Community suitability of California, United States Of America
Moderately suitable confidence B · live score 77
86
best land · p90
80%
good land
—
one block
How each domain holds up
Governance, safety & tenure 78
Economy & cost 95
Society, freedom & health 88
Land & water 75
Climate, growing & hazards 76
Autonomy & access 75
Where it pushes back
Food & forage diversityLand cover & degradationWater availability & quality
Within California — 57 sub-regions
Estimated finer-grained reads from the same open data. Phase-1, not yet verified.
Santa Barbara
strongest Economy & cost (95) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (78)
pushes back: Water availability & quality
Highly suitable 85
Amador
strongest Autonomy & access (96) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (78)
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Highly suitable 83
El Dorado
strongest Autonomy & access (98) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (78)
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Highly suitable 83
Mariposa
strongest Economy & cost (95) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (78)
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Highly suitable 83
Monterey
strongest Economy & cost (95) ·
weakest Governance, safety & tenure (78)
pushes back: Water availability & quality
Highly suitable 83
Calaveras
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Highly suitable 82
Mendocino
pushes back: Accessibility
Highly suitable 82
Napa
pushes back: Land cover & degradation
Highly suitable 82
Nevada
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Highly suitable 82
San Luis Obispo
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Highly suitable 82
Sonoma
pushes back: Land cover & degradation
Highly suitable 82
Ventura
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Highly suitable 82
Placer
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Highly suitable 81
San Benito
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Highly suitable 81
Madera
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 80
Tehama
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 80
Del Norte
pushes back: Water availability & quality
Moderately suitable 79
Butte
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 79
Colusa
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 79
Glenn
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 79
Plumas
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 79
Sierra
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 79
Tulare
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 79
Merced
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 78
Santa Clara
pushes back: Land cover & degradation
Moderately suitable 78
Tuolumne
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 78
Yuba
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 78
Siskiyou
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 77
Alpine
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 77
Fresno
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 77
Kern
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 77
Marin
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 77
Stanislaus
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 77
Kings
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 76
San Diego
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 76
Shasta
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 76
Yolo
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 76
Humboldt
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 75
Trinity
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 73
Lassen
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 72
Riverside
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 72
Santa Cruz
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 72
Sutter
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 71
Los Angeles
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 70
San Mateo
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 70
Modoc
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 69
Mono
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 69
San Bernardino
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 69
San Joaquin
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 69
Solano
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 69
Imperial
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Moderately suitable 68
Alameda
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 67
Sacramento
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 66
Contra Costa
pushes back: Accessibility
Moderately suitable 64
Inyo
pushes back: Food & forage diversity
Marginally suitable 60
Orange
pushes back: Accessibility
Marginally suitable 58
San Francisco
pushes back: Accessibility
Currently not suitable 34
Reading the land, criterion by criterion
Each signal names the open dataset behind it and how measured it is.
Seed & agricultural autonomycountry C UPOV membership proxy
Governance & corruptioncountry A World Bank WGI + Transparency CPI
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 United States Of America
Compare nearby options, ranked by overall suitability.