Community suitability of Mexico, Mexico
Moderately suitable confidence B · live score 73
96
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 85
Climate, growing & hazards 93
Autonomy & access 99
Where it pushes back
Land tenure securityGovernance & corruptionLegal entity & land framework
Within Mexico — 121 sub-regions
Estimated finer-grained reads from the same open data. Phase-1, not yet verified.
Amanalco
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 77
Ozumba
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 77
Atizapan
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 76
Ayapango
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 76
Donato Guerra
strongest Society, freedom & health (100) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (39)
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 76
Morelos
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 76
Timilpan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 76
Acambay
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 75
Aculco
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 75
Chapa De Mota
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 75
Ixtapan Del Oro
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 75
Jalatlaco
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 75
Jiquipilco
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 75
Jocotitlan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 75
Temascaltepec
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 75
Almoloya Del Rio
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 74
Amecameca
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 74
Atlacomulco
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 74
Jilotepec
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 74
San Felipe Del Progreso
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 74
Texcaltitlan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 74
Texcoco
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 74
Valle Del Bravo
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 74
Villa De Allende
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 74
Villa Del Carbon
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 74
Villa Victoria
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 74
Zacualpan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 74
Zinacatepec
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 74
Almoloya De Alquisiras
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
Atlautla
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
Chalco
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
Coatepec Harinas
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
El Oro
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
Ocuilan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
Tianguistenco
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
Tlalmanalco
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
Tonatico
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 73
Ixtapaluca
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 72
Ixtlahuaca
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 72
Nopaltepec
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 72
San Simon De Guerrero
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 72
Santo Tomas
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 72
Temascalcingo
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 72
Tenancingo
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 72
Zumpahuacan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 72
Isidro Fabela
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Malinalco
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Otumba
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Otzoloapan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Polotitlan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Rayon
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Soyaniquilpan De Juarez
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Tlexcalyacac
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Zacazonapan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 71
Axapusco
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 70
Ixtapan De La Sal
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 70
Ocoyoacac
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 70
Tejupilco
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 70
Amatepec
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 69
Calimaya
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 69
Joquicingo
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 69
Sultepec
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 69
Temamatla
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 69
Villa Guerrero
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 69
Apaxco
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 68
Hueypoxtla
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 68
Tlatlaya
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 68
Almoloya De Juarez
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 67
Ecatzingo
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 67
Jilotzingo
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 67
San Antonio La Isla
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 67
Tenango Del Aire
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 67
Tepetlaoxtoc
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 67
Tepetlixpan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 67
Cocotitlan
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 66
Huehuetoca
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 66
Chapultepec
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 65
Temascalapa
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 65
Temoaya
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 65
Tequixquiac
pushes back: Land tenure security
Moderately suitable 65
Juchitepec
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 64
Xonacatlan
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 64
Lerma
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 63
Mexicalcingo
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 63
Nicolas Romero
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 63
Capulhuac
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 62
Tenango Del Valle
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 62
Toluca
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 61
San Martin De La Piramide
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 60
Otzolotepec
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 59
Chicoloapan
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 58
Huixquilucan
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 58
Metepec
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 57
Chimalhuacan
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 55
Coyotepec
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 54
Naucalpan
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 54
San Mateo Atenco
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 54
Tepotzotlan
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 53
Zumpango
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 52
Teotihuacan
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 50
Papalotla
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 46
Teoloyucan
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 46
Tecamac
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 45
La Paz
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 36
Acolman
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 35
Atenco
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 35
Atizapan De Zaragoza
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 35
Chiautla
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 35
Chiconcuac
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 35
Cuautitlan
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 35
Melchor Ocampo
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 35
Nextlalpan
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 35
Tezoyuca
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 35
Tultitlan
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 35
Coacalco
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 34
Cuautitlan Izcalli
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 34
Ecatepec
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 34
Jaltenco
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 34
Nezahualcoyotl
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 34
Tultepec
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 34
Tlalnepantla
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 32
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.