North Carolina corn growers face greater variability in rainfall and soil conditions compared to those in the Midwest, which increases the need for adaptive risk management strategies to stabilize yields and mitigate production risk. This article examines trends in crop insurance and irrigation, highlighting how growers can use these tools to manage yield variability. Ongoing research and extension efforts at NC State, supported by the North Carolina Corn Growers Association, are helping producers evaluate water management strategies that can enhance both profitability and long-term resilience.
Introduction
Water availability is a key driver of corn production, and its significance was made evident in 2024 when drought and flood conditions reduced North Carolina’s corn yield to its lowest deviation from the expected yield (or “trend yield”) in at least the past 35 years. Based on average yield trends from 1990 to 2023, the expected yield for 2024 was 135.5 bushels per acre. However, actual yields averaged just 87 bushels per acre—a deficit of 48.5 bushels, or 35.8% below trend. With the 2024 North Carolina marketing year average price of $4.95 per bushel, this shortfall translated to a revenue loss of $240.08 per acre.
While most US corn is produced in the Midwest where rainfall is more predictable and soils are highly fertile (Mase et al. 2017; Miller et al. 2009; Schaetzl et al. 2012), North Carolina farmers face a more unpredictable climate that differs from the mountains to the coast. Furthermore, North Carolina’s annual rainfall is predicted to become more variable while the Midwestern states are expected to remain consistent (Harp and Horton 2023).
As shown in Figure 1, corn yields in Midwestern states like Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, and Nebraska have followed steady, upward trends over the past 35 years—averaging annual yield increases of 2.10 to 2.50 bushels per acre and typically exceeding 190 bushels per acre (bu/ac) today. In the 2024 growing season, Illinois’s performance was 12.47 bu/ac (6.06%) above trend at 218 bu/ac, Iowa’s was 6.09 bu/ac (2.94%) above trend at 213 bu/ac, Nebraska’s was 2.25 bu/ac (1.17%) above trend at 194 bu/ac, and lastly, Minnesota finished the 2024 growing season at -14.87 bu/ac (-7.52%) below trend at 183 bu/ac (USDA-NASS 2024). In contrast, North Carolina’s corn yield trend rises more slowly—about 1.60 bushels per acre per year—and an average of just 106.83 bushels per acre, with pronounced “saw-tooth” variability in yield. This unpredictability in production is likely reflected in the region's heightened exposure to both drought and wet conditions, which makes it more difficult for farmers to plan, manage risk, and invest in longer-term infrastructure.
As a critical component for maximizing yields, growers must implement practices that address rainfall extremes—reducing the impact of both drought and excess moisture stress during key stages of the growing season. Research from the 2024 Water Resiliency Corn Hybrid Performance Trials at the Tidewater Research Station in eastern North Carolina highlights the significant impact of drought and moisture stress on corn yields. For example, under dry stress conditions, medium-maturity corn varieties (110-115 days to relative maturity) produced yields that were 38.2 bushels per acre lower than under optimal conditions. Under wet stress, these same varieties performed 98.8 bushels per acre below the optimal trial. Similarly, late-maturity varieties (116 days to relative maturity) experienced losses of 18.3 bushels per acre under dry stress and 97.8 bushels per acre for wet stress (Poole 2025). That’s a substantial yield difference, highlighting a need for water management strategies including improved drainage and irrigation, which can help protect crops from moisture stress. When drainage is paired with irrigation, better water management can reduce yield variability from year to year—making it easier for growers to plan, invest with confidence, and improve long-term productivity.
Crop insurance is a widely used tool for managing risk, and most farmers in North Carolina participate in federal insurance programs, with more than 90% of planted corn acres insured each year (USDA-NASS 2024; USDA-RMA 2024). However, it’s important to recognize that crop insurance does not prevent losses; it simply provides financial compensation for losses after they occur. From a risk management standpoint, the most effective strategy is likely a combination of crop insurance and proactive practices such as irrigation and drainage. Irrigated crop acres also typically qualify for lower crop insurance premiums due to their reduced production risk, which provides an additional economic benefit to combining these strategies. While insurance can help offset the financial impact of extreme weather, physical water management solutions can be more practical for reducing yield losses in the first place. In years when weather-related production shortfalls occur, farmers who can maintain yields through improved water management may also benefit from stronger local prices—that is, having bushels in hand when others do not can lead to added gains, since a tighter regional supply often pushes up basis and cash prices.
Despite the potential benefits of improved water management, the adoption of irrigation and drainage technologies in North Carolina remains relatively low. As of 2022, just 10.8% of farms in the state used irrigation, and 22.64% of farmland was artificially drained (USDA-NASS 2024c). This lags significantly behind adoption rates in Midwestern states—for example, Nebraska reports 34% irrigation use (USDA-NASS 2024b), and Illinois has nearly half its farmland artificially drained (USDA-NASS 2024a). In North Carolina, lower adoption may reflect a combination of factors, including high upfront costs, variability in soils and topography, the influence of microclimates across different growing regions, and uncertainty about long-term economic returns on investment.
Figure 1. Corn yield trends in North Carolina compared to top Midwestern producers: Illinois, Minnesota, Iowa, and Nebraska.
(USDA-NASS 2024)
Insurance Adoption and Irrigation Uptake
Because the United States Department of Agriculture-National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA-NASS) does not report annually on irrigated versus nonirrigated corn acreage in North Carolina, this analysis relies on crop insurance data as a proxy. Insurance and Farm Service Agency (FSA) program enrollment records distinguish between irrigated and nonirrigated policies, providing the only consistent sources of county-level insight into irrigation use.
Over the past 25 years, enrollment in crop insurance among North Carolina corn producers has steadily increased, and the number of uninsured corn acres has been declining. More recently (2007 to 2024), as total planted acreage has stabilized around 920,000 acres annually, uninsured acres have declined at a rate of approximately 4,300 acres per year. As shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3, more than 90% of corn acres are now insured—reflecting strong participation in federal crop insurance programs.
Most of this growth has occurred in nonirrigated policies. However, in recent years, irrigated insurance policies have risen both in absolute terms and as a share of total insured acres. From 2007 to 2024, insured irrigated corn acres increased by a factor of more than ten, rising from approximately 3,100 acres to nearly 34,000 acres (see Figure 4). While irrigated corn still accounts for less than 5% of total insured corn acreage, the trend line for irrigated acres shows a steady increase of about 1,689 acres per year, thus indicating a gradual shift toward greater irrigation adoption among insured operations.
This upward trajectory suggests that some producers are beginning to view irrigation not only as a yield-enhancing practice, but as a complementary risk management tool—particularly in response to recurring drought years (2007, 2008, 2012, and 2024) and higher corn prices. As extreme weather events are likely to become more frequent (Kunkel et al. 2020), this trend may reflect a broader structural shift toward integrating physical water management with financial risk protection to build long-term production resilience. While most growers rely on insurance to manage financial risk, relatively few have adopted physical water management strategies—such as irrigation, tile drainage, or drainage water management systems—that can reduce the likelihood of yield losses in the first place. Expanding the use of these tools could improve resilience and profitability, especially in regions more vulnerable to drought or excess moisture.
In Figure 2, the gap between the total corn acres planted and the total corn acres insured is narrowing and is directly proportional to the amount of uninsured corn acres. Likewise, the growing gap between the total corn acres insured and the total nonirrigated corn acres insured is directly proportional to the increasing total irrigated insured corn acres.
Figure 4 shows trends in corn prices and irrigated corn acreage in North Carolina from 2007 to 2024, illustrating how growers have likely responded to a combination of drought conditions and elevated market prices. The timing suggests that farmers tend to invest in irrigation infrastructure when both environmental risks (for example, the droughts in 2007 to 2008, 2011, 2015, and 2024) and economic incentives (for example, high corn prices) align. This pattern reflects strategic decision-making, since growers appear more likely to adopt irrigation when the expected benefits of risk reduction and yield preservation outweigh the associated costs. It is also noteworthy that when corn prices and precipitation were relatively stable (2016 to 2020), the adoption of irrigated acres stagnated for a period before continuing to grow once corn prices improved.
Figure 2. North Carolina corn practice by acreage and corn acres enrolled in crop insurance in North Carolina.
(USDA-NASS 2024; USDA-RMA 2024)
Figure 3. North Carolina corn practice trends by acreage.
(USDA-NASS 2024; USDA-RMA 2024)
Figure 4. Insured irrigated corn acres (USDA-RMA), corn futures prices (NCSU-ARE 2025), and reported drought events.
(US Drought Monitor)
Where Is Irrigation Adoption Happening?
While statewide statistics provide a broad overview, irrigation adoption does not appear to be uniform across North Carolina; therefore, a county-level assessment is essential. Using data from the Risk Management Agency (RMA), FSA, and NASS, we can examine spatial patterns in irrigation practices by county. Because insurance enrollment and FSA reporting are voluntary and self-reported, some variation between datasets is expected.
These county-level data illustrate the uneven adoption of irrigation across North Carolina. As shown in Figure 5, counties in the southeastern and northeastern parts of the state exhibit higher rates of irrigation adoption. This pattern likely reflects a combination of factors, including preexisting infrastructure, soil and climate conditions prone to drought, and the presence of high-value crops requiring irrigation. In some areas, the prevalence of livestock operations—and the associated need to apply manure to fields as part of waste management—may also contribute to greater irrigation use. While irrigated insurance policies cover only a small share of the total corn acreage statewide, enrollment is notably higher in counties such as Robeson, Cumberland, Duplin, Pamlico, Hertford, and Northampton.
These trends are consistent with broader irrigation patterns shown in Figure 6, which confirm that physical irrigation infrastructure is more concentrated in the Coastal Plain—particularly in its southeastern and northeastern regions. Together, these figures highlight the county-level variability in irrigated corn acreage and underscore both the potential and the limitations of irrigation as a risk management strategy in North Carolina—particularly where water access, cropping systems, livestock intensity, and exposure to precipitation extremes intersect.
While irrigation offers protection against drought risk, there are still several barriers that may limit its adoption. These include significant upfront costs such as establishing water sources (surface or groundwater), sourcing the power required to operate the systems, and the cost of the irrigation system itself. Upfront costs vary significantly depending on farm-specific factors and location, making it difficult to provide precise estimates. Instead, it is more practical to present a range that reflects the most common scenarios, which individual producers can adapt as a baseline and then modify to reflect their own circumstances. Developing these cost ranges remains a work in progress. Other challenges include water availability and quality, which can impact system effectiveness and longevity. Additionally, some farms may face permitting and reporting requirements depending on location and water usage levels.
Cost-share programs like EQIP (Environmental Quality Incentives Program), tax benefits such as Section 179 expensing, and advancements in precision irrigation technologies (for example, GPS-enabled variable-rate irrigation and remote monitoring systems) can help reduce some of these constraints. These programs and technologies can provide incentives for investments by potentially reducing the net total out-of-pocket expenses via direct cost sharing, immediate tax deductions, and lowering irrigation costs through more efficient resource use. However, the investment still requires an upfront expense. This need for upfront investment is illustrated by the observations that increases in irrigated acres have occurred when corn prices are higher, as shown in Figure 4. As growers consider these investments, understanding the trade-offs between long-term profitability and risk reduction and short-term upfront capital costs remains critical—and are important areas for future research.
Figure 5. Percentage of planted acres insured under “irrigated” practice from 5-Year average county-level irrigation adoption in North Carolina (USDA-NASS 2024; USDA-RMA 2024).
Figure 6. Percentage of planted acres reported as “irrigated” from 5-Year average county-level irrigation adoption in North Carolina.
(USDA-NASS 2024; USDA-FSA 2024)
Conclusion
Available data indicate that North Carolina corn growers are increasingly utilizing both crop insurance and irrigation to mitigate production risk. Insurance coverage has expanded significantly statewide, and while irrigation remains limited in many areas, based on the insurance data, we can substantiate that irrigation adoption is picking up in several counties. As markets and weather patterns continue to shift, tools such as irrigation and drainage will likely become even more important for helping farmers maintain yield stability, improve the efficiency of input use, and remain competitive—making their operations increasingly profitable and economically sustainable over the long term. Ongoing research and extension efforts at NC State—supported by the North Carolina Corn Growers Association—focus on bringing a better understanding to the production and economic benefits of water management technologies, as well as how adopting these strategies can help farmers make informed decisions that support both short-term economic gains and long-term environmental and operational resilience.
References
Harp, R. D., and D. E. Horton. 2023. “Observed Changes in Interannual Precipitation Variability in the United States.” Geophysical Research Letters 50. ↲
Kunkel, K. E., D. R. Easterling, A. Ballinger, et al. 2020. North Carolina Climate Science Report. North Carolina Institute for Climate Studies, 233 pp. ↲
Mase, A. S., B. M. Gramig, and L. S. Prokopy. 2017. “Climate Change Beliefs, Risk Perceptions, and Adaptation Behavior among Midwestern U.S. Crop Farmers.” Climate Risk Management 15: 8–17. ↲
Miller, B., R. J. Schaetzl, and F. Krist Jr. 2009. The Soil Fertility and Drainage Indexes: Taxonomically Based, Ordinal Estimates of Relative Soil Properties. Technical report. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University and United States Forestry Service. ↲
NC State University, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics (NCSU-ARE). 2025. Ag Econ Report: Field Crops Price. North Carolina State University. Accessed September 15, 2025. ↲
North Carolina Drought Management Advisory Council. “Current Conditions.” Accessed July 10, 2025.
Poole, C. 2025. “Corn Water Stress Trials.” NC State Extension. Accessed Jul 8, 2025. ↲
Schaetzl, R. J., F. Krist Jr., B. A. Miller. 2012. “A Taxonomically Based Ordinal Estimate of Soil Productivity for Landscape-Scale Analyses.” Soil Science 177: 288-199. ↲
United States Department of Agriculture, Farm Service Agency (USDA-FSA). “Crop Acreage Data.” Accessed June 8, 2025. ↲
United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service (USDA-NASS). 2024a. 2022 Census of Agriculture: Illinois: State and County Data. Washington, DC: United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service. ↲
USDA-NASS. 2024b. 2022 Census of Agriculture: Nebraska: State and County Data. Washington DC: United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service. ↲
USDA-NASS. 2024c. 2022 Census of Agriculture: North Carolina: State and County Data. Washington DC: United States Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service. ↲
United States Department of Agriculture, Risk Management Agency (USDA-RMA). “State/County/Crop Summary of Business.” Accessed June 8, 2025.
Publication date: Dec. 9, 2025
AG-997
N.C. Cooperative Extension prohibits discrimination and harassment regardless of age, color, disability, family and marital status, gender identity, national origin, political beliefs, race, religion, sex (including pregnancy), sexual orientation and veteran status.