Emergent scholarship principles

Emergent scholarship represents a reimagining of scholarly practice for our interconnected world. It recognises that knowledge creation is not bound by institutional walls or disciplinary boundaries. Instead, it arises from the dynamic interplay between diverse participants, technologies, and ideas. This approach doesn’t aim to abolish traditional academic practices, but rather to evolve them – keeping what works while embracing new possibilities.

The principles that follow aim to guide this evolution, providing a framework for scholars who want to maintain intellectual rigour while exploring more open, dynamic, and inclusive ways of creating and sharing knowledge. They are intentionally high-level, allowing for flexible interpretation and application across different contexts and disciplines.


Knowledge emerges through connection

  • Scholarship thrives when ideas, people, and practices can freely connect and interact
  • The most valuable insights often arise at the intersection of different perspectives and disciplines
  • New understanding emerges from both formal and informal exchanges across diverse networks

Openness enables innovation

  • Knowledge should be as open and accessible as possible, while respecting ethical considerations
  • Scholarly work benefits from early sharing and continuous feedback
  • Open processes allow for unexpected connections and discoveries
  • Public engagement enriches rather than diminishes scholarly work

Form follows function

  • The format of scholarly work should serve its purpose, not tradition
  • Different kinds of knowledge may require different modes of creation and sharing
  • Methods and outputs can evolve as new possibilities emerge
  • Technology should enable scholarship, not constrain it

Validate through engagement

  • Quality assurance comes through active engagement with scholarly communities
  • Peer review is valuable but can take many forms
  • Impact is measured by meaningful contribution, not just citation metrics
  • The ultimate test of scholarship is its value to society

Embrace uncertainty and adaptation

  • Scholarship is a journey of discovery, not just a collection of outputs
  • Research questions and methods can evolve as understanding deepens
  • Scholars should be free to explore unexpected paths and possibilities
  • Failure and iteration are natural parts of the scholarly process

Build for sustainability

  • Scholarly practice should be sustainable for both individuals and institutions
  • Knowledge creation should contribute to, not detract from, societal well-being
  • Systems and processes should promote long-term thinking
  • Scholarship should enhance rather than deplete human and environmental resources

Foster collective intelligence

  • Individual brilliance matters less than collective wisdom
  • Good ideas can come from anywhere and anyone
  • Technology can augment human intelligence
  • Collaboration should be valued as highly as individual achievement

These principles aim to guide rather than prescribe. They offer a framework for reimagining scholarship while maintaining its essential purpose: the creation and sharing of knowledge that benefits society.


How is this different to traditional scholarship?

  • Integration of systems: While individual elements (open access, public engagement, etc.) exist in current scholarship, emergent scholarship uniquely integrates them into a coherent system that acknowledges and works with complexity rather than trying to reduce it.
  • Shift in primary focus: Traditional scholarship treats things like public engagement and interdisciplinary work as “add-ons” to the “real work” of peer-reviewed publication. These principles fundamentally invert that hierarchy, making engagement and connection primary rather than secondary.
  • Power dynamics: These principles actively challenge the traditional power structures in academia. While others have criticised these structures, emergent scholarship provides a practical framework for operating differently within (and eventually transforming) them.

Practical differences in outcomes

A scholar following these principles could work differently in several concrete ways:

  • They might start sharing their thinking publicly through various media while research is in progress, rather than waiting for formal publication
  • Their research questions might emerge through public engagement rather than solely from the academic literature
  • They could validate their work through diverse forms of peer review and community feedback, not just traditional peer review
  • Their outputs might include multiple formats (digital artifacts, community resources, etc.) alongside traditional papers