Unlock the Power of GIS
Decision Support, Not Mapping
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) is often misunderstood as a mapping tool. In capital allocation decisions, GIS is a risk analysis platform—one that reveals spatial relationships invisible in traditional due diligence.
Beyond the Map
Traditional infrastructure due diligence relies on financial statements and engineering reports. GIS adds spatial risk analysis, helping to understand how location affects:
- Regulatory exposure (jurisdiction shopping, zoning variance probability)
- Competitive dynamics (saturation, first-mover advantage, barrier creation)
- Operational complexity (supply chain logistics, workforce access)
- Exit liquidity (alternative use values, resale market depth)
GIS as Decision Support
Prospect Identification
Not simply "where is the geology favorable," but "where does favorable geology intersect with:
- Permissive regulatory environment
- Available power infrastructure
- Minimal surface ownership complexity
- Defensible competitive position"
Risk Visualization
Complex title issues become comprehensible when mapped:
- Heirship concentration clusters
- Boundary dispute patterns
- Easement corridor conflicts
- Mineral severance complexity by tract
Mapping reveals correlated risks—such as multiple wells dependent on a single surface owner—that tabular data obscures.
Scenario Modeling
GIS enables dynamic scenario analysis to quantify downside exposure:
- "What if this floodplain expands?"
- "What if transmission line routing changes?"
- "What if a competitor acquires an adjacent position?"
The Technology Reality
Effective GIS for capital decisions requires data integration (public records, commercial land ownership, and propriety intelligence), analytical rigor (predictive modeling and uncertainty quantification), and executive communication (risk registers, not just pretty maps).
Practical Example: Infrastructure Siting
A recent engagement evaluated land for industrial load:
Traditional approach: Site visits, utility conversations, and zoning check.
GIS analysis: Flood probability modeling (identified 500-year risk zone), transmission constraint mapping (queue position analysis), and surface ownership complexity evaluation.
Result: Avoided $10M+ exposure in a flood-prone, transmission-constrained position. Selected alternative site with lower headline cost but much higher strategic value.
Conclusion
GIS complements financial analysis and engineering judgment with spatial intelligence. In infrastructure capital allocation, geographic blind spots are expensive. GIS is the tool that illuminates them.