Abstract

The notion of ‘excellence’ has become the key logic structuring academic funding and evaluation. This essay offers a critique of this policy logic by examining the case of biocuration, an area of academic scholarship that is ‘non-excellent’ (according to this notion’s operationalisation) but that has, I argue, profound epistemic significance. I develop my argument in a number of steps. I first characterise excellence regimes by examining how excellence is operationalised within them, before discussing epistemic diversity and injustice, and how these concepts can be applied in the context of studies of maintenance and repair. I then turn to my case study of biocuration and its use of bio-ontologies, introducing biocuration and its struggles for visibility and recognition before discussing its epistemic significance and contribution to the wider biosciences. In closing I argue that there is a need to better understand what epistemic diversity in academic settings looks like in practice, to assess the different kinds of work that contribute to knowledge production, and to base evaluation and funding practices upon the acknowledgement and material recognition of epistemic diversity.