Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

NOAA By the Numbers Topics

Drought

Drought can cause tremendous economic and social loss and is among the most damaging and least understood natural hazards. NOAA’s National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS) works to prepare people, communities, and governments to mitigate the impacts of drought through preparation, improved monitoring and prediction, and building information networks that extend from the local to the federal level.

NOAA's Role:

  • NOAA’s National Integrated Drought Information System (NIDIS) was established in 2006 by the U.S. Congress and reauthorized in 2014 with the goal to develop a national early warning system to enhance drought preparedness and response.
  • NIDIS works with numerous partners across the federal, state, and tribal governments, academia, and the private sector. Since 2011, research to advance the understanding, monitoring and prediction of U.S. drought in support of NIDIS has been coordinated through a Drought Task Force (DTF) established by NOAA’s Office of Atmospheric Research, Climate Program Office, and Modeling Analysis Predictions and Projections (MAPP) Program.
  • Developing and maintaining an early drought warning system requires a suite of research activities including those to advance our comprehension of drought and our capability to monitor and predict drought. In this context, key NIDIS-relevant research aims to:
  • Advance the scientific understanding of the weather and climatic mechanisms that lead to the onset, maintenance and recovery of drought
  • Improve drought prediction skill by identifying and exploiting sources of drought predictability and related aspects such as the dependence on time scales, regions, seasons and variables, and improvements in forecast models and procedures
  • Improve current drought monitoring capabilities, including using new data, methodologies and metrics that would improve society’s capability to manage drought
  • Improve drought information systems through incorporating the latest advances in monitoring and prediction, objective metrics relevant to various societal sectors and advanced information delivery platforms.  – National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2014). NOAA Drought Task Force 2016: research to advance national drought monitoring and prediction capabilities. http://dx.doi.org/10.7289/V5V122S3 
  • NOAA, in collaboration with NDMC and USDA, publishes the weekly U.S. Drought Monitor (USDM), initiated in 1999, and is globally considered the state-of-the-art drought monitoring tool. The USDM is not a forecast, but rather an assessment or snapshot of current drought conditions, based on a combination of indicators and indices that are synthesized using a simple drought severity classification scheme and addresses both short- and long-term drought across the United States – Hayes, M. J., Svoboda, M., Wardlow, B., Anderson, M. C., & Kogan, F. (2012). Drought Monitoring: Historical and Current Perspectives. In B. Wardlow, M. C. Anderson, & J. P. Verdin (Eds.), Remote Sensing of Drought: Innovative Monitoring Approaches (pp. 1-19). CRC Press. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/droughtfacpub/94/ 
  • The North American Land Data Assimilation System (NLDAS) runs four land surface models (at hourly time-steps over the continental U.S. and at 0.125-degree resolution) which play an important role in science-based advances in drought monitoring. NLDAS, housed at the NOAA NCEP Environmental Modeling Center (EMC), continues to be enhanced through NOAA and NASA research programs. – National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. (2014). NOAA Drought Task Force 2016: research to advance national drought monitoring and prediction capabilities. http://dx.doi.org/10.7289/V5V122S3
  • Historical monthly drought monitoring data from 1900 are available from NOAA’s National Climate Data Center. Palmer indices use available temperature and precipitation data to estimate relative dryness. NOAA publishes several monthly Palmer indices that can indicate short and long-term droughts – Santos, J. R., Pagsuyoin, S. T., Herrera, L. C., Tan, R. R., & Yu, K. D. (2014). Analysis of drought risk management strategies using dynamic inoperability input–output modeling and event tree analysis. Environment Systems and Decisions, 34(4), 492-506. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-014-9514-5

Why It Matters:

Agricultural Impacts

Assessing the Damages Caused
  • Thousands of drought events occur in the U.S. every year. Droughts contribute to water stress which has been shown to affect a number of large cities across the country and worldwide:
    • The United States is one of the most affected countries by droughts. An average of 2,427 drought events have occurred in the United States per year during 1996–2016, with annual mean economic losses up to $1,684 million (2016$) per year. – Zhou, Q. Q., Leng, G. Y., & Peng, J. (2018). Recent Changes in the Occurrences and Damages of Floods and Droughts in the United States. Water, 10(9), 10, Article 1109. https://doi.org/10.3390/w10091109 
    • In the United States, between 1895-2010, 14% of the country on average experienced severe to extreme drought conditions during any given year. This finding is based on data from the NOAA National Climatic Data Center. –  Hayes, M. J., Svoboda, M., Wardlow, B., Anderson, M. C., & Kogan, F. (2012). Drought Monitoring: Historical and Current Perspectives. In B. Wardlow, M. C. Anderson, & J. P. Verdin (Eds.), Remote Sensing of Drought: Innovative Monitoring Approaches (pp. 1-19). CRC Press. http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/droughtfacpub/94/
    • A global survey of the water sources of over 150 large cities (with populations greater than 750,000) found that one-quarter of the population or around 381 million people are water stressed and exposed to perennial water shortages. These water-stressed cities, which included major cities in the United States (e.g., Los Angeles), contained $4.8 trillion (2005$) in economic activity. – McDonald et al. (2014). Water on an urban planet: Urbanization and the reach of urban water infrastructure. Global Environmental Change, 27, 96-105. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.04.022  
    • Global drought severity has increased, with an average of 40% of this intensification attributed to atmospheric evaporative demand (AED)–the rate at which water evaporates from the Earth’s surface into the atmosphere. The global area affected by drought from 1981-2022 has increased by 0.36% annually. Additionally, the most recent five-year period (2018-2022) saw a 74% increase in the average drought-affected area compared to 1981-2017, with AED accounting for 58% of this rise. – Gebrechorkos, S. H., Sheffield, J., Vicente-Serrano, S. M., Funk, C., Miralles, D. G., Peng, J., Dyer, E., Talib, J., Beck, H. E., Singer, M. B., & Dadson, S. J. (2025). Warming accelerates global drought severity. Nature, 642(8068). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-025-09047-2
  • NOAA’s Palmer Drought Severity Index has been used to assess the risk of drought and its agricultural impacts. Research has shown droughts to cause billions of dollars in crop losses in the United States:
    • The five central Plains states (Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, South Dakota, and North Dakota) experienced severe droughts during the 1930s, particularly in 1934 and 1936, which led to crop failure at a time when the largest economic downturn in U.S. history took place. A high level of land erosion occurred in many Plains counties due to a loss of ground cover and greater susceptibility to self-perpetuating dust storms. These events became known as the Dust Bowl. Controlling for pre-1930 characteristics, statistical analysis shows significant impacts from the drought. Between 1930-1940, the Dust Bowl led to a drop in the per acre value of farmland by 30% in high-erosion counties (i.e., more than 75% of topsoil lost)–amounting to $12.5 billion (2007$) in agricultural land losses. The adjustment to more productive alternative land usage was slow due to the Depression along with significant out-migration of agricultural workers. – Hornbeck, R. (2012). The Enduring Impact of the American Dust Bowl: Short- and Long-Run Adjustments to Environmental Catastrophe. American Economic Review, 102(4), 1477-1507. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.102.4.1477 
    • Across four study sites in the Midwest United States, a simulation model based on climate and crop yield data over a 70-year period (1940-2010) estimated that drought stress may reduce total crop yield in the area by 8.1–17.5%. – Wang, R., Bowling, L. C., & Cherkauer, K. A. (2016). Estimation of the effects of climate variability on crop yield in the Midwest USA. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology, 216, 141-156. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agrformet.2015.10.001 
    • In an assessment of drought risk for the 30 most vulnerable agricultural communities in the United States, Mendocino, Sonoma, Humboldt, El Dorado, Fresno, and Kern counties in California were found to have the highest exposure to drought and expected annual agricultural losses with losses of $9.762 million (2022$), $57.294 million, $2.162 million, $3.300 million, $19.475 million, and $3.287 million, respectively.  – Tanir, T., Yildirim, E., Ferreira, C. M., & Demir, I. (2024). Social vulnerability and climate risk assessment for agricultural communities in the United States. Science of The Total Environment, 908, Article 168346. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.168346 
    • In Kentucky, from the 1980s until 2006, each year in which there was a drought the state experienced more than $100 million (2010$) in annual soybean revenue loss compared to their respective decadal average. These findings use commodity data from the National Agricultural Statistics Service and drought severity data from NOAA’s Palmer Drought Severity Index.  – Craft, K. E., Mahmood, R., King, S. A., Goodrich, G., & Yan, J. (2015). Twentieth century droughts and agriculture: Examples from impacts on soybean production in Kentucky, USA. Ambio, 44(6), 557-568. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24670637
    • During severe drought years Kentucky’s hay production declined by up to 50%. Severe droughts in 1930, 1999, and 2007 led to production declines of 49.9% (649,049 metric tons), 9.5% (452,505 metric tons), and 29.5% (1,513,781 metric tons) relative to their decadal averages. Additionally, during the 1999 and 2007 severe droughts hay revenue was $41 million and $82 million (2010$) lower than their decadal averages. The findings were based on commodity data (including yield, production, price, and revenue for hay) from the USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service and drought data from NOAA’s Palmer Drought Severity Index. – Craft, K. E., Mahmood, R., King, S. A., Goodrich, G., & Yan, J. (2017). Droughts of the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries: Influences on the production of beef and forage in Kentucky, USA. Science of The Total Environment, 577, 122-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.10.128 
    • A study analyzed the agricultural impact of a severe drought from 2008-2015 in the Colorado Basin in Texas. Compared to average agricultural GDP during 2000–2007, average drought year GDP in the basin was $574 million lower (35%) and in 2011 alone was $913 million lower (56%) (2022$). The upper region was more severely affected due to its large agricultural sector and suffered a reduction in agricultural GDP of 51% from 2008–2015, while, in contrast, the middle and lower regions were only reduced by 26% and 24%. The findings were based on USDA annual crop production and harvested area data.  – Ferencz, S. B., Sun, N., Turner, S. W. D., Smith, B. A., & Rice, J. S. (2024). Multisectoral analysis of drought impacts and management responses to the 2008-2015 record drought in the Colorado Basin, Texas. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 24(5), 1871-1896. https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-24-1871-2024 
    • A study assessed drought impacts on maize and soybean yields in the southeastern U.S. between 1979-2019 and found that drought events occurring during the critical development growth stage had significant negative impacts on year-to-year yield variability in over half of the counties in the study region. On average, an extremely dry event occurring during the critical development growth stage resulted in a region-wide average yield reduction between 31.9% and 42.7% for maize and between 23.4% and 25.4% for soybean. The findings were based on crop yield data from USDA’s National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS) and drought indices including modified Standardized Precipitation Indices and the Standardized Precipitation Evapotranspiration Index (SPEI).  – Nguyen, H., Thompson, A., & Costello, C. (2023). Impacts of historical droughts on maize and soybean production in the southeastern United States. Agricultural Water Management, 281, Article 108237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2023.108237 
    • A study assessed the impact of drought on crop yields and farm income across the U.S. from 2001-2013. Dryland counties were found to experience crop yield losses ranging from 0.1% to 1.2% for each additional week of drought for corn and soybeans, with greater reductions for more severe drought. Similarly, irrigated counties were found to experience less severe crop yield losses ranging from 0.1% to 0.5%. Drought impacts varied by region with dryland counties in the Midwest suffering an 8.0% reduction in corn yields and a 3.1% reduction in soybean yields for each additional week of exceptional (U.S. Drought Monitor category D4) drought. In contrast, drought impacts on crop yields were minimal in dryland counties in the Northeast and Southeast regions. Additional weeks of drought were found to have little to no effect on farm income, possibly due to farmers receiving higher prices as a result of drought-induced scarcity, offsetting yield losses. These findings were based on drought data from NOAA and USDA’s U.S. Drought Monitor, crop yield data from USDA’s NASS, and farm income data from BEA. – Kuwayama, Y., Thompson, A., Bernknopf, R., Zaitchik, B., & Vail, P. (2019). Estimating the Impact of Drought on Agriculture Using the US Drought Monitor. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 101(1), 193-210. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajae/aay037 
  • Drought can reduce runoff and severely impact hydropowered electricity generation, especially in the western United States where hydro accounts for 23% of electricity generation.
    • A study on U.S. hydropower vulnerability to drought found that drought events from 2003 to 2020 led to a cumulative reduction of approximately 300 million MWh in hydroelectricity generation. This reduction resulted in an estimated economic loss of approximately $28 billion to the hydropower sector across the contiguous United States. The Western U.S. incurred half of the total economic loss, with California, Washington, and Oregon suffering the greatest cumulative losses, exceeding $8.7 billion, $4.2 billion, and $1.6 billion, respectively. – Moghaddasi, P., Gavahi, K., Moftakhari, H., & Moradkhani, H. (2024). Unraveling the hydropower vulnerability to drought in the United States. Environmental Research Letters, 19(8), Article 084038. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/ad6200