The border is not one market. It never was. The Border Trade Intelligence tool created by Dr. Daniel Covarrubias, director of the Texas Center for Border Economic and Enterprise Development at Texas A&M International University, makes this point. Its power is not just data; it is layering.
The tool compresses the border from a macro trade headline into an investable operating geography. Moving from the full border to the state and corridor level reveals freight movement, industry drivers, infrastructure, and where strategy should follow.
It does not replace operating diligence. Labor, utilities, land, water, permitting, customs reliability, incentives, carrier capacity, and execution risk must align. But it shows where the thesis should begin. That has been the central thesis of my own work: the border is a series of matched binational operating systems shaped by freight flows, transportation, and industry ecosystems.
Each corridor has its own alignment of labor, suppliers, utilities, land, infrastructure, logistics capacity, customs reliability, capital, and specialization. It is an economic production system with distinct freight logic, industrial base, constraints, and implications.
Laredo is not Eagle Pass.
Eagle Pass is not Otay Mesa.
Otay Mesa is not Nogales.
The same macro trends of nearshoring, USMCA, tariffs, resilience, and advanced manufacturing can express themselves differently by corridor.
Daniel’s post, “Same Trailer, Richer Cargo,” reinforces that point. The issue is not simply that trains or trucks are moving. The question is what is moving, where it is shifting, and what the freight mix says about each corridor’s future role.
Eagle Pass and Laredo rail activity are converging, pointing to network rebalancing. Laredo’s truck values are rising as counts soften, suggesting the same trailer may carry more valuable cargo.
That distinction matters… Crossing counts measure traffic. Value density measures what a corridor becomes.
For site selection, logistics, industrial real estate, or FDI decisions, that is the difference between viewing the border as a headline and underwriting an operating system.
The better question is which corridor is becoming more valuable for how a company produces, moves, protects, and delivers.
For manufacturers, logistics providers, transportation companies, investors, and life sciences firms, the right corridor must align with labor, suppliers, logistics, utilities, land, infrastructure, customers, incentives, capital, and risk.
That is why we monitor established and emerging U.S./Mexico corridors: not simply to see where freight is moving today, but to understand which corridors can support future production, distribution, and investment before the market sees it.
That is where the next generation of U.S./Mexico strategy will be won: by understanding corridors that move freight, support factories, connect suppliers, and shape investment.
Dr. Covarrubias’ tool is valuable because it makes corridor-level trade and operating signals visible.
Editor's Note: The above commentary was penned by Carl Quesinberry, senior director for industrial corporate services for Avison Young, a global commercial real estate advisory firm. The commentary first appeared on the author’s social media pages.
