gong2022 2021考研初试12月26~27日举行，2021考研初试环境(点击检察》》2021考研初试真题及谜底解析专题)，第一时候为考生供给考研真题谜底及谜底解析内容，同时考研考研西席将为考生供给视频直播解析。直播进口|考研真题谜底专区
Text 2
Last year marked the third year in a row of that Indonesia’s bleak rate ofdeforestation has slowed in pace. One reason for the turnaround may be thecountry’s antipoverty program.
In 2007, Indonesia started phasing in a program that gives money to itspoorest residents under certain conditions, such as requiring people to keepkids in school or get regular medical care. Called conditional cash transfers orCCTs, these social assistance programs are designed to reduce inequality andbreak the cycle of poverty. They’re already used in dozens of countriesworldwide. In Indonesia, the program has provided enough food and medicine tosubstantially reduce severe growth problems among children.
But CCT programs don’t generally consider effects on the environment. Infact, poverty alleviation and environmental protection are often viewed asconflicting goals, says Paul Ferraro, an economist at Johns HopkinsUniversity.
That’s because economic growth can be correlated with environmentaldegradation, while protecting the environment is sometimes correlated withgreater poverty. However, those correlations don’t prove cause and effect. Theonly previous study analyzing causality, based on an area in Mexico that hadinstituted CCTs, supported the traditional view. There, as people got moremoney, some of them may have more cleared land for cattle to raise for meat,Ferraro says.
Such programs do not have to negatively affect the environment, though.Ferrarowanted to see if Indonesia’s poverty-alleviation program was affectingdeforestation. Indonesia has the third-largest area of tropical forest in theworld and one of the highest deforestation rates.
Ferraroanalyzed satellite data showing annual forest loss from 2008 to 2012— including during Indonesia’s phase— in of the antipoverty program — in 7,468forested villages across 15 provinces and multiple islands. The duo separatedthe effects of
the CCT program on forest loss from other factors, like weatherand macroeconomic changes, which were also affecting forest loss. With that, “wesee that the program is associated with a 30 percent reduction indeforestation,” Ferraro says.
That’s likely because the rural poor are using the money as makeshiftinsurance policies against inclement weather, Ferraro says. Typically, if rainsare delayed, people may clear land to plant more rice to supplement theirharvests. With the CCTs, individuals instead can use the money to supplementtheir harvests.
Whether this research translates elsewhere is anybody’s guess. Ferrarosuggests the importance of growing rice and market access. And regardless oftransferability, the study shows that what’s good for people may also be goodfor the value of the avoided deforestation just for carbon dioxide emissionsalone is more than the program costs.
26. According to the first two paragraphs, CCT programs aim to ____.
A. lower deforestation rates
B. facilitate health care problem
C. improve local education systems
D. help poor families get better off
27. The study based on an area in Mexico is cited to show that ____.
A. cattle rearing has been a major means of livelihood for the poor
B. economic growth tends to cause environmental degradation
C. CCT programs have helped preserve traditional lifestyles
D. anti-poverty efforts require the participation of local farmers
28. In his study about Indonesia, Ferraro intends to find out ____.
A. the relation of CCTs to its forest loss
B. its annual rate of poverty alleviation
C. the role of its forests in climate change
D. its acceptance level of CCTs
29. According to Ferraro, the CCT program in Indonesia is most valuable inthat ____.
A. it can protect the environment
B. it can boost grain production
C. it will reduce regional inequality
D. it will benefit other Asian countries
30. What is the text centered on?
A. The process of a study
B. The transferability of a study
C. The effects of a program
D. The debates over a program
【准确谜底】21. D 22. B 23. A 24. A 25. C
【解析】
26.准确谜底为D。标题问的是“按照前两段，CCT项目旨在____。”CCT为专着名词，可定位至原文第二段第二句，指“conditional cashtransfers”(有前提的现金转移)，该句大意为“这些社会支援规划旨在削减不服等，冲破贫苦的恶性轮回”，因此可对应D选项“帮忙贫苦家庭变得加倍富饶”。首段提到印尼丛林砍伐率持续降低的缘由是该国的反贫苦项目(antipovertyprogram)，是以A选项“低落丛林砍伐率”是反贫苦项目标详细表现，而非目标;B选项“改良康健问题”及C选项“改进本地教诲体系”在定位区域内均无表现。
27.准确谜底为B。标题问的是“援用基于墨西哥某地域的钻研是为了表白____。”本题是一道典范的例证题。例证逻辑的考核重点就是区别论点和论据。按照题干关头词“anarea in Mexico”定位至原文第四段第三句，该句为例子地点处。连系前一句的概念可知，经济增加(economic, greaterpoverty)与情况(environment)的相干性其实不能证实其因果瓜葛。而基于墨西哥一个设立CCT项目标地域的钻研是此前独一一项阐发因果瓜葛的钻研，并支撑了传统概念(traditionalview)，及上文提到的相干性。是以可对应B选项“经济增加常常致使情况退化”。A选项“养牛(cattlerearing)一向是贫民的重要餬口手腕”作为墨西哥例子的详细细节，非概念显现;C选项意为“CCT项目帮忙庇护传统的糊口方法”，原文未提到“traditionallifestyles”;D选项“反贫苦事情必要本地农夫的介入”属于无中生有。
28.准确谜底为A。标题问的是“费拉罗关于印尼的钻研旨在发明____。”原文第五段第二句提到费拉罗钻研印尼的目标，“想看看印尼的扶贫项目是不是会影响丛林砍伐。”可直接对应A选项“CCT项目与丛林削减的瓜葛”。B选项“每一年的扶贫速率”是针对原文第六段中“annualforest loss(每一年的丛林削减)”举行滋扰;C选项“丛林在天气变革中的感化”及D选项“CCT项目标接管水平”属无中生有。
29.准确谜底为A。标题问的是“费拉罗认为，印度尼西亚的CCT项目最有价值的缘由是____。”本题考核因果逻辑。原文第六段记实了费加罗针对印尼钻研的详细数据。第七段诠释了印尼扶贫项目有助于削减丛林采伐的缘由。第八段末端提到“抛开可转移性不谈，钻研表白，有利于人类的工具也会有利于防止砍伐丛林的价值(thevalue of the avoided deforestation)”，并提到了二氧化碳排放(carbon dioxideemissions)，是以可对应A选项“可以或许庇护情况”。B选项“促成谷物出产”为前两段的部门信息，不合适本题定位区域;C选项“削减区域不服等”属无中生有;D选项“对亚洲其他国度有利”为尾段前半部门信息，并不是该项目最有价值的缘由。
30.准确谜底为C。本题为大旨题，必要总结文章中间。经由过程梳理文章信息可知，焦点论述工具为CCT项目，并环抱其对付脱贫、经济成长及情况庇护的影响开展阐述，是以可对应C选项“一个项目标影响”。A选项为“一项钻研的进程”，原文提到了费拉罗的钻研目标和成果，而并未对其进程举行胪陈;B选项“一项钻研的可转移性”为尾段部门信息，没法总结全文;D选项“一个项目标争辩”没法从原文推知。
