Community suitability of Slaskie, Poland
Moderately suitable confidence B · live score 69
91
best land · p90
99%
good land
—
one block
How each domain holds up
Legal & sovereignty 66
Governance, safety & tenure 67
Economy & cost 91
Society, freedom & health 87
Land & water 85
Climate, growing & hazards 88
Autonomy & access 53
Where it pushes back
AccessibilityLegal entity & land frameworkGovernance & corruption
Within Slaskie — 38 sub-regions
Estimated finer-grained reads from the same open data. Phase-1, not yet verified.
Lubliniec
strongest Economy & cost (91) ·
weakest Legal & sovereignty (66)
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 75
Zawiercie
strongest Economy & cost (91) ·
weakest Legal & sovereignty (66)
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 75
Zywiec
strongest Economy & cost (91) ·
weakest Legal & sovereignty (66)
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 74
Blachownia
strongest Economy & cost (91) ·
weakest Autonomy & access (61)
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 73
Moderately suitable 73
Myszkow
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 72
Cieszyn
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 70
Tarnowskie Gory
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 68
Raciborz
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 67
Knurow
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 66
Pszczyna
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 66
Czechowice-Dziedzice
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 65
Jastrzebie Zdroj
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 64
Jaworzno
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 63
Bedzin
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 62
Rybnik II
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 62
Rybnik III
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 62
Mikolow
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 61
Wodzislaw Slaski
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 61
Zory
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 61
Dabrowa Gornicza
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 60
Tychy I
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 60
Bielsko-Biala
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 54
Rybnik I
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 53
Myslowice
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 52
Rybnik
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 52
Tychy
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 52
Czestochowa
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 51
Gliwice
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 49
Bytom
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 48
Katowice
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 48
Piekary Slaskie
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 48
Sosnowiec
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 48
Zabrze
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 38
Ruda Slaska
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 37
Siemianowice Slaskie
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 37
Swietochlowice
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 37
Chorzow
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 36
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
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 Poland
Compare nearby options, ranked by overall suitability.