Philipp Golka
LightNews LightNews
banner
pgolka.bsky.social
Philipp Golka
@pgolka.bsky.social
3K followers 1K following 300 posts
Senior researcher @mpifg.bsky.social, studying private wealth, finance & the state in the climate crisis. #privatewealth | #impinv | #greenfinance | #strandedassets
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by Philipp Golka
mpifg.bsky.social
📣 Call for Abstracts!

Join the 4th Doctoral Conference on the Social and Political Constitution of the Economy, March 19 -20, 2026 at the MPIfG in Cologne.

🎓 We welcome abstracts by doctoral researchers in economic sociology, political economy and related fields by Dec 8, 2025.

s.gwdg.de/U27NQb
November 25, 2025 at 2:14 PM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
johannespetry.bsky.social
Thrilled to see our latest paper published in @iojournal.bsky.social! 🥳
"Dollar Diminished: The Unmaking of US Financial Hegemony Under Trump" co-authored with Tobias Pforr (@eui-eu.bsky.social) and @fabianpape.bsky.social 🙂

doi.org/10.1017/S002...
November 20, 2025 at 9:26 AM
pgolka.bsky.social
Tuilp bulb producer shrugs off "tulip bubble" anxiety with bumper flower bulb demand
November 20, 2025 at 9:47 AM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
socialdiginomad.bsky.social
1/14
Im Wissenschaftssystem entstehen durch Befristungen, Unterbesetzungen, strukturelle Prekarität keine Vakuumsituationen, sondern informelle Verschiebungen von Arbeit, Verantwortung, Macht.
Diese Diffusion stabilisiert das System auf Kosten derer, die am wenigsten abgesichert sind.
#IchBinHanna
November 19, 2025 at 10:58 AM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
sylvainmaechler.bsky.social
Why do global environmental institutions multiply and persist even when they seem unable to address biodiversity loss and environmental governance failures effectively?

Our new OA article with @jacquelinebest.bsky.social in @risjnl.bsky.social tries to answer this question. 1/7

cup.org/4hZNlcX
Failure-proof or failure-prone? The paradoxes of global biodiversity institutions | Review of International Studies | Cambridge Core
Failure-proof or failure-prone? The paradoxes of global biodiversity institutions
cup.org
November 19, 2025 at 6:43 AM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
mpifg.bsky.social
Besucht uns heute bis 16 Uhr am Stand des MPIfG auf dem "Basar der Wissenschaften" im Rautenstrauch-Joest-Museum (Neumarkt) - und entdeckt dort auch die Forschung aller Kölner Hochschulen und wissenschaftlichen Einrichtungen!
📊🔬🤗
MPIfG Stand MPIfG Stand MPIfG Stand MPIfG Stand
November 15, 2025 at 10:25 AM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
vapunkt.bsky.social
🚨You always wondered about how to make sense of the many accounts on Green Finance? We got you covered:
@nataschavanderzwan.bsky.social @danmertens.bsky.social ky.social Julius Kob and I critically review existing accounts and argue for an integrated analytical approach👇
doi.org/10.1017/fas....
Constructions, cleavages, and complementarities: Macro- and micro-approaches in the study of green finance | Finance and Society | Cambridge Core
Constructions, cleavages, and complementarities: Macro- and micro-approaches in the study of green finance
doi.org
November 13, 2025 at 1:04 PM
pgolka.bsky.social
Just realized the Blairite instructions on our office water fountain are gone. Times have changed, friends.
November 13, 2025 at 9:40 AM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
cschbrt.bsky.social
Job Alert! Professur (Open Rank: W2 oder W1 mit Tenure Track auf W2) ,,Digitale Transformation in Arbeit und Gesellschaft". Gemeinsame Berufung von @tu-dortmund.de und @cais-research.bsky.social nach Jülicher Modell.
Ausschreibung unter:
service.tu-dortmund.de/documents/18...
service.tu-dortmund.de
November 13, 2025 at 8:54 AM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
benbraun.bsky.social
The central argument in this excellent paper & thread is that the open-access turn has neglected profit; indeed, it turbo-charged publishers’ margins. As political economists who know a thing or two about profit and power we should speak up a lot more. As it says below: What we’re doing is crazy.
hansonmark.bsky.social Mark A. Hanson @hansonmark.bsky.social · 14d
We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing:

a 🧵 1/n

Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820
Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below. 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. A figure detailing the drain on researcher time. 1. The four-fold drain 1.2 Time The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce, with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure 1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs, grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time. The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many review demands. Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in ‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier, local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision. A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below: 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.
November 12, 2025 at 8:30 AM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
ueberdruss.bsky.social
🚨 I am delighted to announce that Tom Turnbull’s and my volume with @stanfordpress.bsky.social is out today, featuring Jennifer Eaglin, Victor Seow, Shellen Wu, Antoine Missemer, Giuliano Garavini, Michael Dobson, Laura A. Twagira, Damilola Adebayo, Troy Vettese, Liz Chatterjee, and Rebecca Wright
March 25, 2025 at 2:27 PM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
pettertornberg.com
Is social media dying? How much has Twitter changed as it became X? Which party now dominates the conversation?

Using nationally representative ANES data from 2020 & 2024, I map how the U.S. social media landscape has transformed.

Here are the key take-aways 🧵

arxiv.org/abs/2510.25417
October 30, 2025 at 8:09 AM
pgolka.bsky.social
Says everything about academic working condition when your out-of-office triggers an out-of-office response from your colleague.
October 30, 2025 at 10:08 AM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
robertgro5.bsky.social
***Call for Papers***
Dissertant:innen-Tagung Wirtschafts-, Sozial- und Umweltgeschichte 2026 @univie.ac.at

#envhist
October 23, 2025 at 8:50 AM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
jonashorn.bsky.social
#cfp: Happy to share that the next Doctoral Conference at the @mpifg.bsky.social will be taking place in March 2026.

Particularly relevant for PhD students from political economy/economic sociology and neighbouring disciplines. 🤗

When: 19.-20.03.2026

More information: www.mpifg.de/1432364/2026...
Call for abstracts for the Fourth Doctoral Cpnference on the Social and Political Constitution of the Economy
October 23, 2025 at 8:16 AM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
susiebuch.bsky.social
The @mpifg.bsky.social MPIfG's Discussion Paper Series is part of this excellent open access repository, as are all articles in 'Economic Sociology'.
This great service is appreciated by @zbw-leibniz.bsky.social
#OAweek #OAweek2025 🎈 #OpenAcess
October 21, 2025 at 2:31 PM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
The absolute bloody vandalism of austerity in one chart. Good analysis of the overall picture here.
October 15, 2025 at 6:48 PM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
bjsociology.bsky.social
📣 Submit your abstract for the British Journal of Sociology Conference by Monday 20 October.

There is no predetermined theme, and we invite scholars of all ranks and affiliations to submit abstracts on any aspect of sociology.

Submit your abstract ➡️ www.lse.ac.uk/sociology/br...
October 15, 2025 at 11:02 AM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
hadoose.bsky.social
🚨New Article Out! “The Scottish Road to Net Zero: Corporate Welfare and Assetization Cascades”

The article focuses on the evolution of the land-based natural capital market in Scotland in light of the country's net zero efforts.
October 14, 2025 at 12:54 PM
pgolka.bsky.social
October 13, 2025 at 5:51 PM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
juliusk.bsky.social
Großer Sieg für die Klimabewegung beim Hamburger Zukunftsentscheid: Große Zustimmung findet das „Gesetz für besseren Klimaschutz“ vor allem in zentrumsnahen Gegenden und Stadtteilen mit einer jüngeren Bevölkerung. Deutlich niedriger ist die Zustimmung in Gegenden mit höherem Eigentümeranteil. (1/2)
October 13, 2025 at 7:10 AM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
benbraun.bsky.social
Während Politikwissenschaftler*innen unter Höchstanstrengung den Wählerwillen zum Thema Vermögensbesteuerung vermessen, Evidenz zur undemokratischen Willensbildung:
October 9, 2025 at 9:48 AM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
arnesemsrott.bsky.social
NEU: Die Wirtschaftsministerin persönlich hat der Stiftung Familienunternehmen Lobby-Tipps gegeben. Ihr Ministerium könne das Vorhaben dann "flankieren". Und ihr Staatssekretär hat die Milliardärslobby gebeten, Druck auf die SPD auszuüben.

@fragdenstaat.de: fragdenstaat.de/artikel/exkl...
Wirtschaftsministerium: Reiche berät Reiche
Bei Treffen mit der Stiftung Familienunternehmen gaben Ministerin Reiche und ihr Staatssekretär Tipps, wie die Superreichen-Lobby Steuersenkungen erreichen könne. Das zeigen interne Unterlagen.
fragdenstaat.de
October 9, 2025 at 8:03 AM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
benbraun.bsky.social
Remember when dense networks of strategic cross-shareholdings among firms, native to coordinated market economies, went the way of the dodo?

The Rhenish model, Germany, Inc. undone by Anglo institutional investors?

Well, the dodo is back. Say hello to USA, Inc.
www.bloomberg.com/news/feature...
October 8, 2025 at 9:44 PM
Reposted by Philipp Golka
cleocz.bsky.social
The department of Economic History at LSE is hiring! Assistant Prof. (all fields and period). Deadline for application 4 November 2025! @lseechist.bsky.social

For more info ➡️ jobs.lse.ac.uk/Vacancies/W/...
Assistant Professor in Economic History
Assistant Professor in Economic History, , <p class="paragraph" style="margin: 0cm; text-align: center;"><span class="normaltextrun"><em><span>LSE is committed to building a diverse, equitable and tru...
jobs.lse.ac.uk
October 6, 2025 at 9:03 AM