Community suitability of Chihuahua, Mexico
Marginally suitable confidence B · live score 60
89
best land · p90
89%
good land
—
one block
How each domain holds up
Legal & sovereignty 52
Governance, safety & tenure 39
Economy & cost 86
Society, freedom & health 100
Land & water 75
Climate, growing & hazards 77
Autonomy & access 32
Where it pushes back
AccessibilityLand tenure securityGovernance & corruption
Within Chihuahua — 66 sub-regions
Estimated finer-grained reads from the same open data. Phase-1, not yet verified.
Cusihuiriachi
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Gran Morelos
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Santa Barbara
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Cuauhtemoc
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 70
Gereral Trias
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 70
Guerrero
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 70
Matamoros
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 70
Ocampo
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 70
Bocoyna
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 69
Riva Palacio
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 69
Casas Grandes
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 67
Chihuahua
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 67
Matachi
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 67
Meoqui
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 67
San Francisco Del Oro
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 67
Allende
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 66
Coronado
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 66
Lopez
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 66
Saucillo
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 66
Bachiniva
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 65
Carichi
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 65
Doctor Belisario Domingue
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 65
Galeana
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 65
Rosales
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 65
Aquiles Serdan
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 64
Delicias
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 64
Hidalgo Del Parral
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 64
Huejotitan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 63
Ignacio Zaragoza
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 63
La Cruz
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 63
Maguarichi
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 63
Praxedis G. Guerrero
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 63
San Francisco De Borja
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 63
Temosachi
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 63
Valle De Zaragoza
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 63
Janos
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 62
Balleza
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 61
Guachochi
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 61
Juarez
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 61
Madera
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 61
Namiquipa
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 61
Satevo
pushes back: Land tenure security
Marginally suitable 61
Aldama
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 60
El Tule
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 60
Moris
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 60
Nuevo Casas Grandes
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 60
San Francisco De Conchos
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 60
Guadalupe Y Calvo
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 59
Julimes
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 59
Urique
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 59
Uruachi
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 59
Buenaventura
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 58
Guazapares
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 58
Nonoava
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 58
Ahumada
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 57
Batopilas
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 57
Chinipas
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 57
Rosario
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 57
Jimenez
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 56
Ascension
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 55
Camargo
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 55
Morelos
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 54
Guadalupe
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 53
Manuel Benavides
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 53
Ojinaga
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 53
Coyame
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 52
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
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
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 Mexico
Compare nearby options, ranked by overall suitability.