nep-pke New Economics Papers
on Post Keynesian Economics
Issue of 2026–02–23
five papers chosen by
Karl Petrick


  1. Poverty relief policies in pre- and post-transformation Poland: A Polanyian perspective By Lüpnitz, Jonas
  2. Teaching happiness (economics) in your dismal-science courses By Cooper, Kristen B.; Heffetz, Ori; Ifcher, John; Oparina, Ekaterina; Wu, Stephen
  3. The meritocracy of preservation: Reimagining merit beyond production By Nicolas B. Verger; Raffi Duymedjian; Vlad P Glăveanu
  4. To Infinity and Beyond! Anthropocentric Stories of Innovation and Growth By Wim Naudé
  5. Dollars and Cents: Real Hourly Wage Growth across the Lower Half of the Wage Distribution By Kyle Fee

  1. By: Lüpnitz, Jonas
    Abstract: This working paper investigates the tension between market forces and welfare policies by applying Karl Polanyi's "double movement" study to pre- and posttransformation Poland. The analysis aims at providing a comprehensive perspective on how poverty relief policies impacted and have been impacted by social, economic and political changes. Under socialism, the centralised welfare system promoted egalitarianism but failed to efficiently alleviate poverty. Solidarno´s´c, acting as a Polanyian countermovement, turned against the lack of adequate welfare policies. After the transition to capitalism the neoliberal shock therapy with its subsequent retrenchment increased inequality and, hence, poverty remained a substantial issue. Strikes and the electoral success of right-wing populism are analysed as a Polanyian countermovement advocating stronger social protection. The findings highlight how Polish history has been affected by a close interaction between Polanyian counter movements and expanding market forces that were not adequately met by poverty relief policies.
    Keywords: Marxism, Poverty Distribution, Welfare Effects, Economic History, Political Economy, Transition Economies, Former Socialist States
    JEL: B24 D33 I32 I38 N34 P16 P2 P36
    Date: 2026
    URL: https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:zbw:ipewps:336777
  2. By: Cooper, Kristen B.; Heffetz, Ori; Ifcher, John; Oparina, Ekaterina; Wu, Stephen
    Abstract: The authors of this article discuss ideas for incorporating the study of happiness and other measures of self-reported or subjective well-being (SWB) into undergraduate economics courses. They begin by motivating why economics students would benefit from learning about SWB, and then proceed to provide examples of ways to introduce this topic into different parts of the curriculum: macroeconomics, microeconomics, and upper-division electives.
    Keywords: happiness; subjective well-being; undergraduate curriculum; pedagogy
    JEL: A22 I30
    Date: 2026–01–24
    URL: https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ehl:lserod:129888
  3. By: Nicolas B. Verger (DCU - Dublin City University [Dublin]); Raffi Duymedjian (EESC-GEM - Grenoble Ecole de Management); Vlad P Glăveanu (DCU - Dublin City University [Dublin])
    Abstract: Meritocracy is often discussed as an issue of distributive justice – that is, as the fair allocation of resources. Capitalist organizations are frequently structured around meritocracy, rewarding people hierarchically according to their talent and hard work. Amid concerns that these organizations also contribute to sustaining the ecological crisis, how does meritocracy contribute to, or maintain, environmental damage? In this Connexion piece, we explore this issue. Our analysis identifies a dominant system embedded within capitalism, which we call the Meritocracy of Production. This system views the world primarily as a collection of exploitable resources, rewarding maximization, efficiency and innovative exploitation aimed at unlimited outputs, often justifying extensive resource extraction with little regard for socio-ecological consequences. By contrast, we discuss practices (e.g. bricolage, upcycling, low-tech) that exemplify a Meritocracy of Preservation. This alternative emphasizes sustainable co-existence and collective robustness, valuing dignified, respectful and interdependent relations within ecological and social environments. It rewards practices that sustainably contribute to co-habitation and co-existence. We argue these two meritocratic systems are ontologically equivalent, each offering distinct worldviews, narratives and modes of engagement with the world. People and organizations navigate tensions between these poles by borrowing discursive and representational elements from both systems. While these elements simultaneously influence everyday practices, capitalist organizations are heavily skewed toward the Meritocracy of Production, placing little emphasis on valuing efforts of dynamic preservation—that is, on amplifying the worth and dignity of multiple things-in-the-world, not as a return to a pristine past, but as their ongoing rearrangements to enable their cohabitation. Recognizing this interplay highlights the need to shift towards greater ecological balance and environmental responsibility.
    Abstract: La méritocratie est souvent abordée comme une question de justice distributive, c'est-à-dire comme une allocation équitable des ressources. Les organisations capitalistes sont fréquemment structurées autour de la méritocratie, récompensant les individus de manière hiérarchique en fonction de leur talent et de leur travail. Alors que ces organisations sont également mises en cause pour leur contribution au maintien de la crise écologique, comment la méritocratie participe-t-elle aux dommages environnementaux, ou les perpétue-t-elle ? Dans cet article de Connexion, nous explorons cette question. Notre analyse met en évidence un système dominant inscrit dans le capitalisme, que nous appelons la méritocratie de la production. Ce système considère le monde avant tout comme un ensemble de ressources exploitables et valorise la maximisation, l'efficacité et l'exploitation innovante orientées vers une production illimitée, justifiant souvent une extraction intensive des ressources sans réelle prise en compte des conséquences socio-écologiques. À l'inverse, nous examinons des pratiques (par exemple le bricolage, l'upcycling, le low-tech) qui illustrent une méritocratie de la préservation. Cette alternative met l'accent sur une coexistence durable et une robustesse collective, en valorisant des relations dignes, respectueuses et interdépendantes au sein des environnements écologiques et sociaux. Elle récompense les pratiques qui contribuent de manière durable à la cohabitation et à la coexistence. Nous soutenons que ces deux systèmes méritocratiques sont ontologiquement équivalents, chacun proposant des visions du monde, des récits et des modes d'engagement distincts avec celui-ci. Les individus et les organisations naviguent entre ces pôles en empruntant des éléments discursifs et représentationnels à chacun des deux systèmes. Bien que ces éléments influencent simultanément les pratiques quotidiennes, les organisations capitalistes restent fortement orientées vers la méritocratie de la production, accordant peu d'importance à la valorisation des efforts de préservation dynamique — c'est-à-dire à l'amplification de la valeur et de la dignité de multiples entités-au-monde, non pas comme un retour à un passé pristine, mais comme des réagencements continus permettant leur cohabitation. Reconnaître cette interaction met en lumière la nécessité d'un déplacement vers un plus grand équilibre écologique et une responsabilité environnementale accrue.
    Keywords: Creative preservation, creativity, ecology, innovation, meritocracy, post-growth, resource, resourcification, sustainability ORCID iDs
    Date: 2025–07–13
    URL: https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:hal:journl:hal-05422094
  4. By: Wim Naudé (RWTH Aachen University & University of Coimbra, CeBER)
    Abstract: This paper provides a non-technical and selective explanation of the theory of innovation and economic growth, in light of the 2025 Bank of Sweden Prize in Memory of Alfred Nobel, awarded to Joel Mokyr, Philippe Aghion, and Peter Howitt. Their body of scholarship is critically evaluated, and the useful, less useful, and most problematic aspects are highlighted. The verdict is that it is largely a collection of anthropocentric stories of innovation and growth. It avoids spelling out why sustained growth is desirable, it reduces innovation’s ultimate goal to the pursuit of economic growth, it is based on a deep-seated notion of human exceptionalism, and it promotes directed technical change - based on the assumption that all resources are fungible and can be substituted - as a way to sustain economic growth without causing environmental destruction. Their analysis of growth is useful for highlighting the importance of scientific knowledge, for showing that creative destruction can be more destructive than creative, and that economic growth will only be sustained under very special conditions. However, the failure to satisfactorily address energy in innovation and growth remains a glaring gap in modern economic growth theory. For economics to become more useful, it would require becoming an Earth Systems Science based on biocentric holism.
    Keywords: Innovation, economic growth, technology, sustainability, energy
    JEL: O31 O33 J11 J24
    Date: 2026–02
    URL: https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:gmf:papers:2026-03
  5. By: Kyle Fee
    Abstract: This report analyzes real dollar differences across the lower half of the US wage distribution to shed light on the financial health of low- and moderate-income people and their households.
    Date: 2026–02–18
    URL: https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:fip:c00034:102455

This nep-pke issue is ©2026 by Karl Petrick. It is provided as is without any express or implied warranty. It may be freely redistributed in whole or in part for any purpose. If distributed in part, please include this notice.
General information on the NEP project can be found at https://nep.repec.org. For comments please write to the director of NEP, Marco Novarese at <director@nep.repec.org>. Put “NEP” in the subject, otherwise your mail may be rejected.
NEP’s infrastructure is sponsored by the Griffith Business School of Griffith University in Australia.