General Comprehension (UPSC) (Part-II)

Climate change may force the shifting of locations of the existing crops due to:

1. melting of glaciers.

2. water availability and temperature suitability at other locations.

3. poor productivity of crops.

4. wider adaptability of crop plants.

Which of the statements given above are correct?

Climate change poses potentially devastating effects on India's agriculture. While the overall parameters of climate change are increasingly accepted - a 1°C average temperature increase over the next 30 years, sea level rise of less than 10 cm in the same period, and regional monsoon variations and corresponding droughts - the impacts in India are likely to be quite site and crop specific.

Some crops may respond favorably to the changing conditions, others may not. This emphasizes the need to promote agricultural research and create maximum flexibility in the system to permit adaptations.

The key ingredient for "drought proofing" is the managed recharge of aquifers. To ensure continued yields of important staple crops (e.g. wheat), it may also be necessary to shift the locations where these crops are grown, in response to temperature changes as well as to water availability. The latter will be a key factor in making long term investment decisions.

For example, water runoff from the Himalayas is predicted to increase over the next 30 years as glaciers melt, but then decline substantially thereafter. It will be critical to provide incentives to plan for these large-scale shifts in agro-ecological conditions.

India needs to make long term investment in research and development in agriculture. India is likely to experience changed weather patterns in future.

Climate change poses potentially devastating effects on India's agriculture. While the overall parameters of climate change are increasingly accepted - a 1°C average temperature increase over the next 30 years, sea level rise of less than 10 cm in the same period, and regional monsoon variations and corresponding droughts - the impacts in India are likely to be quite site and crop specific.

Some crops may respond favorably to the changing conditions, others may not. This emphasizes the need to promote agricultural research and create maximum flexibility in the system to permit adaptations.

The key ingredient for "drought proofing" is the managed recharge of aquifers. To ensure continued yields of important staple crops (e.g. wheat), it may also be necessary to shift the locations where these crops are grown, in response to temperature changes as well as to water availability. The latter will be a key factor in making long term investment decisions.

For example, water runoff from the Himalayas is predicted to increase over the next 30 years as glaciers melt, but then decline substantially thereafter. It will be critical to provide incentives to plan for these large-scale shifts in agro-ecological conditions.

India needs to make long term investment in research and development in agriculture. India is likely to experience changed weather patterns in future.

1. Reducing the consumption of meat

2. Rapid economic liberalization

3. Reducing the consumerism

4. Modern management practices of livestock

Select the correct answer using the code given below:

It is essential that we mitigate the emissions of greenhouse gases and thus avoid some of the worst impacts of climate change that would take place in coming years and decades. Mitigation would require a major shift in the way we produce and consume energy.

A shift away from overwhelming dependence on fossil fuels is now long overdue, but unfortunately, technological development has been slow and inadequate largely because government policies have not promoted investments in research and development, myopically as a result of relatively low prices of oil.

It is now, therefore, imperative for a country like India treating the opportunity of harnessing renewable energy on a large scale as a national imperative. This country is extremely well endowed with solar, wind and biomass sources of energy. Where we have lagged, unfortunately, is in our ability to develop and to create technological solutions for harnessing these resources.

One particular trajectory for carrying out stringent mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions assessed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) clearly shows the need for ensuring that global emissions of greenhouse gases peak no later than 2015 and reduce rapidly thereafter. The cost associated with such a trajectory is truly modest and would amount, in the estimation of IPCC, to not more than 3 percent of the global GDP in 2030.

In other words, the level of prosperity that the world would have reached without mitigation would at worst be postponed by a few months or a year at the most. This is clearly not a very high price to pay for protecting hundreds of millions of people from the worst risks associated with climate change. Any such effort, however, would require lifestyles to change appropriately also.

Mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions is not a mere technological fix, and clearly requires changes in lifestyles and transformation of a country's economic structure, whereby effective reduction in emissions is brought about, such as through the consumption of much lower quantities of animal protein.

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has determined that the emissions from the livestock sector amount to 18 percent of the total. The reduction of emissions from this source is entirely in the hands of human beings, who have never questioned the impacts that their dietary habits of consuming more and more animal protein are bringing about.

1. Inadequate technological development

2. Inadequate funds for research and development

3. Inadequate availability of alternative sources of energy

Select the correct answer using the code given below:

It is essential that we mitigate the emissions of greenhouse gases and thus avoid some of the worst impacts of climate change that would take place in coming years and decades. Mitigation would require a major shift in the way we produce and consume energy.

A shift away from overwhelming dependence on fossil fuels is now long overdue, but unfortunately, technological development has been slow and inadequate largely because government policies have not promoted investments in research and development, myopically as a result of relatively low prices of oil.

It is now, therefore, imperative for a country like India treating the opportunity of harnessing renewable energy on a large scale as a national imperative. This country is extremely well endowed with solar, wind and biomass sources of energy. Where we have lagged, unfortunately, is in our ability to develop and to create technological solutions for harnessing these resources.

One particular trajectory for carrying out stringent mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions assessed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) clearly shows the need for ensuring that global emissions of greenhouse gases peak no later than 2015 and reduce rapidly thereafter. The cost associated with such a trajectory is truly modest and would amount, in the estimation of IPCC, to not more than 3 percent of the global GDP in 2030.

In other words, the level of prosperity that the world would have reached without mitigation would at worst be postponed by a few months or a year at the most. This is clearly not a very high price to pay for protecting hundreds of millions of people from the worst risks associated with climate change. Any such effort, however, would require lifestyles to change appropriately also.

Mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions is not a mere technological fix, and clearly requires changes in lifestyles and transformation of a country's economic structure, whereby effective reduction in emissions is brought about, such as through the consumption of much lower quantities of animal protein.

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has determined that the emissions from the livestock sector amount to 18 percent of the total. The reduction of emissions from this source is entirely in the hands of human beings, who have never questioned the impacts that their dietary habits of consuming more and more animal protein are bringing about.

1. Reduces expenditure on public health

2. Reduces dependence on livestock

3. Reduces energy requirements

4. Reduces rate of global climate change

Select the correct answer using the code given below:

It is essential that we mitigate the emissions of greenhouse gases and thus avoid some of the worst impacts of climate change that would take place in coming years and decades. Mitigation would require a major shift in the way we produce and consume energy.

A shift away from overwhelming dependence on fossil fuels is now long overdue, but unfortunately, technological development has been slow and inadequate largely because government policies have not promoted investments in research and development, myopically as a result of relatively low prices of oil.

It is now, therefore, imperative for a country like India treating the opportunity of harnessing renewable energy on a large scale as a national imperative. This country is extremely well endowed with solar, wind and biomass sources of energy. Where we have lagged, unfortunately, is in our ability to develop and to create technological solutions for harnessing these resources.

One particular trajectory for carrying out stringent mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions assessed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) clearly shows the need for ensuring that global emissions of greenhouse gases peak no later than 2015 and reduce rapidly thereafter. The cost associated with such a trajectory is truly modest and would amount, in the estimation of IPCC, to not more than 3 percent of the global GDP in 2030.

In other words, the level of prosperity that the world would have reached without mitigation would at worst be postponed by a few months or a year at the most. This is clearly not a very high price to pay for protecting hundreds of millions of people from the worst risks associated with climate change. Any such effort, however, would require lifestyles to change appropriately also.

Mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions is not a mere technological fix, and clearly requires changes in lifestyles and transformation of a country's economic structure, whereby effective reduction in emissions is brought about, such as through the consumption of much lower quantities of animal protein.

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has determined that the emissions from the livestock sector amount to 18 percent of the total. The reduction of emissions from this source is entirely in the hands of human beings, who have never questioned the impacts that their dietary habits of consuming more and more animal protein are bringing about.

It is essential that we mitigate the emissions of greenhouse gases and thus avoid some of the worst impacts of climate change that would take place in coming years and decades. Mitigation would require a major shift in the way we produce and consume energy.

A shift away from overwhelming dependence on fossil fuels is now long overdue, but unfortunately, technological development has been slow and inadequate largely because government policies have not promoted investments in research and development, myopically as a result of relatively low prices of oil.

It is now, therefore, imperative for a country like India treating the opportunity of harnessing renewable energy on a large scale as a national imperative. This country is extremely well endowed with solar, wind and biomass sources of energy. Where we have lagged, unfortunately, is in our ability to develop and to create technological solutions for harnessing these resources.

One particular trajectory for carrying out stringent mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions assessed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) clearly shows the need for ensuring that global emissions of greenhouse gases peak no later than 2015 and reduce rapidly thereafter. The cost associated with such a trajectory is truly modest and would amount, in the estimation of IPCC, to not more than 3 percent of the global GDP in 2030.

In other words, the level of prosperity that the world would have reached without mitigation would at worst be postponed by a few months or a year at the most. This is clearly not a very high price to pay for protecting hundreds of millions of people from the worst risks associated with climate change. Any such effort, however, would require lifestyles to change appropriately also.

Mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions is not a mere technological fix, and clearly requires changes in lifestyles and transformation of a country's economic structure, whereby effective reduction in emissions is brought about, such as through the consumption of much lower quantities of animal protein.

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) has determined that the emissions from the livestock sector amount to 18 percent of the total. The reduction of emissions from this source is entirely in the hands of human beings, who have never questioned the impacts that their dietary habits of consuming more and more animal protein are bringing about.

In recent times, India has grown fast not only compared to its own past but also in comparison with other nations. But there cannot be any room for complacency because it is possible for the Indian economy to develop even faster and also to spread the benefits of this growth more widely than has been done thus far.

Before going into details of the kinds of micro-structural changes that we need to conceptualize and then proceed to implement, it is worthwhile elaborating on the idea of inclusive growth that constitutes the defining concept behind this Government's various economic policies and decisions.

A nation interested in inclusive growth views the same growth differently depending on whether the gains of the growth are heaped primarily on a small segment or shared widely by the population. The latter is cause for celebration but not the former. In other words, growth must not be treated as an end in itself but as an instrument for spreading prosperity to all. India's own past experience and the experience of other nations suggests that growth is necessary for eradicating poverty but it is not a sufficient condition.

In other words, policies for promoting growth need to be complemented with policies to ensure that more and more people join in the growth process and, further, that there are mechanisms in place to redistribute some of the gains to those who are unable to partake in the market process and, hence, get left behind.

A simple way of giving this idea of inclusive growth a sharper form is to measure a nation's progress in terms of the progress of its poorest segment, for instance the bottom 20 per cent of the population. One could measure the per capita income of the bottom quintile of the population and also calculate the growth rate of income; and evaluate our economic success in terms of these measures that pertain to the poorest segment.

This approach is attractive because it does not ignore growth like some of the older heterodox criteria did. It simply looks at the growth of income of the poorest sections of the population. It also ensures that those who are outside of the bottom quintile do not get ignored. If that were done, then those people would in all likelihood drop down into the bottom quintile and so would automatically become a direct target of our policies.

Hence the criterion being suggested here is a statistical summing up of the idea of inclusive growth, which, in turn, leads to two corollaries: to wish that India must strive to achieve high growth and that we must work to ensure that the weakest segments benefit from the growth.

In recent times, India has grown fast not only compared to its own past but also in comparison with other nations. But there cannot be any room for complacency because it is possible for the Indian economy to develop even faster and also to spread the benefits of this growth more widely than has been done thus far.

Before going into details of the kinds of micro-structural changes that we need to conceptualize and then proceed to implement, it is worthwhile elaborating on the idea of inclusive growth that constitutes the defining concept behind this Government's various economic policies and decisions.

A nation interested in inclusive growth views the same growth differently depending on whether the gains of the growth are heaped primarily on a small segment or shared widely by the population. The latter is cause for celebration but not the former. In other words, growth must not be treated as an end in itself but as an instrument for spreading prosperity to all. India's own past experience and the experience of other nations suggests that growth is necessary for eradicating poverty but it is not a sufficient condition.

In other words, policies for promoting growth need to be complemented with policies to ensure that more and more people join in the growth process and, further, that there are mechanisms in place to redistribute some of the gains to those who are unable to partake in the market process and, hence, get left behind.

A simple way of giving this idea of inclusive growth a sharper form is to measure a nation's progress in terms of the progress of its poorest segment, for instance the bottom 20 per cent of the population. One could measure the per capita income of the bottom quintile of the population and also calculate the growth rate of income; and evaluate our economic success in terms of these measures that pertain to the poorest segment.

This approach is attractive because it does not ignore growth like some of the older heterodox criteria did. It simply looks at the growth of income of the poorest sections of the population. It also ensures that those who are outside of the bottom quintile do not get ignored. If that were done, then those people would in all likelihood drop down into the bottom quintile and so would automatically become a direct target of our policies.

Hence the criterion being suggested here is a statistical summing up of the idea of inclusive growth, which, in turn, leads to two corollaries: to wish that India must strive to achieve high growth and that we must work to ensure that the weakest segments benefit from the growth.

According to the author, India's economy has grown but there is no room for complacency as :

1. growth eradicates poverty.

2. growth has resulted in prosperity for all.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

In recent times, India has grown fast not only compared to its own past but also in comparison with other nations. But there cannot be any room for complacency because it is possible for the Indian economy to develop even faster and also to spread the benefits of this growth more widely than has been done thus far.

Before going into details of the kinds of micro-structural changes that we need to conceptualize and then proceed to implement, it is worthwhile elaborating on the idea of inclusive growth that constitutes the defining concept behind this Government's various economic policies and decisions.

A nation interested in inclusive growth views the same growth differently depending on whether the gains of the growth are heaped primarily on a small segment or shared widely by the population. The latter is cause for celebration but not the former. In other words, growth must not be treated as an end in itself but as an instrument for spreading prosperity to all. India's own past experience and the experience of other nations suggests that growth is necessary for eradicating poverty but it is not a sufficient condition.

In other words, policies for promoting growth need to be complemented with policies to ensure that more and more people join in the growth process and, further, that there are mechanisms in place to redistribute some of the gains to those who are unable to partake in the market process and, hence, get left behind.

A simple way of giving this idea of inclusive growth a sharper form is to measure a nation's progress in terms of the progress of its poorest segment, for instance the bottom 20 per cent of the population. One could measure the per capita income of the bottom quintile of the population and also calculate the growth rate of income; and evaluate our economic success in terms of these measures that pertain to the poorest segment.

This approach is attractive because it does not ignore growth like some of the older heterodox criteria did. It simply looks at the growth of income of the poorest sections of the population. It also ensures that those who are outside of the bottom quintile do not get ignored. If that were done, then those people would in all likelihood drop down into the bottom quintile and so would automatically become a direct target of our policies.

Hence the criterion being suggested here is a statistical summing up of the idea of inclusive growth, which, in turn, leads to two corollaries: to wish that India must strive to achieve high growth and that we must work to ensure that the weakest segments benefit from the growth.

According to the passage, an oil company can make greater profits, if a transparent formula for petrol pricing is announced every fortnight or month, by :

1. promoting its sales.

2. undertaking innovation.

3. cutting costs.

4. selling its equity shares at higher prices.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

It is easy for the government to control State-owned companies through nods and winks. So what really needs to be done as a first step is to put petrol pricing on a transparent formula - if the price of crude is x and the exchange rate y, then every month or fortnight, the government announces a maximum price of petrol, which anybody can work out from the x and the y.

The rule has to be worked out to make sure that the oil-marketing companies can, in general, cover their costs. This will mean that if one company can innovate and cut costs, it will make greater profits. Hence, firms will be more prone to innovate and be efficient under this system. Once the rule is announced, there should be no interference by the government.

If this is done for a while, private companies will re-enter this market. And once a sufficient number of them are in the fray, we can remove the rule-based pricing and leave it truly to the market (subject to, of course, the usual regulations of anti-trust and other competition laws).