CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >   Directions: Read the passage and answer the ... Start Learning for Free
Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.
If I say that Indian agriculture has the potential to double or even triple its output in the next 15-20 years, many people will laugh it away. But the reality is that many countries have done it and we can do it.
India, China and Israel started off their new political journey in late 1940s, but today China's per capita income in dollar terms is almost five times that of India, and Israel's almost 20 times higher than India. Agriculture contributes just 8 per cent of overall GDP in China compared to about 17 per cent in India, and only 1 per cent in Israel. Over a period of time, people have moved out of agriculture. About 26 per cent of China's workforce is in agriculture, in Israel this is less than 1 percent while India is still stuck with 42 per cent of its workforce in agriculture.
China, as many would know, started off its economic reforms in 1978 by taking up agriculture first. It dismantled its commune system of land holdings and liberated agri-markets that allowed farmers to get much higher prices for their produce. As a result, in 1978-84, farmers' incomes in China increased by almost 14 per cent per annum, more than doubling in six years.
In India, the 1991 reforms bypassed agriculture. There was only some indirect effect when tariffs on manufactured goods were reduced. But Indian agri-food policies remained more consumer-oriented with a view to "protect the poor". In the process, they never allowed farmers to enjoy the best prices they could get from free markets within India or abroad. The net result of all this was farmers' incomes remained low and so did those of landless agri-labourers.
India can learn from other countries. Israel offers something unique: How to turn a desert into cultivating high-value crops for exports (citrus fruits, dates, olives) by recycling urban waste water for agriculture, by de-salinisation of sea waters. Water accounting in Israel is something exemplary.
Q. Which of the following will the author of this passage agree with the most?
  • a)
    Indian agriculture, if liberated, can gain more from international market than domestic one.
  • b)
    Per capita income of a country is proportionate to its agriculture's contribution to GDP.
  • c)
    Socialistic controls on market forces often stand in the way of agricultural revolution.
  • d)
    None of these
Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Most Upvoted Answer
Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.If ...
Option A is incorrect. The author does not favour international market; he only mentions, "In the process, they never allowed farmers to enjoy the best prices they could get from free markets within India or abroad."
Option B is incorrect. As per the data given, India has better agriculture contribution to GDP in relation to China and Israel, but fares poorly on per-capita income.
Option C gets support from, "But Indian agri-food policies remained more consumer-oriented with a view to "protect the poor"."
Attention CLAT Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed CLAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in CLAT.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.If I say that Indian agriculture has the potential to double or even triple its output in the next 15-20 years, many people will laugh it away. But the reality is that many countries have done it and we can do it.India, China and Israel started off their new political journey in late 1940s, but today China's per capita income in dollar terms is almost five times that of India, and Israel's almost 20 times higher than India. Agriculture contributes just 8 per cent of overall GDP in China compared to about 17 per cent in India, and only 1 per cent in Israel. Over a period of time, people have moved out of agriculture. About 26 per cent of China's workforce is in agriculture, in Israel this is less than 1 percent while India is still stuck with 42 per cent of its workforce in agriculture.China, as many would know, started off its economic reforms in 1978 by taking up agriculture first. It dismantled its commune system of land holdings and liberated agri-markets that allowed farmers to get much higher prices for their produce. As a result, in 1978-84, farmers' incomes in China increased by almost 14 per cent per annum, more than doubling in six years.In India, the 1991 reforms bypassed agriculture. There was only some indirect effect when tariffs on manufactured goods were reduced. But Indian agri-food policies remained more consumer-oriented with a view to "protect the poor". In the process, they never allowed farmers to enjoy the best prices they could get from free markets within India or abroad. The net result of all this was farmers' incomes remained low and so did those of landless agri-labourers.India can learn from other countries. Israel offers something unique: How to turn a desert into cultivating high-value crops for exports (citrus fruits, dates, olives) by recycling urban waste water for agriculture, by de-salinisation of sea waters. Water accounting in Israel is something exemplary.Q. Which of the following, if true, would strengthen the author's arguments in the passage?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.If I say that Indian agriculture has the potential to double or even triple its output in the next 15-20 years, many people will laugh it away. But the reality is that many countries have done it and we can do it.India, China and Israel started off their new political journey in late 1940s, but today China's per capita income in dollar terms is almost five times that of India, and Israel's almost 20 times higher than India. Agriculture contributes just 8 per cent of overall GDP in China compared to about 17 per cent in India, and only 1 per cent in Israel. Over a period of time, people have moved out of agriculture. About 26 per cent of China's workforce is in agriculture, in Israel this is less than 1 percent while India is still stuck with 42 per cent of its workforce in agriculture.China, as many would know, started off its economic reforms in 1978 by taking up agriculture first. It dismantled its commune system of land holdings and liberated agri-markets that allowed farmers to get much higher prices for their produce. As a result, in 1978-84, farmers' incomes in China increased by almost 14 per cent per annum, more than doubling in six years.In India, the 1991 reforms bypassed agriculture. There was only some indirect effect when tariffs on manufactured goods were reduced. But Indian agri-food policies remained more consumer-oriented with a view to "protect the poor". In the process, they never allowed farmers to enjoy the best prices they could get from free markets within India or abroad. The net result of all this was farmers' incomes remained low and so did those of landless agri-labourers.India can learn from other countries. Israel offers something unique: How to turn a desert into cultivating high-value crops for exports (citrus fruits, dates, olives) by recycling urban waste water for agriculture, by de-salinisation of sea waters. Water accounting in Israel is something exemplary.Q. Which of the following can be the conclusion based on the arguments given in the passage?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.If I say that Indian agriculture has the potential to double or even triple its output in the next 15-20 years, many people will laugh it away. But the reality is that many countries have done it and we can do it.India, China and Israel started off their new political journey in late 1940s, but today China's per capita income in dollar terms is almost five times that of India, and Israel's almost 20 times higher than India. Agriculture contributes just 8 per cent of overall GDP in China compared to about 17 per cent in India, and only 1 per cent in Israel. Over a period of time, people have moved out of agriculture. About 26 per cent of China's workforce is in agriculture, in Israel this is less than 1 percent while India is still stuck with 42 per cent of its workforce in agriculture.China, as many would know, started off its economic reforms in 1978 by taking up agriculture first. It dismantled its commune system of land holdings and liberated agri-markets that allowed farmers to get much higher prices for their produce. As a result, in 1978-84, farmers' incomes in China increased by almost 14 per cent per annum, more than doubling in six years.In India, the 1991 reforms bypassed agriculture. There was only some indirect effect when tariffs on manufactured goods were reduced. But Indian agri-food policies remained more consumer-oriented with a view to "protect the poor". In the process, they never allowed farmers to enjoy the best prices they could get from free markets within India or abroad. The net result of all this was farmers' incomes remained low and so did those of landless agri-labourers.India can learn from other countries. Israel offers something unique: How to turn a desert into cultivating high-value crops for exports (citrus fruits, dates, olives) by recycling urban waste water for agriculture, by de-salinisation of sea waters. Water accounting in Israel is something exemplary.Q. The arguments of the author of the passage depend on his assumption that

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.If I say that Indian agriculture has the potential to double or even triple its output in the next 15-20 years, many people will laugh it away. But the reality is that many countries have done it and we can do it.India, China and Israel started off their new political journey in late 1940s, but today China's per capita income in dollar terms is almost five times that of India, and Israel's almost 20 times higher than India. Agriculture contributes just 8 per cent of overall GDP in China compared to about 17 per cent in India, and only 1 per cent in Israel. Over a period of time, people have moved out of agriculture. About 26 per cent of China's workforce is in agriculture, in Israel this is less than 1 percent while India is still stuck with 42 per cent of its workforce in agriculture.China, as many would know, started off its economic reforms in 1978 by taking up agriculture first. It dismantled its commune system of land holdings and liberated agri-markets that allowed farmers to get much higher prices for their produce. As a result, in 1978-84, farmers' incomes in China increased by almost 14 per cent per annum, more than doubling in six years.In India, the 1991 reforms bypassed agriculture. There was only some indirect effect when tariffs on manufactured goods were reduced. But Indian agri-food policies remained more consumer-oriented with a view to "protect the poor". In the process, they never allowed farmers to enjoy the best prices they could get from free markets within India or abroad. The net result of all this was farmers' incomes remained low and so did those of landless agri-labourers.India can learn from other countries. Israel offers something unique: How to turn a desert into cultivating high-value crops for exports (citrus fruits, dates, olives) by recycling urban waste water for agriculture, by de-salinisation of sea waters. Water accounting in Israel is something exemplary.Q. What role does the author's mention of Israel offering something unique play in the arguments in the passage?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.The Pesticide Management Bill, 2020, is a long-overdue law on this critical segment of agriculture, in the making since 2008, to replace the obsolete Insecticides Act, 1968. Globally, India is the fourth-largest producer of pesticides. As a first step, the proposed legislation covers all classes of pesticides, not just insecticides as the current law does.Taking into account advances in modern pest management science and the ill effects of synthetic pesticides, the Pesticide Management Bill should bring India's pesticide sector in line with global norms, to some of which India has signed up. The food safety law already has limits on pesticide residue. It would be desirable for the government to subject the Bill to public comment.The present law addresses manufacturing, sale, import, transport, use, and distribution of insecticides. The Bill will cover the life cycle of pesticides from manufacture to disposal and will include regulation of export, packaging, labelling, pricing, storage, and advertisement. Penalties on manufacturers for non-compliance with rules and regulations would be stiffer.An important focus of the Bill is on labelling-manufacturers will be required by law to specify clear and specific information on material and chemical composition, and dosage of use. The labels must carry this information in the local language to ensure that farmers are properly informed. This is critical. There is a tendency of overuse of pesticides by farmers, often driven by ignorance.The Bill should also have provision for technical assistance to farmers on pesticide use from agriculture extension services centers. This is vital for farm exports. Proposals for a pool for compensating farmers might sound good but would diffuse culpability, which must be rigorously established before seeking compensation. Empowering states to set locally relevant norms would be a good idea.While the Bill is a major step forward, it needs to go beyond regulating chemical pesticides. It must take into account non-synthetic pesticides, including research and development.Q. If a manufacturer is supplying pesticides to the farmers at a village in Tamil Nadu. What is the most important thing for the manufacturer to ensure according to the proposed Pesticide Management Bill, 2020?

Top Courses for CLAT

Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.If I say that Indian agriculture has the potential to double or even triple its output in the next 15-20 years, many people will laugh it away. But the reality is that many countries have done it and we can do it.India, China and Israel started off their new political journey in late 1940s, but today China's per capita income in dollar terms is almost five times that of India, and Israel's almost 20 times higher than India. Agriculture contributes just 8 per cent of overall GDP in China compared to about 17 per cent in India, and only 1 per cent in Israel. Over a period of time, people have moved out of agriculture. About 26 per cent of China's workforce is in agriculture, in Israel this is less than 1 percent while India is still stuck with 42 per cent of its workforce in agriculture.China, as many would know, started off its economic reforms in 1978 by taking up agriculture first. It dismantled its commune system of land holdings and liberated agri-markets that allowed farmers to get much higher prices for their produce. As a result, in 1978-84, farmers' incomes in China increased by almost 14 per cent per annum, more than doubling in six years.In India, the 1991 reforms bypassed agriculture. There was only some indirect effect when tariffs on manufactured goods were reduced. But Indian agri-food policies remained more consumer-oriented with a view to "protect the poor". In the process, they never allowed farmers to enjoy the best prices they could get from free markets within India or abroad. The net result of all this was farmers' incomes remained low and so did those of landless agri-labourers.India can learn from other countries. Israel offers something unique: How to turn a desert into cultivating high-value crops for exports (citrus fruits, dates, olives) by recycling urban waste water for agriculture, by de-salinisation of sea waters. Water accounting in Israel is something exemplary.Q. Which of the following will the author of this passage agree with the most?a)Indian agriculture, if liberated, can gain more from international market than domestic one.b)Per capita income of a country is proportionate to its agriculture's contribution to GDP.c)Socialistic controls on market forces often stand in the way of agricultural revolution.d)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.If I say that Indian agriculture has the potential to double or even triple its output in the next 15-20 years, many people will laugh it away. But the reality is that many countries have done it and we can do it.India, China and Israel started off their new political journey in late 1940s, but today China's per capita income in dollar terms is almost five times that of India, and Israel's almost 20 times higher than India. Agriculture contributes just 8 per cent of overall GDP in China compared to about 17 per cent in India, and only 1 per cent in Israel. Over a period of time, people have moved out of agriculture. About 26 per cent of China's workforce is in agriculture, in Israel this is less than 1 percent while India is still stuck with 42 per cent of its workforce in agriculture.China, as many would know, started off its economic reforms in 1978 by taking up agriculture first. It dismantled its commune system of land holdings and liberated agri-markets that allowed farmers to get much higher prices for their produce. As a result, in 1978-84, farmers' incomes in China increased by almost 14 per cent per annum, more than doubling in six years.In India, the 1991 reforms bypassed agriculture. There was only some indirect effect when tariffs on manufactured goods were reduced. But Indian agri-food policies remained more consumer-oriented with a view to "protect the poor". In the process, they never allowed farmers to enjoy the best prices they could get from free markets within India or abroad. The net result of all this was farmers' incomes remained low and so did those of landless agri-labourers.India can learn from other countries. Israel offers something unique: How to turn a desert into cultivating high-value crops for exports (citrus fruits, dates, olives) by recycling urban waste water for agriculture, by de-salinisation of sea waters. Water accounting in Israel is something exemplary.Q. Which of the following will the author of this passage agree with the most?a)Indian agriculture, if liberated, can gain more from international market than domestic one.b)Per capita income of a country is proportionate to its agriculture's contribution to GDP.c)Socialistic controls on market forces often stand in the way of agricultural revolution.d)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.If I say that Indian agriculture has the potential to double or even triple its output in the next 15-20 years, many people will laugh it away. But the reality is that many countries have done it and we can do it.India, China and Israel started off their new political journey in late 1940s, but today China's per capita income in dollar terms is almost five times that of India, and Israel's almost 20 times higher than India. Agriculture contributes just 8 per cent of overall GDP in China compared to about 17 per cent in India, and only 1 per cent in Israel. Over a period of time, people have moved out of agriculture. About 26 per cent of China's workforce is in agriculture, in Israel this is less than 1 percent while India is still stuck with 42 per cent of its workforce in agriculture.China, as many would know, started off its economic reforms in 1978 by taking up agriculture first. It dismantled its commune system of land holdings and liberated agri-markets that allowed farmers to get much higher prices for their produce. As a result, in 1978-84, farmers' incomes in China increased by almost 14 per cent per annum, more than doubling in six years.In India, the 1991 reforms bypassed agriculture. There was only some indirect effect when tariffs on manufactured goods were reduced. But Indian agri-food policies remained more consumer-oriented with a view to "protect the poor". In the process, they never allowed farmers to enjoy the best prices they could get from free markets within India or abroad. The net result of all this was farmers' incomes remained low and so did those of landless agri-labourers.India can learn from other countries. Israel offers something unique: How to turn a desert into cultivating high-value crops for exports (citrus fruits, dates, olives) by recycling urban waste water for agriculture, by de-salinisation of sea waters. Water accounting in Israel is something exemplary.Q. Which of the following will the author of this passage agree with the most?a)Indian agriculture, if liberated, can gain more from international market than domestic one.b)Per capita income of a country is proportionate to its agriculture's contribution to GDP.c)Socialistic controls on market forces often stand in the way of agricultural revolution.d)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.If I say that Indian agriculture has the potential to double or even triple its output in the next 15-20 years, many people will laugh it away. But the reality is that many countries have done it and we can do it.India, China and Israel started off their new political journey in late 1940s, but today China's per capita income in dollar terms is almost five times that of India, and Israel's almost 20 times higher than India. Agriculture contributes just 8 per cent of overall GDP in China compared to about 17 per cent in India, and only 1 per cent in Israel. Over a period of time, people have moved out of agriculture. About 26 per cent of China's workforce is in agriculture, in Israel this is less than 1 percent while India is still stuck with 42 per cent of its workforce in agriculture.China, as many would know, started off its economic reforms in 1978 by taking up agriculture first. It dismantled its commune system of land holdings and liberated agri-markets that allowed farmers to get much higher prices for their produce. As a result, in 1978-84, farmers' incomes in China increased by almost 14 per cent per annum, more than doubling in six years.In India, the 1991 reforms bypassed agriculture. There was only some indirect effect when tariffs on manufactured goods were reduced. But Indian agri-food policies remained more consumer-oriented with a view to "protect the poor". In the process, they never allowed farmers to enjoy the best prices they could get from free markets within India or abroad. The net result of all this was farmers' incomes remained low and so did those of landless agri-labourers.India can learn from other countries. Israel offers something unique: How to turn a desert into cultivating high-value crops for exports (citrus fruits, dates, olives) by recycling urban waste water for agriculture, by de-salinisation of sea waters. Water accounting in Israel is something exemplary.Q. Which of the following will the author of this passage agree with the most?a)Indian agriculture, if liberated, can gain more from international market than domestic one.b)Per capita income of a country is proportionate to its agriculture's contribution to GDP.c)Socialistic controls on market forces often stand in the way of agricultural revolution.d)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.If I say that Indian agriculture has the potential to double or even triple its output in the next 15-20 years, many people will laugh it away. But the reality is that many countries have done it and we can do it.India, China and Israel started off their new political journey in late 1940s, but today China's per capita income in dollar terms is almost five times that of India, and Israel's almost 20 times higher than India. Agriculture contributes just 8 per cent of overall GDP in China compared to about 17 per cent in India, and only 1 per cent in Israel. Over a period of time, people have moved out of agriculture. About 26 per cent of China's workforce is in agriculture, in Israel this is less than 1 percent while India is still stuck with 42 per cent of its workforce in agriculture.China, as many would know, started off its economic reforms in 1978 by taking up agriculture first. It dismantled its commune system of land holdings and liberated agri-markets that allowed farmers to get much higher prices for their produce. As a result, in 1978-84, farmers' incomes in China increased by almost 14 per cent per annum, more than doubling in six years.In India, the 1991 reforms bypassed agriculture. There was only some indirect effect when tariffs on manufactured goods were reduced. But Indian agri-food policies remained more consumer-oriented with a view to "protect the poor". In the process, they never allowed farmers to enjoy the best prices they could get from free markets within India or abroad. The net result of all this was farmers' incomes remained low and so did those of landless agri-labourers.India can learn from other countries. Israel offers something unique: How to turn a desert into cultivating high-value crops for exports (citrus fruits, dates, olives) by recycling urban waste water for agriculture, by de-salinisation of sea waters. Water accounting in Israel is something exemplary.Q. Which of the following will the author of this passage agree with the most?a)Indian agriculture, if liberated, can gain more from international market than domestic one.b)Per capita income of a country is proportionate to its agriculture's contribution to GDP.c)Socialistic controls on market forces often stand in the way of agricultural revolution.d)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.If I say that Indian agriculture has the potential to double or even triple its output in the next 15-20 years, many people will laugh it away. But the reality is that many countries have done it and we can do it.India, China and Israel started off their new political journey in late 1940s, but today China's per capita income in dollar terms is almost five times that of India, and Israel's almost 20 times higher than India. Agriculture contributes just 8 per cent of overall GDP in China compared to about 17 per cent in India, and only 1 per cent in Israel. Over a period of time, people have moved out of agriculture. About 26 per cent of China's workforce is in agriculture, in Israel this is less than 1 percent while India is still stuck with 42 per cent of its workforce in agriculture.China, as many would know, started off its economic reforms in 1978 by taking up agriculture first. It dismantled its commune system of land holdings and liberated agri-markets that allowed farmers to get much higher prices for their produce. As a result, in 1978-84, farmers' incomes in China increased by almost 14 per cent per annum, more than doubling in six years.In India, the 1991 reforms bypassed agriculture. There was only some indirect effect when tariffs on manufactured goods were reduced. But Indian agri-food policies remained more consumer-oriented with a view to "protect the poor". In the process, they never allowed farmers to enjoy the best prices they could get from free markets within India or abroad. The net result of all this was farmers' incomes remained low and so did those of landless agri-labourers.India can learn from other countries. Israel offers something unique: How to turn a desert into cultivating high-value crops for exports (citrus fruits, dates, olives) by recycling urban waste water for agriculture, by de-salinisation of sea waters. Water accounting in Israel is something exemplary.Q. Which of the following will the author of this passage agree with the most?a)Indian agriculture, if liberated, can gain more from international market than domestic one.b)Per capita income of a country is proportionate to its agriculture's contribution to GDP.c)Socialistic controls on market forces often stand in the way of agricultural revolution.d)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.If I say that Indian agriculture has the potential to double or even triple its output in the next 15-20 years, many people will laugh it away. But the reality is that many countries have done it and we can do it.India, China and Israel started off their new political journey in late 1940s, but today China's per capita income in dollar terms is almost five times that of India, and Israel's almost 20 times higher than India. Agriculture contributes just 8 per cent of overall GDP in China compared to about 17 per cent in India, and only 1 per cent in Israel. Over a period of time, people have moved out of agriculture. About 26 per cent of China's workforce is in agriculture, in Israel this is less than 1 percent while India is still stuck with 42 per cent of its workforce in agriculture.China, as many would know, started off its economic reforms in 1978 by taking up agriculture first. It dismantled its commune system of land holdings and liberated agri-markets that allowed farmers to get much higher prices for their produce. As a result, in 1978-84, farmers' incomes in China increased by almost 14 per cent per annum, more than doubling in six years.In India, the 1991 reforms bypassed agriculture. There was only some indirect effect when tariffs on manufactured goods were reduced. But Indian agri-food policies remained more consumer-oriented with a view to "protect the poor". In the process, they never allowed farmers to enjoy the best prices they could get from free markets within India or abroad. The net result of all this was farmers' incomes remained low and so did those of landless agri-labourers.India can learn from other countries. Israel offers something unique: How to turn a desert into cultivating high-value crops for exports (citrus fruits, dates, olives) by recycling urban waste water for agriculture, by de-salinisation of sea waters. Water accounting in Israel is something exemplary.Q. Which of the following will the author of this passage agree with the most?a)Indian agriculture, if liberated, can gain more from international market than domestic one.b)Per capita income of a country is proportionate to its agriculture's contribution to GDP.c)Socialistic controls on market forces often stand in the way of agricultural revolution.d)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.If I say that Indian agriculture has the potential to double or even triple its output in the next 15-20 years, many people will laugh it away. But the reality is that many countries have done it and we can do it.India, China and Israel started off their new political journey in late 1940s, but today China's per capita income in dollar terms is almost five times that of India, and Israel's almost 20 times higher than India. Agriculture contributes just 8 per cent of overall GDP in China compared to about 17 per cent in India, and only 1 per cent in Israel. Over a period of time, people have moved out of agriculture. About 26 per cent of China's workforce is in agriculture, in Israel this is less than 1 percent while India is still stuck with 42 per cent of its workforce in agriculture.China, as many would know, started off its economic reforms in 1978 by taking up agriculture first. It dismantled its commune system of land holdings and liberated agri-markets that allowed farmers to get much higher prices for their produce. As a result, in 1978-84, farmers' incomes in China increased by almost 14 per cent per annum, more than doubling in six years.In India, the 1991 reforms bypassed agriculture. There was only some indirect effect when tariffs on manufactured goods were reduced. But Indian agri-food policies remained more consumer-oriented with a view to "protect the poor". In the process, they never allowed farmers to enjoy the best prices they could get from free markets within India or abroad. The net result of all this was farmers' incomes remained low and so did those of landless agri-labourers.India can learn from other countries. Israel offers something unique: How to turn a desert into cultivating high-value crops for exports (citrus fruits, dates, olives) by recycling urban waste water for agriculture, by de-salinisation of sea waters. Water accounting in Israel is something exemplary.Q. Which of the following will the author of this passage agree with the most?a)Indian agriculture, if liberated, can gain more from international market than domestic one.b)Per capita income of a country is proportionate to its agriculture's contribution to GDP.c)Socialistic controls on market forces often stand in the way of agricultural revolution.d)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.If I say that Indian agriculture has the potential to double or even triple its output in the next 15-20 years, many people will laugh it away. But the reality is that many countries have done it and we can do it.India, China and Israel started off their new political journey in late 1940s, but today China's per capita income in dollar terms is almost five times that of India, and Israel's almost 20 times higher than India. Agriculture contributes just 8 per cent of overall GDP in China compared to about 17 per cent in India, and only 1 per cent in Israel. Over a period of time, people have moved out of agriculture. About 26 per cent of China's workforce is in agriculture, in Israel this is less than 1 percent while India is still stuck with 42 per cent of its workforce in agriculture.China, as many would know, started off its economic reforms in 1978 by taking up agriculture first. It dismantled its commune system of land holdings and liberated agri-markets that allowed farmers to get much higher prices for their produce. As a result, in 1978-84, farmers' incomes in China increased by almost 14 per cent per annum, more than doubling in six years.In India, the 1991 reforms bypassed agriculture. There was only some indirect effect when tariffs on manufactured goods were reduced. But Indian agri-food policies remained more consumer-oriented with a view to "protect the poor". In the process, they never allowed farmers to enjoy the best prices they could get from free markets within India or abroad. The net result of all this was farmers' incomes remained low and so did those of landless agri-labourers.India can learn from other countries. Israel offers something unique: How to turn a desert into cultivating high-value crops for exports (citrus fruits, dates, olives) by recycling urban waste water for agriculture, by de-salinisation of sea waters. Water accounting in Israel is something exemplary.Q. Which of the following will the author of this passage agree with the most?a)Indian agriculture, if liberated, can gain more from international market than domestic one.b)Per capita income of a country is proportionate to its agriculture's contribution to GDP.c)Socialistic controls on market forces often stand in the way of agricultural revolution.d)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: Read the passage and answer the question that follows.If I say that Indian agriculture has the potential to double or even triple its output in the next 15-20 years, many people will laugh it away. But the reality is that many countries have done it and we can do it.India, China and Israel started off their new political journey in late 1940s, but today China's per capita income in dollar terms is almost five times that of India, and Israel's almost 20 times higher than India. Agriculture contributes just 8 per cent of overall GDP in China compared to about 17 per cent in India, and only 1 per cent in Israel. Over a period of time, people have moved out of agriculture. About 26 per cent of China's workforce is in agriculture, in Israel this is less than 1 percent while India is still stuck with 42 per cent of its workforce in agriculture.China, as many would know, started off its economic reforms in 1978 by taking up agriculture first. It dismantled its commune system of land holdings and liberated agri-markets that allowed farmers to get much higher prices for their produce. As a result, in 1978-84, farmers' incomes in China increased by almost 14 per cent per annum, more than doubling in six years.In India, the 1991 reforms bypassed agriculture. There was only some indirect effect when tariffs on manufactured goods were reduced. But Indian agri-food policies remained more consumer-oriented with a view to "protect the poor". In the process, they never allowed farmers to enjoy the best prices they could get from free markets within India or abroad. The net result of all this was farmers' incomes remained low and so did those of landless agri-labourers.India can learn from other countries. Israel offers something unique: How to turn a desert into cultivating high-value crops for exports (citrus fruits, dates, olives) by recycling urban waste water for agriculture, by de-salinisation of sea waters. Water accounting in Israel is something exemplary.Q. Which of the following will the author of this passage agree with the most?a)Indian agriculture, if liberated, can gain more from international market than domestic one.b)Per capita income of a country is proportionate to its agriculture's contribution to GDP.c)Socialistic controls on market forces often stand in the way of agricultural revolution.d)None of theseCorrect answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev