CAT Exam  >  CAT Questions  >  Directions: The passage below is followed by ... Start Learning for Free
Directions: The passage below is followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.
THE DECADES-OLD proposal to link all of India's major rivers with one another was revived with much fanfare last year. Most political parties welcomed it then as a solution to the country's drinking water and irrigation problems. But it has not taken long for the proposal to come face to face with the hard reality of planning what will be the largest project ever taken up in India. A number of States, from Punjab in the north to Kerala in the south, have expressed their opposition to a transfer of river waters from their territory to other States. The latest example is the considerable anxiety in Kerala about including a link between the Pampa and the Achankovil (flowing through Kerala) and the Vaippar (in Tamil Nadu) in the proposed national river grid. This is only one of many reasons why the ambitious, many would say unrealistic. Schedules for execution of the project have already been thrown out of gear.
The high-level task force on the project, constituted in December 2002, was expected to prepare the schedule for completion of feasibility studies and estimate the cost of the project by the end of April this year. It was to then come up in June with the options for funding the project. It was also expected to convene a meeting in May/June of State Chief Ministers and obtain their agreement and cooperation. None of these deadlines has been met and there is no indication that these events will take place in the near future. This is not surprising, for while the interlinking proposal has been spoken about for decades, all the complex engineering, economic, environmental and social issues involved in the project have never been carefully studied. It is, therefore, not an easy task to draw up in a few months even the time lines for implementation. It will also be impossible to complete within a decade (as decreed by the Supreme Court) execution of a project that at first approximation is estimated to cost Rs. 5,60,000 crores, which is twice the size of India's gross domestic product at present. In fact, the one Government committee that did examine aspects of the proposal to some extent, the National Commission for an Integrated Water Resources Development Plan, was in 1999 ambivalent about the benefits of interlinking the country's rivers.
The drought of 2002 was the context in which the proposal to build a grid connecting India's rivers was revived. Before another drought leads to another round of active interest in the project, it is necessary to come up with answers to two broad sets of questions. The first question is, what will be the total costs and benefits of a river grid project in economic, environmental and social terms. The second will be, what are the different options to meet the future requirements of water and is the interlinking proposal the best among them. Answers to these questions will have to address issues in agricultural technology, patterns of water use, extraction of ground and surface water resources, efficiency in consumption of water in crop cultivation, resource mobilization, human displacement and changes in the environment. A plan on such a scale and of such complexity as the proposal to link the country's rivers can be taken up only after a range of such substantive issues are analyzed threadbare.
Q. What is the main idea of the passage?
  • a)
    To highlight the objections raised by some states against the proposed project to interlink all major rivers of India
  • b)
    To point out reasons due to which the proposed interlinking of rivers could not be achieved in time
  • c)
    To critically analyse the pros and cons of such a project
  • d)
    The political wrangling over a public utility enterprise
  • e)
    The cost-benefit analysis of a gigantic project
Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Most Upvoted Answer
Directions: The passage below is followed by a question based on its c...
Main Idea of the Passage

The main idea of the passage is to highlight the reasons why the proposed project to interlink all major rivers of India has faced challenges and delays in its implementation.

Reasons for Delay in Achieving the Proposed Interlinking of Rivers

- Opposition from States: Several states, such as Punjab and Kerala, have expressed their opposition to the transfer of river waters from their territory to other states.
- Complexity of the Project: The project involves complex engineering, economic, environmental, and social issues that have never been carefully studied.
- Missed Deadlines: The high-level task force assigned to the project failed to meet deadlines for completion of feasibility studies, cost estimation, funding options, and obtaining agreement from State Chief Ministers.
- Huge Cost: The estimated cost of the project is Rs. 5,60,000 crores, which is twice the size of India's current gross domestic product.
- Lack of Comprehensive Analysis: The National Commission for an Integrated Water Resources Development Plan was ambivalent about the benefits of interlinking the country's rivers in 1999, indicating a lack of thorough analysis.

Therefore, the passage emphasizes the challenges and obstacles that have hindered the progress of the proposed river interlinking project in India.
Attention CAT Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed CAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in CAT.
Explore Courses for CAT exam

Similar CAT Doubts

Answer the following question based on the information given below.India ranks 4th in carbon emission among nations worldwide. For a developing nation like India, it seems impossible to bring a significant reduction in carbon emissions in near future. The Environment Protection Act, 1986, was one of the first legislations brought about by the legislature to protect the environment from degradation caused by the ever-increasing pollution. The next decade was a witness to economic liberalisation which in turn resulted in industrialisation and a revolutionary increase in automobiles on the road.The Delhi government recently applied the odd and even plan for automobiles. The odd and even scheme of the Delhi government is laudable for the sheer fact that it takes courage to take such an antipopulist measure. The scheme may not have had a drastic impact on the pollution, but it has indeed resulted in a reduction in both the traffic and the resultant pollution. There are certain sections of society who are still miffed with the government, but then constructive criticism is a sign of a healthy democracy.Taking a lesson from the successful implementation of odd and even rule, governments across the country should board the reform bandwagon. These days we see many advertisements making people aware of the ill-impact of various particulate matters from vehicles as well as from industry. The government should continue with them and should spread awareness among the masses.Every developing township is getting clogged with the ever increasing traffic on their roads. Cities which have already acquired a shape can be restructured through implementing metro rail-based mass rapid transit systems (MRTS). It has been observed that road- based MRTS is less effective in the urban centres in India. Most of the Indian cities have developed in a haphazard manner and there is no or little scope for implementation of road-based MRTS.The use of CNG vehicles should be increased and people should be encouraged to use more and more of it. It could be fuelled further by asking auto manufacturers to assign CNG fitting stations from where people can install CNG kits in their cars without losing their warranty. Conversion percentage of vehicles into CNG will get a shot in the arm with this initiative.However, it seems impossible for governments to act on their own because unlike the Delhi government, very few governments in the states enjoy such absolute majority. The reason for judicialintervention is the avaricious attitude of the people. The court should reassume its role and put its act together to save them from the self-destructive ways and should pave a way in which pollution could be curbed in India.Q.According to the passage, which of the following is true?

Analyse the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questions that follow:Each piece, or part, of the whole of nature is always merely an approximation to the complete truth, or the complete truth so far as we know it. In fact, everything we know is only some kind of approximation, because we know that we do not know all the laws as yet. Therefore, things must be learned only to be unlearned again or, more likely, to be corrected.The principle of science, the definition, almost, is the following: The test of all knowledge is experiment. Experiment is the sole judge of scientific "truth." But what is the source of knowledge? Where do the laws that are to be tested come from? Experiment, itself, helps to produce these laws, in the sense that it gives us hints.But also needed is imagination to create from these hints the great generalizations-to guess at the wonderful, simple, but very strange patterns beneath them all, and then to experiment to check again whether we have made the right guess. This imagining process is so difficult that there is a division of labour in physics: there are theoretical physicists who imagine, deduce, and guess at new laws, but do not experiment; and then there are experimental physicists who experiment, imagine, deduce, and guess.We said that the laws of nature are approximate: that we first find the "wrong" ones, and then we find the "right" ones. Now, how can an experiment be "wrong"? First, in a trivial way: the apparatus can be faulty and you did not notice. But these things are easily fixed and checked back and forth. So without snatching at such minor things, how can the results of an experiment be wrong? Only by being inaccurate. For example, the mass of an object never seems to change; a spinning top has the same weight as a still one. So a "law" was invented: mass is constant, independent of speed. That "law" is now found to be incorrect. Mass is found to increase with velocity, but appreciable increase requires velocities near that of light.A true law is: if an object moves with a speed of less than one hundred miles a second the mass is constant to within one part in a million. In some such approximate form this is a correct law. So in practice one might think that the new law makes no significant difference. Well, yes and no. For ordinary speeds we can certainly forget it and use the simple constant mass law as a good approximation. But for high speeds we are wrong, and the higher the speed, the more wrong we are.Finally, and  most  interesting,  philosophically  we  are completely  wrong  with  the approximate law. Our entire picture of the world has to be altered even though the mass changes only by a little bit. This is a very peculiar thing about the philosophy, or the ideas, behind the laws.Even a very small effect sometimes requires profound changes to our ideas.Consider the two statements from the passage:Statement I: The mass of an object never seems to change.Statement II: Mass is found to increase with velocity.Q. Which of the following options CANNOT be concluded from the above passage?( d)  Statement I reveals that experimental physicists who imagine, deduce, and guess are philosophically wrong.

Directions: Read the passage carefully and select the best answer out of the given four alternatives.Business sustainability has come a long way. From the dawn of the modern environmental movement and the establishment of environmental regulations in the 1970s, it has become a strategic concern driven by market forces. Today, more than 90 percent of CEOs state that sustainability is important to their company's success, and companies develop sustainability strategies, market sustainable products and services, create positions such as chief sustainability officer, and publish sustainability reports for consumers, investors, activists, and the public at large. This trend will not abate anytime soon.Surveys show that 88 percent of business school students think that learning about social and environmental issues in business is a priority, and 67 percent want to incorporate environmental sustainability into their future jobs. For all this interest, we should expect the world to become more sustainable. But problems such as climate change, water scarcity, species extinction, and many others continue to worsen. Sustainable business is reaching the limits of what it can accomplish in its present form. It is slowing the velocity at which we are approaching a crisis, but we are not changing course. Instead of tinkering around the edges of the market with new products and services, business must now transform it. That is the focus of the next phase of business sustainability, and we can see signs that it is emerging.The first phase of business sustainability, called "enterprise integration," is founded on a model of business responding to market shifts to increase competitive positioning by integrating sustainability into pre existing business considerations. By contrast, the next phase of business sustainability, what we call "market transformation," is founded on a model of business transforming the market. Instead of waiting for a market shift to create incentives for sustainable practices, companies are creating those shifts to enable new forms of business sustainability.Enterprise integration is geared toward present-day measures of success; market transformation will help companies create tomorrow's measures. The first is focused on reducing un-sustainability; the second is focused on creating sustainability. The first attends to symptoms; the second attends to causes. The first focuses primarily inward toward the health and vitality of the organisation; the second expands that focus to look outward toward the health and vitality of the market and society in which the organisation operates. The first will help future leaders get a job in today's marketplace; the second will help them develop a target for a lifelong career. The first is incremental, the second transformational.Changing the way we do business is essential to addressing the challenges of environmental degradation. The market is the most powerful institution on earth, and business is the most powerful entity within it. Business transcends national boundaries, and it possesses resources that exceed those of many nation-states. Business is responsible for producing the buildings we live and work in, the food we eat, the clothes we wear, the automobiles we drive, the energy that propels them, and the next form of mobility that will replace them. This does not mean that only business can generate solutions, but with its unmatched powers of ideation, production, and distribution, business is best positioned to bring the change we need at the scale we need it.Q. What is the flaw in `sustainable business' as it is perceived today as mentioned in the passage?

Top Courses for CAT

Directions: The passage below is followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.THE DECADES-OLD proposal to link all of Indias major rivers with one another was revived with much fanfare last year. Most political parties welcomed it then as a solution to the countrys drinking water and irrigation problems. But it has not taken long for the proposal to come face to face with the hard reality of planning what will be the largest project ever taken up in India. A number of States, from Punjab in the north to Kerala in the south, have expressed their opposition to a transfer of river waters from their territory to other States. The latest example is the considerable anxiety in Kerala about including a link between the Pampa and the Achankovil (flowing through Kerala) and the Vaippar (in Tamil Nadu) in the proposed national river grid. This is only one of many reasons why the ambitious, many would say unrealistic. Schedules for execution of the project have already been thrown out of gear.The high-level task force on the project, constituted in December 2002, was expected to prepare the schedule for completion of feasibility studies and estimate the cost of the project by the end of April this year. It was to then come up in June with the options for funding the project. It was also expected to convene a meeting in May/June of State Chief Ministers and obtain their agreement and cooperation. None of these deadlines has been met and there is no indication that these events will take place in the near future. This is not surprising, for while the interlinking proposal has been spoken about for decades, all the complex engineering, economic, environmental and social issues involved in the project have never been carefully studied. It is, therefore, not an easy task to draw up in a few months even the time lines for implementation. It will also be impossible to complete within a decade (as decreed by the Supreme Court) execution of a project that at first approximation is estimated to cost Rs. 5,60,000 crores, which is twice the size of Indias gross domestic product at present. In fact, the one Government committee that did examine aspects of the proposal to some extent, the National Commission for an Integrated Water Resources Development Plan, was in 1999 ambivalent about the benefits of interlinking the countrys rivers.The drought of 2002 was the context in which the proposal to build a grid connecting Indias rivers was revived. Before another drought leads to another round of active interest in the project, it is necessary to come up with answers to two broad sets of questions. The first question is, what will be the total costs and benefits of a river grid project in economic, environmental and social terms. The second will be, what are the different options to meet the future requirements of water and is the interlinking proposal the best among them. Answers to these questions will have to address issues in agricultural technology, patterns of water use, extraction of ground and surface water resources, efficiency in consumption of water in crop cultivation, resource mobilization, human displacement and changes in the environment. A plan on such a scale and of such complexity as the proposal to link the countrys rivers can be taken up only after a range of such substantive issues are analyzed threadbare.Q. What is the main idea of the passage?a)To highlight the objections raised by some states against the proposed project to interlink all major rivers of Indiab)To point out reasons due to which the proposed interlinking of rivers could not be achieved in timec)To critically analyse the pros and cons of such a projectd)The political wrangling over a public utility enterprisee)The cost-benefit analysis of a gigantic projectCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Directions: The passage below is followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.THE DECADES-OLD proposal to link all of Indias major rivers with one another was revived with much fanfare last year. Most political parties welcomed it then as a solution to the countrys drinking water and irrigation problems. But it has not taken long for the proposal to come face to face with the hard reality of planning what will be the largest project ever taken up in India. A number of States, from Punjab in the north to Kerala in the south, have expressed their opposition to a transfer of river waters from their territory to other States. The latest example is the considerable anxiety in Kerala about including a link between the Pampa and the Achankovil (flowing through Kerala) and the Vaippar (in Tamil Nadu) in the proposed national river grid. This is only one of many reasons why the ambitious, many would say unrealistic. Schedules for execution of the project have already been thrown out of gear.The high-level task force on the project, constituted in December 2002, was expected to prepare the schedule for completion of feasibility studies and estimate the cost of the project by the end of April this year. It was to then come up in June with the options for funding the project. It was also expected to convene a meeting in May/June of State Chief Ministers and obtain their agreement and cooperation. None of these deadlines has been met and there is no indication that these events will take place in the near future. This is not surprising, for while the interlinking proposal has been spoken about for decades, all the complex engineering, economic, environmental and social issues involved in the project have never been carefully studied. It is, therefore, not an easy task to draw up in a few months even the time lines for implementation. It will also be impossible to complete within a decade (as decreed by the Supreme Court) execution of a project that at first approximation is estimated to cost Rs. 5,60,000 crores, which is twice the size of Indias gross domestic product at present. In fact, the one Government committee that did examine aspects of the proposal to some extent, the National Commission for an Integrated Water Resources Development Plan, was in 1999 ambivalent about the benefits of interlinking the countrys rivers.The drought of 2002 was the context in which the proposal to build a grid connecting Indias rivers was revived. Before another drought leads to another round of active interest in the project, it is necessary to come up with answers to two broad sets of questions. The first question is, what will be the total costs and benefits of a river grid project in economic, environmental and social terms. The second will be, what are the different options to meet the future requirements of water and is the interlinking proposal the best among them. Answers to these questions will have to address issues in agricultural technology, patterns of water use, extraction of ground and surface water resources, efficiency in consumption of water in crop cultivation, resource mobilization, human displacement and changes in the environment. A plan on such a scale and of such complexity as the proposal to link the countrys rivers can be taken up only after a range of such substantive issues are analyzed threadbare.Q. What is the main idea of the passage?a)To highlight the objections raised by some states against the proposed project to interlink all major rivers of Indiab)To point out reasons due to which the proposed interlinking of rivers could not be achieved in timec)To critically analyse the pros and cons of such a projectd)The political wrangling over a public utility enterprisee)The cost-benefit analysis of a gigantic projectCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for CAT 2024 is part of CAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: The passage below is followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.THE DECADES-OLD proposal to link all of Indias major rivers with one another was revived with much fanfare last year. Most political parties welcomed it then as a solution to the countrys drinking water and irrigation problems. But it has not taken long for the proposal to come face to face with the hard reality of planning what will be the largest project ever taken up in India. A number of States, from Punjab in the north to Kerala in the south, have expressed their opposition to a transfer of river waters from their territory to other States. The latest example is the considerable anxiety in Kerala about including a link between the Pampa and the Achankovil (flowing through Kerala) and the Vaippar (in Tamil Nadu) in the proposed national river grid. This is only one of many reasons why the ambitious, many would say unrealistic. Schedules for execution of the project have already been thrown out of gear.The high-level task force on the project, constituted in December 2002, was expected to prepare the schedule for completion of feasibility studies and estimate the cost of the project by the end of April this year. It was to then come up in June with the options for funding the project. It was also expected to convene a meeting in May/June of State Chief Ministers and obtain their agreement and cooperation. None of these deadlines has been met and there is no indication that these events will take place in the near future. This is not surprising, for while the interlinking proposal has been spoken about for decades, all the complex engineering, economic, environmental and social issues involved in the project have never been carefully studied. It is, therefore, not an easy task to draw up in a few months even the time lines for implementation. It will also be impossible to complete within a decade (as decreed by the Supreme Court) execution of a project that at first approximation is estimated to cost Rs. 5,60,000 crores, which is twice the size of Indias gross domestic product at present. In fact, the one Government committee that did examine aspects of the proposal to some extent, the National Commission for an Integrated Water Resources Development Plan, was in 1999 ambivalent about the benefits of interlinking the countrys rivers.The drought of 2002 was the context in which the proposal to build a grid connecting Indias rivers was revived. Before another drought leads to another round of active interest in the project, it is necessary to come up with answers to two broad sets of questions. The first question is, what will be the total costs and benefits of a river grid project in economic, environmental and social terms. The second will be, what are the different options to meet the future requirements of water and is the interlinking proposal the best among them. Answers to these questions will have to address issues in agricultural technology, patterns of water use, extraction of ground and surface water resources, efficiency in consumption of water in crop cultivation, resource mobilization, human displacement and changes in the environment. A plan on such a scale and of such complexity as the proposal to link the countrys rivers can be taken up only after a range of such substantive issues are analyzed threadbare.Q. What is the main idea of the passage?a)To highlight the objections raised by some states against the proposed project to interlink all major rivers of Indiab)To point out reasons due to which the proposed interlinking of rivers could not be achieved in timec)To critically analyse the pros and cons of such a projectd)The political wrangling over a public utility enterprisee)The cost-benefit analysis of a gigantic projectCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: The passage below is followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.THE DECADES-OLD proposal to link all of Indias major rivers with one another was revived with much fanfare last year. Most political parties welcomed it then as a solution to the countrys drinking water and irrigation problems. But it has not taken long for the proposal to come face to face with the hard reality of planning what will be the largest project ever taken up in India. A number of States, from Punjab in the north to Kerala in the south, have expressed their opposition to a transfer of river waters from their territory to other States. The latest example is the considerable anxiety in Kerala about including a link between the Pampa and the Achankovil (flowing through Kerala) and the Vaippar (in Tamil Nadu) in the proposed national river grid. This is only one of many reasons why the ambitious, many would say unrealistic. Schedules for execution of the project have already been thrown out of gear.The high-level task force on the project, constituted in December 2002, was expected to prepare the schedule for completion of feasibility studies and estimate the cost of the project by the end of April this year. It was to then come up in June with the options for funding the project. It was also expected to convene a meeting in May/June of State Chief Ministers and obtain their agreement and cooperation. None of these deadlines has been met and there is no indication that these events will take place in the near future. This is not surprising, for while the interlinking proposal has been spoken about for decades, all the complex engineering, economic, environmental and social issues involved in the project have never been carefully studied. It is, therefore, not an easy task to draw up in a few months even the time lines for implementation. It will also be impossible to complete within a decade (as decreed by the Supreme Court) execution of a project that at first approximation is estimated to cost Rs. 5,60,000 crores, which is twice the size of Indias gross domestic product at present. In fact, the one Government committee that did examine aspects of the proposal to some extent, the National Commission for an Integrated Water Resources Development Plan, was in 1999 ambivalent about the benefits of interlinking the countrys rivers.The drought of 2002 was the context in which the proposal to build a grid connecting Indias rivers was revived. Before another drought leads to another round of active interest in the project, it is necessary to come up with answers to two broad sets of questions. The first question is, what will be the total costs and benefits of a river grid project in economic, environmental and social terms. The second will be, what are the different options to meet the future requirements of water and is the interlinking proposal the best among them. Answers to these questions will have to address issues in agricultural technology, patterns of water use, extraction of ground and surface water resources, efficiency in consumption of water in crop cultivation, resource mobilization, human displacement and changes in the environment. A plan on such a scale and of such complexity as the proposal to link the countrys rivers can be taken up only after a range of such substantive issues are analyzed threadbare.Q. What is the main idea of the passage?a)To highlight the objections raised by some states against the proposed project to interlink all major rivers of Indiab)To point out reasons due to which the proposed interlinking of rivers could not be achieved in timec)To critically analyse the pros and cons of such a projectd)The political wrangling over a public utility enterprisee)The cost-benefit analysis of a gigantic projectCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Directions: The passage below is followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.THE DECADES-OLD proposal to link all of Indias major rivers with one another was revived with much fanfare last year. Most political parties welcomed it then as a solution to the countrys drinking water and irrigation problems. But it has not taken long for the proposal to come face to face with the hard reality of planning what will be the largest project ever taken up in India. A number of States, from Punjab in the north to Kerala in the south, have expressed their opposition to a transfer of river waters from their territory to other States. The latest example is the considerable anxiety in Kerala about including a link between the Pampa and the Achankovil (flowing through Kerala) and the Vaippar (in Tamil Nadu) in the proposed national river grid. This is only one of many reasons why the ambitious, many would say unrealistic. Schedules for execution of the project have already been thrown out of gear.The high-level task force on the project, constituted in December 2002, was expected to prepare the schedule for completion of feasibility studies and estimate the cost of the project by the end of April this year. It was to then come up in June with the options for funding the project. It was also expected to convene a meeting in May/June of State Chief Ministers and obtain their agreement and cooperation. None of these deadlines has been met and there is no indication that these events will take place in the near future. This is not surprising, for while the interlinking proposal has been spoken about for decades, all the complex engineering, economic, environmental and social issues involved in the project have never been carefully studied. It is, therefore, not an easy task to draw up in a few months even the time lines for implementation. It will also be impossible to complete within a decade (as decreed by the Supreme Court) execution of a project that at first approximation is estimated to cost Rs. 5,60,000 crores, which is twice the size of Indias gross domestic product at present. In fact, the one Government committee that did examine aspects of the proposal to some extent, the National Commission for an Integrated Water Resources Development Plan, was in 1999 ambivalent about the benefits of interlinking the countrys rivers.The drought of 2002 was the context in which the proposal to build a grid connecting Indias rivers was revived. Before another drought leads to another round of active interest in the project, it is necessary to come up with answers to two broad sets of questions. The first question is, what will be the total costs and benefits of a river grid project in economic, environmental and social terms. The second will be, what are the different options to meet the future requirements of water and is the interlinking proposal the best among them. Answers to these questions will have to address issues in agricultural technology, patterns of water use, extraction of ground and surface water resources, efficiency in consumption of water in crop cultivation, resource mobilization, human displacement and changes in the environment. A plan on such a scale and of such complexity as the proposal to link the countrys rivers can be taken up only after a range of such substantive issues are analyzed threadbare.Q. What is the main idea of the passage?a)To highlight the objections raised by some states against the proposed project to interlink all major rivers of Indiab)To point out reasons due to which the proposed interlinking of rivers could not be achieved in timec)To critically analyse the pros and cons of such a projectd)The political wrangling over a public utility enterprisee)The cost-benefit analysis of a gigantic projectCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Directions: The passage below is followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.THE DECADES-OLD proposal to link all of Indias major rivers with one another was revived with much fanfare last year. Most political parties welcomed it then as a solution to the countrys drinking water and irrigation problems. But it has not taken long for the proposal to come face to face with the hard reality of planning what will be the largest project ever taken up in India. A number of States, from Punjab in the north to Kerala in the south, have expressed their opposition to a transfer of river waters from their territory to other States. The latest example is the considerable anxiety in Kerala about including a link between the Pampa and the Achankovil (flowing through Kerala) and the Vaippar (in Tamil Nadu) in the proposed national river grid. This is only one of many reasons why the ambitious, many would say unrealistic. Schedules for execution of the project have already been thrown out of gear.The high-level task force on the project, constituted in December 2002, was expected to prepare the schedule for completion of feasibility studies and estimate the cost of the project by the end of April this year. It was to then come up in June with the options for funding the project. It was also expected to convene a meeting in May/June of State Chief Ministers and obtain their agreement and cooperation. None of these deadlines has been met and there is no indication that these events will take place in the near future. This is not surprising, for while the interlinking proposal has been spoken about for decades, all the complex engineering, economic, environmental and social issues involved in the project have never been carefully studied. It is, therefore, not an easy task to draw up in a few months even the time lines for implementation. It will also be impossible to complete within a decade (as decreed by the Supreme Court) execution of a project that at first approximation is estimated to cost Rs. 5,60,000 crores, which is twice the size of Indias gross domestic product at present. In fact, the one Government committee that did examine aspects of the proposal to some extent, the National Commission for an Integrated Water Resources Development Plan, was in 1999 ambivalent about the benefits of interlinking the countrys rivers.The drought of 2002 was the context in which the proposal to build a grid connecting Indias rivers was revived. Before another drought leads to another round of active interest in the project, it is necessary to come up with answers to two broad sets of questions. The first question is, what will be the total costs and benefits of a river grid project in economic, environmental and social terms. The second will be, what are the different options to meet the future requirements of water and is the interlinking proposal the best among them. Answers to these questions will have to address issues in agricultural technology, patterns of water use, extraction of ground and surface water resources, efficiency in consumption of water in crop cultivation, resource mobilization, human displacement and changes in the environment. A plan on such a scale and of such complexity as the proposal to link the countrys rivers can be taken up only after a range of such substantive issues are analyzed threadbare.Q. What is the main idea of the passage?a)To highlight the objections raised by some states against the proposed project to interlink all major rivers of Indiab)To point out reasons due to which the proposed interlinking of rivers could not be achieved in timec)To critically analyse the pros and cons of such a projectd)The political wrangling over a public utility enterprisee)The cost-benefit analysis of a gigantic projectCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: The passage below is followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.THE DECADES-OLD proposal to link all of Indias major rivers with one another was revived with much fanfare last year. Most political parties welcomed it then as a solution to the countrys drinking water and irrigation problems. But it has not taken long for the proposal to come face to face with the hard reality of planning what will be the largest project ever taken up in India. A number of States, from Punjab in the north to Kerala in the south, have expressed their opposition to a transfer of river waters from their territory to other States. The latest example is the considerable anxiety in Kerala about including a link between the Pampa and the Achankovil (flowing through Kerala) and the Vaippar (in Tamil Nadu) in the proposed national river grid. This is only one of many reasons why the ambitious, many would say unrealistic. Schedules for execution of the project have already been thrown out of gear.The high-level task force on the project, constituted in December 2002, was expected to prepare the schedule for completion of feasibility studies and estimate the cost of the project by the end of April this year. It was to then come up in June with the options for funding the project. It was also expected to convene a meeting in May/June of State Chief Ministers and obtain their agreement and cooperation. None of these deadlines has been met and there is no indication that these events will take place in the near future. This is not surprising, for while the interlinking proposal has been spoken about for decades, all the complex engineering, economic, environmental and social issues involved in the project have never been carefully studied. It is, therefore, not an easy task to draw up in a few months even the time lines for implementation. It will also be impossible to complete within a decade (as decreed by the Supreme Court) execution of a project that at first approximation is estimated to cost Rs. 5,60,000 crores, which is twice the size of Indias gross domestic product at present. In fact, the one Government committee that did examine aspects of the proposal to some extent, the National Commission for an Integrated Water Resources Development Plan, was in 1999 ambivalent about the benefits of interlinking the countrys rivers.The drought of 2002 was the context in which the proposal to build a grid connecting Indias rivers was revived. Before another drought leads to another round of active interest in the project, it is necessary to come up with answers to two broad sets of questions. The first question is, what will be the total costs and benefits of a river grid project in economic, environmental and social terms. The second will be, what are the different options to meet the future requirements of water and is the interlinking proposal the best among them. Answers to these questions will have to address issues in agricultural technology, patterns of water use, extraction of ground and surface water resources, efficiency in consumption of water in crop cultivation, resource mobilization, human displacement and changes in the environment. A plan on such a scale and of such complexity as the proposal to link the countrys rivers can be taken up only after a range of such substantive issues are analyzed threadbare.Q. What is the main idea of the passage?a)To highlight the objections raised by some states against the proposed project to interlink all major rivers of Indiab)To point out reasons due to which the proposed interlinking of rivers could not be achieved in timec)To critically analyse the pros and cons of such a projectd)The political wrangling over a public utility enterprisee)The cost-benefit analysis of a gigantic projectCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: The passage below is followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.THE DECADES-OLD proposal to link all of Indias major rivers with one another was revived with much fanfare last year. Most political parties welcomed it then as a solution to the countrys drinking water and irrigation problems. But it has not taken long for the proposal to come face to face with the hard reality of planning what will be the largest project ever taken up in India. A number of States, from Punjab in the north to Kerala in the south, have expressed their opposition to a transfer of river waters from their territory to other States. The latest example is the considerable anxiety in Kerala about including a link between the Pampa and the Achankovil (flowing through Kerala) and the Vaippar (in Tamil Nadu) in the proposed national river grid. This is only one of many reasons why the ambitious, many would say unrealistic. Schedules for execution of the project have already been thrown out of gear.The high-level task force on the project, constituted in December 2002, was expected to prepare the schedule for completion of feasibility studies and estimate the cost of the project by the end of April this year. It was to then come up in June with the options for funding the project. It was also expected to convene a meeting in May/June of State Chief Ministers and obtain their agreement and cooperation. None of these deadlines has been met and there is no indication that these events will take place in the near future. This is not surprising, for while the interlinking proposal has been spoken about for decades, all the complex engineering, economic, environmental and social issues involved in the project have never been carefully studied. It is, therefore, not an easy task to draw up in a few months even the time lines for implementation. It will also be impossible to complete within a decade (as decreed by the Supreme Court) execution of a project that at first approximation is estimated to cost Rs. 5,60,000 crores, which is twice the size of Indias gross domestic product at present. In fact, the one Government committee that did examine aspects of the proposal to some extent, the National Commission for an Integrated Water Resources Development Plan, was in 1999 ambivalent about the benefits of interlinking the countrys rivers.The drought of 2002 was the context in which the proposal to build a grid connecting Indias rivers was revived. Before another drought leads to another round of active interest in the project, it is necessary to come up with answers to two broad sets of questions. The first question is, what will be the total costs and benefits of a river grid project in economic, environmental and social terms. The second will be, what are the different options to meet the future requirements of water and is the interlinking proposal the best among them. Answers to these questions will have to address issues in agricultural technology, patterns of water use, extraction of ground and surface water resources, efficiency in consumption of water in crop cultivation, resource mobilization, human displacement and changes in the environment. A plan on such a scale and of such complexity as the proposal to link the countrys rivers can be taken up only after a range of such substantive issues are analyzed threadbare.Q. What is the main idea of the passage?a)To highlight the objections raised by some states against the proposed project to interlink all major rivers of Indiab)To point out reasons due to which the proposed interlinking of rivers could not be achieved in timec)To critically analyse the pros and cons of such a projectd)The political wrangling over a public utility enterprisee)The cost-benefit analysis of a gigantic projectCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: The passage below is followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.THE DECADES-OLD proposal to link all of Indias major rivers with one another was revived with much fanfare last year. Most political parties welcomed it then as a solution to the countrys drinking water and irrigation problems. But it has not taken long for the proposal to come face to face with the hard reality of planning what will be the largest project ever taken up in India. A number of States, from Punjab in the north to Kerala in the south, have expressed their opposition to a transfer of river waters from their territory to other States. The latest example is the considerable anxiety in Kerala about including a link between the Pampa and the Achankovil (flowing through Kerala) and the Vaippar (in Tamil Nadu) in the proposed national river grid. This is only one of many reasons why the ambitious, many would say unrealistic. Schedules for execution of the project have already been thrown out of gear.The high-level task force on the project, constituted in December 2002, was expected to prepare the schedule for completion of feasibility studies and estimate the cost of the project by the end of April this year. It was to then come up in June with the options for funding the project. It was also expected to convene a meeting in May/June of State Chief Ministers and obtain their agreement and cooperation. None of these deadlines has been met and there is no indication that these events will take place in the near future. This is not surprising, for while the interlinking proposal has been spoken about for decades, all the complex engineering, economic, environmental and social issues involved in the project have never been carefully studied. It is, therefore, not an easy task to draw up in a few months even the time lines for implementation. It will also be impossible to complete within a decade (as decreed by the Supreme Court) execution of a project that at first approximation is estimated to cost Rs. 5,60,000 crores, which is twice the size of Indias gross domestic product at present. In fact, the one Government committee that did examine aspects of the proposal to some extent, the National Commission for an Integrated Water Resources Development Plan, was in 1999 ambivalent about the benefits of interlinking the countrys rivers.The drought of 2002 was the context in which the proposal to build a grid connecting Indias rivers was revived. Before another drought leads to another round of active interest in the project, it is necessary to come up with answers to two broad sets of questions. The first question is, what will be the total costs and benefits of a river grid project in economic, environmental and social terms. The second will be, what are the different options to meet the future requirements of water and is the interlinking proposal the best among them. Answers to these questions will have to address issues in agricultural technology, patterns of water use, extraction of ground and surface water resources, efficiency in consumption of water in crop cultivation, resource mobilization, human displacement and changes in the environment. A plan on such a scale and of such complexity as the proposal to link the countrys rivers can be taken up only after a range of such substantive issues are analyzed threadbare.Q. What is the main idea of the passage?a)To highlight the objections raised by some states against the proposed project to interlink all major rivers of Indiab)To point out reasons due to which the proposed interlinking of rivers could not be achieved in timec)To critically analyse the pros and cons of such a projectd)The political wrangling over a public utility enterprisee)The cost-benefit analysis of a gigantic projectCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: The passage below is followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.THE DECADES-OLD proposal to link all of Indias major rivers with one another was revived with much fanfare last year. Most political parties welcomed it then as a solution to the countrys drinking water and irrigation problems. But it has not taken long for the proposal to come face to face with the hard reality of planning what will be the largest project ever taken up in India. A number of States, from Punjab in the north to Kerala in the south, have expressed their opposition to a transfer of river waters from their territory to other States. The latest example is the considerable anxiety in Kerala about including a link between the Pampa and the Achankovil (flowing through Kerala) and the Vaippar (in Tamil Nadu) in the proposed national river grid. This is only one of many reasons why the ambitious, many would say unrealistic. Schedules for execution of the project have already been thrown out of gear.The high-level task force on the project, constituted in December 2002, was expected to prepare the schedule for completion of feasibility studies and estimate the cost of the project by the end of April this year. It was to then come up in June with the options for funding the project. It was also expected to convene a meeting in May/June of State Chief Ministers and obtain their agreement and cooperation. None of these deadlines has been met and there is no indication that these events will take place in the near future. This is not surprising, for while the interlinking proposal has been spoken about for decades, all the complex engineering, economic, environmental and social issues involved in the project have never been carefully studied. It is, therefore, not an easy task to draw up in a few months even the time lines for implementation. It will also be impossible to complete within a decade (as decreed by the Supreme Court) execution of a project that at first approximation is estimated to cost Rs. 5,60,000 crores, which is twice the size of Indias gross domestic product at present. In fact, the one Government committee that did examine aspects of the proposal to some extent, the National Commission for an Integrated Water Resources Development Plan, was in 1999 ambivalent about the benefits of interlinking the countrys rivers.The drought of 2002 was the context in which the proposal to build a grid connecting Indias rivers was revived. Before another drought leads to another round of active interest in the project, it is necessary to come up with answers to two broad sets of questions. The first question is, what will be the total costs and benefits of a river grid project in economic, environmental and social terms. The second will be, what are the different options to meet the future requirements of water and is the interlinking proposal the best among them. Answers to these questions will have to address issues in agricultural technology, patterns of water use, extraction of ground and surface water resources, efficiency in consumption of water in crop cultivation, resource mobilization, human displacement and changes in the environment. A plan on such a scale and of such complexity as the proposal to link the countrys rivers can be taken up only after a range of such substantive issues are analyzed threadbare.Q. What is the main idea of the passage?a)To highlight the objections raised by some states against the proposed project to interlink all major rivers of Indiab)To point out reasons due to which the proposed interlinking of rivers could not be achieved in timec)To critically analyse the pros and cons of such a projectd)The political wrangling over a public utility enterprisee)The cost-benefit analysis of a gigantic projectCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CAT tests.
Explore Courses for CAT exam

Top Courses for CAT

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