From Policy to Practice: Progress towards Data- and Code-Sharing in Ecology and Evolution
EcoEvoRxiv
pre-print
pre-registered
data available
code available
Ilias Berberi 
Antica Čulina
Dominique G. Roche
Rafaela Almeida
Bawan Amin
Kevin R. Bairos‐Novak
Heikel Balti
Michael G. Bertram
Louis Bliard
Ilha Byrne
Ying‐Chi Chan
William G. Cioffi
Quentin Corbel
Alexander Elsy
Katie R. N. Florko
Elliot Gould
Matthew Grainger
Anne E. Harshbarger
Knut Anders Hovstad
Jake M. Martin
April Robin Martinig
Giulia Masoero
Iain R. Moodie
David Moreau
Rose E. O’Dea
Matthieu Paquet
Joel L. Pick
Tuba Rizvi
Inês Silva
Birgit Szabo
Elina Takola
Eli S.J. Thoré
Wilco C. E. P. Verberk
Saras M. Windecker
Gabe Winter
Zuzana Zajková
Romy Zeiss
Abstract
High quality research data and analytical code are essential for ensuring the credibility of scientific results, are key research outputs, and are crucial elements to facilitate reproducibility. However, in ecology and evolution (E&E) in particular, it is currently unknown how many journals have policies on data- and code-sharing for peer review purposes, or upon manuscript acceptance. Furthermore, the clarity of such policies may impact authors’ compliance. Thus, we assessed the clarity, strictness, and timing of data- and code-sharing policies across 275 journals in E&E. We also analysed initial policy compliance using submission data from two journals: Proceedings of the Royal Society B and Ecology Letters. Across all 275 journals, 22.5% encouraged and 38.2% mandated data-sharing, whereas 26.6% encouraged and 26.9% mandated code-sharing. Most journals that mandated data- or code-sharing required these to be provided “during peer review” (59.0% and 77.0%). This number was reduced for journals that encouraged data- and code-sharing (40.3% and 24.7%). More journals mandated or encouraged data- (+5.7%) and code-sharing (+12.6%) since the last assessments of these percentages in 2021 and 2020. Mandatory policies were associated with higher rates of data- and code-sharing upon submission (16.9% pre-mandate to 42.6% post-mandate), even when not fully adhered to. When enforced by editorial staff, mandated policies led to very high compliance rates (e.g., 96.5%). Our results also suggest that low initial compliance may in part be explained by vague wording used in sharing policies. We provide seven specific recommendations to help journals improve policy compliance and boost data- and code-sharing in E&E.
Citation
BibTeX citation:
@article{ivimey‐cook2025,
author = {Ivimey‐Cook, Edward and Sánchez‐Tójar, Alfredo and Berberi,
Ilias and Čulina, Antica and Roche, Dominique G. and Almeida,
Rafaela and Amin, Bawan and Bairos‐Novak, Kevin R. and Balti, Heikel
and Bertram, Michael G. and Bliard, Louis and Byrne, Ilha and Chan,
Ying‐Chi and Cioffi, William G. and Corbel, Quentin and Elsy,
Alexander and Florko, Katie R. N. and Gould, Elliot and Grainger,
Matthew and Harshbarger, Anne E. and Hovstad, Knut Anders and
Martin, Jake M. and Martinig, April Robin and Masoero, Giulia and
Moodie, Iain R. and Moreau, David and O’Dea, Rose E. and Paquet,
Matthieu and Pick, Joel L. and Rizvi, Tuba and Silva, Inês and
Szabo, Birgit and Takola, Elina and Thoré, Eli S.J. and Verberk,
Wilco C. E. P. and Windecker, Saras M. and Winter, Gabe and Zajková,
Zuzana and Zeiss, Romy and Moran, Nicholas P.},
title = {From {Policy} to {Practice:} {Progress} Towards {Data-} and
{Code-Sharing} in {Ecology} and {Evolution}},
journal = {EcoEvoRxiv},
date = {2025-01-20},
url = {https://irmoodie.com/publications/ivimey-cookPolicyPracticeProgress2025.html},
doi = {10.32942/X2492Q},
langid = {en},
abstract = {High quality research data and analytical code are
essential for ensuring the credibility of scientific results, are
key research outputs, and are crucial elements to facilitate
reproducibility. However, in ecology and evolution (E\&E) in
particular, it is currently unknown how many journals have policies
on data- and code-sharing for peer review purposes, or upon
manuscript acceptance. Furthermore, the clarity of such policies may
impact authors’ compliance. Thus, we assessed the clarity,
strictness, and timing of data- and code-sharing policies across 275
journals in E\&E. We also analysed initial policy compliance using
submission data from two journals: Proceedings of the Royal Society
B and Ecology Letters. Across all 275 journals, 22.5\% encouraged
and 38.2\% mandated data-sharing, whereas 26.6\% encouraged and
26.9\% mandated code-sharing. Most journals that mandated data- or
code-sharing required these to be provided “during peer review”
(59.0\% and 77.0\%). This number was reduced for journals that
encouraged data- and code-sharing (40.3\% and 24.7\%). More journals
mandated or encouraged data- (+5.7\%) and code-sharing (+12.6\%)
since the last assessments of these percentages in 2021 and 2020.
Mandatory policies were associated with higher rates of data- and
code-sharing upon submission (16.9\% pre-mandate to 42.6\%
post-mandate), even when not fully adhered to. When enforced by
editorial staff, mandated policies led to very high compliance rates
(e.g., 96.5\%). Our results also suggest that low initial compliance
may in part be explained by vague wording used in sharing policies.
We provide seven specific recommendations to help journals improve
policy compliance and boost data- and code-sharing in E\&E.}
}
For attribution, please cite this work as:
Ivimey‐Cook, E., A. Sánchez‐Tójar, I. Berberi, A. Čulina, D. G. Roche,
R. Almeida, B. Amin, et al. 2025. From Policy to Practice: Progress
towards Data- and Code-Sharing in Ecology and Evolution. EcoEvoRxiv.