Community suitability of Hidalgo, Mexico
Moderately suitable confidence B · live score 72
92
best land · p90
100%
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 81
Climate, growing & hazards 91
Autonomy & access 86
Where it pushes back
Land tenure securityGovernance & corruptionLegal entity & land framework
Within Hidalgo — 84 sub-regions
Estimated finer-grained reads from the same open data. Phase-1, not yet verified.
Almoloya
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 76
Atotonilco El Grande
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 76
Huasca De Ocampo
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 76
Nopala De Villagran
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 76
Omitlan De Juarez
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 76
Actopan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 75
Apan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 75
Tepeapulco
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 75
Chapantongo
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 74
El Arenal
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 74
Huichapan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 74
Metepec
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 74
Singuilucan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 74
Agua Blanca De Iturbide
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
Ajacuba
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
Chilcuautla
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
Cuautepec De Hinojosa
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
Emiliano Zapata
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
Francisco I. Madero
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
Huautla
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
Mineral Del Chico
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
San Agustin Metzquititlan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
Tepetitlan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
Tlanalapa
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
Yahualica
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
Alfajayucan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 72
Calnali
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 72
Huazalingo
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 72
Mineral Del Monte
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 72
Mixquiahuala De Juarez
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 72
Molango De Escamilla
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 72
Progreso De Obregon
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 72
San Salvador
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 72
Tetepango
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 72
Xochiatipan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 72
Zempoala
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 72
Acatlan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Atitalaquia
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Atlapexco
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Juarez Hidalgo
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Lolotla
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Metztitlan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Santiago De Anaya
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Tecozautla
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Tenango De Doria
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Tlanchinol
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Xochicoatlan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Acaxochitlan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 70
Atotonilco De Tula
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 70
Eloxochitlan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 70
Epazoyucan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 70
La Mision
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 70
Tianguistengo
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 70
Zacualtipan De Angeles
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 70
Cardonal
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 69
Chapulhuacan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 69
Ixmiquilpan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 69
Jacala De Ledezma
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 69
San Bartolo Tutotepec
pushes back: Water availability & quality
Moderately suitable 69
San Felipe Orizatlan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 69
Tasquillo
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 69
Tepehuacan De Guerrero
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 69
Tlahuelilpan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 69
Tlahuiltepa
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 69
Villa De Tezontepec
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 69
Huehuetla
pushes back: Water availability & quality
Moderately suitable 68
Huejutla De Reyes
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 68
Jaltocan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 68
Nicolas Flores
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 68
Pisaflores
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 68
Tezontepec De Aldama
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 68
Zapotlan De Juarez
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 68
Tlaxcoapan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 66
Zimapan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 66
Tepeji Del Rio De Ocampo
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 65
Tolcayuca
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 65
Tulancingo De Bravo
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 65
Pacula
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 64
Tula De Allende
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 64
Mineral De La Reforma
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 63
Pachuca
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 62
San Agustin Tlaxiaca
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 60
Tizayuca
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 59
Santiago Tulantepec De L.
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 58
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.