Food prices have been rising in the US for the last couple of years. O...
Argument Analysis
Pre-Thinking
Conclusion Clarification
The paradox here is that most analysts are predicting food prices would come down even when there is no increase in food stocks and there will be no decrease in the use of biofuels that consume food stocks, thereby contributing to the increase in food prices.
Pre-Thinking Approach
To resolve the paradox, let’s see how we can select a scenario in which both the situations can be true without contradicting each other. To do so, we will look at the logical structure, focusing on the seemingly contradictory situations.
Food prices can come down when one of these two things happens:
- Demand goes down i.e. overall food consumption in the US decreases
- Supply goes up i.e. there is more availability of food stocks to make food
We know that there is no increase in food stocks and there will be no decrease in the use of biofuels. In such a case, the following instances may explain the situation.
-
- Instance 1: The requirement of biofuels is fulfilled by some alternative of food stock. In this way, the use of biofuel will remain same but the use of food stock can be decreased, leading to a decline in prices.
-
- Instance 2: A decrease in the food consumption in the US can lead to a decline in food prices, explaining the paradox.
-
- Instance 3: The efficiency of the process that converts food stocks to biofuels increases so that the same amount of biofuels can be obtained with lower amount of food stocks.
With this pre-thinking in mind, let’s evaluate the answer choices.
Answer Choices
A
A large number of analysts do think that food prices will continue their upward trend.
Incorrect - Doesn’t explain the situation
This statement talks about the analysts who do not believe in the prediction made in the argument. Our task in the question is to look for a choice that explains the prediction. A contrary belief will not do so.
B
Biofuels are not the only alternatives to gasoline as automobile fuel.
Incorrect - Doesn’t explain the situation
Even if other alternatives to gasoline are present, the use of biofuels isn’t going to come down, as declared by the government. So we still can’t explain why food prices will come down when the use of biofuels, which use food stocks, wouldn’t.
C
Wood chips and prairie grass are expected to replace food stock for the production of biofuels.
Correct
This option is written along the lines of our pre-thinking per the explanation presented in instance1. If this happens, more food stocks can be used to make food, increasing the supply of food and bringing down the prices.
D
Analysts are not always correct in their predictions.
Incorrect - Doesn’t explain the situation
Knowing the fact that analysts can be wrong in their prediction doesn’t explain the prediction given in the argument. Our task in the question is not to cast doubt on the given prediction but to explain it.
E
There is a strong shift in the eating habits of the US population from home-made food to junk food.
Incorrect - Doesn’t explain the situation
As we don’t know the amount of food stocks which go toward making junk food v/s home-made food, we can’t say whether this shift will lead to more use of food stocks or less.