Writing in an open, collaborative system

The way we write profoundly shapes what we can say and how we collaborate. Traditional academic writing processes—centred around word processors and email exchanges—both reflect and reinforce closed, hierarchical knowledge systems. This new academic writing workflow isn't only a technical choice; it's a deliberate effort to create bridges between how we talk about scholarship and how we actually practise it.

This workflow enables a low-cost, near frictionless method for open scholarly practice and rapid dissemination of academic work, while also directly challenging the publishing industry's control over publication. By managing our own means of creation, production, distribution, and archival channels, we shift power back to scholars and communities, making knowledge more accessible and allowing for more responsive, evolving scholarship.

Writing process overview

Here's how my academic writing and publication process works:

1. Markdown for writing: Plain text with simple formatting that focuses on content rather than presentation (I do most of my writing in Obsidian)
2. Git/GitHub for versioning and collaboration: Version control with transparent history, public engagement, and the possibility of peer review
3. VitePress for presentation: Automated conversion of markdown to a readable website (this site is built with Vitepress)
4. Netlify for deployment: Automated publishing of the "live" version of the document, initially with no DOI
5. Manual Zenodo submission: For creating DOIs and permanent snapshots through preprints (I will also start adding the preprints to the Internet Archive for long-term archiving)
6. Journal submission: If I decide to, I can submit the preprint to a traditional academic journal for a more traditional publication

This system enables me to rapidly create and publish live documents that evolve transparently while maintaining academically citable versions. It's not just about the technology—it's about putting emergent scholarship principles into practice through the media I use to share ideas.

Emgergent scholarship principles embodied

While this writing process enables a more open and collaborative practice, it's also a way for me to test the principles of emergent scholarship; do these principles actually enable "a forward-looking, interdisciplinary approach to knowledge creation and sharing that embraces complexity, connection, collaboration, adaptation, and public engagement"?

Knowledge through connection

• Git's branching and merging makes the evolution of ideas transparent; every change is tracked and recorded through version control
• GitHub issues and pull requests create visible connections between contributors (assuming others join the project and buy into the publishing system)
• Using Vitepress to create links between project- and web-based documents and discussions show the networked nature of knowledge development

Information flow through networks

• Open repositories allow anyone to fork, adapt, and build upon work (I recognise that this is quite technical and possibly out of reach for many people who don't have the time or inclination to adapt to new processes)
• Automated publishing ensures ideas move freely and rapidly
• Multiple distribution formats (web, PDF, DOI) enable content to flow across contexts

Identity through community

• All contributions are permanently attributed through Git history
• Public review and discussion builds community around shared work, hopefully leading to shared ownership of products and a public 'academic commons' where intellectual property belongs to the community
• Author identity emerges through visible patterns of contribution and collaboration; what you choose to contribute to says something about your academic identify, your values, and beliefs

Innovation through openness

• Public repositories invite unexpected contributions
• Early sharing creates conditions for serendipitous connections that may spark new ideas in others
• Open, ongoing development enables continuous improvement, where the version of record becomes a stepping stone in an evolutionary series

Meaning through medium

• Markdown focuses on content and ideas over formatting and presentation, emphasising a simpler approach to writing process
• Multiple output formats acknowledge that different contexts require different presentations

Value through engagement

• GitHub metrics make engagement visible (stars, forks, issues), similar to altmetrics for academic publication
• Public dialogue creates transparent record of impact, moving away from the notion of value through traditional citation metrics
• However, DOIs (through Zenodo) enable traditional citation alongside alternative engagement metrics

Sustainability through ecology

• Plain text ensures work remains readable regardless of technological change, ensuring long-term sustainability of the work
• Low-bandwidth plain text minimises environmental impact of information transmission and storage
• Public repositories reduce duplication of effort, as it becomes easier to find projects to contribute to
• Open collaboration distributes workload across contributors, making it easier to build large scale projects

Rebalancing power in knowledge production

Through these concrete technical practices, I'm trying to not only theorise about emergent scholarship but also enact it, demonstrating its principles through the process I use to describe them.