In the relentless pursuit of scientific advancement, an overlooked yet pervasive challenge undermines both collaboration and creativity: a phenomenon researchers have dubbed the “Gollum effect.” This term, inspired by the possessive and obsessive character from J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings, highlights a growing issue within contemporary academia where data, resources, and ideas are guarded jealously, hindering progress and damaging careers—particularly among the most vulnerable in the research community. Scientists from Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg (MLU) and the German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) recently illuminated this problem through an extensive international survey, revealing the scale and severity of these territorial behaviors in research environments.
This study, published in the journal One Earth, involved a rigorous survey of 563 active researchers from 64 countries, encompassing a broad spectrum of scientific disciplines with a focus on ecology, biodiversity conservation, and environmental sciences. The survey aimed to quantify experiences of data hoarding, exclusion, and competitive obstructionism in science, collectively termed the “Gollum effect” by the authors. Astonishingly, nearly half of the respondents reported having directly encountered situations where access to valuable research materials or collaborative opportunities was deliberately restricted. Even more striking, approximately two-thirds admitted to facing these challenges repeatedly throughout their careers.
The ramifications of such restrictive behaviors extend beyond mere academic inconvenience. Participants described being denied access to crucial study sites or primary datasets, incidents of idea theft, manipulation over authorship credit, and outright obstruction of research progress. These manifest forms of academic territoriality not only slow the pace of discovery but also induce serious psychological distress. Several interviewees recounted reaching a state of mental health crisis severe enough to require clinical intervention. The “Gollum effect” thus transcends the professional sphere, impacting personal wellbeing and long-term career trajectories.
An analysis of who perpetrates these exclusionary practices reveals a layered structural problem within scientific hierarchies. Established researchers and principal investigators, including supervisors who traditionally mentor junior colleagues, were identified as frequent culprits. Moreover, hostile dynamics sometimes exist even within individual research groups, as well as between competing labs vying for limited funding and prestige. This territorial behavior, while perhaps understandable against the backdrop of academia’s hypercompetitive landscape, perpetuates a toxic culture that disproportionately burdens early-career scientists and members of historically marginalized groups.
The inequity embedded in such systemic possessiveness is particularly pernicious. Junior researchers, who often depend on collaboration and resource sharing to establish their reputation and scientific identity, find themselves marginalized. Similarly, those coming from underrepresented or disadvantaged backgrounds face amplified obstacles, compounding the challenges already present in accessing and contributing to mainstream scientific conversations. The survey authors suggest that these dynamics stem from pressures endemic to modern higher education systems—scarce permanent positions, intensifying competition for grants, and strategic gatekeeping of knowledge and opportunities.
Consequently, the consequences of the “Gollum effect” are profound and multifaceted. Around 70% of affected researchers reported tangible career setbacks, with some forced to alter their research focus under duress, switch institutions or exit academia altogether. This attrition represents a significant loss of intellectual capital for the global scientific endeavor. It also highlights a chilling paradox: the very structures meant to foster innovation and knowledge dissemination instead induce stagnation and attrition. Compounding this, only a minority of those experiencing the effect reported taking assertive steps to confront or mitigate the behavior, indicating a climate of fear, resignation, or lack of institutional support.
Intriguingly, self-reflection among the research community revealed that nearly 20% of respondents recognized having behaved in a manner reminiscent of the “Gollum effect” themselves. This cyclical nature of possessiveness suggests embedded cultural norms wherein possessiveness is a survival strategy as much as a pathological behavior. Such cycles further reinforce the need for systemic reform rather than individual blame. The study co-authors emphasize recognizing and naming the problem as the critical first step towards fostering more equitable scientific environments.
To confront this endemic issue, the researchers highlighted potential avenues for reform and remediation based on survey responses. Chief among these were fostering a culture marked by transparency, openness, and ethical collaboration. Raising awareness about the detrimental impact of academic territoriality was seen as vital, alongside institutional policies designed to reward team-oriented behaviors and discourage gatekeeping. Structural reforms proposed include enhanced and stable funding streams particularly targeting junior scientists, clear and enforceable guidelines on data sharing and authorship, and stronger mentorship frameworks to cultivate inclusivity and shared success.
The implications of these findings resonate deeply within the current discourse on transforming scientific culture. In an era increasingly defined by interdisciplinary teams and open science mandates, the persistence of exclusionary practices presents a formidable barrier to maximizing the social and intellectual returns of research investment. The “Gollum effect” encapsulates a paradoxical tension between the ideals of science as a communal quest for knowledge and the competitive realities imposed by career pressures and institutional incentives.
Looking forward, the authors advocate for sustained efforts to encourage open discussion about territoriality and possessiveness in science. By giving researchers a conceptual framework and vocabulary to describe these experiences, the study aims to catalyze cultural shifts that prioritize fairness, collaboration, and mental wellbeing. As Dr. John Gould from the University of Newcastle remarks, acknowledging the problem is a crucial milestone in transforming academia into a space where ideas and data flow freely, and where scientists at all career stages can thrive.
In sum, uncovering the “Gollum effect” sheds essential light on a systemic malaise within academic research that obstructs knowledge sharing and damages individual careers. This phenomenon represents more than isolated instances of unprofessional conduct; it reflects deep-rooted systemic pressures and cultural norms that privilege territoriality over collaboration. Addressing these challenges requires holistic reforms involving policy, culture, and resource allocation to ensure science achieves its highest potential as a truly collective human enterprise.
This study’s insights arrive at a pivotal moment in the evolution of scientific practice when openness and cooperation are not merely ethical imperatives but necessities to confront global challenges such as biodiversity loss and environmental degradation. Overcoming the “Gollum effect” holds promise not only for accelerating discovery but also for nurturing a more just and sustainable scientific ecosystem for generations to come.
Subject of Research: Not applicable
Article Title: Systemic territoriality in academia: The Gollum effect’s impact on scientific research and careers
News Publication Date: 20-May-2025
Web References:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2025.101314
References:
Valdez J.W., Sharma S., Gould J. Systemic territoriality in academia: The Gollum effect’s impact on scientific research and careers. One Earth (2025). doi: 10.1016/j.oneear.2025.101314
Keywords: Gollum effect, academic territoriality, data hoarding, scientific collaboration, career development, open science, research ethics, mental health in academia, academia culture, early-career researchers, systemic barriers, scientific misconduct
