Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

From policy to practice: Progress towards data- and code-sharing in ecology and evolution

  • Edward R. Ivimey-Cook
  • , Alfredo Sánchez-Tójar
  • , Ilias Berberi
  • , Antica Culina
  • , Dominique G. Roche
  • , Rafaela A. Almeida
  • , Bawan Amin
  • , Kevin R. Bairos-Novak
  • , Heikel Balti
  • , Michael G. Bertram
  • , Louis Bliard
  • , Ilha Byrne
  • , Ying-Chi Chan
  • , William R. Cioffi
  • , Quentin Corbel
  • , Alexander D. Elsy
  • , Katie R. N. Florko
  • , Elliot Gould
  • , Matthew J. 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, Nicholas Patrick Moran

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

8 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Data and code are essential for ensuring the credibility of scientific results and facilitating reproducibility, areas in which journal sharing policies play a crucial role. However, in ecology and evolution, we still do not know how widespread data- and code-sharing policies are, how accessible they are, and whether journals support data and code peer review. Here, we first assessed the clarity, strictness and timing of data- and code-sharing policies across 275 journals in ecology and evolution. Second, we assessed initial compliance to journal policies using submissions from two journals: Proceedings of the Royal Society B (Mar 2023-Feb 2024: n = 2340) and Ecology Letters (Jun 2021-Nov 2023: n = 571). Our results indicate the need for improvement: across 275 journals, 22.5% encouraged and 38.2% mandated data-sharing, while 26.6% encouraged and 26.9% mandated code-sharing. Journals that mandated data- or code-sharing typically required it for peer review (59.0% and 77.0%, respectively), which decreased when journals only encouraged sharing (40.3% and 24.7%, respectively). Our evaluation of policy compliance confirmed the important role of journals in increasing data- and code-sharing but also indicated the need for meaningful changes to enhance reproducibility. We provide seven recommendations to help improve data- and code-sharing, and policy compliance.

Original languageEnglish
Article number20251394
JournalProceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
Volume292
Issue number2055
Early online date17 Sept 2025
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 17 Sept 2025

Keywords

  • journal policy
  • open science
  • peer review
  • replicability
  • reproducibility
  • transparency

Cite this