The article argues that slow science is not a rejection of excellence or rigor, but an alternative to academic overwork that seeks to reclaim time in academia as a necessary condition for high-quality knowledge production. By emphasizing sustainable science practices and mindful approaches in research, slow science offers practical and ethical pathways toward more sustainable research cultures. The discussion highlights how slowing down can support intellectual depth, methodological care, and researcher well-being, while addressing systemic issues such as academic burnout and mental health risks in doctoral training.
Overall, the article presents slow science as a constructive framework for responsible research that aligns scientific integrity with human limits, proposing a viable alternative to acceleration-driven academic systems without abandoning ambition or critical inquiry.
Slow Science – Why Research Needs Time
In a world that constantly accelerates, science seems to have fallen under the same pressures of markets, politics, and technology. Research outcomes are expected to be “impactful,” immediately applicable, and published at an ever-increasing pace. The adage “publish or perish” has become a global mantra. Yet while the world rushes ahead, a counter-current is emerging in laboratories, lecture halls, and intellectual spaces: Slow Science. It advocates for time, space, and reflection—a scientific practice that is more deliberate, responsible, and sustainable.
What Is Slow Science?
Slow Science is both a movement and a mindset. It challenges the acceleration and commercialization of scientific work. Much like the Slow Food movement, which promotes mindful consumption and sustainable practices, Slow Science emphasizes quality over quantity and values knowledge over mere data production.
At its core, Slow Science rests on the recognition that research takes time: time to think, read, question, and even fail. The well-known Slow Science Manifesto of 2010 succinctly captures this ethos:
“Science needs time to think. Science needs time to read, and time to fail.”
These words stand in opposition to the cadence of funding cycles, project deadlines, and academic rankings that force researchers to produce faster than the complexity of their questions allows. Slow Science is not nostalgia for a slower era—it is a call for research to proceed according to its own rhythms.
Why the Movement Emerged
Modern science increasingly revolves around performance metrics. Funding, careers, and reputation often depend on citation counts, impact factors, and publication numbers. This pressure can produce superficial research: studies are fragmented, methods truncated, replications neglected.
Researchers have long warned that this “fast science” culture undermines both the quality and credibility of scholarly work. The reproducibility crisis in psychology and medicine, erroneous data in rushed publications, and the neglect of basic research are symptoms of a system that values speed over substance.
Slow Science seeks to counter this dynamic, advocating that research should once again be understood as a process, not merely a product. Knowledge often grows slowly, unpredictably, and sometimes even in contradiction—none of which can be captured by rigid project timelines or quantified metrics.
Key Voices: Isabelle Stengers and Others
One of the most influential voices in this discourse is Belgian philosopher of science Isabelle Stengers, author of Another Science Is Possible: A Manifesto for Slow Science (2018). Stengers critiques fast science for prioritizing control, efficiency, and competition—factors that can destroy the openness essential to scientific thinking. She argues that research must become “response-able”: aware of its responsibilities and its entanglement with society.
Other scholars, such as Petri Salo and Hannu L.T. Heikkinen in Slow Science: Research and Teaching for Sustainable Praxis (2021), emphasize that both research and teaching need to be more sustainable. Universities should create conditions that allow time for learning, reflection, and experimentation.
Additional publications, including Slow Science for 21st Century Healthcare, illustrate that the movement is gaining traction even in applied fields like medical research, where speed and efficiency pressures are particularly acute. Slow Science in these contexts does not mean “slower treatment” but rather more thorough, holistic, and human-centered inquiry.
 |
| Picture by gryffyn m on Unsplash |
Core Principles of Slow Science
Slow Science is not a call for idleness—it is a principle-driven approach to mindful scientific practice. Its core tenets include:
- Time for Reflection and Failure – Research needs freedom to ask questions, discard hypotheses, and learn from mistakes.
- Quality over Quantity – The value of research lies in depth, rigor, and reproducibility, not in the number of publications.
- Transparency and Reproducibility – Research outcomes should be verifiable, accessible, and open for scrutiny.
- Societal Responsibility – Science should serve the public good, not just individual careers or corporate interests.
- Interdisciplinarity and Dialogue – Slow Science encourages cross-disciplinary thinking and engagement with societal perspectives.
These principles emphasize deliberate practice over mere speed, envisioning knowledge as a collective endeavor rather than an industrial output.
Ideas and Initiatives for Implementation
Slow Science is part of a broader movement toward a more reflective research culture. Several initiatives and ideas demonstrate how these principles can be translated into practice.
1. The Slow Science Manifesto
The Berlin-based manifesto of 2010 is a foundational document. It emphasizes that research is a slow, unpredictable process—its very strength lies in this deliberateness. Its provocative line—“We are scientists. We don’t blog. We don’t tweet. We take our time”—challenges prevailing metrics-driven norms. The manifesto calls for institutional and political support: longer project durations, reduced reliance on quantitative metrics, and greater trust in researchers’ autonomy.
2. Open Science
Open Science complements Slow Science by promoting transparency and reproducibility. Open datasets, transparent methodologies, and accessible results are the foundation for quality over quantity. Initiatives like the Berkeley Initiative for Transparency in the Social Sciences (BITSS) exemplify structural solutions: they make research verifiable and reduce the incentive to produce “quick” but unreliable findings.
3. Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI)
RRI, particularly in European policy contexts, advocates that research should not only be technically robust but also ethically and socially responsible. It aligns with Slow Science by embedding reflection, accountability, and societal relevance into research practices.
4. Academic Sustainability Initiatives
Across the globe, universities are creating networks promoting “sustainable science,” including flexible working structures, recognition of teaching contributions, and alternative career paths. These initiatives address the system-level challenges of burnout and unsustainable work practices, supporting reflection, interdisciplinary dialogue, and slower, more deliberate research.
Practical Implementation: What Slow Science Looks Like
On an individual level, Slow Science means allowing time for reading, reflection, and discussion. Researchers can deliberately focus on fewer, more substantial projects, share results openly, and communicate methodological uncertainties.
At the institutional level, it requires structural changes:
- Longer funding cycles, enabling thorough and rigorous research.
- Evaluation systems that prioritize quality, collaboration, and societal impact over publication counts.
- Dedicated spaces for research free from immediate commercial or political pressures, such as sabbaticals or research semesters.
- Cultural shifts in academic communication, valuing depth and thoughtfulness over constant output.
Pilot projects in Belgium (slowscience.be) and Scandinavian universities demonstrate that such ideas can be operationalized, fostering reflection, interdisciplinary collaboration, and an appreciation for the slow rhythms of inquiry.
The Pause Method
A particularly illustrative example of applying Slow Science in daily practice is the Pause Method, documented on my Substack. The method encourages researchers to intentionally interrupt their workflow—not as procrastination, but to gain perspective and reflect on the direction of their work.
These “pauses” are short, structured moments of metacognition: asking, for example, What am I actually investigating? Which questions truly matter? What might I be overlooking in my haste?
This method embodies the practical side of Slow Science. It does not reduce productivity but enhances it by fostering conscious, reflective work, reminding researchers that thoughtful science requires moments of stillness amid the busyness of experiments and publications.
Critiques and Challenges
Slow Science is not without its critics. Some argue that rapid research is necessary in emergencies, such as pandemics or climate crises. Yet Slow Science does not oppose timely action; rather, it advocates deliberate slowing where possible, ensuring that speed does not compromise rigor.
Another challenge concerns early-career researchers under career pressures. Embracing “slowness” can feel risky when institutional incentives favor quick output. Slow Science therefore emphasizes systemic reform, so that individuals are not penalized for adopting reflective practices.
Finally, resource constraints pose difficulties: slow, thorough research often requires funding and time. Proponents counter that the long-term benefits—robust, reliable, and socially responsible knowledge—far outweigh the short-term costs. Hasty or low-quality research carries far greater societal, financial, and epistemic costs.
Why Slow Science Matters Today
Society increasingly demands that science solve complex problems, innovate technologies, and provide guidance. Yet fast production risks overlooking the essence of research. Slow Science invites a renewed understanding of science as a cultural practice, not just a mechanical process.
In an age of information overload, misinformation, and declining trust in institutions, Slow Science offers a counter-model: research that listens, reflects, and acknowledges its limitations. It reconnects science with its enduring goal: to understand, explain, and responsibly contribute to the world.
Slow Science builds on the classical ideal of knowledge for its own sake but enriches it with an awareness that insight arises in relationship: to people, values, and society.
Conclusion: Toward a Science of Time and Depth
Slow Science is more than a manifesto—it is a cultural call to reclaim the responsibility and integrity of scientific practice. It is not a call for inactivity but for the rehabilitation of time, care, and reflection.
Science that allows itself to slow down is not luxury; it is necessity. Knowledge produced in haste often lacks depth, context, and meaning. When research is permitted to breathe, it gains in quality, trustworthiness, and societal relevance.
Slow Science is not a contradiction to modernity—it is a prerequisite. Only those willing to think slowly can hope to understand quickly and act wisely.
References
Adam, B. (2004). Time. Polity Press.
Brandt, R. (2025, November 4). The Pause Method. Substack. https://substack.com/@researchrebekka/note/p-177760095?utm_source=notes-share-action&r=6dn33z
Berg, M., & Seeber, B. K. (2016). The slow professor: Challenging the culture of speed in the academy. University of Toronto Press.
European Commission. (2013). Options for strengthening responsible research and innovation: Report of the Expert Group on the State of Art in Europe on Responsible Research and Innovation. Publications Office of the European Union.
Fecher, B., & Friesike, S. (2014). Open science: One term, five schools of thought. In S. Bartling & S. Friesike (Eds.), Opening science (pp. 17–47). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00026-8_2
Felt, U. (Ed.). (2017). The handbook of science and technology studies (4th ed.). MIT Press.
Fochler, M., Felt, U., & Müller, R. (2016). Unsustainable growth, hyper-competition, and the marginalization of care in science. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 41(5), 869–890. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243915626986
Heikkinen, H. L. T., & Salo, P. (2021). Slow science: Research and teaching for sustainable praxis. European Educational Research Journal, 20(5), 563–575. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904120988316
Mirowski, P. (2011). Science-Mart: Privatizing American science. Harvard University Press.
Mountz et al. (2015). For slow scholarship: A feminist politics of resistance through collective action in the neoliberal university. ACME: An International E-Journal for Critical Geographies, 14(4), 1235–1259.
Rosa, H. (2013). Social acceleration: A new theory of modernity (J. Trejo-Mathys, Trans.). Columbia University Press.
Slow Science Academy. (2010). The Slow Science Manifesto. https://slowscience.org/manifesto/
Stengers, I. (2018). Another science is possible: A manifesto for slow science (S. Muecke, Trans.). Polity Press.
Wilsdon et al. (2015). The Metric Tide: Report of the Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment and Management. Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE).