Test: Reading Comprehension - 7 - Judiciary Exams MCQ

India has come a long way since the Bengal Famine of 1943. The food situation in India, once characterised by "chronic" shortages and the spectre of famines, has changed dramatically over the years. From being the biggest recipient of PL -480 and during the 1950s and 1960s, India today is relatively self-sufficient in foodgrain at the given level of incomes and prices; in fact, it has marginal surpluses. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) has been signed, with India as one of the signatories, under which all countries will have to gradually open up their agricultural sectors.

It is, therefore, neither feasible nor desirable to keep India's foodgrain sector insulated from world markets. In fact, this is an appropriate opportunity for India to "integrate" its agriculture with global agriculture, and make use of private trade (both domestic and foreign) as an important instrument for efficiently allocating her resources as well as providing food security to her people at the lowest economic cost. The time to change gears in food policy has come.

Food security, in a broader context, means that people have physical and economic access to food. Since foodgrains have the largest share in the food basket of the poor in a developing country like India, it is the availability of foodgrains that lies at the heart of food security. The first step in this direction, therefore, is to make foodgrains physically available to the people. This can be done by augmenting production, or through imports and transportation of grain to people wherever they are.

There are several ways of achieving these targets. One may rely on private entrepreneurship by letting the individual farmers produce, traders trade/import and make it available to consumers far and wide; or the government may directly intervene in the production and /or the trade process. In the former case, the government follows policies that provide appropriate market signals while in the latter, it acts as producer, importer and trader itself. Indian policy makers have followed a mix of both these options. For production, they have "relied" on the farmers while the government has retained control over imports. For distribution, it created public agencies to do the job along with private trade, thus creating dual market structure.

Providing economic access to food is the second part of the concept of food security. This can be best "obtained" by adopting a cost-effective technology in production so that the real price of foodgrains come down and more people have access to it. In case it still fails to reach the larger sections of the population, the government can directly subsidise food for the poor, "launch" a drive to augment their incomes, or try a combination of the two strategies.India has followed both these policies.

Q.

Which of the following forms the most essential part of the concept of food security in India?

India has come a long way since the Bengal Famine of 1943. The food situation in India, once characterised by "chronic" shortages and the spectre of famines, has changed dramatically over the years. From being the biggest recipient of PL -480 and during the 1950s and 1960s, India today is relatively self-sufficient in foodgrain at the given level of incomes and prices; in fact, it has marginal surpluses. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) has been signed, with India as one of the signatories, under which all countries will have to gradually open up their agricultural sectors.

It is, therefore, neither feasible nor desirable to keep India's foodgrain sector insulated from world markets. In fact, this is an appropriate opportunity for India to "integrate" its agriculture with global agriculture, and make use of private trade (both domestic and foreign) as an important instrument for efficiently allocating her resources as well as providing food security to her people at the lowest economic cost. The time to change gears in food policy has come.

Food security, in a broader context, means that people have physical and economic access to food. Since foodgrains have the largest share in the food basket of the poor in a developing country like India, it is the availability of foodgrains that lies at the heart of food security. The first step in this direction, therefore, is to make foodgrains physically available to the people. This can be done by augmenting production, or through imports and transportation of grain to people wherever they are.

There are several ways of achieving these targets. One may rely on private entrepreneurship by letting the individual farmers produce, traders trade/import and make it available to consumers far and wide; or the government may directly intervene in the production and /or the trade process. In the former case, the government follows policies that provide appropriate market signals while in the latter, it acts as producer, importer and trader itself. Indian policy makers have followed a mix of both these options. For production, they have "relied" on the farmers while the government has retained control over imports. For distribution, it created public agencies to do the job along with private trade, thus creating dual market structure.

Providing economic access to food is the second part of the concept of food security. This can be best "obtained" by adopting a cost-effective technology in production so that the real price of foodgrains come down and more people have access to it. In case it still fails to reach the larger sections of the population, the government can directly subsidise food for the poor, "launch" a drive to augment their incomes, or try a combination of the two strategies.India has followed both these policies.

Q.

If private agencies are entrusted the work of making foodgrains available to people, what facilitative role the government should undertake?

India has come a long way since the Bengal Famine of 1943. The food situation in India, once characterised by "chronic" shortages and the spectre of famines, has changed dramatically over the years. From being the biggest recipient of PL -480 and during the 1950s and 1960s, India today is relatively self-sufficient in foodgrain at the given level of incomes and prices; in fact, it has marginal surpluses. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) has been signed, with India as one of the signatories, under which all countries will have to gradually open up their agricultural sectors.

It is, therefore, neither feasible nor desirable to keep India's foodgrain sector insulated from world markets. In fact, this is an appropriate opportunity for India to "integrate" its agriculture with global agriculture, and make use of private trade (both domestic and foreign) as an important instrument for efficiently allocating her resources as well as providing food security to her people at the lowest economic cost. The time to change gears in food policy has come.

Food security, in a broader context, means that people have physical and economic access to food. Since foodgrains have the largest share in the food basket of the poor in a developing country like India, it is the availability of foodgrains that lies at the heart of food security. The first step in this direction, therefore, is to make foodgrains physically available to the people. This can be done by augmenting production, or through imports and transportation of grain to people wherever they are.

There are several ways of achieving these targets. One may rely on private entrepreneurship by letting the individual farmers produce, traders trade/import and make it available to consumers far and wide; or the government may directly intervene in the production and /or the trade process. In the former case, the government follows policies that provide appropriate market signals while in the latter, it acts as producer, importer and trader itself. Indian policy makers have followed a mix of both these options. For production, they have "relied" on the farmers while the government has retained control over imports. For distribution, it created public agencies to do the job along with private trade, thus creating dual market structure.

Providing economic access to food is the second part of the concept of food security. This can be best "obtained" by adopting a cost-effective technology in production so that the real price of foodgrains come down and more people have access to it. In case it still fails to reach the larger sections of the population, the government can directly subsidise food for the poor, "launch" a drive to augment their incomes, or try a combination of the two strategies.India has followed both these policies.

Q.

Which of the following can be inferred about the general view of the author in the context of the passage?

India has come a long way since the Bengal Famine of 1943. The food situation in India, once characterised by "chronic" shortages and the spectre of famines, has changed dramatically over the years. From being the biggest recipient of PL -480 and during the 1950s and 1960s, India today is relatively self-sufficient in foodgrain at the given level of incomes and prices; in fact, it has marginal surpluses. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) has been signed, with India as one of the signatories, under which all countries will have to gradually open up their agricultural sectors.

It is, therefore, neither feasible nor desirable to keep India's foodgrain sector insulated from world markets. In fact, this is an appropriate opportunity for India to "integrate" its agriculture with global agriculture, and make use of private trade (both domestic and foreign) as an important instrument for efficiently allocating her resources as well as providing food security to her people at the lowest economic cost. The time to change gears in food policy has come.

Food security, in a broader context, means that people have physical and economic access to food. Since foodgrains have the largest share in the food basket of the poor in a developing country like India, it is the availability of foodgrains that lies at the heart of food security. The first step in this direction, therefore, is to make foodgrains physically available to the people. This can be done by augmenting production, or through imports and transportation of grain to people wherever they are.

There are several ways of achieving these targets. One may rely on private entrepreneurship by letting the individual farmers produce, traders trade/import and make it available to consumers far and wide; or the government may directly intervene in the production and /or the trade process. In the former case, the government follows policies that provide appropriate market signals while in the latter, it acts as producer, importer and trader itself. Indian policy makers have followed a mix of both these options. For production, they have "relied" on the farmers while the government has retained control over imports. For distribution, it created public agencies to do the job along with private trade, thus creating dual market structure.

Providing economic access to food is the second part of the concept of food security. This can be best "obtained" by adopting a cost-effective technology in production so that the real price of foodgrains come down and more people have access to it. In case it still fails to reach the larger sections of the population, the government can directly subsidise food for the poor, "launch" a drive to augment their incomes, or try a combination of the two strategies.India has followed both these policies.

Q.

According to the author, food at affordable price could be made available to poor by which of the following measures?
I. Reducing the cost of production of foodgrains by using appropriate technology.
II. Offering foodgrains at lower cost and offering economic support for maintaining lower cost.
III. Raising the earning of the poor.

India has come a long way since the Bengal Famine of 1943. The food situation in India, once characterised by "chronic" shortages and the spectre of famines, has changed dramatically over the years. From being the biggest recipient of PL -480 and during the 1950s and 1960s, India today is relatively self-sufficient in foodgrain at the given level of incomes and prices; in fact, it has marginal surpluses. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) has been signed, with India as one of the signatories, under which all countries will have to gradually open up their agricultural sectors.

It is, therefore, neither feasible nor desirable to keep India's foodgrain sector insulated from world markets. In fact, this is an appropriate opportunity for India to "integrate" its agriculture with global agriculture, and make use of private trade (both domestic and foreign) as an important instrument for efficiently allocating her resources as well as providing food security to her people at the lowest economic cost. The time to change gears in food policy has come.

Food security, in a broader context, means that people have physical and economic access to food. Since foodgrains have the largest share in the food basket of the poor in a developing country like India, it is the availability of foodgrains that lies at the heart of food security. The first step in this direction, therefore, is to make foodgrains physically available to the people. This can be done by augmenting production, or through imports and transportation of grain to people wherever they are.

There are several ways of achieving these targets. One may rely on private entrepreneurship by letting the individual farmers produce, traders trade/import and make it available to consumers far and wide; or the government may directly intervene in the production and /or the trade process. In the former case, the government follows policies that provide appropriate market signals while in the latter, it acts as producer, importer and trader itself. Indian policy makers have followed a mix of both these options. For production, they have "relied" on the farmers while the government has retained control over imports. For distribution, it created public agencies to do the job along with private trade, thus creating dual market structure.

Providing economic access to food is the second part of the concept of food security. This can be best "obtained" by adopting a cost-effective technology in production so that the real price of foodgrains come down and more people have access to it. In case it still fails to reach the larger sections of the population, the government can directly subsidise food for the poor, "launch" a drive to augment their incomes, or try a combination of the two strategies.India has followed both these policies.

Q.

Choose the word which is most OPPOSITE in meaning of the word given in bold as used in the passage: CHRONIC

India has come a long way since the Bengal Famine of 1943. The food situation in India, once characterised by "chronic" shortages and the spectre of famines, has changed dramatically over the years. From being the biggest recipient of PL -480 and during the 1950s and 1960s, India today is relatively self-sufficient in foodgrain at the given level of incomes and prices; in fact, it has marginal surpluses. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) has been signed, with India as one of the signatories, under which all countries will have to gradually open up their agricultural sectors.

It is, therefore, neither feasible nor desirable to keep India's foodgrain sector insulated from world markets. In fact, this is an appropriate opportunity for India to "integrate" its agriculture with global agriculture, and make use of private trade (both domestic and foreign) as an important instrument for efficiently allocating her resources as well as providing food security to her people at the lowest economic cost. The time to change gears in food policy has come.

Food security, in a broader context, means that people have physical and economic access to food. Since foodgrains have the largest share in the food basket of the poor in a developing country like India, it is the availability of foodgrains that lies at the heart of food security. The first step in this direction, therefore, is to make foodgrains physically available to the people. This can be done by augmenting production, or through imports and transportation of grain to people wherever they are.

There are several ways of achieving these targets. One may rely on private entrepreneurship by letting the individual farmers produce, traders trade/import and make it available to consumers far and wide; or the government may directly intervene in the production and /or the trade process. In the former case, the government follows policies that provide appropriate market signals while in the latter, it acts as producer, importer and trader itself. Indian policy makers have followed a mix of both these options. For production, they have "relied" on the farmers while the government has retained control over imports. For distribution, it created public agencies to do the job along with private trade, thus creating dual market structure.

Providing economic access to food is the second part of the concept of food security. This can be best "obtained" by adopting a cost-effective technology in production so that the real price of foodgrains come down and more people have access to it. In case it still fails to reach the larger sections of the population, the government can directly subsidise food for the poor, "launch" a drive to augment their incomes, or try a combination of the two strategies.India has followed both these policies.

Q.

Choose the word which is most OPPOSITE in meaning of the word given in bold as used in the passage: INTEGRATE

India has come a long way since the Bengal Famine of 1943. The food situation in India, once characterised by "chronic" shortages and the spectre of famines, has changed dramatically over the years. From being the biggest recipient of PL -480 and during the 1950s and 1960s, India today is relatively self-sufficient in foodgrain at the given level of incomes and prices; in fact, it has marginal surpluses. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) has been signed, with India as one of the signatories, under which all countries will have to gradually open up their agricultural sectors.

It is, therefore, neither feasible nor desirable to keep India's foodgrain sector insulated from world markets. In fact, this is an appropriate opportunity for India to "integrate" its agriculture with global agriculture, and make use of private trade (both domestic and foreign) as an important instrument for efficiently allocating her resources as well as providing food security to her people at the lowest economic cost. The time to change gears in food policy has come.

Food security, in a broader context, means that people have physical and economic access to food. Since foodgrains have the largest share in the food basket of the poor in a developing country like India, it is the availability of foodgrains that lies at the heart of food security. The first step in this direction, therefore, is to make foodgrains physically available to the people. This can be done by augmenting production, or through imports and transportation of grain to people wherever they are.

There are several ways of achieving these targets. One may rely on private entrepreneurship by letting the individual farmers produce, traders trade/import and make it available to consumers far and wide; or the government may directly intervene in the production and /or the trade process. In the former case, the government follows policies that provide appropriate market signals while in the latter, it acts as producer, importer and trader itself. Indian policy makers have followed a mix of both these options. For production, they have "relied" on the farmers while the government has retained control over imports. For distribution, it created public agencies to do the job along with private trade, thus creating dual market structure.

Providing economic access to food is the second part of the concept of food security. This can be best "obtained" by adopting a cost-effective technology in production so that the real price of foodgrains come down and more people have access to it. In case it still fails to reach the larger sections of the population, the government can directly subsidise food for the poor, "launch" a drive to augment their incomes, or try a combination of the two strategies.India has followed both these policies.

Q.

Choose the word which is most nearly the SAME in meaning as the word given in bold as used in the passage: RELIED

India has come a long way since the Bengal Famine of 1943. The food situation in India, once characterised by "chronic" shortages and the spectre of famines, has changed dramatically over the years. From being the biggest recipient of PL -480 and during the 1950s and 1960s, India today is relatively self-sufficient in foodgrain at the given level of incomes and prices; in fact, it has marginal surpluses. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) has been signed, with India as one of the signatories, under which all countries will have to gradually open up their agricultural sectors.

It is, therefore, neither feasible nor desirable to keep India's foodgrain sector insulated from world markets. In fact, this is an appropriate opportunity for India to "integrate" its agriculture with global agriculture, and make use of private trade (both domestic and foreign) as an important instrument for efficiently allocating her resources as well as providing food security to her people at the lowest economic cost. The time to change gears in food policy has come.

Food security, in a broader context, means that people have physical and economic access to food. Since foodgrains have the largest share in the food basket of the poor in a developing country like India, it is the availability of foodgrains that lies at the heart of food security. The first step in this direction, therefore, is to make foodgrains physically available to the people. This can be done by augmenting production, or through imports and transportation of grain to people wherever they are.

There are several ways of achieving these targets. One may rely on private entrepreneurship by letting the individual farmers produce, traders trade/import and make it available to consumers far and wide; or the government may directly intervene in the production and /or the trade process. In the former case, the government follows policies that provide appropriate market signals while in the latter, it acts as producer, importer and trader itself. Indian policy makers have followed a mix of both these options. For production, they have "relied" on the farmers while the government has retained control over imports. For distribution, it created public agencies to do the job along with private trade, thus creating dual market structure.

Providing economic access to food is the second part of the concept of food security. This can be best "obtained" by adopting a cost-effective technology in production so that the real price of foodgrains come down and more people have access to it. In case it still fails to reach the larger sections of the population, the government can directly subsidise food for the poor, "launch" a drive to augment their incomes, or try a combination of the two strategies.India has followed both these policies.

Q.

Choose the word which is most nearly the SAME in meaning of the word given in bold as used in the passage: OBTAINED

Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below it. Certain words / phrases are given in bold and Underlined to help you to locate them while answering some of the questions.

The implicit rationale for, or the philosophical foundation of, the intellectual property rights system in India is embodied in three underlying objectives. First, it seeks to strike a balance between the interest of producers on the one hand and consumers on the other, that is, those who develop the scientific knowledge or innovate and those who use the goods or services derived there from. Needless to say every country attempts the same, but where the balance is reached depends on the level of development. The "levels" of income in the economy and the stage of development in the society are thus particularly important in the context.

The logical exclusions from patentability follows from this objective. Methods of horticulture and agriculture, as also food, are excluded because such a large proportion of the population is dependent on agriculture for a livelihood. The purchasing power of the poor even for food is limited, while drugs and medicines are excluded because millions do not have access to basic health care.

Second, it endeavours to ensure rewards for the owners of knowledge or the innovators but, at the same time, aims to place a limit on the monopoly profits or the quasi-rents which may be appropriated by the entity that commercialises the technology or transforms the scientific knowledge into a marketable product. This is the logic of compulsory licensing. There are two underlying principles set out in the Patents Act: patents are granted to encourage inventions and to secure that the inventions are available in India: and patents are not granted merely to enable the patentees to enjoy a monopoly for the importation of the patented article.

Third, it attempts to create an environment which is conducive for the diffusion of existing technologies and the development of new technologies, in so far as technology is a basic determinant of development in a society that is a latecomer to industrialisation. The patentability of process alone, but not products, in some sectors, and the reduced term of patents derives from this objective.

Q.

Which of the following words is the same in meaning as the word “level” as used in the passage?

The implicit rationale for, or the philosophical foundation of, the intellectual property rights system in India is embodied in three underlying objectives. First, it seeks to strike a balance between the interest of producers on the one hand and consumers on the other, that is, those who develop the scientific knowledge or innovate and those who use the goods or services derived there from. Needless to say every country attempts the same, but where the balance is reached depends on the level of development. The "levels" of income in the economy and the stage of development in the society are thus particularly important in the context.

The logical exclusions from patentability follows from this objective. Methods of horticulture and agriculture, as also food, are excluded because such a large proportion of the population is dependent on agriculture for a livelihood. The purchasing power of the poor even for food is limited, while drugs and medicines are excluded because millions do not have access to basic health care.

Second, it endeavours to ensure rewards for the owners of knowledge or the innovators but, at the same time, aims to place a limit on the monopoly profits or the quasi-rents which may be appropriated by the entity that commercialises the technology or transforms the scientific knowledge into a marketable product. This is the logic of compulsory licensing. There are two underlying principles set out in the Patents Act: patents are granted to encourage inventions and to secure that the inventions are available in India: and patents are not granted merely to enable the patentees to enjoy a monopoly for the importation of the patented article.

Third, it attempts to create an environment which is conducive for the diffusion of existing technologies and the development of new technologies, in so far as technology is a basic determinant of development in a society that is a latecomer to industrialisation. The patentability of process alone, but not products, in some sectors, and the reduced term of patents derives from this objective.

Q.

Which of the following, according to the passage, are excluded from the Patent Act?

The implicit rationale for, or the philosophical foundation of, the intellectual property rights system in India is embodied in three underlying objectives. First, it seeks to strike a balance between the interest of producers on the one hand and consumers on the other, that is, those who develop the scientific knowledge or innovate and those who use the goods or services derived there from. Needless to say every country attempts the same, but where the balance is reached depends on the level of development. The "levels" of income in the economy and the stage of development in the society are thus particularly important in the context.

The logical exclusions from patentability follows from this objective. Methods of horticulture and agriculture, as also food, are excluded because such a large proportion of the population is dependent on agriculture for a livelihood. The purchasing power of the poor even for food is limited, while drugs and medicines are excluded because millions do not have access to basic health care.

Second, it endeavours to ensure rewards for the owners of knowledge or the innovators but, at the same time, aims to place a limit on the monopoly profits or the quasi-rents which may be appropriated by the entity that commercialises the technology or transforms the scientific knowledge into a marketable product. This is the logic of compulsory licensing. There are two underlying principles set out in the Patents Act: patents are granted to encourage inventions and to secure that the inventions are available in India: and patents are not granted merely to enable the patentees to enjoy a monopoly for the importation of the patented article.

Third, it attempts to create an environment which is conducive for the diffusion of existing technologies and the development of new technologies, in so far as technology is a basic determinant of development in a society that is a latecomer to industrialisation. The patentability of process alone, but not products, in some sectors, and the reduced term of patents derives from this objective.

Q.

What according to the passage, is the first objective of the intellectual property rights system?

The implicit rationale for, or the philosophical foundation of, the intellectual property rights system in India is embodied in three underlying objectives. First, it seeks to strike a balance between the interest of producers on the one hand and consumers on the other, that is, those who develop the scientific knowledge or innovate and those who use the goods or services derived there from. Needless to say every country attempts the same, but where the balance is reached depends on the level of development. The "levels" of income in the economy and the stage of development in the society are thus particularly important in the context.

The logical exclusions from patentability follows from this objective. Methods of horticulture and agriculture, as also food, are excluded because such a large proportion of the population is dependent on agriculture for a livelihood. The purchasing power of the poor even for food is limited, while drugs and medicines are excluded because millions do not have access to basic health care.

Second, it endeavours to ensure rewards for the owners of knowledge or the innovators but, at the same time, aims to place a limit on the monopoly profits or the quasi-rents which may be appropriated by the entity that commercialises the technology or transforms the scientific knowledge into a marketable product. This is the logic of compulsory licensing. There are two underlying principles set out in the Patents Act: patents are granted to encourage inventions and to secure that the inventions are available in India: and patents are not granted merely to enable the patentees to enjoy a monopoly for the importation of the patented article.

Third, it attempts to create an environment which is conducive for the diffusion of existing technologies and the development of new technologies, in so far as technology is a basic determinant of development in a society that is a latecomer to industrialisation. The patentability of process alone, but not products, in some sectors, and the reduced term of patents derives from this objective.

Q.

What, according to the passage, is the main determinant for bringing in balance in intellectual property rights system in a country?

The implicit rationale for, or the philosophical foundation of, the intellectual property rights system in India is embodied in three underlying objectives. First, it seeks to strike a balance between the interest of producers on the one hand and consumers on the other, that is, those who develop the scientific knowledge or innovate and those who use the goods or services derived there from. Needless to say every country attempts the same, but where the balance is reached depends on the level of development. The "levels" of income in the economy and the stage of development in the society are thus particularly important in the context.

The logical exclusions from patentability follows from this objective. Methods of horticulture and agriculture, as also food, are excluded because such a large proportion of the population is dependent on agriculture for a livelihood. The purchasing power of the poor even for food is limited, while drugs and medicines are excluded because millions do not have access to basic health care.

Second, it endeavours to ensure rewards for the owners of knowledge or the innovators but, at the same time, aims to place a limit on the monopoly profits or the quasi-rents which may be appropriated by the entity that commercialises the technology or transforms the scientific knowledge into a marketable product. This is the logic of compulsory licensing. There are two underlying principles set out in the Patents Act: patents are granted to encourage inventions and to secure that the inventions are available in India: and patents are not granted merely to enable the patentees to enjoy a monopoly for the importation of the patented article.

Third, it attempts to create an environment which is conducive for the diffusion of existing technologies and the development of new technologies, in so far as technology is a basic determinant of development in a society that is a latecomer to industrialisation. The patentability of process alone, but not products, in some sectors, and the reduced term of patents derives from this objective.

Q.

Which of the following best describes the sentence ``This is the logic of compulsory licensing'' as given in passage?

The implicit rationale for, or the philosophical foundation of, the intellectual property rights system in India is embodied in three underlying objectives. First, it seeks to strike a balance between the interest of producers on the one hand and consumers on the other, that is, those who develop the scientific knowledge or innovate and those who use the goods or services derived there from. Needless to say every country attempts the same, but where the balance is reached depends on the level of development. The "levels" of income in the economy and the stage of development in the society are thus particularly important in the context.

The logical exclusions from patentability follows from this objective. Methods of horticulture and agriculture, as also food, are excluded because such a large proportion of the population is dependent on agriculture for a livelihood. The purchasing power of the poor even for food is limited, while drugs and medicines are excluded because millions do not have access to basic health care.

Second, it endeavours to ensure rewards for the owners of knowledge or the innovators but, at the same time, aims to place a limit on the monopoly profits or the quasi-rents which may be appropriated by the entity that commercialises the technology or transforms the scientific knowledge into a marketable product. This is the logic of compulsory licensing. There are two underlying principles set out in the Patents Act: patents are granted to encourage inventions and to secure that the inventions are available in India: and patents are not granted merely to enable the patentees to enjoy a monopoly for the importation of the patented article.

Third, it attempts to create an environment which is conducive for the diffusion of existing technologies and the development of new technologies, in so far as technology is a basic determinant of development in a society that is a latecomer to industrialisation. The patentability of process alone, but not products, in some sectors, and the reduced term of patents derives from this objective.

Q.

Which, according to the passage, is one of the underlying principles of the Patents Act?

The implicit rationale for, or the philosophical foundation of, the intellectual property rights system in India is embodied in three underlying objectives. First, it seeks to strike a balance between the interest of producers on the one hand and consumers on the other, that is, those who develop the scientific knowledge or innovate and those who use the goods or services derived there from. Needless to say every country attempts the same, but where the balance is reached depends on the level of development. The "levels" of income in the economy and the stage of development in the society are thus particularly important in the context.

The logical exclusions from patentability follows from this objective. Methods of horticulture and agriculture, as also food, are excluded because such a large proportion of the population is dependent on agriculture for a livelihood. The purchasing power of the poor even for food is limited, while drugs and medicines are excluded because millions do not have access to basic health care.

Second, it endeavours to ensure rewards for the owners of knowledge or the innovators but, at the same time, aims to place a limit on the monopoly profits or the quasi-rents which may be appropriated by the entity that commercialises the technology or transforms the scientific knowledge into a marketable product. This is the logic of compulsory licensing. There are two underlying principles set out in the Patents Act: patents are granted to encourage inventions and to secure that the inventions are available in India: and patents are not granted merely to enable the patentees to enjoy a monopoly for the importation of the patented article.

Third, it attempts to create an environment which is conducive for the diffusion of existing technologies and the development of new technologies, in so far as technology is a basic determinant of development in a society that is a latecomer to industrialisation. The patentability of process alone, but not products, in some sectors, and the reduced term of patents derives from this objective.

Q.

Why, according to the passage, are methods of horticulture and agriculture excluded from patentability?

The implicit rationale for, or the philosophical foundation of, the intellectual property rights system in India is embodied in three underlying objectives. First, it seeks to strike a balance between the interest of producers on the one hand and consumers on the other, that is, those who develop the scientific knowledge or innovate and those who use the goods or services derived there from. Needless to say every country attempts the same, but where the balance is reached depends on the level of development. The "levels" of income in the economy and the stage of development in the society are thus particularly important in the context.

The logical exclusions from patentability follows from this objective. Methods of horticulture and agriculture, as also food, are excluded because such a large proportion of the population is dependent on agriculture for a livelihood. The purchasing power of the poor even for food is limited, while drugs and medicines are excluded because millions do not have access to basic health care.

Second, it endeavours to ensure rewards for the owners of knowledge or the innovators but, at the same time, aims to place a limit on the monopoly profits or the quasi-rents which may be appropriated by the entity that commercialises the technology or transforms the scientific knowledge into a marketable product. This is the logic of compulsory licensing. There are two underlying principles set out in the Patents Act: patents are granted to encourage inventions and to secure that the inventions are available in India: and patents are not granted merely to enable the patentees to enjoy a monopoly for the importation of the patented article.

Third, it attempts to create an environment which is conducive for the diffusion of existing technologies and the development of new technologies, in so far as technology is a basic determinant of development in a society that is a latecomer to industrialisation. The patentability of process alone, but not products, in some sectors, and the reduced term of patents derives from this objective.

Q.

What, according to the passage, is the third objective of the intellectual property rights system?

The implicit rationale for, or the philosophical foundation of, the intellectual property rights system in India is embodied in three underlying objectives. First, it seeks to strike a balance between the interest of producers on the one hand and consumers on the other, that is, those who develop the scientific knowledge or innovate and those who use the goods or services derived there from. Needless to say every country attempts the same, but where the balance is reached depends on the level of development. The "levels" of income in the economy and the stage of development in the society are thus particularly important in the context.

The logical exclusions from patentability follows from this objective. Methods of horticulture and agriculture, as also food, are excluded because such a large proportion of the population is dependent on agriculture for a livelihood. The purchasing power of the poor even for food is limited, while drugs and medicines are excluded because millions do not have access to basic health care.

Second, it endeavours to ensure rewards for the owners of knowledge or the innovators but, at the same time, aims to place a limit on the monopoly profits or the quasi-rents which may be appropriated by the entity that commercialises the technology or transforms the scientific knowledge into a marketable product. This is the logic of compulsory licensing. There are two underlying principles set out in the Patents Act: patents are granted to encourage inventions and to secure that the inventions are available in India: and patents are not granted merely to enable the patentees to enjoy a monopoly for the importation of the patented article.

Third, it attempts to create an environment which is conducive for the diffusion of existing technologies and the development of new technologies, in so far as technology is a basic determinant of development in a society that is a latecomer to industrialisation. The patentability of process alone, but not products, in some sectors, and the reduced term of patents derives from this objective.

Q.

Which, according to the passage, is envisaged as one of the basic determinants of development of a country?