#12 - Global Reference, Must Be True, Author's Perspective

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

The correct answer choice is (A).

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice.

Answer choice (B):

Answer choice (C):

Answer choice (D):

Answer choice (E):


This explanation is still in progress. Please post any questions below!

[eh090]

Hi, I'm a bit confused about why E is incorrect.

It seems we can infer E from line 52-54.

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi eh,

Answer choice (E) is very close to correct. It's one of those incredibly tempting answer choices that is part right, part wrong. The passage tells us that treaties that allot fixed amounts of water favor heavy users of the waterways. However, it does not tell us anything about what the countries themselves favor. Maybe countries that are heavy users would still favor a proportional system as it would increase global stability overall. We don't know for sure based on the passage. We can support that those treaties favor countries that are heavy users, but we don't have any information on what those countries themselves would favor.

Hope that helps!
Rachael

[caseyh123]

What is the problem with answer c?
"The Draft Articles need to be reformulated to take into account the effects of water usage on entire river systems instead of focusing on the individual segments of such systems that lie entirely within each nation's borders."

Is it because it talks about the effects of water usage on river systems rather than the effects of environmental changes?

[KelseyWoods]

Hi Casey!

Answer choice (C) is incorrect because the Draft Articles already do take into account the effects of water usage on entire river systems instead of focusing on the individual segments of such systems that lie entirely within each nation's borders. Lines 25-30 state: "They prescribe that treaties should uphold several broad precepts: that one nation’s use of a watercourse should not cause appreciable harm to another nation, that every nation’s use of the watercourse should be equitable and reasonable, and that nations should work for the protection of ecosystems." So the Draft Articles are all about how what one country is doing to the river within its borders might have an impact on other nations. The inadequacies with the Draft Articles, as outlined in the passage, have more to do with preparing for future environmental changes and responding to potential large fluctuations in river flows that may occur because of these environmental changes.

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey

[christinecwt]

Hi Team - may i know why Answer Choice D is wrong?

[Robert Carroll]

christinecwt,

The third paragraph of the passage expresses a concern that abiding by the principles of the Draft Articles will be inadequate for imminent situations where water availability is affected by global warming. The Draft Articles themselves do not incorporate the necessary flexibility in adapting to changing water availability, and this is the author's main point in the passage. There is no indication that any existing treaties have solved this problem - the author is worried that obeying the strictures of the Draft Articles will not be sufficient to solve that problem. Thus, not only is there no mention of an actual treaty that has solved this problem, but the author thinks reliance on the flawed Draft Articles will still not go far enough.

Ultimately, we can say that answer choice (D) is wrong because there is no mention of any treaty that has solved the problem.

Robert Carroll

[Angelicanb95]

Hi, can someone please explain why A is correct? Likes 48-49 say that “once specific water rights are allocated along a river in accordance with the Draft Articles, nations would have no mechanism for coping with a drastic reduction in the flow of the river.” I read that to mean, it would NOT be possible for nations to devise treaties that uphold the broad precepts embraced in the Draft Articles while also permitting them to adapt to large fluctuations in river flows.

[Jeff Wren]

Hi Angelicanb,

As always with reading comprehension, it's critical to be clear on exactly how the author feels about the topic(s) being discussed in the passage. Here, the author agrees with the goals/principles of the Draft Articles (which are described in lines 25-31), but criticizes the Draft Articles for not being flexible enough to deal with environmental changes.

Understanding the author's mixed/nuanced view of the Draft Articles (which is best captured in lines 32-37) is critical to correctly answering questions 8, 11, 12, and 14.

For question 12, the lines that you mention (48-49) do show the problem/limitation that they author has with the Draft Articles (namely, that they are not able to adapt to changes in the environment, such as changing river flow). However, the author then goes on to provide possible solutions to this problem (lines 54-62), such as treaties using proportional shares of water rather than fixed allotments or treaties having contingency plans.

When Answer A says that "it is possible to devise treaties that uphold the broad precepts embraced in the Draft Articles and that also permit countries to adapt to large fluctuations in rivers flows," this does not mean by using the Draft Articles as they currently exist.

What this answer means it that it is possible to create treaties that match the broad goals of the Draft Articles (such as not harming other nations, equitable use of watercourse, etc. described in lines 25-31) while still being able to be flexible. The author would definitely agree with this statement because that is the author's whole reason for recommending the possible solutions at the end of the passage. In other words, the author is basically saying, "Let's take the goals that are in the Draft Articles, which are admirable, but also include flexibility provisions in the treaties to allow them to be able to deal with environmental changes."