All six states saw significant increases in the share of commercial dairies with at least one female operator

Table 5.2 shows the share of commercial dairies with at least one female operator by state and year. This has very interesting results with all commercial dairies reporting at least one female operator in 2017. The actual share of female operators compared to the share of operators gives us a better representation of demographic changes. The share of female core operators increased from 2002 to 2017 in every state but New Mexico, for which the share of female core operators decreased in 2007 and 2012 but was the same in 2002 as in 2017 . California and New York both increased the number of across each Census year. California had a 27% increase in female core operators from 2002 to 2017 and the share of female core operators in New York increased by 33%. Idaho, Texas, and Wisconsin all had a slight decrease in female core operators in 2007 and 2012, but an increase in 2017 relative to all previous years. Interestingly, when we look at the share of female operators it follows a similar pattern. California and New York both increases in the share of female operators across each Census. Wisconsin, Idaho, and Texas all had slight decreases in 2007 and 2012 relative to the 2002 share, but the share of female operators in 2017 was larger than in 2002 . However, the share of female operators in New Mexico had a small decrease from 2002 to 2017. This suggests that despite the addition of a fourth core operator in the 2017 COA the pattern is not substantially different from the trend in operators and that the trend was not only facilitated by capturing previously unmeasured management activities by women. From here characterizing the trend could be thought of in two ways: 1) this describes an actual increase in women operators playing a more prominent role and/or 2) an increase in their male associates being more likely to recognize and report female operators.

Disentangling exactly what characterizes these trends is impossible, trimming cannabis but it seems likely that the addition of a fourth core operator and the ability for more than one principal operator may have signaled a conversation about representation on the COA for many commercial dairies. Next, it is important to characterize the management characteristics of commercial dairy operators. These results are only characteristic of core operators as this data was not collected for all operators. The COA asked core operators whether their principal occupation was off farm. Overall, a larger share of female core operators had a principal off-farm occupation than male core operators . In California, less than 10% of the male core operators had an off-farm principal occupation, but about 30% of female core operators had an off-farm principal occupation with little variation over time. In other states, like Idaho and Texas, the share of core operators with off-farm principal occupation followed a similar pattern to California by gender. However, there was an 86.6% increase in male core operators with an off-farm principal occupation and an 18% decrease in female core operators in New Mexico. Along a similar thread, a very small portion of female core operators was labeled as principal operators. Now, the definition of a principal operator did change for the 2017 COA, but even with the 2017 addition of more than one core operator being labeled as a principal operator the share of female core operators that are labeled as a principal operator is relatively small. In California, 5% of female core operators are principal operators from 2002to 2012 with a jump in 2017 to 17% with the addition of the fourth core operator .

Idaho, New York, and Wisconsin follow a similar pattern as California with little to no change from 2002 to 2012 and a large jump in 2017. New Mexico and Texas, however, had a decrease from 2002 to 2012 and then a large jump in 2017. In 2017, most states had about 16- 20% of female core operators listed as a principal operator, but New Mexico only had 11%. This research would be incomplete without a description of the presence of spousalrun dairy farms in the U.S. A spousal-run dairy refers to a dairy that is managed by two operators that are married to one another. There is a historic assumption that many dairy farms are run by spouses, however, this research finds that trends in spousal commercial dairy operations does differ greatly by state . For some states, like Wisconsin, New York, and Idaho, a significantly large share of commercial dairy farms was being run by spouses, with over 40% of commercial dairy farms in each state being spousal run. In California, 31% of commercial dairy farms are run by spouses, but New Mexico had relatively few commercial dairies run by spouses and a decrease from 15% to 13% from 2012 to 2017. A large share of female core operators of commercial dairies was married to a principal operator in 2012 and 2017 . In 2017 Texas had the largest share with 80% of female core operators married to a principal operator and then Idaho and Wisconsin both had more than 75%. New Mexico had the smallest share of female core operators married to a principal operator with 48%, but that remains a significant share. Next, age of commercial dairy operators has been a point of discussion for because of the increasing age of dairy farm operators. Table 5.9 presents the share of operators by gender and age group for the Census year and state. Across all state the largest share of female operators was in the less than 50 years old age group with all states following a similar trend of a decreasing share of younger operators and increase in the share of older operators. For male operators the largest share was the less than 50 age group also had the largest share.

There was a significant share of male operators in the larger age group categories across all states with every state, but Wisconsin, have at least 10% of operators being male and over the age of 66. Finally, previous literature suggested that women may be more likely to adopt sustainable-minded practices. Regarding organic production, this seems to be true. In 2017, most organic commercial dairies have at least one female core operator, except in New Mexico for which only 17% of organic commercial dairies have at least one female core operator . The share of organic commercial dairies with at least one female operator is larger than the overall share of commercial dairies with at least one female operator. There was an increase in the share of female core operators that operated an organic commercial from 2007 to 2017 , but this was also with the addition of the fourth operator. There has been a slight increase in the share of organic commercial dairies across all states, but in 2017 all states had less than 15% of commercial dairies with organic production . Organic dairies do tend to have smaller herd sizes, in general and more milk sales revenue per cow. Organic commercial dairies have a larger share of female core operators than commercial dairies overall for all states, except New Mexico. In 2017, organic commercial dairies report at least a 30% or more share of female core operators, except New Mexico which only had an 8% share of female core operators . In every state, except New York, there was an increase in the share of female core operators that manage organic commercial dairy. The share of female core operators that manage an organic dairy decreased by 28% in New York but increased by 66% in Idaho. Next, I turn to explore the relationship between the farm size and gender demographics of farm operators and spousal-run operation. COA is panel data, gardening rack meaning that it is both times series and cross sectional in nature. For my analysis, I utilize a log-linear model with fixed effects in order account for cross-state and cross-time differences. The farm size variables, of the individual farm at time , are the logged dependent variables including Cowsit number of milk cows , TMDit total sales revenue from dairy or milk, and TVPit total value of production. I utilize farm-level operator characteristics variables including a binary variable for the presence of a female core operator , the share female operator on the individual farm , and a binary variable that indicates a spousal run farm variable .

Furthermore, I included a variable to control for a relationship between the age demographics of operators on farm size. MaxAgeit describes the maximum age listed by any given core operator on an individual commercial dairy. Table 5.13 shows the list of variables use in regressions and their corresponding definition. In addition, αi and λt represent the state fixed effect and the time fixed effect, respectively, and uit is an error term. Xit represents a vector of farm operator characteristics and farm management characteristics. logFarmSizeit represents a vector of the logged farm size variables listed above. Equations 1 is the regression equation used to show the relationship between the presence of a female operator and farm size, accounting for age, state, and year influences on farm size. Table 5.14 shows the relative coefficients and standard errors of each regression. Concerning the number of milk cows, the presence of at least one female core operator relates to a decrease in the herd size by about 12.9%, when holding constant for age, state, and year influences on farm size. With herd size, when accounting for the presence of a female operator, the max age corresponds to an increase in the herd size by 0.5%. The presence of at least one female core operator suggests a decrease of the total value of production by 31% and all milk or dairy sales by about 13.4% as well. So, across all farm size measures, there are relatively similar results. A one-year increase of the maximum age of any core operator relates to an increase in the total value of production by about 0.7%. Since 2002, there has been an increase in the share of female core operators and commercial dairies with at least one female operator. The trends in the share of the core operator and the share of operators suggest that these increases are not due to the increase in the number of core operators’ data collected by the COA, but, in fact, an actual increase in female commercial dairy farm management. Furthermore, both the presence of female operators and the share of female operators had significant negative relationship with farm size of commercial dairies across states and time. Furthermore, the presence of spouses running the commercial dairy also shows a significant decrease on the farm size. Due to the significant share of female core operators that are married to principal operators, it seems likely that this trend could be due to change in management and risk incentives of the operators resulting from both spouses’ income being likely determined by the success of the dairy. A garden may be understood as a place where the ‘geography of the mind meets that of the earth’, making it entirely apropos that the vertical garden finds its origins in the monumentally horizontal prairies and farmlands of the American Middle West, where the topography of Professor Stanley Hart White’s creative intellect meets a seemingly endless geography of flatness. White patented the first known green wall in 1938, prototyping the technology in the backyard of his Urbana residence, yet the concept emerges in his writings and drawings as far back as 1931 as a response to the problem of modern garden design. The significance of this invention has ‘still unrealized provocations’3 on the history of gardens and designed landscapes, having been conceived during a trajectory towards modernism in the same geographic region as the Prairie School and American Skyscraper. Although the provenance of this new technological garden is topographically uncanny, the invention itself is pure genius, synthesizing ideas from modern landscape and architectural theory, building sciences, horticulture, and industrial arts alike. White’s vertical garden finds its legal origins in 1937–38, albeit the technological and material precursors to the invention extend back to early horticultural experiments and industrialization of modern building materials.