Test: Reading Comprehension - 5 - Judiciary Exams MCQ

Hunger is about people; it is also about oppression and inequalities. Hunger is about corrupt politicians and corrupt bureaucracy; it is also about power and powerlessness. Hunger is about borrowed ideas of science and technology and development which have not worked in local realities; it is also about the disintegration of local communities; about loss of values, traditions, culture and spirituality. Ending hunger is the important unfinished agenda of this century and of independent India.

The world as a whole has achieved dramatic increase in food production, enough to cover the minimum needs of the projected population globally. Yet hunger and malnutrition persist in alarming measure in India and other Third World countries. The World Bank’s estimates are that over a billion people in the world have problems of food security. The Food and Agriculture Organization estimates point out that in the coming decades, 64 developing countries out of 117 will be unable to feed their population adequately and that 38 out of these developing countries will be able to feed less than half of their population adequately.

India believes that its problems of hunger and food security are almost over because of the significant increase in productivity achieved through the use of new technologies of the Green Revolution. Food grains per capita increased from 395 grams in 1951 to 466 grams in 1993. There are reports about surplus stocks used for exports; also reports about surplus stock rotting because there are not enough storage facilities. And yet in such a situation, we have millions who go hungry and who die a silent death of starvation and malnutrition. In 1974, the FAO organized the first World Food Conference, where its members took a pledge to end hunger by 1984. Henry Kissinger, then US Secretary of State vowed at the meeting that “within a decade, no man, woman or child will go to bed hungry”. A quarter of a century later, more people are dying of hunger. The FAO organized its second World Food Conference in 1985 which re-affirmed its moral commitment “to achieve the goal of ensuring that all people at all times are in a position to produce the basic food they need.” In 1996, yet again the FAO organized its third global conference on food security with much fanfare. The result of this third summit meeting was another declaration, called the Rome Declaration, affirming once again the right of everyone to be free of hunger. The summit also offered an action plan to reduce the numbers of hungry people by half within two decades – a more modest commitment than that made by Kissinger a quarter of a century ago.

In spite of the three global conferences, the future of food security looks as bleak as ever. Fidel Castro, communist leader, who also attended the third FAO summit meeting, pointed out “Hunger is the offspring of injustice and the unequal distribution of wealth. Indeed, the history of hunger has always been which has marginalized the poor and deprived them of the means to eat”.

The NGO’s and people’ representatives who had also gathered for this summit meeting said in their final declaration, ”Ensuring food security demands an approach to agricultural policy that is in almost every respect the reverse of that adopted by the Summit delegates.” They suggested that instead of pursuing policies that encourage corporate agriculture, there should be policies in labour, organic production, reducing or eliminating the use of pesticides and other agro-chemicals. And instead of locking farmers into a global economy over which they have no control, they suggested that resources be shifted in favour of local farming and regional food producers and food systems.

Q. 

What is the major point in the NGOs’ stand after the third FAO summit?

Hunger is about people; it is also about oppression and inequalities. Hunger is about corrupt politicians and corrupt bureaucracy; it is also about power and powerlessness. Hunger is about borrowed ideas of science and technology and development which have not worked in local realities; it is also about the disintegration of local communities; about loss of values, traditions, culture and spirituality. Ending hunger is the important unfinished agenda of this century and of independent India.

The world as a whole has achieved dramatic increase in food production, enough to cover the minimum needs of the projected population globally. Yet hunger and malnutrition persist in alarming measure in India and other Third World countries. The World Bank’s estimates are that over a billion people in the world have problems of food security. The Food and Agriculture Organization estimates point out that in the coming decades, 64 developing countries out of 117 will be unable to feed their population adequately and that 38 out of these developing countries will be able to feed less than half of their population adequately.

India believes that its problems of hunger and food security are almost over because of the significant increase in productivity achieved through the use of new technologies of the Green Revolution. Food grains per capita increased from 395 grams in 1951 to 466 grams in 1993. There are reports about surplus stocks used for exports; also reports about surplus stock rotting because there are not enough storage facilities. And yet in such a situation, we have millions who go hungry and who die a silent death of starvation and malnutrition. In 1974, the FAO organized the first World Food Conference, where its members took a pledge to end hunger by 1984. Henry Kissinger, then US Secretary of State vowed at the meeting that “within a decade, no man, woman or child will go to bed hungry”. A quarter of a century later, more people are dying of hunger. The FAO organized its second World Food Conference in 1985 which re-affirmed its moral commitment “to achieve the goal of ensuring that all people at all times are in a position to produce the basic food they need.” In 1996, yet again the FAO organized its third global conference on food security with much fanfare. The result of this third summit meeting was another declaration, called the Rome Declaration, affirming once again the right of everyone to be free of hunger. The summit also offered an action plan to reduce the numbers of hungry people by half within two decades – a more modest commitment than that made by Kissinger a quarter of a century ago.

In spite of the three global conferences, the future of food security looks as bleak as ever. Fidel Castro, communist leader, who also attended the third FAO summit meeting, pointed out “Hunger is the offspring of injustice and the unequal distribution of wealth. Indeed, the history of hunger has always been which has marginalized the poor and deprived them of the means to eat”.

The NGO’s and people’ representatives who had also gathered for this summit meeting said in their final declaration, ”Ensuring food security demands an approach to agricultural policy that is in almost every respect the reverse of that adopted by the Summit delegates.” They suggested that instead of pursuing policies that encourage corporate agriculture, there should be policies in labour, organic production, reducing or eliminating the use of pesticides and other agro-chemicals. And instead of locking farmers into a global economy over which they have no control, they suggested that resources be shifted in favour of local farming and regional food producers and food systems.

Q. 

All of the following are instances of commercial agriculture EXCEPT

Hunger is about people; it is also about oppression and inequalities. Hunger is about corrupt politicians and corrupt bureaucracy; it is also about power and powerlessness. Hunger is about borrowed ideas of science and technology and development which have not worked in local realities; it is also about the disintegration of local communities; about loss of values, traditions, culture and spirituality. Ending hunger is the important unfinished agenda of this century and of independent India.

The world as a whole has achieved dramatic increase in food production, enough to cover the minimum needs of the projected population globally. Yet hunger and malnutrition persist in alarming measure in India and other Third World countries. The World Bank’s estimates are that over a billion people in the world have problems of food security. The Food and Agriculture Organization estimates point out that in the coming decades, 64 developing countries out of 117 will be unable to feed their population adequately and that 38 out of these developing countries will be able to feed less than half of their population adequately.

India believes that its problems of hunger and food security are almost over because of the significant increase in productivity achieved through the use of new technologies of the Green Revolution. Food grains per capita increased from 395 grams in 1951 to 466 grams in 1993. There are reports about surplus stocks used for exports; also reports about surplus stock rotting because there are not enough storage facilities. And yet in such a situation, we have millions who go hungry and who die a silent death of starvation and malnutrition. In 1974, the FAO organized the first World Food Conference, where its members took a pledge to end hunger by 1984. Henry Kissinger, then US Secretary of State vowed at the meeting that “within a decade, no man, woman or child will go to bed hungry”. A quarter of a century later, more people are dying of hunger. The FAO organized its second World Food Conference in 1985 which re-affirmed its moral commitment “to achieve the goal of ensuring that all people at all times are in a position to produce the basic food they need.” In 1996, yet again the FAO organized its third global conference on food security with much fanfare. The result of this third summit meeting was another declaration, called the Rome Declaration, affirming once again the right of everyone to be free of hunger. The summit also offered an action plan to reduce the numbers of hungry people by half within two decades – a more modest commitment than that made by Kissinger a quarter of a century ago.

In spite of the three global conferences, the future of food security looks as bleak as ever. Fidel Castro, communist leader, who also attended the third FAO summit meeting, pointed out “Hunger is the offspring of injustice and the unequal distribution of wealth. Indeed, the history of hunger has always been which has marginalized the poor and deprived them of the means to eat”.

The NGO’s and people’ representatives who had also gathered for this summit meeting said in their final declaration, ”Ensuring food security demands an approach to agricultural policy that is in almost every respect the reverse of that adopted by the Summit delegates.” They suggested that instead of pursuing policies that encourage corporate agriculture, there should be policies in labour, organic production, reducing or eliminating the use of pesticides and other agro-chemicals. And instead of locking farmers into a global economy over which they have no control, they suggested that resources be shifted in favour of local farming and regional food producers and food systems.

Q. 

What is the basic paradox of India’s food system?

Hunger is about people; it is also about oppression and inequalities. Hunger is about corrupt politicians and corrupt bureaucracy; it is also about power and powerlessness. Hunger is about borrowed ideas of science and technology and development which have not worked in local realities; it is also about the disintegration of local communities; about loss of values, traditions, culture and spirituality. Ending hunger is the important unfinished agenda of this century and of independent India.

The world as a whole has achieved dramatic increase in food production, enough to cover the minimum needs of the projected population globally. Yet hunger and malnutrition persist in alarming measure in India and other Third World countries. The World Bank’s estimates are that over a billion people in the world have problems of food security. The Food and Agriculture Organization estimates point out that in the coming decades, 64 developing countries out of 117 will be unable to feed their population adequately and that 38 out of these developing countries will be able to feed less than half of their population adequately.

India believes that its problems of hunger and food security are almost over because of the significant increase in productivity achieved through the use of new technologies of the Green Revolution. Food grains per capita increased from 395 grams in 1951 to 466 grams in 1993. There are reports about surplus stocks used for exports; also reports about surplus stock rotting because there are not enough storage facilities. And yet in such a situation, we have millions who go hungry and who die a silent death of starvation and malnutrition. In 1974, the FAO organized the first World Food Conference, where its members took a pledge to end hunger by 1984. Henry Kissinger, then US Secretary of State vowed at the meeting that “within a decade, no man, woman or child will go to bed hungry”. A quarter of a century later, more people are dying of hunger. The FAO organized its second World Food Conference in 1985 which re-affirmed its moral commitment “to achieve the goal of ensuring that all people at all times are in a position to produce the basic food they need.” In 1996, yet again the FAO organized its third global conference on food security with much fanfare. The result of this third summit meeting was another declaration, called the Rome Declaration, affirming once again the right of everyone to be free of hunger. The summit also offered an action plan to reduce the numbers of hungry people by half within two decades – a more modest commitment than that made by Kissinger a quarter of a century ago.

In spite of the three global conferences, the future of food security looks as bleak as ever. Fidel Castro, communist leader, who also attended the third FAO summit meeting, pointed out “Hunger is the offspring of injustice and the unequal distribution of wealth. Indeed, the history of hunger has always been which has marginalized the poor and deprived them of the means to eat”.

The NGO’s and people’ representatives who had also gathered for this summit meeting said in their final declaration, ”Ensuring food security demands an approach to agricultural policy that is in almost every respect the reverse of that adopted by the Summit delegates.” They suggested that instead of pursuing policies that encourage corporate agriculture, there should be policies in labour, organic production, reducing or eliminating the use of pesticides and other agro-chemicals. And instead of locking farmers into a global economy over which they have no control, they suggested that resources be shifted in favour of local farming and regional food producers and food systems.

Q. 

The tone of the author in this passage seems to be

Hunger is about people; it is also about oppression and inequalities. Hunger is about corrupt politicians and corrupt bureaucracy; it is also about power and powerlessness. Hunger is about borrowed ideas of science and technology and development which have not worked in local realities; it is also about the disintegration of local communities; about loss of values, traditions, culture and spirituality. Ending hunger is the important unfinished agenda of this century and of independent India.

The world as a whole has achieved dramatic increase in food production, enough to cover the minimum needs of the projected population globally. Yet hunger and malnutrition persist in alarming measure in India and other Third World countries. The World Bank’s estimates are that over a billion people in the world have problems of food security. The Food and Agriculture Organization estimates point out that in the coming decades, 64 developing countries out of 117 will be unable to feed their population adequately and that 38 out of these developing countries will be able to feed less than half of their population adequately.

India believes that its problems of hunger and food security are almost over because of the significant increase in productivity achieved through the use of new technologies of the Green Revolution. Food grains per capita increased from 395 grams in 1951 to 466 grams in 1993. There are reports about surplus stocks used for exports; also reports about surplus stock rotting because there are not enough storage facilities. And yet in such a situation, we have millions who go hungry and who die a silent death of starvation and malnutrition. In 1974, the FAO organized the first World Food Conference, where its members took a pledge to end hunger by 1984. Henry Kissinger, then US Secretary of State vowed at the meeting that “within a decade, no man, woman or child will go to bed hungry”. A quarter of a century later, more people are dying of hunger. The FAO organized its second World Food Conference in 1985 which re-affirmed its moral commitment “to achieve the goal of ensuring that all people at all times are in a position to produce the basic food they need.” In 1996, yet again the FAO organized its third global conference on food security with much fanfare. The result of this third summit meeting was another declaration, called the Rome Declaration, affirming once again the right of everyone to be free of hunger. The summit also offered an action plan to reduce the numbers of hungry people by half within two decades – a more modest commitment than that made by Kissinger a quarter of a century ago.

In spite of the three global conferences, the future of food security looks as bleak as ever. Fidel Castro, communist leader, who also attended the third FAO summit meeting, pointed out “Hunger is the offspring of injustice and the unequal distribution of wealth. Indeed, the history of hunger has always been which has marginalized the poor and deprived them of the means to eat”.

The NGO’s and people’ representatives who had also gathered for this summit meeting said in their final declaration, ”Ensuring food security demands an approach to agricultural policy that is in almost every respect the reverse of that adopted by the Summit delegates.” They suggested that instead of pursuing policies that encourage corporate agriculture, there should be policies in labour, organic production, reducing or eliminating the use of pesticides and other agro-chemicals. And instead of locking farmers into a global economy over which they have no control, they suggested that resources be shifted in favour of local farming and regional food producers and food systems.

Q. 

The author says all of the following EXCEPT

Hunger is about people; it is also about oppression and inequalities. Hunger is about corrupt politicians and corrupt bureaucracy; it is also about power and powerlessness. Hunger is about borrowed ideas of science and technology and development which have not worked in local realities; it is also about the disintegration of local communities; about loss of values, traditions, culture and spirituality. Ending hunger is the important unfinished agenda of this century and of independent India.

The world as a whole has achieved dramatic increase in food production, enough to cover the minimum needs of the projected population globally. Yet hunger and malnutrition persist in alarming measure in India and other Third World countries. The World Bank’s estimates are that over a billion people in the world have problems of food security. The Food and Agriculture Organization estimates point out that in the coming decades, 64 developing countries out of 117 will be unable to feed their population adequately and that 38 out of these developing countries will be able to feed less than half of their population adequately.

India believes that its problems of hunger and food security are almost over because of the significant increase in productivity achieved through the use of new technologies of the Green Revolution. Food grains per capita increased from 395 grams in 1951 to 466 grams in 1993. There are reports about surplus stocks used for exports; also reports about surplus stock rotting because there are not enough storage facilities. And yet in such a situation, we have millions who go hungry and who die a silent death of starvation and malnutrition. In 1974, the FAO organized the first World Food Conference, where its members took a pledge to end hunger by 1984. Henry Kissinger, then US Secretary of State vowed at the meeting that “within a decade, no man, woman or child will go to bed hungry”. A quarter of a century later, more people are dying of hunger. The FAO organized its second World Food Conference in 1985 which re-affirmed its moral commitment “to achieve the goal of ensuring that all people at all times are in a position to produce the basic food they need.” In 1996, yet again the FAO organized its third global conference on food security with much fanfare. The result of this third summit meeting was another declaration, called the Rome Declaration, affirming once again the right of everyone to be free of hunger. The summit also offered an action plan to reduce the numbers of hungry people by half within two decades – a more modest commitment than that made by Kissinger a quarter of a century ago.

In spite of the three global conferences, the future of food security looks as bleak as ever. Fidel Castro, communist leader, who also attended the third FAO summit meeting, pointed out “Hunger is the offspring of injustice and the unequal distribution of wealth. Indeed, the history of hunger has always been which has marginalized the poor and deprived them of the means to eat”.

The NGO’s and people’ representatives who had also gathered for this summit meeting said in their final declaration, ”Ensuring food security demands an approach to agricultural policy that is in almost every respect the reverse of that adopted by the Summit delegates.” They suggested that instead of pursuing policies that encourage corporate agriculture, there should be policies in labour, organic production, reducing or eliminating the use of pesticides and other agro-chemicals. And instead of locking farmers into a global economy over which they have no control, they suggested that resources be shifted in favour of local farming and regional food producers and food systems.

Q. 

The author definitely says which of the following in the context of passage?

Hunger is about people; it is also about oppression and inequalities. Hunger is about corrupt politicians and corrupt bureaucracy; it is also about power and powerlessness. Hunger is about borrowed ideas of science and technology and development which have not worked in local realities; it is also about the disintegration of local communities; about loss of values, traditions, culture and spirituality. Ending hunger is the important unfinished agenda of this century and of independent India.

The world as a whole has achieved dramatic increase in food production, enough to cover the minimum needs of the projected population globally. Yet hunger and malnutrition persist in alarming measure in India and other Third World countries. The World Bank’s estimates are that over a billion people in the world have problems of food security. The Food and Agriculture Organization estimates point out that in the coming decades, 64 developing countries out of 117 will be unable to feed their population adequately and that 38 out of these developing countries will be able to feed less than half of their population adequately.

India believes that its problems of hunger and food security are almost over because of the significant increase in productivity achieved through the use of new technologies of the Green Revolution. Food grains per capita increased from 395 grams in 1951 to 466 grams in 1993. There are reports about surplus stocks used for exports; also reports about surplus stock rotting because there are not enough storage facilities. And yet in such a situation, we have millions who go hungry and who die a silent death of starvation and malnutrition. In 1974, the FAO organized the first World Food Conference, where its members took a pledge to end hunger by 1984. Henry Kissinger, then US Secretary of State vowed at the meeting that “within a decade, no man, woman or child will go to bed hungry”. A quarter of a century later, more people are dying of hunger. The FAO organized its second World Food Conference in 1985 which re-affirmed its moral commitment “to achieve the goal of ensuring that all people at all times are in a position to produce the basic food they need.” In 1996, yet again the FAO organized its third global conference on food security with much fanfare. The result of this third summit meeting was another declaration, called the Rome Declaration, affirming once again the right of everyone to be free of hunger. The summit also offered an action plan to reduce the numbers of hungry people by half within two decades – a more modest commitment than that made by Kissinger a quarter of a century ago.

In spite of the three global conferences, the future of food security looks as bleak as ever. Fidel Castro, communist leader, who also attended the third FAO summit meeting, pointed out “Hunger is the offspring of injustice and the unequal distribution of wealth. Indeed, the history of hunger has always been which has marginalized the poor and deprived them of the means to eat”.

The NGO’s and people’ representatives who had also gathered for this summit meeting said in their final declaration, ”Ensuring food security demands an approach to agricultural policy that is in almost every respect the reverse of that adopted by the Summit delegates.” They suggested that instead of pursuing policies that encourage corporate agriculture, there should be policies in labour, organic production, reducing or eliminating the use of pesticides and other agro-chemicals. And instead of locking farmers into a global economy over which they have no control, they suggested that resources be shifted in favour of local farming and regional food producers and food systems.

Q. 

How does the author corroborate the third sentence in the passage?

Hunger is about people; it is also about oppression and inequalities. Hunger is about corrupt politicians and corrupt bureaucracy; it is also about power and powerlessness. Hunger is about borrowed ideas of science and technology and development which have not worked in local realities; it is also about the disintegration of local communities; about loss of values, traditions, culture and spirituality. Ending hunger is the important unfinished agenda of this century and of independent India.

The world as a whole has achieved dramatic increase in food production, enough to cover the minimum needs of the projected population globally. Yet hunger and malnutrition persist in alarming measure in India and other Third World countries. The World Bank’s estimates are that over a billion people in the world have problems of food security. The Food and Agriculture Organization estimates point out that in the coming decades, 64 developing countries out of 117 will be unable to feed their population adequately and that 38 out of these developing countries will be able to feed less than half of their population adequately.

India believes that its problems of hunger and food security are almost over because of the significant increase in productivity achieved through the use of new technologies of the Green Revolution. Food grains per capita increased from 395 grams in 1951 to 466 grams in 1993. There are reports about surplus stocks used for exports; also reports about surplus stock rotting because there are not enough storage facilities. And yet in such a situation, we have millions who go hungry and who die a silent death of starvation and malnutrition. In 1974, the FAO organized the first World Food Conference, where its members took a pledge to end hunger by 1984. Henry Kissinger, then US Secretary of State vowed at the meeting that “within a decade, no man, woman or child will go to bed hungry”. A quarter of a century later, more people are dying of hunger. The FAO organized its second World Food Conference in 1985 which re-affirmed its moral commitment “to achieve the goal of ensuring that all people at all times are in a position to produce the basic food they need.” In 1996, yet again the FAO organized its third global conference on food security with much fanfare. The result of this third summit meeting was another declaration, called the Rome Declaration, affirming once again the right of everyone to be free of hunger. The summit also offered an action plan to reduce the numbers of hungry people by half within two decades – a more modest commitment than that made by Kissinger a quarter of a century ago.

In spite of the three global conferences, the future of food security looks as bleak as ever. Fidel Castro, communist leader, who also attended the third FAO summit meeting, pointed out “Hunger is the offspring of injustice and the unequal distribution of wealth. Indeed, the history of hunger has always been which has marginalized the poor and deprived them of the means to eat”.

The NGO’s and people’ representatives who had also gathered for this summit meeting said in their final declaration, ”Ensuring food security demands an approach to agricultural policy that is in almost every respect the reverse of that adopted by the Summit delegates.” They suggested that instead of pursuing policies that encourage corporate agriculture, there should be policies in labour, organic production, reducing or eliminating the use of pesticides and other agro-chemicals. And instead of locking farmers into a global economy over which they have no control, they suggested that resources be shifted in favour of local farming and regional food producers and food systems.

Q. 

What sort of passage is this one?

Hunger is about people; it is also about oppression and inequalities. Hunger is about corrupt politicians and corrupt bureaucracy; it is also about power and powerlessness. Hunger is about borrowed ideas of science and technology and development which have not worked in local realities; it is also about the disintegration of local communities; about loss of values, traditions, culture and spirituality. Ending hunger is the important unfinished agenda of this century and of independent India.

The world as a whole has achieved dramatic increase in food production, enough to cover the minimum needs of the projected population globally. Yet hunger and malnutrition persist in alarming measure in India and other Third World countries. The World Bank’s estimates are that over a billion people in the world have problems of food security. The Food and Agriculture Organization estimates point out that in the coming decades, 64 developing countries out of 117 will be unable to feed their population adequately and that 38 out of these developing countries will be able to feed less than half of their population adequately.

India believes that its problems of hunger and food security are almost over because of the significant increase in productivity achieved through the use of new technologies of the Green Revolution. Food grains per capita increased from 395 grams in 1951 to 466 grams in 1993. There are reports about surplus stocks used for exports; also reports about surplus stock rotting because there are not enough storage facilities. And yet in such a situation, we have millions who go hungry and who die a silent death of starvation and malnutrition. In 1974, the FAO organized the first World Food Conference, where its members took a pledge to end hunger by 1984. Henry Kissinger, then US Secretary of State vowed at the meeting that “within a decade, no man, woman or child will go to bed hungry”. A quarter of a century later, more people are dying of hunger. The FAO organized its second World Food Conference in 1985 which re-affirmed its moral commitment “to achieve the goal of ensuring that all people at all times are in a position to produce the basic food they need.” In 1996, yet again the FAO organized its third global conference on food security with much fanfare. The result of this third summit meeting was another declaration, called the Rome Declaration, affirming once again the right of everyone to be free of hunger. The summit also offered an action plan to reduce the numbers of hungry people by half within two decades – a more modest commitment than that made by Kissinger a quarter of a century ago.

In spite of the three global conferences, the future of food security looks as bleak as ever. Fidel Castro, communist leader, who also attended the third FAO summit meeting, pointed out “Hunger is the offspring of injustice and the unequal distribution of wealth. Indeed, the history of hunger has always been which has marginalized the poor and deprived them of the means to eat”.

The NGO’s and people’ representatives who had also gathered for this summit meeting said in their final declaration, ”Ensuring food security demands an approach to agricultural policy that is in almost every respect the reverse of that adopted by the Summit delegates.” They suggested that instead of pursuing policies that encourage corporate agriculture, there should be policies in labour, organic production, reducing or eliminating the use of pesticides and other agro-chemicals. And instead of locking farmers into a global economy over which they have no control, they suggested that resources be shifted in favour of local farming and regional food producers and food systems.

Q. 

Choose the word that is most nearly the SAME in meaning as the word given in italic as used in the passage.

DISINTEGRATION

Hunger is about people; it is also about oppression and inequalities. Hunger is about corrupt politicians and corrupt bureaucracy; it is also about power and powerlessness. Hunger is about borrowed ideas of science and technology and development which have not worked in local realities; it is also about the disintegration of local communities; about loss of values, traditions, culture and spirituality. Ending hunger is the important unfinished agenda of this century and of independent India.

The world as a whole has achieved dramatic increase in food production, enough to cover the minimum needs of the projected population globally. Yet hunger and malnutrition persist in alarming measure in India and other Third World countries. The World Bank’s estimates are that over a billion people in the world have problems of food security. The Food and Agriculture Organization estimates point out that in the coming decades, 64 developing countries out of 117 will be unable to feed their population adequately and that 38 out of these developing countries will be able to feed less than half of their population adequately.

India believes that its problems of hunger and food security are almost over because of the significant increase in productivity achieved through the use of new technologies of the Green Revolution. Food grains per capita increased from 395 grams in 1951 to 466 grams in 1993. There are reports about surplus stocks used for exports; also reports about surplus stock rotting because there are not enough storage facilities. And yet in such a situation, we have millions who go hungry and who die a silent death of starvation and malnutrition. In 1974, the FAO organized the first World Food Conference, where its members took a pledge to end hunger by 1984. Henry Kissinger, then US Secretary of State vowed at the meeting that “within a decade, no man, woman or child will go to bed hungry”. A quarter of a century later, more people are dying of hunger. The FAO organized its second World Food Conference in 1985 which re-affirmed its moral commitment “to achieve the goal of ensuring that all people at all times are in a position to produce the basic food they need.” In 1996, yet again the FAO organized its third global conference on food security with much fanfare. The result of this third summit meeting was another declaration, called the Rome Declaration, affirming once again the right of everyone to be free of hunger. The summit also offered an action plan to reduce the numbers of hungry people by half within two decades – a more modest commitment than that made by Kissinger a quarter of a century ago.

In spite of the three global conferences, the future of food security looks as bleak as ever. Fidel Castro, communist leader, who also attended the third FAO summit meeting, pointed out “Hunger is the offspring of injustice and the unequal distribution of wealth. Indeed, the history of hunger has always been which has marginalized the poor and deprived them of the means to eat”.

The NGO’s and people’ representatives who had also gathered for this summit meeting said in their final declaration, ”Ensuring food security demands an approach to agricultural policy that is in almost every respect the reverse of that adopted by the Summit delegates.” They suggested that instead of pursuing policies that encourage corporate agriculture, there should be policies in labour, organic production, reducing or eliminating the use of pesticides and other agro-chemicals. And instead of locking farmers into a global economy over which they have no control, they suggested that resources be shifted in favour of local farming and regional food producers and food systems.

Q. 

Choose the word that is most nearly the SAME in meaning as the word given in italic as used in the passage.

OFFSPRING

Hunger is about people; it is also about oppression and inequalities. Hunger is about corrupt politicians and corrupt bureaucracy; it is also about power and powerlessness. Hunger is about borrowed ideas of science and technology and development which have not worked in local realities; it is also about the disintegration of local communities; about loss of values, traditions, culture and spirituality. Ending hunger is the important unfinished agenda of this century and of independent India.

The world as a whole has achieved dramatic increase in food production, enough to cover the minimum needs of the projected population globally. Yet hunger and malnutrition persist in alarming measure in India and other Third World countries. The World Bank’s estimates are that over a billion people in the world have problems of food security. The Food and Agriculture Organization estimates point out that in the coming decades, 64 developing countries out of 117 will be unable to feed their population adequately and that 38 out of these developing countries will be able to feed less than half of their population adequately.

India believes that its problems of hunger and food security are almost over because of the significant increase in productivity achieved through the use of new technologies of the Green Revolution. Food grains per capita increased from 395 grams in 1951 to 466 grams in 1993. There are reports about surplus stocks used for exports; also reports about surplus stock rotting because there are not enough storage facilities. And yet in such a situation, we have millions who go hungry and who die a silent death of starvation and malnutrition. In 1974, the FAO organized the first World Food Conference, where its members took a pledge to end hunger by 1984. Henry Kissinger, then US Secretary of State vowed at the meeting that “within a decade, no man, woman or child will go to bed hungry”. A quarter of a century later, more people are dying of hunger. The FAO organized its second World Food Conference in 1985 which re-affirmed its moral commitment “to achieve the goal of ensuring that all people at all times are in a position to produce the basic food they need.” In 1996, yet again the FAO organized its third global conference on food security with much fanfare. The result of this third summit meeting was another declaration, called the Rome Declaration, affirming once again the right of everyone to be free of hunger. The summit also offered an action plan to reduce the numbers of hungry people by half within two decades – a more modest commitment than that made by Kissinger a quarter of a century ago.

In spite of the three global conferences, the future of food security looks as bleak as ever. Fidel Castro, communist leader, who also attended the third FAO summit meeting, pointed out “Hunger is the offspring of injustice and the unequal distribution of wealth. Indeed, the history of hunger has always been which has marginalized the poor and deprived them of the means to eat”.

The NGO’s and people’ representatives who had also gathered for this summit meeting said in their final declaration, ”Ensuring food security demands an approach to agricultural policy that is in almost every respect the reverse of that adopted by the Summit delegates.” They suggested that instead of pursuing policies that encourage corporate agriculture, there should be policies in labour, organic production, reducing or eliminating the use of pesticides and other agro-chemicals. And instead of locking farmers into a global economy over which they have no control, they suggested that resources be shifted in favour of local farming and regional food producers and food systems.

Q. 

Choose the word that is most nearly OPPOSITE in meaning as the word given in italic as used in the passage.

DEPRIVED

Hunger is about people; it is also about oppression and inequalities. Hunger is about corrupt politicians and corrupt bureaucracy; it is also about power and powerlessness. Hunger is about borrowed ideas of science and technology and development which have not worked in local realities; it is also about the disintegration of local communities; about loss of values, traditions, culture and spirituality. Ending hunger is the important unfinished agenda of this century and of independent India.

The world as a whole has achieved dramatic increase in food production, enough to cover the minimum needs of the projected population globally. Yet hunger and malnutrition persist in alarming measure in India and other Third World countries. The World Bank’s estimates are that over a billion people in the world have problems of food security. The Food and Agriculture Organization estimates point out that in the coming decades, 64 developing countries out of 117 will be unable to feed their population adequately and that 38 out of these developing countries will be able to feed less than half of their population adequately.

India believes that its problems of hunger and food security are almost over because of the significant increase in productivity achieved through the use of new technologies of the Green Revolution. Food grains per capita increased from 395 grams in 1951 to 466 grams in 1993. There are reports about surplus stocks used for exports; also reports about surplus stock rotting because there are not enough storage facilities. And yet in such a situation, we have millions who go hungry and who die a silent death of starvation and malnutrition. In 1974, the FAO organized the first World Food Conference, where its members took a pledge to end hunger by 1984. Henry Kissinger, then US Secretary of State vowed at the meeting that “within a decade, no man, woman or child will go to bed hungry”. A quarter of a century later, more people are dying of hunger. The FAO organized its second World Food Conference in 1985 which re-affirmed its moral commitment “to achieve the goal of ensuring that all people at all times are in a position to produce the basic food they need.” In 1996, yet again the FAO organized its third global conference on food security with much fanfare. The result of this third summit meeting was another declaration, called the Rome Declaration, affirming once again the right of everyone to be free of hunger. The summit also offered an action plan to reduce the numbers of hungry people by half within two decades – a more modest commitment than that made by Kissinger a quarter of a century ago.

In spite of the three global conferences, the future of food security looks as bleak as ever. Fidel Castro, communist leader, who also attended the third FAO summit meeting, pointed out “Hunger is the offspring of injustice and the unequal distribution of wealth. Indeed, the history of hunger has always been which has marginalized the poor and deprived them of the means to eat”.

The NGO’s and people’ representatives who had also gathered for this summit meeting said in their final declaration, ”Ensuring food security demands an approach to agricultural policy that is in almost every respect the reverse of that adopted by the Summit delegates.” They suggested that instead of pursuing policies that encourage corporate agriculture, there should be policies in labour, organic production, reducing or eliminating the use of pesticides and other agro-chemicals. And instead of locking farmers into a global economy over which they have no control, they suggested that resources be shifted in favour of local farming and regional food producers and food systems.

Q. 

Choose the word that is most nearly OPPOSITE in meaning as the word given in italic as used in the passage.

BLEAK

DIRECTIONS (16-20): Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given thereafter on the basis of the passage. Certain words/phrases are underline to help you to locate them while answering some of the questions.

It is a truism that effective advertising must be built on an understanding of the consumer. Yet sometimes perceptions and assumptions about people and about countries prevent marketers from responding to the opportunities inherent in social change. There are two subjects about which everyone in the marketing and advertising communities has strong opinions and preconceptions. One of them is women. The other is international marketing.

It isn’t too many years ago that markets in the United States were clearly separated by gender.  The assumption was that the target for all the expensive, big-ticket products and services, such as cars, travel and financing services were men. On the other hand, women were sold food, household, fashion goods and cosmetics. It is remarkable to recall that at that time, working women were invisible in the marketing and advertising plans.

Most advertisers thought of women consumers as housewives. The usual target definition was “any housewife, 18 to 49”. Occasionally, they would recognize young, single women, who in those days described girls as natural targets for cosmetic and fashion targets. These two perceptions of women dominated marketing approaches to women in those days.

The surge of women entering the workforce has revolutionized the way we define the consumer market place. We find that men are crossing over into the supermarkets and shopping for food and household products that used to be the exclusive responsibility of the housewives.

We find women crossing over into big-ticket product categories. They have become good customers for financial services, travel and cars. We find that not all working women are young, single girls, and not all housewives are married.

In short, our perception of the total consumer marketplace has turned upside down as a result of this one single demographic fact. The concept of effective advertising and marketing must be built on an understanding of the consumer, particularly relevant to the international market-place.

Q. 

How can an effective advertising be built, according to the passage?

It is a truism that effective advertising must be built on an understanding of the consumer. Yet sometimes perceptions and assumptions about people and about countries prevent marketers from responding to the opportunities inherent in social change. There are two subjects about which everyone in the marketing and advertising communities has strong opinions and preconceptions. One of them is women. The other is international marketing.

It isn’t too many years ago that markets in the United States were clearly separated by gender.  The assumption was that the target for all the expensive, big-ticket products and services, such as cars, travel and financing services were men. On the other hand, women were sold food, household, fashion goods and cosmetics. It is remarkable to recall that at that time, working women were invisible in the marketing and advertising plans.

Most advertisers thought of women consumers as housewives. The usual target definition was “any housewife, 18 to 49”. Occasionally, they would recognize young, single women, who in those days described girls as natural targets for cosmetic and fashion targets. These two perceptions of women dominated marketing approaches to women in those days.

The surge of women entering the workforce has revolutionized the way we define the consumer market place. We find that men are crossing over into the supermarkets and shopping for food and household products that used to be the exclusive responsibility of the housewives.

We find women crossing over into big-ticket product categories. They have become good customers for financial services, travel and cars. We find that not all working women are young, single girls, and not all housewives are married.

In short, our perception of the total consumer marketplace has turned upside down as a result of this one single demographic fact. The concept of effective advertising and marketing must be built on an understanding of the consumer, particularly relevant to the international market-place.

Q. 

Which of the following presents a true picture of the US markets?

It is a truism that effective advertising must be built on an understanding of the consumer. Yet sometimes perceptions and assumptions about people and about countries prevent marketers from responding to the opportunities inherent in social change. There are two subjects about which everyone in the marketing and advertising communities has strong opinions and preconceptions. One of them is women. The other is international marketing.

It isn’t too many years ago that markets in the United States were clearly separated by gender.  The assumption was that the target for all the expensive, big-ticket products and services, such as cars, travel and financing services were men. On the other hand, women were sold food, household, fashion goods and cosmetics. It is remarkable to recall that at that time, working women were invisible in the marketing and advertising plans.

Most advertisers thought of women consumers as housewives. The usual target definition was “any housewife, 18 to 49”. Occasionally, they would recognize young, single women, who in those days described girls as natural targets for cosmetic and fashion targets. These two perceptions of women dominated marketing approaches to women in those days.

The surge of women entering the workforce has revolutionized the way we define the consumer market place. We find that men are crossing over into the supermarkets and shopping for food and household products that used to be the exclusive responsibility of the housewives.

We find women crossing over into big-ticket product categories. They have become good customers for financial services, travel and cars. We find that not all working women are young, single girls, and not all housewives are married.

In short, our perception of the total consumer marketplace has turned upside down as a result of this one single demographic fact. The concept of effective advertising and marketing must be built on an understanding of the consumer, particularly relevant to the international market-place.

Q. 

Which of the following falls in the big-ticket product categories?

It is a truism that effective advertising must be built on an understanding of the consumer. Yet sometimes perceptions and assumptions about people and about countries prevent marketers from responding to the opportunities inherent in social change. There are two subjects about which everyone in the marketing and advertising communities has strong opinions and preconceptions. One of them is women. The other is international marketing.

It isn’t too many years ago that markets in the United States were clearly separated by gender.  The assumption was that the target for all the expensive, big-ticket products and services, such as cars, travel and financing services were men. On the other hand, women were sold food, household, fashion goods and cosmetics. It is remarkable to recall that at that time, working women were invisible in the marketing and advertising plans.

Most advertisers thought of women consumers as housewives. The usual target definition was “any housewife, 18 to 49”. Occasionally, they would recognize young, single women, who in those days described girls as natural targets for cosmetic and fashion targets. These two perceptions of women dominated marketing approaches to women in those days.

The surge of women entering the workforce has revolutionized the way we define the consumer market place. We find that men are crossing over into the supermarkets and shopping for food and household products that used to be the exclusive responsibility of the housewives.

We find women crossing over into big-ticket product categories. They have become good customers for financial services, travel and cars. We find that not all working women are young, single girls, and not all housewives are married.

In short, our perception of the total consumer marketplace has turned upside down as a result of this one single demographic fact. The concept of effective advertising and marketing must be built on an understanding of the consumer, particularly relevant to the international market-place.

Q. 

Which of the following can be inferred from the passage?

It is a truism that effective advertising must be built on an understanding of the consumer. Yet sometimes perceptions and assumptions about people and about countries prevent marketers from responding to the opportunities inherent in social change. There are two subjects about which everyone in the marketing and advertising communities has strong opinions and preconceptions. One of them is women. The other is international marketing.

It isn’t too many years ago that markets in the United States were clearly separated by gender.  The assumption was that the target for all the expensive, big-ticket products and services, such as cars, travel and financing services were men. On the other hand, women were sold food, household, fashion goods and cosmetics. It is remarkable to recall that at that time, working women were invisible in the marketing and advertising plans.

Most advertisers thought of women consumers as housewives. The usual target definition was “any housewife, 18 to 49”. Occasionally, they would recognize young, single women, who in those days described girls as natural targets for cosmetic and fashion targets. These two perceptions of women dominated marketing approaches to women in those days.

The surge of women entering the workforce has revolutionized the way we define the consumer market place. We find that men are crossing over into the supermarkets and shopping for food and household products that used to be the exclusive responsibility of the housewives.

We find women crossing over into big-ticket product categories. They have become good customers for financial services, travel and cars. We find that not all working women are young, single girls, and not all housewives are married.

In short, our perception of the total consumer marketplace has turned upside down as a result of this one single demographic fact. The concept of effective advertising and marketing must be built on an understanding of the consumer, particularly relevant to the international market-place.

Q. 

Which of the following is true in the context of the passage?