Assertion (A) : In the world as a whole, the environment has degraded during…

Concept

In an assertion–reason item, truth and explanatory force are separate tests. After judging both statements independently, ask whether the reason as worded states the causal relationship that makes the assertion follow; two trends can both be true without one statement functioning as the other’s correct explanation.

Environmental impact is shaped by population together with per-capita consumption, production systems, technology, land use, and governance. Population growth can intensify pressure, but the factual statement that population grew does not itself state how the observed environmental degradation was produced.

Application

The assertion is true: multiple global indicators show environmental deterioration over recent decades, including pollution, habitat loss, and resource depletion.

The reason is also true: world population increased substantially during the period. Yet (R) merely reports that demographic trend; it does not state the causal relation between population, consumption, production, and environmental impact that would explain (A). Thus the two statements are true, but the wording of (R) does not function as the correct explanation of (A).

Contrast

• “(A) is correct, (R) is correct and (R) is the correct explanation of (A)” treats the demographic trend statement as though it stated the causal relation behind the environmental trend.

• “(A) is correct, (R) is correct and (R) is not the correct explanation of (A)” separates the truth of both trends from the missing causal relationship in the wording of (R).

• “(A) is correct, but (R) is false” conflicts with the documented substantial growth of world population during the period.

• “(A) is false, but (R) is correct” conflicts with the widely observed global deterioration in multiple environmental indicators.

Cross-check

A demographic count becomes an environmental explanation only when linked to resource demand, consumption patterns, production, technology, and resulting pressures. Those mediating links are absent from (R), so its factual truth does not make it the stated explanation of (A).

Therefore, both (A) and (R) are correct, but (R) is not the correct explanation of (A), matching the keyed result for the June 2010 UGC NET Paper 1 item.