, publisher=constructed, n=385)
  • world_bank_wdi:NY.GDP.PCAP.KD → initial_gdp_pc_1990 (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=12104)
  • constructed: 1 from 2004 for EU accession countries → eu_membership_dummy (controls, publisher=constructed, n=385)
  • world_bank_wdi:NE.TRD.GNFS.ZS → trade_openness (controls, publisher=world_bank_wdi, n=10714)
  • wgi:RL.EST → wgi_rule_of_law (controls, publisher=wgi, n=5296)
  • pwt:hc → human_capital (controls, publisher=pwt, n=8637)

Generated by scripts/run_panel_fe.py at 2026-06-29T17:52:59+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.