DISCUSSION: The author gives their main point in lines 8-12. They want to give good advice to policy makers so that those policy makers can make good decisions.
Note that the author is not giving policy recommendations. Instead they are merely discussing whether a couple of common arguments are correct.
___________
- This is a trap answer. The author is making policy arguments, but they have not made any proposals.
Policy argument: Environmentalists are wrong to say that forests produce oxygen on balance.
Policy proposal: We should therefore end all restrictions on logging in the amazon. - A scientific solution would be a practical proposal. Just as in A, this is wrong because the author proposed no specific actions we should take. Instead they merely discussed whether a couple of common arguments are correct.
- The economic resource here would be forests. The author didn’t suggest any new ways of using forests.
E.g. new way: Rather than logging the forest, we should bring in revenue using tourists and licensing of discoveries to pharmaceutical companies. - The author seems to be doing the opposite. Their whole argument supports the idea that we could probably safely log more forests than we currently do.
- CORRECT. The topic is: how to regulate logging in tropical forests. The points of view are: forests provide oxygen (paragraph 2), and that preservation of biodiversity requires stricter policy (paragraph 3). The author argues against both views.
Want a free Reading Comp lesson?
Get a free sample of the Reading Comprehension Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving RC questions
Leave a Reply