Best and Worst U.S. States for Access to Locally Produced Food

The U.S. is one of the top agricultural producers in the world, producing $543 billion in 2022. Yet much of this bounty is destined for export markets, industrial applications, or non-food purposes rather than local consumption.

This raises an intriguing question: How much of the food produced by American farms actually ends up being consumed in the communities where it’s grown? To answer this, we conducted an extensive analysis of all fifty states, examining multiple factors that influence local food availability and consumption patterns.

Our research incorporated data on direct-to-consumer sales, Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) programs, farmers markets, and other metrics to paint a comprehensive picture of local food ecosystems across the country. The results reveal interesting regional patterns and challenge common assumptions about agricultural production and food accessibility.

But before we dive into our detailed findings and methodology, let’s take a look at some of the key takeaways from our research. (Jump down to see our methodology )

Ranking U.S. States by Availability of Locally Produced Food

To determine our rankings, we looked at data across a variety of categories, including the number of farms selling food through various local and regional channels, the availability of locally produced food at the county level, as well as the value of local food sales compared with overall food expenditures in each state.

We assigned each state a score in each category, then combined them into an aggregate score out of a possible one hundred points. These were the results.

Ranking U.S. States by Availability of Locally Produced Food

A few comments on the results. First, note that Vermont didn’t just top the list—it dominated. In fact, we had to adjust the results to make them more legible because Vermont was so far ahead of all other states. (See the Methodology and Notes section below for more information.)

Its dominance was fueled by an extremely high prevalence of local producers, as well as much higher spending on local agricultural products across the board. For example, direct-to-consumer farm sales equated to 2.07% of grocery spending in the state; in all other states, that number was well under 1%.

Vermont is one of the nation’s smallest states, both in terms of population and geography. Did that affect the results? Probably; after all, it seems natural that a smaller number of people who need to travel a shorter distance would have a favorable impact on the level of access to local food. But Vermont’s size does not explain everything.

Looking at the ten geographically smallest states, only one other state (Hawaii) placed in the top ten of our results here, and only one more (New Hampshire) placed in the top twenty. As for small-population states, no other state with fewer than one million people placed in the top ten; meanwhile, the nation’s largest state, California, placed fifth. So while size and population may have contributed to Vermont’s rank, it seems apparent that what really sets it apart is the behavior of its residents.

Aside from Vermont’s across-the-board dominance, the other most notable takeaway is that some of the country’s top agricultural producers actually placed low in terms of local food availability. This includes states like Texas, Nebraska, Illinois, and Kansas. This is likely due in part to the fact that, because those states focus so heavily on lucrative commodity products, less arable land is used for products destined for local consumption.

For example, in Kansas, nearly two-thirds (65.12%) of all cropland acreage is used for a handful of commodity food crops: corn, oats, soybeans, wheat, sorghum, barley, and dry beans. In Vermont, only 4.45% of cropland acreage was used for those crops.^{1 2 3}

At the same time, both states had almost the same amount of acreage devoted to “vegetables harvested for sale”—3,959 acres in Vermont and 4,275 in Kansas—despite the fact that Kansas has almost sixty-five times as much cropland as Vermont. Vermont also has 3,136 acres of orchards (0.72% of the state’s cropland), compared with 5,361 acres in Kansas (0.02% of the state’s cropland), meaning that orchards make up roughly thirty-eight times as much acreage in Vermont as they do in Kansas.^{1 2 3}

These statistics support the perspective that states with a heavy reliance on agriculture often do not produce significant amounts of produce for local consumption compared to other states.

With all that said, let’s take a closer look at the five states that placed highest in our rankings.

The Top Five States for Local Produce

Vermont

As mentioned above, Vermont placed first in every category we considered—often by significant margins. For example, in one category we evaluated the county-level availability of five types of local food resources: Community Supported Agriculture programs (referred to as CSAs), farmers markets, on-farm markets, food hubs, and agritourism sites. Vermont was the only state in the country where the majority of people live in a county with above-average access to all five types.

Vermont also had by far the highest levels of consumption of local food of any other state. Direct-to-consumer farm sales—that is, sales of produce directly to consumers, rather than to businesses—equates to 2.07% of grocery expenditures in the state. That’s more than double the other top-ranked states on our list, and nearly seven times the national average of 0.31%.

No matter how you slice it, the Green Mountain State reigns as the top state for local produce.

Oregon

Oregon placed second in our rankings, in large part because of the state’s many local food producers; in four out of five categories, a majority of residents lived in a county with above-average access—only two other states (Maine and New Hampshire) can claim that, while Vermont (of course) scored a perfect five.

The Beaver State also boasted robust sales of locally and regionally branded food products to retailers, institutions, and food hubs, with a valuation of $12.8 million per 100K people—more than three times the national average.

Maine

Maine distinguished itself by its high prevalence of local food resources. Our analysis revealed that 77.76% of the population lived in a county with above-average access to farmers markets; the same can be said for 80.84% with regard to on-farm markets, 87.16% for CSAs, and fully 100% for agritourism.

The widespread prevalence of local food producers and vendors indicates not only high availability of local products, but also a healthy appetite for supporting local farms among the state’s residents.

Hawaii

Hawaii may not come to mind as an agricultural powerhouse—indeed, it ranks near the bottom of the list in terms of raw agricultural output nationally. This is largely due to its small size and remote location, among other factors. However, that remoteness is precisely what creates an opportunity for local farmers.

In the Aloha State, 18.66% of farms sell directly to businesses for locally or regionally branded products—the highest rate in the country—while 20.83% of farms sell directly to consumers, which is also one of the nation’s highest rates. The high cost of importing food to the islands creates more space for local producers to contribute to the food scene, with residents enjoying the results.

California

California is by far the largest agricultural producer in the U.S.—in 2023, the state took in $59.4 billion in cash receipts for all commodities. Unlike other states with major agricultural activity, however, California distinguishes itself in that it also scores highly for local produce availability.

For example, in California 12.46% of farms sell directly to businesses for locally or regionally branded products; in Texas that number is 3.27%, while in Iowa it’s 1.10% and in Nebraska it’s a mere 0.70%. California farms are also two to four times as likely to sell directly to consumers as other major agricultural states. These findings indicate that there’s broad diversity in the state’s food production—as well as healthy demand for local produce among residents.

Methodology and Notes

To obtain these results, we evaluated each state across the following six categories.

First, we obtained data on the availability of five types of local food resources (CSAs, farmers markets, on-farm markets, food hubs, and agritourism) in each state using data from the USDA’s Local Food Directories⁴. We compared the results to the population of each state⁵ to establish a per capita distribution of each type of resource, then aggregated all five types to establish an overall score for each state.

Second, we combined the USDA data on food resource availability⁴ with U.S. Census Bureau data on county populations⁶ in order to determine the availability of each type of resource in each county in each state. We analyzed overall county-level availability to determine relative availability compared with national averages.

Then, we used USDA data on farms selling direct-to-consumer (DTC) as well as directly to retail markets, institutions, and food hubs for local or regionally branded products⁷ to determine the number of farms engaging in each type of activity as well as the value of sales in each category. We used this data to determine the percentage of farms selling through each of the two channels; we also compared it with USDA data on state-level food expenditures⁸ to determine the ratio of each type of farm sales compared to food expenditures.

For each of these categories, we assigned each state a score on a normalized 0-100 scale; then, we combined the six scores to form a weighted score out of a possible 100 points. Because Vermont placed so far ahead of all other states (in the original rankings, second-place Oregon scored 47.87), we applied a square root adjustment to the results in order to expand the range of the results and create more visible differences.

This analysis reveals the complex relationship between agricultural production and local food availability across America. While some states with modest agricultural output excel at connecting local producers with consumers, other agricultural giants prioritize commodity crops over local food systems. These findings underscore how policy choices, consumer preferences, and farming practices together shape Americans’ access to locally produced food.

Sources

(1) United States Department of Agriculture, Local Food Directories
(2) United States Census Bureau, Quick Facts
(3) United States Census Bureau, County Population Totals and Components of Change: 2020-2024
(4) United States Department of Agriculture, Market Value of Agricultural Products Sold Including Food Marketing Practices and Value-Added Products: 2022 and 2017
(5) United States Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service, Food Expenditure Series, State food sales, with taxes and tips, for all purchasers
(6) United States Department of Agriculture, Selected Crops Harvested: 2022
(7) United States Department of Agriculture, 2022 Census of Agriculture State Profile, Kansas
(8) United States Department of Agriculture, 2022 Census of Agriculture State Profile, Vermont

LOOKING FOR MORE INSIGHTS INTO FOOD CULTURE IN AMERICA? CHECK OUT THESE ANALYSES NEXT!

• 2025 Alcohol and Beverage Trends: Key Statistics on What’s Pouring in Bars and Homes
• America’s Most Diverse Food Cities: Ranking the Culinary Diversity of the Largest Cities
• Health & Wellness Food Trends: Key Statistics on What Americans Are Eating for Better Health

¹United States Department of Agriculture, Selected Crops Harvested: 2022
²United States Department of Agriculture, 2022 Census of Agriculture State Profile, Kansas
³United States Department of Agriculture, 2022 Census of Agriculture State Profile, Vermont
⁴United States Department of Agriculture, Local Food Directories
⁵United States Census Bureau, Quick Facts
⁶United States Census Bureau, County Population Totals and Components of Change: 2020-2024
⁷United States Department of Agriculture, Market Value of Agricultural Products Sold Including Food Marketing Practices and Value-Added Products: 2022 and 2017
⁸United States Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service, Food Expenditure Series, State food sales, with taxes and tips, for all purchasers