Today’s developing economic use much less energy per capita than developed countries such as the United States did at similar incomes, showing the potential for lower-carbon growth. Adaptation and mitigation need to be integrated into a climate-smart development strategy that increases resilience, reduces the threat of further global warming, and improves development outcomes. Adaptation and mitigation measures can advance development, and prosperity can raise incomes and foster better institutions. A healthier population living in better-built houses and with access to bank loans and social security is better equipped to deal with a changing climate and its consequences. Advancing robust, resilient development policies that’ promote adaptation is needed today because changes, in the climate, already begun, will increase even in the short term.
Consider the following assumptions
With reference to the passage, which of the above assumptions is/are valid?
All three assumptions are valid with reference to the passage.
Assumption 1: Sustainable economic growth demands the use of creative potential of man.
The passage highlights the "potential for lower-carbon growth" and the necessity of a "climate-smart development strategy" to enhance resilience. Achieving such innovative and resilient development pathways requires strategic thinking, problem-solving, and the application of human ingenuity and creative potential to devise sustainable solutions.
Assumption 2: Intensive agriculture can lead to ecological backlash.
The passage advocates for integrating adaptation and mitigation into a "climate-smart development strategy" to improve "development outcomes" and reduce the threat of global warming. While specific agricultural practices are not mentioned, the overarching theme of "climate-smart" and "resilient" development implicitly acknowledges that intensive human activities, if not managed sustainably, can result in ecological degradation or "backlash." Such outcomes would undermine development goals and increase vulnerability to climate change, contradicting the passage's call for robust policies.
Assumption 3: Spread of economic prosperity can adversely affect the ecology and environment.
The passage contrasts the lower energy consumption per capita in today's developing economies with that of developed countries at similar income levels historically, indicating a "potential for lower-carbon growth." This comparison implies that the traditional path to prosperity, as observed in developed nations, often involved high energy use and associated environmental impacts. The emphasis on a "climate-smart development strategy" and the need to reduce "the threat of further global warming" further suggest that unmanaged or conventional economic expansion can indeed have detrimental effects on the ecology and environment.
Options A, B, and C are incorrect because they selectively validate only one or two of the assumptions. Based on the inferences drawn from the passage, all three assumptions are considered valid, as elaborated above.