This is yours truly's broad definition of emergence.
It's a bit idiosyncratic, but yours truly thinks it's a useful perspective on emergence.
So yours truly is idiosyncratic---so was Job:
To explicate the broad definition:
For example, classical mechanics (AKA Newtonian physics) can be derived rigorously from theory of relativity (which includes general relativity and special relativity) by going to the classical limit. So in one sense, classical mechanics is limit-form special case of theory of relativity.
But classical mechanics was originally discovered long before the theory of relativity, and so is in a historical and conceptual sense independent of the theory of relativity.
Without rigorous proof, yours truly will assume all important theories are emergent theories and will usually call them theories and NOT emergent theories. Yours truly tends to call important theories emergent theories when yours truly wishes to emphasize the emergence.
The narrow definition uses he word "emergence" in the opposite sense: emergence from an underlying system.
In fact, they two definitions seem to yours truly to be different perspectives on nearly the same thing.
The only emergent theory included in the broad definition and excluded under the narrow definition seems to be the fundamental fundamental physics theory which yours truly calls TOE-Plus---the "Plus" means that TOE-Plus includes things NOT usually included in the theory of everything (TOE), but included in physics---most importantly the 2nd law of thermodynamics.
We do NOT have TOE-Plus yet, but we might someday, maybe soon, maybe NOT soon.