You are using the word evidence as if it were evident. It isn't. It is the crux of most problems reaching consensus. If you don't believe that, just try to give me a careful description of you would consider acceptable evidence to be.

The topic of how planned obsolescence (a special case of artificial scarcity) could be measured is worthwhile, but not trivial.

What I would consider the best 'evidence' for me is the simple fact that If a company can sell 2 things instead of one, it tends to profit (up to) twice as much. To the degree that that is true, it guarantees the inclusion of artificial scarcity in markets given enough time for it to arise.

A better question seems to be are there any markets where artificial scarcity doesn't arise? If so, what special traits of that market act to suppress it?