Production, Utilization and Demand
Merritt Taylor, Charles Hall and Gustavo Molina*


The Texas citrus industry was devastated by the December 1983 freeze, which destroyed more than 47,000 of the Rio Grande Valley's 69,000 acres of citrus, and subsequently by the December 1989 freeze which destroyed about 24,000 of the existing 35,700 acres of citrus. Because of these freezes, changes have occurred in the Texas citrus industry, and full recovery to 1983 pre-freeze production levels is still years away. However, it is projected that citrus acreage will return to only about 60 percent of pre-freeze levels. As growers continue to plant orchards, all sectors of the industry are planning and implementing efforts to improve the overall position of Texas citrus in the marketplace.

Data on production and utilization of Texas citrus during the post-1989 freeze recovery period indicate that the industry has not returned to pre-freeze levels. A base set of data comprised of an average of the 5 years immediately preceding the 1983 freeze is used for comparison purposes. Grapefruit and orange production levels between the 1983 and 1989 freezes did not equal the pre1983 freeze production levels before the next freeze hit in 1989. The average production levels during 1983-1989 were 67 percent of the 5-year period preceding the 1983 freeze for grapefruit and 35 percent for oranges. These production levels fell to zero after the 1989 freeze for the 199091 season. The Texas citrus industry began a slow recovery that continued through the 1993-94 production year.

Tonnage sold was almost 0.7 percent for grapefruit and 1.3 percent for oranges of the pre-1983 freeze average in the 1991-92 season. These values continued to increase each of the subsequent years with production from pruned trees that survived the freeze and as newly planted trees began producing,

Production utilized for the 1992-93 season was 75,000 tons or 19.2 percent of the 1983 pre-freeze average for grapefruit and 20,570 tons or 9.2 percent for oranges. The most recent season completed (1993-94) yielded 118,440 tons or 30.3 percent of 1983 pre-freeze levels for grapefruit and 23,078 tons, which was 10.3 percent for oranges.

Although 90 countries worldwide produce oranges, seven countries accounted for 85 percent of world production in the 1991-92 season. In the same season, another seven countries produced 95 percent of the world grapefruit supplies. During the 1991-92 season, the U.S. produced about 23 percent of the world's fresh oranges and 60 percent of its fresh grapefruit.

In 1990, the U.S. exported 16 percent of its fresh grapefruit and 8 percent of its fresh orange production. Texas did not contribute to the U.S. citrus exports in 1990 because the severe freeze experienced in 1989 eliminated its citrus production. Not until recently has Texas resumed the exporting of citrus products. In the 1992-93 season, Texas exported 116 tons of fresh citrus and in the 1993-94 season, it exported 2,069 tons, an increase of almost 1,700 percent. Even though the U.S. is an exporter of citrus products, it continues to import part of its domestic citrus consumption to maintain a year-round supply. Most U.S. imports are from Mexico, particularly during September and October, before domestic harvest begins.

Citrus acreage data and trends indicate the extent of change occurring within the citrus industry and provide a base to project future citrus production supplies. In general, all three of the major U.S. production areas (California/ Arizona, Florida and Texas) have experienced significant acreage reductions. Urban expansion and general economic conditions have been partly responsible, but a series of freezes caused severe acreage losses in Florida and Texas.

Nonetheless, orchard age, density, rootstocks, variety, management, climate and other factors determine orchard productivity. Consequently, actual production and utilization data are better indicators of supply and market share than are acreage data.

Grapefruit

Production, utilization and value of all grapefruit production in the U.S. are presented in Table 1 by production area for the 1978-79 season through the 1993-94 season. Texas ranks third in terms of production and in market utilization (both fresh and processed), representing a little over 7 percent of total U.S. grapefruit production. While Florida supplied 71 percent of U.S. fresh grapefruit, it processed almost 1.5 times more than it shipped fresh.

Table 1. Annual production, utilization and value of U.S grapefruit by area for 1978-1994.

SeasonProduction
(tons)
Fresh
Utilization
(tons)
Processed
Utilization(tons)
Percent freshValue ($1,000)
California/Arizona
1978-79272,465154,350118,11556.6536,967
1979-80340,950155,540185,41045.6229,997
1980-81353,220198,150155,07056.1048,338
1981-82279,135157,415121,72156.3925,325
1982-83345,770208,778136,99260.3832,822
1983-84318,916206,398111,79864.8740,414
1984-85396,720273,740122,98069.0081,869
1985-86356,090245,130110,96068.8472,822
1986-87393,970248,145145,82562.9970,175
1987-88361,790239,000122,79066.0665,388
1988-89325,600223,670101,93068.6958,085
1989-90379,660250,680128,98066.0397,460
1990-91340,000225,224114,77666.2464,370
1991-92424,600279,680144,92065.8780,706
1992-93387,0502342,898144,15262.7649,095
1993-94*356,000NANANANA
Average351,951220,587131,09562.4356,922
Percent of U.S. total13.8018.939.5417.26
Florida
1978-792,125,000841,0751,283,92539.58177,009
1979-802,329,000828,7931,500,20735.59246,458
1980-812,137,750729,5981,408,15234.13248,294
1981-822,044,250710,5581,333,69334.76165,540
1982-831,674,500778,303896,19846.48129,851
1983-841,738,460708,3031,030,15840.74170,511
1984-851,870,000636,9901,233,01034.06228,661
1985-861,986,875833,8501,153,02541.97267,067
1986-872,116,500889,8651,226,63542.04329,098
1987-882,288,625982,1751,306,45042.92387,446
1988-892,326,8751,015,8351,311,04043.66332,849
1989-901,517,250567,120950,13037.38260,275
1990-911,916,7501,016,728900,02353.04328,770
1991-921,802,000970,743831,25853.87349,688
1992-932,343,875984,1301,359,74541.99232,207
1993-94*2,171,000NANANANA
Average2,024,294832,9381,181,57641.48256,915
Percent of U.S. total79.3871.4885.9577.90
Texas
1978-79360,000160,000200,00044.4417,680
1979-80316,000168,000148,00053.1626,237
1980-81268,000186,00082,00069.4027,260
1981-82556,000289,200266,80052.0138,173
1982-83448,000312,000136,00069.6424,148
1983-84128,000114,40013,60089.389,385
1984-850000.000
1985-869,0408,24080091.152,076
1986-8777,00062,20014,80080.7815,759
1987-88152,000111,40040,60073.2925,754
1988-89192,000155,60036,40081.0425,107
1989-9080,00064,20015,80080.2514,162
1990-910000.000
1991-922,6002,6000100.00983
1992-9375,00055,80019,12074.5112,856
1993-94*118,44099,32019,12083.86NA
Average173,880111,81562,06565.1815,972
Percent of U.S. total6.829.604.514.84


*Estimate for the 1993-94 season.
SOURCES: 1993 Texas Citrus Tree Inventory Survey, Texas Department of Agriculture, USDA
1989 Texas Citrus Tree Inventory Survey, Texas Department of Agriculture, USDA
Citrus Estimates, Final Estimates for 1981-82 Crop through 1986-87 Crop, NASS, USDA.
Texas Citrus Handbook, Texas Cooperative Extension, The Texas A&M University System.
Texas Citrus, June1, 1994, TASS, USDA.


Since 1978, on the average, Texas has shipped almost 65 percent of its total grapefruit production as fresh fruit. However, Texas grapefruit value was a distant third, as its almost 7 percent share of U.S. production only generated close to 5 percent of the total U.S. value. The California/ Arizona grapefruit crop averaged $161-73 per ton, while Florida's averaged $126.92 per ton, and Texas grapefruit averaged $90.82 per ton (calculated by dividing average value by average production for the 15-year period).

Oranges

Production, utilization and value of all orange production in the U.S. are presented in Table 2 by production area, for the seasons 1978-79 through 1993-94. Again Texas ranked a distant third in all categories, supplying a little over 1 percent of U.S. orange production. The California/Arizona region was the leading supplier of fresh oranges, with 76 percent of the total. Florida was the leading processing state, with just over 89 percent of all U.S. processed orange production.

Table 2. Annual production, utilization and value of U.S. oranges by area for 1978-1994.

SeasonProduction
(tons)
Fresh
Utilization
(tons)
Processed
Utilization(tons)
Percent freshValue ($1,000)
California/Arizona
1978-791,507,500991,500516,00065.77994,990
1979-802,358,7501,563,000795,75066.261,068,408
1980-812,581,8751,513,5001,068,37558.621,045,600
1981-821,685,6251,332,000353,62579.02387,020
1982-832,996,2501,717,3131,278,93857.32335,257
1983-841,883,6251,562,500421,12577.64411,869
1984-852,041,8751,575,188466,68877.14525,271
1985-862,097,3751,696,687400,68880.90378,920
1986-872,272,5001,637,250635,25072.05450,859
1987-882,280,7501,602,188678,56370.25473,109
1988-892,272,5001,568,063704,43869.00477,006
1989-902,737,8751,809,713928,16366.10568,719
1990-911,025,625660,675364,95064.42401,706
1991-922,616,7501,618,350998,40061.85448,996
1992-932,649,3751,938,600710,77573.17458,677
1993-94*2,467,000NANANANA
Average2,217,2031,512,435688,11569.30561,760
Percent of U.S. total25.1376.1510.2235.90
Florida
1978-797,380,000526,5456,835,4557.13994,990
1979-809,301,500494,5508,806,9505.321,068,408
1980-817,758,000372,4207,385,5804.801,045,600
1981-825,661,000342,9005,318,1006.06752,547
1982-836,282,000464,4005,817,6007.39955,741
1983-845,251,500343,8004,907,7006.55880,377
1984-854,675,500299,3404,376,1606.40930,139
1985-865,364,000403,2004,960,8007.52708,356
1986-875,386,500399,1504,987,3507.41864,171
1987-886,210,000428,4005,781,6006.901,288,199
1988-896,597,000381,9606,215,0405.791,357,529
1989-904,959,000266,4904,692,5105.37888,097
1990-916,822,000560,2956,261,7058.211,180,715
1991-926,291,450520,2905,771,1608.271,094,369
1992-938,392,500481,1857,911,3155.73851,718
1993-94*7,844,000NANANANA
Average6,510,997418,9956,001,9356.59990,731
Percent of U.S. total73.8021.1089.1863.32
Texas
1978-79272,00089,250182,75032.8126,970
1979-80171,27588,40082,87551.6119,791
1980-81184,025121,12562,90065.8220,363
1981-82252,450141,100111,35055.8928,228
1982-83241,400141,95099,45058.8026,402
1983-84106,67559,07547,60055.3811,492
1984-850000.000
1985-8613,17512,32585093.553,168
1986-8737,18833,3633,82589.717,593
1987-8860,77554,2306,54589.2312,373
1988-8978,62566,13012,49584.1113,932
1989-9051,21328,17823,03555.028,256
1990-910000.000
1991-921,2751,2750100.00431
1992-9321,67519,0402,63587.844,274
1993-94*23,07821,1871,89191.81 NA
Average94,67754,78939,88863.2212,218
Percent of U.S. total1.072.760.590.78


*Estimate for the 1993-94 season.
SOURCES: 1993 Texas Citrus Tree Inventory Survey, Texas Department of Agriculture, USDA
1989 Texas Citrus Tree Inventory Survey, Texas Department of Agriculture, USDA
Citrus Estimates, Final Estimates for 1981-82 Crop through 1986-87 Crop, NASS, USDA.
Texas Citrus Handbook, Texas Cooperative Extension, The Texas A&M University System.
Texas Citrus, June1, 1994, TASS, USDA.


California/Arizona navel oranges are noted for their unblemished appearance which contributes to the relatively high percentage (69-30 percent) entering the fresh market. Over 63 percent of Texas production was used in the fresh market. Texas orange value was somewhat higher than that of grapefruit, yet its I percent share of production represented less than 1 percent of the total U.S. value. California/Arizona oranges averaged $253-36 per ton, while Florida's averaged $152.16 per ton, and Texas oranges averaged $129.05 per ton (calculated by dividing average value by average production for the 15-year period).

Texas grapefruit acreage over the 1987-88 through 1992-93 period was 1.6 times greater than its orange acreage. While grapefruit production per acre is typically higher than orange yields, the average value of Texas grapefruit production was only 1.3 times higher than that of oranges-$15,972 million and $12,218 million, respectively. A major factor in the difference in total crop value is the processing value of the two fruits. That is, prices for processed oranges were generally higher than those for processed grapefruit.

Demand

A shift has occurred in the utilization of citrus in the U.S. The "market basket" has been changing with increased demand for convenience foods. Processed markets have become a larger outlet for fruit producers because of increased consumer demand for processed products. At the same time, the fresh market has been declining slightly in importance.

Past utilization trends provide the basis for examining changes in consumption patterns, which reflect the interaction of factors such as production, price, income, population, demand, consumer preference and taste. Table 3 summarizes the trends in per capita consumption by product form. The consumption of fresh citrus declined steadily from 1950 to 1960, remained fairly consistent to 1976, and then continued to decline through 1990. This decline has been offset by a steady increase in per capita consumption of frozen concentrated orange juice, which increased from 21.9 pounds in 1970 to 29.2 pounds by 1990. Chilled juice consumption increased from 4.6 pounds per capita in 1970 to 6.3 pounds in 1990.

Table 3. U.S. per capita citrus consumption by product form, 1970-1990.

YearFresh
(lbs.)
Canned juice
(lbs.)
Frozen juice
(lbs.)
Chilled juice
(lbs.)
Total citrus
(lbs.)
197028.95.221.94.660.6
197129.05.325.64.764.6
197227.35.129.45.166.9
197327.25.528.55.266.4
197427.05.331.15.168.5
197529.15.235.05.674.8
197628.55.135.16.074.8
197726.04.936.65.673.1
197826.15.530.36.067.9
197923.05.532.95.466.8
198026.15.133.85.870.7
198123.54.833.24.165.7
198223.53.936.93.567.8
198327.92.941.74.176.6
198422.72.835.63.764.8
198521.52.340.53.267.4
198624.22.043.33.873.3
198723.92.040.24.570.6
198825.51.740.15.172.4
198923.61.634.36.566.0
199021.41.827.26.356.7


SOURCES: 1993 Fruit and Tree Nuts Situation and Outlook Yearbook, ERS, USDA.
1991 Fruit and Tree Nuts Situation and Outlook Yearbook, ERS, USDA.


Changes in the composition of per capita citrus consumption can be traced to several factors. The substitution of processed fruit for fresh fruit is closely associated with changes in consumer tastes and lifestyles, convenience in shopping, changes in kitchen appliances, and urban population growth. Processed citrus is convenient and time-saving. As family income rises, consumers will tend to pay higher prices for these value-added products.

Changes in the types of fresh citrus consumed were not uniform between 1970 and 1992. The data in Table 4 indicates that consumption of fresh lemons and limes increased but the consumption of all other fresh citrus declined. Fresh orange consumption declined by 20 percent from 16.2 pounds per capita in 1970 to 12.9 pounds in 1992. Grapefruit consumption also went down by 28 percent from 8.2 pounds in 1970 to 5.9 pounds in 1992. The per capita consumption of all fresh citrus has declined by 16 percent, from 28.9 pounds in 1970 to 24.2 pounds in 1992.

Table 4. U.S. per capita fresh citrus consumption, 1970-1992.

YearOranges and Temples (lbs.)Tangerines and Tangelos (lbs.) Lemons (lbs.)Limes(lbs.)Grapefruit(lbs.)Total(lbs.)
197016.22.22.10.28.228.9
197115.72.32.30.28.529.0
197214.52.11.90.28.627.3
197314.42.11.90.28.627.2
197414.42.22.00.28.227.0
197515.92.62.00.28.429.1
197614.72.41.90.29.328.5
197713.42.62.10.27.726.0
197813.42.12.10.28.326.1
197911.52.01.90.37.323.0
198014.32.21.90.47.326.1
198112.42.02.00.46.723.5
198211.72.12.10.47.223.5
198315.02.32.30.57.827.9
198411.92.12.20.56.022.7
198511.61.52.30.65.521.5
198613.41.62.50.66.124.2
198712.81.82.50.56.323.9
198813.91.82.50.66.725.5
198912.21.72.40.76.623.6
199012.41.32.60.74.421.4
19918.51.42.60.85.919.2
199212.91.92.51.05.924.2


SOURCES: 1993 Fruit and Tree Nuts Situation and Outlook Yearbook, ERS, USDA.

While the data indicate a downward trend in fresh grapefruit and orange consumption, the statistics in Table 1 and Table 2 imply a greater proportion of the Texas citrus crops being consumed as fresh fruit. As the industry continues to "recapture" market share by developing brand recognition for their fresh products, this could prove beneficial to growers, processors and to the Rio Grande Valley.

*Professor and Extension Economist, Associate Professor and Extension Economist, and Research Assistant, respectively. Department of Agricultural Economics, Texas Cooperative Extension, The Texas A&M University System.


Home | Marketing


Educational programs conducted by the Texas Cooperative Extension serve people of all ages regardless of socioeconomic level, race, color, sex, religion, handicap or national origin.