Community suitability of Brest, Belarus
Moderately suitable confidence B · live score 67
89
best land · p90
99%
good land
—
one block
How each domain holds up
Legal & sovereignty 35
Governance, safety & tenure 39
Economy & cost 81
Society, freedom & health 79
Land & water 86
Climate, growing & hazards 85
Autonomy & access 86
Where it pushes back
Legal entity & land frameworkLand tenure securityGovernance & corruption
Within Brest — 16 sub-regions
Estimated finer-grained reads from the same open data. Phase-1, not yet verified.
Pinsk
strongest Autonomy & access (98) ·
weakest Legal & sovereignty (35)
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 68
Ivacevichi
strongest Autonomy & access (86) ·
weakest Legal & sovereignty (35)
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 67
Ivanovo
strongest Autonomy & access (95) ·
weakest Legal & sovereignty (35)
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 67
Kamenec
strongest Autonomy & access (91) ·
weakest Legal & sovereignty (35)
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 67
Kobrin
strongest Autonomy & access (92) ·
weakest Legal & sovereignty (35)
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 67
Ljahovichi
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 67
Malorita
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 67
Luninec
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 66
Zhabinka
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 66
Baranovichi
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 65
Brest
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 65
Drogichin
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 65
Gancevichi
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 65
Pruzhany
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 65
Bereza
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 64
Stolin
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 63
Reading the land, criterion by criterion
Each signal names the open dataset behind it and how measured it is.
Legal entity & land frameworkcountry B OECD FDI RRI + manual
Education & schooling freedomcountry B HSLDA + UNESCO UIS
Seed & agricultural autonomycountry C UPOV membership proxy
Governance & corruptioncountry A World Bank WGI + Transparency CPI
Land tenure securitycountry A IPRI (de jure) + Prindex (de facto)
Business & economic viabilitycountry A World Bank B-READY, Heritage, Fraser
Cost of living, labour & landcountry A World Bank PPP, ILOSTAT
Monetary & capital sovereigntycountry A IMF/World Bank, Chinn-Ito
Personal freedomcountry A Cato/Fraser Human Freedom Index
Healthcare qualitycountry B WHO GHO
Disease / vector burden A Malaria Atlas + dengue Index P
Soil quality A SoilGrids (ISRIC)
Water availability & quality A WRI Aqueduct + AQUASTAT
Terrain & buildability A SRTM / NASADEM
Land cover & degradation A ESA WorldCover + Global Forest Watch
Biodiversity & alignment B Biodiversity Intactness Index
Climate & natural hazards A ThinkHazard + NASA FIRMS + USGS
Growing conditions A CHELSA / FAO GAEZ
Food & forage diversity B FAO GAEZ crop suitability + GLW
Coastal risk B Climate Central CoastalDEM
Energy potential A Global Solar Atlas + Global Wind Atlas
Natural building materials B SoilGrids clay + forest + geology
Environmental quality A SEDAC PM2.5 + VIIRS night-lights
Connectivity A Ookla + ITU (+ Starlink)
Accessibility A Malaria Atlas friction surface
Remoteness / surroundings A GPWv4 population density
Contamination legacy C Maus mining polygons + WRI power plants
Phase-1 desk screening
These are desk numbers from open data. Soil tests, water rights and the welcome of actual neighbours all wait for a visit — we'd rather say so than pretend.
Other regions in Belarus
Compare nearby options, ranked by overall suitability.