Community suitability of Podravska, Slovenia
Moderately suitable confidence B · live score 77
94
best land · p90
100%
good land
—
one block
How each domain holds up
Legal & sovereignty 67
Governance, safety & tenure 73
Economy & cost 100
Society, freedom & health 93
Land & water 89
Climate, growing & hazards 91
Autonomy & access 75
Where it pushes back
Legal entity & land frameworkGovernance & corruptionLand tenure security
Within Podravska — 19 sub-regions
Estimated finer-grained reads from the same open data. Phase-1, not yet verified.
Majsperk
strongest Economy & cost (100) ·
weakest Legal & sovereignty (67)
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 80
Ormoz
strongest Economy & cost (100) ·
weakest Legal & sovereignty (67)
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 80
Dornava
strongest Economy & cost (100) ·
weakest Legal & sovereignty (67)
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 79
Gorisnica
strongest Economy & cost (100) ·
weakest Legal & sovereignty (67)
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 79
Jursinci
strongest Economy & cost (100) ·
weakest Legal & sovereignty (67)
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 79
Ruse
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 79
Slovenska Bistrica
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 79
Videm
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 79
Destrnik-Trnovska Vas
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 77
Lenart
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 75
Ptuj
pushes back: Legal entity & land framework
Moderately suitable 75
Kidricevo
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 74
Sentilj
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 74
Duplek
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 72
Kungota
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 72
Race-Fram
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 69
Star?e
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 69
Pesnica
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 68
Maribor
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 65
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
Connectivity A Ookla + ITU (+ Starlink)
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 Slovenia
Compare nearby options, ranked by overall suitability.