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. What role does the author's mention of Israel offering something unique play in the arguments in the passage?a)It supports the author's conclusion that Indian argi-sector needs to make a shift from its business-as-usual approach.b)It contradicts the author's claim that mere 1% of Israel's population is involved in agriculture.c)It supports the author's claim that only liberating the agri-markets can well increase the farmers' income within reasonable time.d)Both A and CCorrect answer is option 'A'. 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. What role does the author's mention of Israel offering something unique play in the arguments in the passage?a)It supports the author's conclusion that Indian argi-sector needs to make a shift from its business-as-usual approach.b)It contradicts the author's claim that mere 1% of Israel's population is involved in agriculture.c)It supports the author's claim that only liberating the agri-markets can well increase the farmers' income within reasonable time.d)Both A and CCorrect answer is option 'A'. 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. What role does the author's mention of Israel offering something unique play in the arguments in the passage?a)It supports the author's conclusion that Indian argi-sector needs to make a shift from its business-as-usual approach.b)It contradicts the author's claim that mere 1% of Israel's population is involved in agriculture.c)It supports the author's claim that only liberating the agri-markets can well increase the farmers' income within reasonable time.d)Both A and CCorrect answer is option 'A'. 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. What role does the author's mention of Israel offering something unique play in the arguments in the passage?a)It supports the author's conclusion that Indian argi-sector needs to make a shift from its business-as-usual approach.b)It contradicts the author's claim that mere 1% of Israel's population is involved in agriculture.c)It supports the author's claim that only liberating the agri-markets can well increase the farmers' income within reasonable time.d)Both A and CCorrect answer is option 'A'. 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. What role does the author's mention of Israel offering something unique play in the arguments in the passage?a)It supports the author's conclusion that Indian argi-sector needs to make a shift from its business-as-usual approach.b)It contradicts the author's claim that mere 1% of Israel's population is involved in agriculture.c)It supports the author's claim that only liberating the agri-markets can well increase the farmers' income within reasonable time.d)Both A and CCorrect answer is option 'A'. 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. What role does the author's mention of Israel offering something unique play in the arguments in the passage?a)It supports the author's conclusion that Indian argi-sector needs to make a shift from its business-as-usual approach.b)It contradicts the author's claim that mere 1% of Israel's population is involved in agriculture.c)It supports the author's claim that only liberating the agri-markets can well increase the farmers' income within reasonable time.d)Both A and CCorrect answer is option 'A'. 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. What role does the author's mention of Israel offering something unique play in the arguments in the passage?a)It supports the author's conclusion that Indian argi-sector needs to make a shift from its business-as-usual approach.b)It contradicts the author's claim that mere 1% of Israel's population is involved in agriculture.c)It supports the author's claim that only liberating the agri-markets can well increase the farmers' income within reasonable time.d)Both A and CCorrect answer is option 'A'. 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. What role does the author's mention of Israel offering something unique play in the arguments in the passage?a)It supports the author's conclusion that Indian argi-sector needs to make a shift from its business-as-usual approach.b)It contradicts the author's claim that mere 1% of Israel's population is involved in agriculture.c)It supports the author's claim that only liberating the agri-markets can well increase the farmers' income within reasonable time.d)Both A and CCorrect answer is option 'A'. 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. What role does the author's mention of Israel offering something unique play in the arguments in the passage?a)It supports the author's conclusion that Indian argi-sector needs to make a shift from its business-as-usual approach.b)It contradicts the author's claim that mere 1% of Israel's population is involved in agriculture.c)It supports the author's claim that only liberating the agri-markets can well increase the farmers' income within reasonable time.d)Both A and CCorrect answer is option 'A'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.