Directions : Read the following passage and answer the questions given below.…
2021
Directions : Read the following passage and answer the questions given below. Some words are highlighted to help you answer some of the questions.
Tropical deforestation is one of the great challenges facing humanity. If we don’t slow it down soon, the chances of avoiding disastrous climate change, species loss and the disruption of indigenous and traditional people’s cultures grow slimmer. And this rapid deceleration will be possible only if the governments, farm sectors, rural communities, businesses and civil societies of tropical forest regions devise and implement effective strategies. In the long term, the goal of taming deforestation must be embedded in public policies, programs, business transactions and culture. To put it bluntly, political leaders who embrace the goal of taming deforestation must be electable. The jurisdictional approach can help to translate unilateral corporate deforestation pledges into collaborative agreements with local governments and farm sectors, building the political case for slowing deforestation.
In a jurisdictional approach, the unit of performance is a landscape with policy-relevant boundaries – political geographies such as a state, province, district or an entire nation. This is the unit of performance that can effectively bring together multi-stakeholders on the appropriate pathway to sustainable development. In Brazil – a shining example of a successful jurisdictional approach to slow tropical deforestation – progress has been possible because political forces were pushing in the right direction. The approach was jurisdictional because success was defined as a decline in deforestation for the entire Brazilian Amazon region and for all types of land use. The Government used command-and-control measures to slow deforestation, but it also broadened its political base by paving its all-weather motorways providing access to Pacific markets. It also attracted new low-carbon industries to set up shop through innovative incentive systems.
The stage is also set to attract private financial investments into new low-carbon industries and farmer support programs as the risks associated with rampant deforestation, illegal land-use practices and labor infractions are diminished. In many ways, a political case for slowing Amazon deforestation was handed to President Lula on a silver platter. He came into office in 2003 with a mandate to deepen Brazil’s international credibility just as Amazon deforestation was skyrocketing, triggering international outrage and a diplomatic headache for the new president. It was in this favorable political context that Lula empowered his environment minister to draw on the most powerful branches of the government – including the army and central bank – to crack down on illegal deforestation and logging in the Amazon. These formal designations further weakened the land-grabbing schemes that were driving deforestation.
What consequence did the use of command-and-control mechanisms by the government have?
- A.
It resulted in environmental protection by halting deforestation.
- B.
It contributed to the establishment of new low-carbon industries.
- C.
It successfully brought individuals together on the correct course.
- D.
Only (a) and (b)
- E.
Only (b) and (c)
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: A
Concept: In an RC question that asks for the consequence of one SPECIFIC government action (here, command-and-control measures), first identify EXACTLY which clause of the passage assigns each outcome to which action. A statement that is true of the passage overall but is credited to a DIFFERENT action must be excluded, even though the outcome itself did happen.
Application — testing each statement against the passage:
“It resulted in environmental protection by halting deforestation.” — The passage says, in the very same clause, that the Government “used command-and-control measures to slow deforestation.” This outcome is directly and explicitly tied to command-and-control. Supported.
“It contributed to the establishment of new low-carbon industries.” — The passage introduces this with a separate clause, “It also attracted new low-carbon industries to set up shop through innovative incentive systems” — crediting a distinct government tool (incentive systems), not command-and-control. Not a consequence of command-and-control.
“It successfully brought individuals together on the correct course.” — Bringing stakeholders together is credited earlier in the passage to the jurisdictional approach in general (“bring together multi-stakeholders on the appropriate pathway”), never to command-and-control specifically. Not supported here.
Result: Among the three individual statements, only the one crediting command-and-control with slowing deforestation is a consequence of command-and-control specifically; the other two outcomes are real passage facts but are credited to different government tools, so they cannot be selected as effects of command-and-control.
Cross-check / contrast:
The option pairing the deforestation-slowing statement with the low-carbon-industries statement over-reaches: it borrows an outcome the passage explicitly assigns to the incentive-system initiative and folds it into the command-and-control answer.
The option pairing the low-carbon-industries statement with the stakeholder statement fails on both halves — neither outcome is credited to command-and-control anywhere in the passage.
The low-carbon-industries statement and the stakeholder statement, taken alone as single options, each describe something the passage says happened — but under a different initiative than the one the question asks about — so neither can stand alone as the answer either.