Economy 5.0 · OSF-ECO-141
Validation of the K-Flow hypothesis: democracies and authoritarian regimes (2010-2024)
By Carlos J. Pérez Pulido · ISHEA Institute ·
K-Flow describes how a system's purpose emerges, travels and holds. Fifteen years of democracies and authoritarian regimes serve as a testbed: where the flow is blocked, systemic tension accumulates.
Preprint — Manuscript deposited on OSF. Not peer-reviewed.
K-Flow refers to the flow of purpose within the ISHEA–KTR–TACC–IHC model. It describes how Purpose (K) emerges, is transmitted (T), and reinforced through resilience (R). When K-Flow is continuous and coherent, systems flourish; when it is fragmented or blocked, systemic tension accumulates, leading to cognitive, biological, or infrastructural deterioration.
Overview
This component provides the empirical validation of the K-Model ISHEA–LEX framework, focusing on the relationship between knowledge flow (K-Flow) and human development outcomes across different political regimes (2010–2024).
The central hypothesis is:
Higher K-Flow → Greater economic, social, and systemic resilience.
Objectives
-
Build and apply a multidimensional K-Flow Index (0–100).
-
Classify countries into democracies, authoritarian regimes, and mixed systems.
-
Validate the causal relationship between K-Flow and:
GDP per capita (PPP)
Total Factor Productivity (TFP)
ISHEA (Expanded Human Satisfaction Index)
-
Explore moderation by religion/state control and digital openness.
-
Provide robust empirical evidence to support the Cognitive Hive Theory at the macro level.
Methods
Data sources: IMF, World Bank, Freedom House, V-Dem, Pew, UNESCO, WIPO, ITU, ODIN.
Panel structure: ~150 countries, 2010–2024.
Statistical design:
Fixed effects with lags
Instrumental variables (IV)
Difference-in-Differences (DiD)
Mediation/moderation analysis
Replicability: All scripts and datasets are stored under /data and /code.
Results (Preliminary)
Strong correlations between K-Flow and development metrics (r = 0.72–0.85, p < 0.01).
Democracies with secular governance show the highest efficiency of K-Flow.
Authoritarian religious regimes show the lowest resilience.
Mixed regimes (e.g., India, Turkey, UAE) display partial gains but systemic friction.
Repository Structure
/data_raw/ → Original datasets
/data_clean/ → Merged panel data
/code/ → Scripts for analysis
/figures/ → Graphical outputs (coefplots, trajectories)
/tables/ → Statistical results in CSV
/docs/ → Reports and extended manuscripts
/wiki/ → This documentation
Citation
Please cite as:
Perez Pulido, C. J. (2025). Validation of the K-Flow Hypothesis: Democracies vs. Authoritarian Regimes (2010–2024). OSF. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/UEF2B
In the same room — Economy 5.0
NOTA-ECO-001 · Economy 5.0
What if the variables we use to measure national success were completely backwards?
For decades, progress has been measured through GDP, productivity, growth and energy use. This piece argues those variables may be inverted and asks us to rethink what it means for a country to thrive.
NOTA-ECO-002 · Economy 5.0
Why do highly engineered systems fail just when technology is most advanced?
In Oil & Gas and other complex operations, more technology does not guarantee better decisions: this piece examines systemic capacity, how much a system can absorb and turn into action under pressure.
NOTA-ECO-003 · Economy 5.0
Frankenstein and Oil: Why Does Venezuela Matter Geopolitically Again?
Third installment of the series: after tracing capital into AI and financial concentration, the next bottleneck comes into view, oil, and with it Venezuela returns to the geopolitical board.