Food Production
Understanding how, how much, where, and which types of food are grown within a region helps to increase the supply and demand of local food and to identify adjustments that can be made to farming practices. There are many prerequisites for food production, from knowledge of how to raise crops and livestock, to access to land, to favorable environmental conditions (sun, soil, water), to agricultural inputs (seeds, livestock, soil amendments, tools, farm equipment, labor). Land development, population growth, climate change, and consumer preferences also shape the production landscape. The dashboards below outline information about the current supply of local agricultural products, local production acreage, the agricultural workforce, and how climate change affects food production.
Much of the publicly available data on food production stems from a single source: the United States Department of Agriculture National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA NASS) Census of Agriculture. Each Census, conducted every five years, is a nationwide survey designed to gather robust information about all farms and ranches and the people who operate them. This data can be helpful for producers, consumers, and researchers for planning purposes and identifying trends.
However, there are limitations to this data. Though responding to the Census is required by federal law, the response rate declined to roughly 61% in the 2022 Census. While this still represents a large sample size, it is unclear who is not counted. Those who respond potentially have more time, financial resources, social connections, and access to technology. Institutionalized discriminatory practices at the USDA—such as denying access to forms of assistance like low-interest loans and grants to Black farmers and other farmers of color and that led to financial losses and loss of land throughout the 1900s—have eroded trust among historically marginalized producers. This mistrust makes it less likely that they will participate in data collection efforts like the Census. These factors lead to sampling issues that likely result in underrepresentation of small- and mid-sized producers, producers of color, and producers with limited access to technology.
Another limitation of the Census of Agriculture is that data collection happens only once every five years. There is opportunity to collect more localized data on a more frequent basis to be able to make plans around food production more equitably and nimbly.
When viewing any of the dashboards below, note that certain data points may be missing for a given county. This is because the Census avoids disclosing data that would identify an individual farm, for example, if there is only one producer of a certain crop within a county.
Questions to Consider
How many farms are there in Central Texas? What is their size breakdown?
What is currently grown in Central Texas, and how is this influenced by the environment and culture?
How does local food production in Central Texas compare to consumer demand?
Where is there opportunity to import less food that can be grown locally?
Where are areas with underutilized arable farmland?
Given land use competition, development pressures, and jurisdictional issues, how can Central Texas work at a regional level to preserve agricultural land?
Where is there availability of city- or county-owned land to support community-driven or publicly owned food production?
How representative of the general population are the farmers in Central Texas in terms of race and ethnicity, gender, and age?
What is the environmental impact of local food production? How do different farming techniques and practices affect the surrounding environment?
What would strengthen local food producers’ resilience and reduce crop loss in the face of extreme weather conditions and natural disasters?
List of Dashboards
Continue scrolling to view the dashboards linked below or click on a link to visit a specific part of this page.
-
Total Agricultural Product Sales and Consumption
Agricultural Sales by Product Type
Number of Farm Operations and Farm Acreage
Crop and Livestock Production
Farm Income
-
Race and Gender of Producers
Age and Experience of Producers
Producers with Military Service
Farm Labor
-
-
Mapping Land and Water Resources
Drought Conditions
Water Pollution
Agricultural Input Use
Organic Agriculture
Agricultural Supply and Demand
Total Agricultural Product Sales and Consumption
Knowing the unmet demand for local agricultural products helps to highlight the potential for increasing local food production in Central Texas. Research suggests that Central Texas’ production cannot realistically meet its total demand for food, but the graphs below help highlight opportunities for increasing production. The graph below on the left shows the estimated consumption of agricultural products in Central Texas. The graph below on the right shows the amount locally produced in each county and can be filtered further into the following three categories: fruits and vegetables, meat/poultry/fish/eggs, and dairy. Note that this dashboard only includes food grown for human consumption, not all agricultural production. Comparing sales volume is an imperfect measure because it does not indicate the quantity of food that was purchased or sold.
Highlights: Production of food for human consumption is highest in McLennan, Williamson, and Caldwell counties. Caldwell County is the only county where production approaches consumption, but all counties have a gap. This gap between consumption and production throughout Central Texas implies that most food consumed in Central Texas is produced outside the region. This means that much of the food supply is subject to supply chain disruptions outside the region and travels further before it reaches its final customer, adding additional emissions to its environmental footprint.
Note that the consumption graph includes food beyond what is produced locally. The data do not indicate that production is the only issue contributing to mismatches in supply and demand; distribution, waste, and economic and physical access to food should also be considered.
Filter data by county by selecting the county name in the table underneath the charts. Click on a census year to change the agricultural sales chart and gap/gap% values in the table. Drag the circles up and down on the y-axis of the bar charts to adjust the y-axis.
Data Sources:
Refreshed:
Consumption: Annually
Sales: Every 5 years. Dashboard last updated May 2024.
Agricultural Sales by Product Type
The charts below show total farm sales by product type and the number of farm operations in Central Texas by sales amount or product type.
Highlights: Animal product sales represent the majority of all farm sales in Central Texas, and most farm operations are focused on producing animal products—especially cattle. Grains are another major category in terms of sales and number of farms producing them. Most of these grains are not grown for human consumption but for livestock feed or fuel.
Filter data by county by selecting the county name in the table under the chart. Filter by year and sales/operations data using the filters on the right.
Included categories represent nearly all categories in the census; tobacco, nursery, equine, and other miscellaneous crops and livestock were omitted to simplify the chart. Note that the vegetable category includes melons.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012, 2017, and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years. Dashboard last updated May 2024.
Number of Farm Operations and Farm Acreage
Central Texas is home to nearly 12,000 farms, which are all privately owned and operated. These farms produce a variety of food, as seen in the dashboards above. Land is a finite resource and farmers and ranchers who want to expand their operations may face many barriers to accessing additional land. These include land being in short supply overall due to development pressures, which also drive up land costs.
The first graph below shows the total acreage in each county used for different agricultural purposes and compares it to the total acreage in each county. Pastureland is used to approximate the amount of land devoted to raising livestock, but note that this does not take into account land used for non-ruminant animals like poultry and hogs that are not pastured. This graph is missing land that may not currently be used for agriculture but could potentially be used for that purpose. The second chart below shows the number of farm operations in Central Texas by size of farm.
Highlights: McLennan and Williamson counties have the most land currently used for agriculture in terms of area. Though it has fewer agricultural acres overall, Caldwell County has a high percentage of land used for agriculture. Across all counties, the vast majority of agricultural acreage is used for pasturing livestock. Most farms are smaller than 50 acres.
Filter data by county by selecting the county name in the table under the graph. Toggle between years using the year filter.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012, 2017, and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years. Dashboard last updated May 2024.
Crop and Livestock Production
The types of food grown locally dictate what can be eaten locally. As shown in the dashboards above, most agricultural sales and land in Central Texas are focused on animal production, with relatively few dollars and acres going towards fruits and vegetables, which are referred to as specialty crops. The dashboards below provide more detail on the products produced.
Highlights: A wide variety of crops are produced in Central Texas, but most farms and acreage are devoted to producing agricultural products that are not for human consumption but rather for feed, fiber, and fuel. Corn and sorghum, along with many other grains and soybeans, are primarily used for livestock feed and/or producing fuel ethanol or industrial products. From 2012 to 2017, the number of farms producing vegetables increased by 25% and total vegetable acreage increased by 35%. The number of farms producing fruit increased by 54% and fruit acreage increased by 9%. Tomatoes were the top vegetable in both 2012 and 2017, though the number of farms producing them dropped in 2017. Blackberries overtook peaches as the top fruit in 2017.
There are also a variety of types of animals raised, including bee colonies and aquaculture. However, cattle are the top livestock, produced by the highest number of operations across the region. Poultry are next, which includes turkey, though this number decreased drastically from 2012 to 2017 and is mostly attributable to McLennan County in 2017.
Use the county, metric, and year filters to adjust the view. Drag the y-axis up and down to see differences among crops in more detail. Click on a category in the legend or table to highlight all crops or livestock in that category in the view. For the sake of space, horticultural products were not included.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012, 2017, and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years. Dashboard last updated May 2024.
Farm Income
Due to the inherent uncertainties of agricultural production and market fluctuations, farming is not always a profitable venture. The following dashboard displays information about the average net income per farm operation and the share of farms that operated with a gain or a loss.
Roughly one-third of farm operations in Central Texas report sales of less than $1,000 per year. However, this does not necessarily mean that these operations are all small working farms. A farm is broadly defined by the Census as “any place from which $1,000 or more of agricultural products were produced and sold, or normally would have been sold, during the census year.” The number of farms reporting less than $1,000 in sales has increased in recent Census counts, up to more than one in five farms. The reasons for farms reporting less than $1,000 in sales are potentially many: small farms facing losses from extreme weather conditions (e.g., drought, flooding, hail, strong winds), ranchers who do not sell cattle in a given year, farmers growing crops to feed their households, and beginning farmers just learning the ropes. Another reason could be that there are tax breaks (agricultural exemptions) for land designated as farmland. This group of farms includes disproportionate numbers of female farmers, farmers of color, and wealthy families. There is opportunity for research to help interpret what this means for the local production landscape, learn more about what operations reporting less than $1,000 in sales look like, pinpoint which farms need more assistance, and compare what is owned or leased to what is actively farmed.
Highlights: The average net cash income per farm went from positive to negative for the region as a whole from the 2012 to the 2017 Census of Agriculture, and that trend accelerated in 2022. Bastrop, Caldwell, and Hays counties had negative income in all three years; McLennan County was positive in all three years; and Travis and Williamson counties had mixed results but were negative in 2022. The share of farms operating with gain dropped from 26% across the region in 2012 to 21% in 2017 and 2022.
Filter data by county by selecting the county name in the list below the graphs.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012, 2017, and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years. Dashboard last updated April 2024.
Farmer and Rancher Characteristics and Farm Labor
The following dashboards highlight various demographic aspects of the Central Texas farming and ranching population. Note that USDA changed its methodology starting with the 2017 Census of Agriculture to include demographic data about all producers involved in agricultural production, not only the primary producer. This resulted in a 7% increase in the total number of agricultural producers from 2012 to 2017. Changes in methodology are highlighted in the dashboards below.
Race and Gender of Producers
Supporting the next generation of growers—especially Historically Underserved Producers (HUP)—is essential for ensuring that local food production increases in an equitable way across Central Texas. This has implications for what the next generation of producers in Central Texas will look like and what types of foods they will grow, in turn affecting the availability of culturally relevant food. The following dashboards show the race or ethnicity and gender of producers in Central Texas. Note that the only gender options provided on the Census of Agriculture are “male” and “female.”
Overall, the number of farmers declined in the 20th century, but this varies by racial group. The number of Asian and Hispanic or Latino/a/e farmers increased sharply, while the number of White, Black, and Native American farmers dropped. Black farmers experienced the largest decline, from a peak in 1920, when 14.3% of all farmers in the US were Black, to the 2017 Census of Agriculture, when 1.7% identified as Black. One contributing factor to loss of land among certain racial groups is the practice of passing land to descendants through heirs’ property, common among Black and Native American communities. In this arrangement, multiple descendants of a deceased farmer who did not leave a will may inherit land and then collectively own it without documented legal ownership. This can make those who inherit the land vulnerable to losing it. Individual heirs can force a sale of the entire parcel. This arrangement can also make it difficult to use land as collateral for obtaining credit or some forms of federal assistance. Lack of access to this financial assistance can also lead to loss of land.
Highlights: Across Central Texas, 87% of farmers and ranchers identify as White, though only 40% of neighbors in Texas identify this way and the range among Central Texas counties is 36-55%. Central Texas farmers are slightly more racially and ethnically diverse than at the national level and at the Texas level, where 95% of all producers identify as White. White farmers and ranchers farm a disproportionate amount of land (92%). Average acres per operation are much higher among White farmers than farmers of other races in all counties other than Bastrop.
Nationally, nearly two-thirds of producers identify as male; this figure is lower in Texas, at 61%, and lower still in Central Texas, at 59%. Though six in 10 producers are male, seven in 10 acres are operated by male producers. The average farm size is smaller among female-operated farms.
Filter data by county and year by selecting the county name and year on the bottom right below the charts.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012, 2017, and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years. Dashboard last updated April 2024.
Age and Experience of Producers
Understanding how many producers are just entering the farming business versus approaching retirement can help determine where more training and support are needed to ensure that subsequent generations of producers can thrive. The dashboards below show the number of producers by age group and number of years farming. A new and beginning producer is one who has been farming for 11 years or less on any operation. A young producer is one who is age 35 or younger.
Highlights: The average age of a farmer across all counties was 60.5 years in 2012, 59.3 years in 2017, and 60 years in 2022 (note that principal operators were counted in 2012 and all producers were counted in 2017 and 2022). This mirrors national trends, though Central Texas farmers are slightly older than at the national level. Less than 6% of producers are under age 35. The fact that the average age of farmers is approaching what would be considered retirement age in most other professions highlights how essential it is to train the next generation of farmers and ensure that their farm operations can be economically viable. The average number of years spent farming has remained fairly steady (22.2 in 2012, 21 in 2017, and 21.4 in 2022). The share of new and beginning farmers and ranchers increased slightly in 2022 to over 30%.
Filter data by county and year by selecting the county name and year using the filters on the bottom right below the charts.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012, 2017, and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years. Dashboard last updated April 2024.
Producers with Military Service
The 2017 Census of Agriculture collected data on producers who have served or are serving in the United States Armed Forces for the first time, as well as the number of acres operated. As Texas is home to the largest military base and has one of the largest veteran populations in the United States, understanding the number of farmers with military service can help quantify the need for additional programs to support this farming population.
Highlights: McLennan County has by far the highest number of farms operated by producers with military service, as well as the largest number of acres operated. Travis County was the only county with an increase in any metric from 2017 to 2022, nearly doubling acreage operated by producers with military service.
Filter data by clicking on a county name or a metric button on the bottom right.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2017 and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years. Dashboard last updated April 2024.
Farm Labor
Farm labor includes seasonal positions, those filled by migrant workers, and those filled by unpaid workers—which typically include a farming household’s family members. Farm laborers are at risk for heat-related illnesses and exposure to agricultural chemicals can lead to a range of health issues. Additionally, many migrant workers face illegal treatment. Note that the Census of Agriculture does not provide a complete count of all migrant workers.
Highlights: Most farms in Central Texas do not hire large numbers of farm laborers. The largest category for farm labor is unpaid labor, which is mostly comprised of household members helping with farm and ranch duties. Among farms that hire outside labor, 91% employ fewer than five workers. These numbers vary slightly from county to county and between census years.
Filter data by clicking on a county name or year on the bottom right.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012, 2017, and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years. Dashboard last updated April 2024.
Community Food Production
Community gardens and school gardens have the ability to build community and connection to food while contributing to small-scale food production. The map below shows these locations, where neighbors can grow food on public land or for the public good. There is opportunity to better research the long-term impacts of school gardens, which have been shown to increase fruit and vegetable consumption and promote an openness to trying new foods. An area of interest for community garden research would be to find yield data and determine how much these gardens contribute to food and nutrition security of participating gardeners. Currently, little is known about the production levels of these gardens and the impact they have on the health and wellbeing of those who access them.
There is no robust dataset on home gardens (indoor container, patio, raised or in-ground garden beds in front or backyards). The number of home gardens, their yields, and their impact on food security and health outcomes are also understudied, though recent research indicates that home gardening may increase food security.
Highlights: Community gardens and food forests are concentrated in more urban areas across Central Texas. Rural counties have fewer community gardens. Note that information is limited on community gardens that are not on City of Austin-owned land and outside of Travis County. Additional locations have been added based on suggestions from partners. School gardens are reported through the Farm to School Census, a nationwide survey conducted every four years. Not all schools are reflected in the survey, so the census results may not reflect all active programs. The school garden locations marked on the map represent school food authorities (SFAs) responding to the Census. SFAs often represent an entire school district. See the table for the total number of gardens reported by the SFAs marked on the map.
The Food Access Community Needs Assessments (CNAs) currently being undertaken by Central Texas Food Bank present opportunities to learn more about the local community garden and school garden landscape.
To add or remove layers, click on the “eye” icons in the “Layers” box in the top right below. View color legends for each layer by selecting the “>” arrows on the left-hand side of the legend to expand the information for that particular layer. Toggle between years using the year filter.
Data Sources:
Community Gardens: City of Austin Community Garden Program and Coalition of Austin Community Gardens (CACG), partner input for locations outside Travis County, January 2024
School Gardens: USDA Farm to School Census, 2019
Refreshed:
Community Gardens: Annually
School Gardens: Every 4 years. 2023 Census data will be released in 2024.
Dashboard last updated February 2024
Agriculture and Climate
Agricultural production is heavily influenced by extreme temperatures, floods, heavy winds, and droughts, which are all occurring more frequently due to climate change. These events increase the level of uncertainty involved in production and can make farming less economically viable, such as when farmers experienced significant revenue losses from crops destroyed by Winter Storm Uri in February 2021.
Production can also vary greatly depending on the size of an operation and the types of growing techniques and practices used. Producers make many choices about how they grow food and which types of inputs they use, which can have different effects on the surrounding environment. Sustainable agricultural practices may help mediate the effects of climate change by capturing carbon, promoting soil health, and contributing to biodiversity. Unsustainable agricultural practices can worsen the climate crisis by polluting air and waterways and can also harm the farm operators and laborers responsible for applying agrochemicals.
To ensure viability into the future, switching crop types and livestock breeds may be necessary to combat the effects of climate change. Scientists are also currently in the process of developing varieties that are drought-resistant and resilient to heat and cold stress.
Mapping Land and Water Resources
Agricultural production is shaped by the environmental resources that surround it. Food production (fruits, vegetables, and other specialty crops) and agricultural production (feed, fiber, and fuel crops) have different environmental requirements. The maps below provide an overview of the land and water resources available in Central Texas. Thank you to Jarred Maxwell from Foodshed Investors for sharing the concept, design, and data sources for the maps below.
In the Central Texas Land and Water Map, explore where good soil overlaps with abundant water. Noting where there is farmland that can be used for food production can help identify potentially underutilized arable farmland and factor into conversations about conservation, managing land use competition, and development pressures. See which types of soils are present (Major Land Resource Areas), which can dictate which areas are best suited for different types of land use; and note where existing water resources are located (Major and Minor Aquifers). Also included on the map are voluntarily reported wells currently drawing from those aquifers and which areas are under particularly limiting water conditions (Priority Groundwater Management Areas).
In the Central Texas Crop Map, explore which types of crops are grown where.
Data for additional geographic areas within Texas are available by request. Please contact the Research Team at Central Texas Food Bank for more information.
Highlights: This map contains a wealth of information and can be explored in many ways. Below are a few suggestions for layers to look at together to learn about the intersection of good soil and abundant water in Central Texas.
Farmland Classification and Major Aquifers: Note the area in Bastrop County and southern Caldwell County that is primarily classified as farmland of statewide importance and is also covered by major aquifers, indicating that it has good farmland with abundant water and may be suitable for growing food crops.
Farmland Classification and Major Land Resource Areas: The major land resource areas and farmland classification layers illustrate the ecoregions present within Central Texas. Though the Texas Blackland Prairie is known for having highly fertile soils and these soils correspond with prime farmland (dark green) on the farmland classification map layer, these areas are more suited to crops used for feed, fiber, and fuel (more information below).
Farmland Classification and Crops: Compare the Central Texas Crop Map to the Farmland Classification layer in the Central Texas Land and Water Map. Areas classified as prime farmland correspond to areas with high corn and cotton concentration on the crop map. These also correspond to the Blackland Prairie soils on the Major Land Resource Areas layer. This illustrates that prime farmland is used for dry cropping, and these crops are generally not used for food production but for feed, fuel, and fiber. This illustrates the difference between agriculture and food production.
Click on the legend (3 lines) and layers (3 stacked diamonds) icons on the top right of each maps to explore, or click on “View larger map” in the bottom left corner of each map to open the map in a new tab. Check layers on and off using the checkboxes to the left of each layer name.
Data Sources:
USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service: Farmland Classification (2023), Major Land Resource Areas (2022), Crops (2024)
Texas Water Development Board: Major Aquifers (2006), Minor Aquifers (2017), Well Locations (2024)
Texas Center for Environmental Quality: Priority Groundwater Management Areas (2018)
Refreshed: Annually. Dashboard last updated April 2024.
Drought Conditions
Low water availability can reduce crop yields and food for animals while increasing farming costs due to the need for increased irrigation. Groundwater depletion complicates the issue of irrigation because sufficient water is in shorter supply. Crop yields decrease by half in fields that were irrigated but can no longer be irrigated. Due to extreme temperatures, some crops that typically require little to no irrigation may require it in the future. Opportunities to reduce water use include using reclaimed wastewater, modernizing irrigation systems, creating new water storage facilities, and improving soil health and vitality.
The data below show how drought levels have changed in Central Texas from the year 2000 to the present, and how Central Texas drought conditions compare to that of the state.
Highlights: Drought conditions vary from year to year, with high drought conditions spanning from 2011-2014 and dropping in 2016. Since 2016, drought conditions have increased again gradually, with 2022 and 2023 approaching 2011-2014 levels and over 90% of land under abnormally dry conditions or worse. Looking at Central Texas drought levels within the context of statewide drought levels, there are only slight differences.
Drag the circles in the timeline to filter for a specific time period. Filter data by a particular county by selecting the county name in the table under the graph.
Refreshed: Annually. Dashboard last updated February 2024.
Water Pollution
Agricultural production can contribute to water pollution when high amounts of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides are used and when farm waste is not disposed of properly. Also, allowing soil to lie fallow with no cover, which is common in conventional agriculture, can lead to soil erosion and over-silting of waterways. Conversely, agricultural production can be negatively impacted by poor water quality. The map below shows impaired waterways and impaired bodies of water in Central Texas. Note that agriculture’s contribution to this overall level of pollution is not specified.
Highlights: The two counties with the highest share of impaired miles are Caldwell and Williamson.
To access different map layers, click on the “eye” icons in the “Layers” box on the top right. View legends for each layer by selecting the “>” arrows on the left-hand side of the legend to expand the information for that particular layer.
Refreshed: Approximately every 2 years. Dashboard last updated February 2024.
Agricultural Input Use
Agricultural inputs include fertilizer, pesticides, and herbicides. These can be synthetic (manufactured from inorganic materials) or organic (naturally derived). Organic inputs can be purchased or produced on-farm in the form of manure and compost. The amount of fertilizer applied should be calculated carefully for optimal plant nutrition and to avoid leaching chemicals into the soil and, in turn, waterways. Overuse of fertilizers and other agricultural chemicals, whether organic or inorganic, can cause pollution.
Different crops require different amounts of nutrients. Looking at the types of crops grown in Central Texas, there are research opportunities related to crop selection and application of fertilizer and other chemicals and how to transition to less resource-intensive crops.
The dashboard below shows the number of acres treated with various agrochemicals in Central Texas. Fungicides tend to be used to control diseases in crops and orchards; insecticides are used to control insects; nematicides are used to control nematodes; herbicides are used to control weeds; and other chemicals are used to control growth, thin fruit, and encourage ripening. Note that organic fertilizer data were first collected in 2017.
Highlights: The agricultural input used by the highest number of operations and acres is commercial fertilizer, with herbicide a close second. Manure and organic fertilizer are used by a small percentage of farms on a small number of agricultural acres.
Filter data by clicking on a county name or a metric button on the bottom right.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012, 2017, and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years. Dashboard last updated April 2024.
Organic Agriculture
The National Organic Program (NOP) established USDA Organic Certification in 2002, but many of the practices required to achieve organic certification have been practiced by humans for millennia. Within the farming community and among farm support organizations, there are controversies around what should qualify as organic and whether the standards are enforced rigorously. USDA Organic is one of many certifications that aim to differentiate foods that are produced in an environmentally sustainable way and using animal welfare-promoting farming practices.
Additionally, farmers can and do promote the health of the environment in other ways that do not involve certification, such as adaptive conservation practices like integrated pest management, reduced tillage, and planting cover crops. Farms that do not certify might already be practicing farming techniques that are at least as stringent as the organic certification standards. Looking at the number of USDA Organic certified farms does not provide the full picture of farmers and ranchers using sustainable farming practices but serves as an indicator of these efforts in the absence of robust data about other methods and certifications.
Many farmers who practice organic techniques do not get certified, or they allow their certification to lapse. One barrier to certification is cost—roughly $1,000 per farm per year, though there is a cost-share program through the USDA that reimburses 75% of the cost. Another barrier is the amount of documentation needed to obtain and retain the certification. A third barrier is that the cost and paperwork required can result in a lack of economic incentive to get certified. It takes three years for farms to transition from conventional to organic due to the time it takes to rebuild soil health through organic means. Farmers can face financial hardships in the interim due to increased expense and labor without being able to receive a premium price for organic products.
“Certified transitional” addresses this three-year gap. Farmers transitioning to organic production can market their products using this language starting in the second year of transition. Also shown on the dashboard are exempt operations, or farms with less than $5,000 in gross annual organic sales that are exempt from certification but can market their products as organic if they comply with USDA Organic standards.
Small farms might already be receiving the highest price they can get for their products at a farmers market or other direct-to-consumer outlet. When small or mid-sized farms are looking to scale up their operations, certification can come into play to help them differentiate their products and access new market channels.
Highlights: Across the US, 0.9% of farms are certified organic. In Texas, this percentage drops to 0.17%, though this is a slight increase over 2017’s 0.13%. The number of organic farms in Central Texas has been decreasing since 2012, though Hays, McLennan, and Travis counties all saw the number of organic farms increase since 2017. In 2022, more than three-quarters of the region’s organic farms are either certified or transitioning to organic, in contrast to 2017, when over half were small enough to be exempt from certification.
Filter data by county by selecting the county name in the filter under the graph.
Data Source: USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2012, 2017, and 2022 Census of Agriculture
Refreshed: Every 5 years. Dashboard last updated April 2024.
Food Production Reports and Articles
Chen, Y., Marek, G. W., Marek, T. H., Porter, D. O., Brauer, D. K., & Srinivasan, R. (2021). Modeling climate change impacts on blue, green, and grey water footprints and crop yields in the Texas High Plains, USA. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 310, 108649.
Congressional Research Service. (2021, November 19). Racial Equity in U.S. Farming: Background in Brief.
Congressional Research Service. (2013, May 29). The Pigford Cases: USDA Settlement of Discrimination Suits by Black Farmers.
Crouch, M., Guerrero, B., Amosson, S., Marek, T., & Almas, L. (2020). Analyzing potential water conservation strategies in the Texas Panhandle. Irrigation Science, 38(5), 559-567.
Daher, B., Lee, S.-H., Kaushik, V., Blake, J., Askariyeh, M. H., Shafiezadeh, H., Zamaripa, S., & Mohtar, R. H. (2019). Towards bridging the water gap in Texas: A water-energy-food nexus approach. Science of The Total Environment, 647, 449-463.
Davis, J. N., Pérez, A., Asigbee, F. M. et al. (2021). School-based gardening, cooking and nutrition intervention increased vegetable intake but did not reduce BMI: Texas sprouts - a cluster randomized controlled trial. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 18(18).
de-Assis, M. P., Barcella, R. C., Padilha, J. C., Pohl, H. H., & Krug, S. B. F. (2021). Health problems in agricultural workers occupationally exposed to pesticides. Revista Brasileira de Medicina do Trabalho, 18(3), 352-363.
Dvorak, B. D. & Ali, A. K. (2016). Urban Agriculture Case Studies in Central Texas: From the Ground to the Rooftop. InTech.
Environmental Protection Agency. (2016). What Climate Change Means for Texas.
FoodPrint. (2024, February 1). Black Land Loss in the United States.
Gaffney, K. A. (2013). Reaching Austin’s Maximum Agricultural Production. Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at Austin.
Kulat, M. I., Mohtar, R. H., & Olivera, F. (2019). Holistic Water-Energy-Food Nexus for Guiding Water Resources Planning: Matagorda County, Texas Case. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 7.
Niles, M. T., McCarthy, A. C., Malacarne, J., Bliss, S., Belarmino, E. H., Laurent, J., Merrill, S. C., Nowak, S. A., & Schattman, R. E. (2024). Home and wild food procurement were associated with improved food security during the COVID-19 pandemic in two rural US states. Scientific Reports, 14(2682).
Ray, R. L., Fares, A., & Risch, E. (2018). Effects of drought on crop production and cropping areas in Texas. Agricultural & Environmental Letters, 3(1).
Rosenberg, N. & Stucki, B. W. (2019, June 26). How USDA distorted data to conceal decades of discrimination against Black farmers. The Counter.
Rosero, A., Granda, L., Berdugo-Cely, J. A., Šamajová, O., Šamaj, J., & Cerkal, R. (2020). A Dual Strategy of Breeding for Drought Tolerance and Introducing Drought-Tolerant, Underutilized Crops into Production Systems to Enhance Their Resilience to Water Deficiency. Plants (Basel), 9(10), 1263.
Saeed, F., Chaudhry, U. K., Raza, A., Charagh, S., Bakhsh, A., Bohra, A., Ali, S., Chitikineni, A., Saeed, Y., Visser, R. G. F., Siddique, K. H. M., & Varshney, R. K. (2023). Developing future heat-resilient vegetable crops. Functional & Integrative Genomics, 23(1), 47.
Simpson, April. (2023, October 10). Why is accurate data about Black farmers so hard to get? The Center for Public Integrity.
St. Pierre, C., Sokalsky, A., & Sacheck, J. M. (2024). Participant Perspectives on the Impact of a School-Based, Experiential Food Education Program Across Childhood, Adolescence, and Young Adulthood. Society for Nutrition Education and Behavior, 56(1), 4-15.
USDA Rural Business Cooperative Service. (2002). Black Farmers in America, 1865-2000: The Pursuit of Independent Farming and the Role of Cooperatives. RBS Research Report 194.
Wozniacka, G. (2019, April 12). Is it a Farm if it Doesn’t Sell Food? Civil Eats.
Wurbs, R. A. (2015). Sustainable Statewide Water Resources Management in Texas. Journal of Water Resources Planning and Management, 141(12), A4014002.