Community suitability of Durango, Mexico
Marginally suitable confidence B · live score 60
90
best land · p90
98%
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 80
Climate, growing & hazards 84
Autonomy & access 25
Where it pushes back
AccessibilityLand tenure securityGovernance & corruption
Within Durango — 38 sub-regions
Estimated finer-grained reads from the same open data. Phase-1, not yet verified.
Durango
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Vicente Guerrero
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 70
Nombre De Dios
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 69
Guadalupe Victoria
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 68
Panuco De Coronado
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 68
Poanas
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 67
Cuencame
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 66
Gomez Palacio
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 66
San Juan Del Rio
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 66
Canatlan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 65
Ocampo
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 65
Lerdo
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 64
Penon Blanco
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 63
Santa Clara
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 63
Pueblo Nuevo
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 62
Coneto De Comonfort
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 61
Nazas
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 61
Suchil
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 61
Tamazula
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 61
Canelas
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 60
Mezquital
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 60
Topia
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 60
Guanacevi
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 59
Mapimi
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 59
General Simon Bolivar
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 58
Hidalgo
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 58
San Bernardo
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 58
San Dimas
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 58
San Pedro Del Gallo
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 58
Santiago Papasquiaro
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 58
Tlahualilo
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 58
Inde
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 57
Rodeo
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 57
Tepehuanes
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 57
San Luis Del Cordero
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 56
El Oro
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 55
Otaez
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 54
San Juan De Guadalupe
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 54
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.