Reviewing qualitative GIS research—Toward a wider usage of open‐source GIS and reproducible research practices

Muenchow, Jannes; Schäfer, Susann; Krüger, Eric

doi:10.1111/gec3.12441

Cited by 26 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 58 publications

(65 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Using systematic analysis based on a rubric for reproducible research, we found that the majority of AGILE papers neither provided sufficient information for a reviewer to evaluate the code and data and attempt a reproduction, nor enough material for readers to reuse or extend data or code from the analytical workflows. This is corroborated by research in related disciplines such as quantitative geography [3], qualitative GIS [21], geoscience [16], and e-Science [10]. The problems identified in these related research areas are transferable to the scientific discipline of GIScience, which operates at the intersections of aforementioned fields [11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 75%

Reproducible Research and GIScience: an evaluation using GIScience conference papers

Ostermann¹,

Nüst²,

Granell³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

GIScience conference authors and researchers face the same computational reproducibility challenges as authors and researchers from other disciplines who use computers to analyse data. Here, to assess the reproducibility of GIScience research, we apply a rubric for assessing the reproducibility of 75 conference papers published at the GIScience conference series in the years 2012-2018. Since the rubric and process were previously applied to the publications of the AGILE conference series, this paper itself is an attempt to replicate that analysis, however going beyond the previous work by evaluating and discussing proposed measures to improve reproducibility in the specific context of the GIScience conference series. The results of the GIScience paper assessment are in line with previous findings: although descriptions of workflows and the inclusion of the data and software suffice to explain the presented work, in most published papers they do not allow a third party to reproduce the results and findings with a reasonable effort. We summarise and adapt previous recommendations for improving this situation and propose the GIScience community to start a broad discussion on the reusability, quality, and openness of its research. Further, we critically reflect on the process of assessing paper reproducibility, and provide suggestions for improving future assessments. The code and data for this article are

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 75%

Reproducible Research and GIScience: an evaluation using GIScience conference papers

Ostermann¹,

Nüst²,

Granell³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Free and open source statistical software and visualization packages have been developed and adopted in scientific communities (Lowndes et al, 2017;Hampton et al, 2015;Lausch et al, 2015) and are replacing commercial software like in case of R and Python shared under a GNU license (Hampton et al, 2015). For spatial data management using geographic information system (GIS), free and open source software such as QGIS, GRASS GIS, and SAGA GIS are widely used (Muenchow et al, 2019;Rocchini et al, 2017); there is accordingly less need for expensive commercial GIS software. The codes specific for GHG community are now also shared openly (like in case of EddyProhttps://www.licor.com/env/support/EddyPro/software.html or the ONEFlux tool described by Pastorello et al, 2020).…”

Section: Free Open Source Software Data and Computational Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reviews and syntheses: Enhancing research and monitoring of land-to-atmosphere greenhouse gases exchange in developing countries

Kim

Bond‐Lamberty

Ryu

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Greenhouse gas (GHG) research has traditionally required data collection and analysis using advanced and often expensive instruments, complex and proprietary software, and skilled technicians. Partly as a result, relatively little GHG research has been conducted in resource-constrained developing countries and a critical data gap exists in these regions. At the same time, these are the same countries and regions in which climate-change impacts will likely be strongest, and in which major science uncertainties are centered, given the importance of dryland and tropical systems to the global carbon cycle and climate. Increasingly, scientific communities have adopted appropriate technology and approach (AT&A) for GHG research, including low-cost and low-technology instruments, open source software and data, and participatory and networking-based research approaches. Adopting AT&A can mean acquiring data with fewer technical constraints and lower economic burden, and is thus a strategy for enhancing GHG research in developing countries. However, AT&A can be characterized by higher uncertainties; these can often be mitigated by carefully designing experimental set-up, providing clear protocols for data collection, and monitoring and validating the quality of obtained data. For implementing this approach in GHG research of developing countries, first, it is necessary to recognize the scientific and moral importance of AT&A. At the same time, new AT&A techniques should be identified and further developed. Finally, these processes should be promoted through training local staff and encouraged for wide use and further innovation in developing countries.

show abstract

“…Statistical software and visualization packages have been developed and adopted in scientific communities 260 (Lowndes et al, 2017;Hampton et al, 2015;Lausch et al, 2015) like in case of R and Python that are used and shared under a GNU license (Hampton et al, 2015). The same is valid for GIS open source software such as QGIS, GRASS GIS, and SAGA GIS (Muenchow et al, 2019;Rocchini et al, 2017) and for codes specific for GHG community that are now also shared openly (like in case of EddyPro-https://www.licor.com/env/support/EddyPro/software.html or the ONEFlux tool described by Pastorello et al, 2020). 265…”

Section: Access To Data Software and Computational Resourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ideas and Perspectives: Enhancing research and monitoring of carbon pools and land-to-atmosphere greenhouse gases exchange in developing countries

Kim

Bond‐Lamberty

Ryu

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Carbon (C) and greenhouse gas (GHG) research has traditionally required data collection and analysis using advanced and often expensive instruments, complex and proprietary software, and skilled technicians. Partly as a result, relatively little C and GHG research has been conducted in resource-constrained developing countries. At the same time, these are the same countries and regions in which climate-change impacts will likely be strongest, and in which major science uncertainties are centred, given the importance of dryland and tropical systems to the global C cycle. Increasingly, scientific communities have adopted appropriate technology and approach (AT&A) for C and GHG research, which focuses on low-cost and low-technology instruments, open source software and data, and participatory and networking-based research approaches. Adopting AT&A can mean acquiring data with fewer technical constraints and lower economic burden and is thus a strategy for enhancing C and GHG research in developing countries. However, AT&A can be characterized by higher uncertainties; these can often be mitigated by carefully designing experiments, providing clear protocols for data collection, and monitoring and validating the quality of obtained data. For implementing this approach in developing countries, it is first necessary to recognize the scientific and moral importance of AT&A. At the same time, new AT&A techniques should be identified and further developed. All these processes should be promoted in collaboration with local researchers and through training local staff and encouraged for wide use and further innovation in developing countries.

show abstract

Reviewing qualitative GIS research—Toward a wider usage of open‐source GIS and reproducible research practices

Cited by 26 publications

References 58 publications

Reproducible Research and GIScience: an evaluation using GIScience conference papers

Reproducible Research and GIScience: an evaluation using GIScience conference papers

Reviews and syntheses: Enhancing research and monitoring of land-to-atmosphere greenhouse gases exchange in developing countries

Ideas and Perspectives: Enhancing research and monitoring of carbon pools and land-to-atmosphere greenhouse gases exchange in developing countries

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About