Policy Impact Analysis - 117/HR/7813

Bill Overview

Title: Cacao Tree Health Initiative Act of 2022

Description: This bill establishes a research and extension grant program for a cacao tree health initiative. Specifically, the bill authorizes the Department of Agriculture to provide competitive grants for developing and disseminating science-based tools and treatments to combat plant pests that affect cacao trees; establishing an integrated pest management programs for cacao trees in areas affected by or at risk of being affected by such pests; surveying and collecting data on cacao tree production, health, and markets; investigating cacao tree biology, ecology, genomics, and production systems; conducting research on factors that may contribute to, or be associated with, resilient cacao production systems; and conducting research on factors that may contribute to, or be associated with, serious threats to cacao trees, including the sublethal effects of insecticides, herbicides, and fungicides on beneficial insects and cacao tree growth.

Sponsors: Rep. Kahele, Kaiali'i [D-HI-2]

Target Audience

Population: People involved in cacao production and agriculture globally

Estimated Size: 50000

Reasoning

Simulated Interviews

Agricultural Scientist (Houston, TX)

Age: 38 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy presents a great opportunity for U.S. researchers to contribute to important global agricultural advancements.
  • I'm hopeful for collaboration opportunities with international researchers.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 8 7

Chocolate Factory Manager (Hershey, PA)

Age: 45 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • The policy could provide some stability in cacao sources, which is always beneficial for production planning.
  • I'm cautiously optimistic about long term impacts on sourcing strategies.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 8 7

Chocolate Brand Owner (San Francisco, CA)

Age: 56 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Any initiative that can stabilize or improve cacao supply is of interest to my business.
  • Support for cacao farms through research aligns with our ethical sourcing mission.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 9 8
Year 3 9 8
Year 5 9 8
Year 10 10 8
Year 20 9 8

Consumer (New York, NY)

Age: 30 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 20/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I doubt this policy would directly influence me, but anything helping farmers and securing chocolate supply sounds good.
  • Chocolate pricing and availability haven't felt unstable to me.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 7
Year 2 7 7
Year 3 7 7
Year 5 7 7
Year 10 8 7
Year 20 7 7

Policy Advisor in Agriculture (Washington DC)

Age: 47 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 2.0 years

Commonness: 4/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This initiative should build global competence in cacao health management, indirectly helping U.S. markets reliant on cacao.
  • It may influence future U.S. agricultural policy priorities.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 7 6
Year 3 7 6
Year 5 6 6
Year 10 6 6
Year 20 6 6

Supply Chain Analyst (Chicago, IL)

Age: 33 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 5/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • This policy might ease some supply chain complexities and stabilize pricing.
  • It offers a positive outlook for future planning and sourcing strategies.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 7 5
Year 3 7 5
Year 5 8 5
Year 10 8 5
Year 20 7 5

Retired (Los Angeles, CA)

Age: 62 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 8

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 15/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • I think supporting cacao farming is wonderful but I'm not sure how directly this impacts local products or prices.
  • It's good to know research is being conducted for global good.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 8
Year 2 8 8
Year 3 8 8
Year 5 8 8
Year 10 8 8
Year 20 8 8

Economist (Philadelphia, PA)

Age: 29 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 7

Duration of Impact: 5.0 years

Commonness: 3/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Increased research funding can stabilize the chocolate market by addressing underlying agricultural issues.
  • As an economist, I see great value in global collaboration supported by this policy.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 8 7
Year 2 8 7
Year 3 8 7
Year 5 9 7
Year 10 9 7
Year 20 8 7

Food Science Professor (Miami, FL)

Age: 52 | Gender: female

Wellbeing Before Policy: 6

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 2/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • There are mutual benefits in participating in global research networks made possible by initiatives like this.
  • Long-term, it could increase opportunities for U.S. science faculties interested in cacao health.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 7 6
Year 2 8 6
Year 3 8 6
Year 5 8 6
Year 10 9 6
Year 20 8 6

Chocolate Blogger (Boulder, CO)

Age: 41 | Gender: male

Wellbeing Before Policy: 5

Duration of Impact: 10.0 years

Commonness: 10/20

Statement of Opinion:

  • Increased cacao health initiatives could spice up industry discourse and provide more content for my blogs.
  • I'm excited about potential changes in supplier profiles and market dynamics.

Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)

Year With Policy Without Policy
Year 1 6 5
Year 2 6 5
Year 3 6 5
Year 5 6 5
Year 10 7 5
Year 20 6 5

Cost Estimates

Year 1: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)

Year 2: $10500000 (Low: $8500000, High: $12500000)

Year 3: $11000000 (Low: $9000000, High: $13000000)

Year 5: $12000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $14000000)

Year 10: $15000000 (Low: $12000000, High: $18000000)

Year 100: $30000000 (Low: $25000000, High: $35000000)

Key Considerations