A note on reproducible GIS by economists: it's mostly absent. Here are some tips.
Reproducibility means that the inputs and methods can be repeated by a (somewhat) knowledgeable person. For GIS, that *might* (should) mean code, but it *definitely* means at least SOME instructions. Even if they are manual....
Maps are data. While your typical Stata/Matlab/R/Julia graph is data projected into Cartesian coordinates, maps are data projected into geographic coordinates. So at a minimum, we need to know what the inputs to the map are, same as we need to know inputs to graphs.
So "data + code" + "graph twoway scatter x y" -> 📈📉, and "data + code" + "maptile x, geo(state)" -> 🗺️. Or "data + code" + "instructions(ArcGIS)" -> 🗺️. Note that for a map, "data" includes shapefiles (including provenance of the shapefile)
So: checklist for reproducible maps:
✅ data (+ provenance)
✅ code (manipulates data)
✅ shapefile (provides coordinates)
✅ code (preferred) or instructions (sufficient)
Summary: Please try to create scripted maps, but always describe what data you are mapping, and where you got the shapefiles from (note: copyrights might apply, permissions might need to be obtained!)
An example of reproducibility checking when data is restricted-access (or "reproducibility checking is hard, but never impossible").
I want to highlight a recent article in the @AEAjournals Economic Policy:
Leung, Pauline, and Christopher O'Leary. 2020. "Unemployment Insurance and Means-Tested Program Interactions: Evidence from Administrative Data." doi.org/10.1257/pol.20…
This manuscript was part of our earliest reproducibility checks - assigned to us in April 2019. It is an excellent example of a well-documented, and as it turns out, reproducible article. Even if the data is confidential and restricted-access! (1 Caveat: see the End)