Comprehension
Biodiversity is being lost at a rate not seen since the last mass extinction. But the United Nations decade-old plan to slow down and eventually stop the decline of species and ecosystems by 2020 has failed. Most of the plan's 20 targets - known as the Aichi Biodiversity Targeto have not been met. The Aichi targcto arc part of an international agreement called the UN Convention on Biological Diversity. and member states are now finalizing replacements for them. Currently referred to as the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). its draft was published in July 2021. It aims to slow down the rate of biodiversity loss by 2030. And by 2050. biodiversity will be "valued. conserved. restored and wisely used. maintaining ecosystem services. sustaining a healthy planet and delivering benefits essential for all people". The GBF is a comprehensive plan. But success will require systemic change across public policy. That is both a strength and a weakness. If systemic change can be implemented, it will lead to real change. But if it cannot, there's no plan B. This has led some researchers to argue that one target or number should be prioritized and defined in a way that is clear to the public and to policy makers. It would be biodiversity's equivalent of the 2°C climate target.
Question: 1
As per the passage. which of the following is a challenge for implementation of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)?
As per the passage. which of the following is a challenge for implementation of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF)?
Updated On: Jul 14, 2026
- Unfulfillment of the pre-2020 global biodiversity targets
- Clarity of action plan for the society and government
- Threat of mass extinction
- Failure of plan to save ecosystems
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is B
Approach Solution - 1
The correct option is (B): Clarity of action plan for the society and government.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
This question asks which of the listed points is identified in the passage as a challenge specifically for implementing the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), rather than as a description of the earlier Aichi Targets or of biodiversity loss in general.
- Option A: The unfulfillment of the pre-2020 targets is described in the passage as the outcome of the earlier Aichi plan, a fact about the past rather than a challenge facing the GBF's own implementation going forward. This is a description of prior failure, not a forward-looking implementation challenge.
- Option B: The passage explains that the GBF, being a comprehensive plan, depends on systemic change across public policy, and that this is risky because there is "no plan B" if such broad change does not occur. It goes on to say that some researchers therefore want one target defined "in a way that is clear to the public and to policy makers," implying that the framework's current lack of a single, clearly communicated target is precisely what could hinder its implementation. This directly identifies clarity of the action plan as a live concern for the GBF going forward.
- Option C: The threat of mass extinction is presented at the start of the passage as the broader context and motivation for having a biodiversity framework at all, not as a factor that makes implementing the GBF itself more difficult.
- Option D: Failure of the plan to save ecosystems describes the outcome attributed to the earlier Aichi Targets having not been met, again a statement about the past plan's results rather than an implementation challenge for the GBF.
Only the concern about the plan lacking a single, clearly defined target is framed by the passage as a forward-looking risk to the GBF's own success, making it the genuine implementation challenge among the options.
Therefore, the correct answer is clarity of action plan for the society and government.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 2
According to the passage, why do some researchers advocate that one biodiversity target be prioritized?
According to the passage, why do some researchers advocate that one biodiversity target be prioritized?
Updated On: Jul 14, 2026
- Systemic policy change is difficult to implement
- Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) is comprehensive
- The 2 climate target needs to be prioritized
- Biodiversity needs to be valued, conserved, restored and wisely used
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Approach Solution - 1
The correct option is (A): Systemic policy change is difficult to implement.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
This question asks why some researchers push for one biodiversity target to take priority over the many goals laid out in the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). Let us weigh each option against the reasoning that runs through the discussion.
- Systemic policy change is difficult to implement: A framework loaded with many parallel targets asks governments to reform policy on several fronts at once, land use, agriculture, fisheries, finance, and more. When commitments are scattered like this, no single target carries enough political weight to force the kind of sweeping, coordinated policy shift that biodiversity protection actually needs. Concentrating attention on one target gives governments a clear, trackable benchmark, much like the 2 degrees Celsius goal did for climate action, and makes the difficult work of overhauling policy more achievable. This lines up with why researchers would favour prioritising a single target.
- Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) is comprehensive: The GBF being comprehensive is precisely the problem researchers are responding to, not the reason they want one target prioritised. A framework's comprehensiveness explains why it is hard to implement, it does not explain the case for narrowing it down to a single priority.
- The 2 degrees Celsius climate target needs to be prioritized: The 2 degrees Celsius target belongs to climate policy, not biodiversity policy. It is invoked only as a reference point, an example of what a single unifying target can achieve, not as something that itself needs to be prioritised within the GBF.
- Biodiversity needs to be valued, conserved, restored and wisely used: This restates the broad aspirational aims found across the GBF's many goals. It describes what biodiversity policy should achieve overall, not the specific argument for why a single target should be prioritised over the rest.
Only the first option identifies the real obstacle, the difficulty of driving systemic policy change when effort is divided across numerous targets, which is exactly why some researchers want one target elevated above the others.
Therefore, the correct answer is Systemic policy change is difficult to implement.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 3
Which of the following is correct expression of the author's opinion as stated in passage?
Which of the following is correct expression of the author's opinion as stated in passage?
Updated On: Jul 14, 2026
- Implementation of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) allows no middle ground for success or failure.
- It is high time that countries re-evaluate the progress in achieving biodiversity targets.
- Biodiversity conservation should be prioritized over climate change at the global level.
- The post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) is the best way to prevent mass extinction.
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Approach Solution - 1
The correct option is (A): Implementation of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) allows no middle ground for success or failure.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
The question asks which statement best captures the author's own opinion, rather than a fact or a claim made by others, about the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). Here is each option assessed on its own merits.
- Implementation of the post-2020 GBF allows no middle ground for success or failure: This reflects a strong, evaluative judgment, the kind of decisive stance an author takes when arguing that a framework will either work fully or fail outright, with nothing achieved in between. This is the sort of pointed, opinionated claim an author makes to press home the stakes involved.
- It is high time countries re-evaluate the progress in achieving biodiversity targets: This is a plausible recommendation but reads as a general call to action rather than the author's core opinion about the framework's implementation itself. It is more of a procedural suggestion than a considered judgment.
- Biodiversity conservation should be prioritized over climate change at the global level: This sets up an either-or contest between biodiversity and climate priorities that is not actually being argued, the two are typically discussed as connected concerns, not competitors where one must be ranked above the other.
- The post-2020 GBF is the best way to prevent mass extinction: This is an overly absolute, sweeping claim. A measured discussion of a policy framework is usually careful not to declare any single framework as definitively "the best" solution to a problem as large as mass extinction, this overstates the tone of the argument.
The option that reads as the author's own considered judgment, rather than a hedge, a recommendation, or an overstatement, is the one about the framework leaving no middle ground for success or failure.
Therefore, the correct answer is Implementation of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) allows no middle ground for success or failure.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 4
Which of the following is the central theme of the above passage?
Which of the following is the central theme of the above passage?
Updated On: Jul 14, 2026
- The reason for failure of biodiversity conservation efforts at global level
- The inter-relationship between biodiversity conservation and climate change
- The future of biodiversity conservation efforts at global level
- The role of United Nations in biodiversity conservation at global level
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is C
Approach Solution - 1
The correct option is (C): The future of biodiversity conservation efforts at global level.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
This question is about identifying the central theme, the idea that ties the whole discussion together, rather than a detail mentioned in passing.
- The reason for failure of biodiversity conservation efforts at global level: Past shortcomings may be referenced to set up the discussion, but a piece built around the post-2020 GBF is fundamentally forward-looking, it is not primarily a post-mortem on why earlier efforts fell short.
- The inter-relationship between biodiversity conservation and climate change: The 2 degrees Celsius climate target is mentioned only as a point of comparison for how targets can be structured, this is a supporting detail, not the main subject.
- The future of biodiversity conservation efforts at global level: A discussion built around a newly adopted framework, the debate over prioritising targets, and its holistic design is, at its core, about what lies ahead for global biodiversity efforts, whether the new framework will succeed and how it should be structured going forward.
- The role of United Nations in biodiversity conservation at global level: No institutional focus on the UN's role is central here, the discussion centres on the substance of the framework's targets and their implementation, not on which body administers them.
The option that best captures the overall direction, forward-looking analysis of how global biodiversity conservation will proceed under the new framework, is the correct central theme.
Therefore, the correct answer is The future of biodiversity conservation efforts at global level.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Question: 5
Which of the following can be inferred from the above passage?
Which of the following can be inferred from the above passage?
Updated On: Jul 14, 2026
- The holistic nature of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) is a boon.
- The holistic nature of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) is a bane.
- The holistic nature of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) can be a boon or a bane.
- The post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) includes the 2°C climate target.
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is C
Approach Solution - 1
The correct option is (C): The holistic nature of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) can be a boon or a bane.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
Approach Solution -2
This is an inference question, the correct option is the one that follows logically from how the debate around the post-2020 GBF's design is framed, without being stated outright.
- The holistic nature of the post-2020 GBF is a boon: This treats the framework's comprehensiveness as purely positive. But the difficulty of implementing systemic policy change under a broad, multi-target structure is also part of the picture, so a purely positive reading is incomplete.
- The holistic nature of the post-2020 GBF is a bane: This treats it as purely negative. Yet a comprehensive framework also has the advantage of covering more ground and more dimensions of biodiversity loss than a narrow, single-target approach would, so a purely negative reading is equally incomplete.
- The holistic nature of the post-2020 GBF can be a boon or a bane: Taken together, the discussion cuts both ways, comprehensiveness broadens coverage, which helps, but it also dilutes focus and complicates systemic policy change, which hurts. The reasonable inference is that this same holistic design carries both possibilities depending on how it is implemented.
- The post-2020 GBF includes the 2 degrees Celsius climate target: The 2 degrees Celsius figure belongs to climate policy and is invoked only as an analogy for single-target design, the GBF itself does not incorporate it as one of its own targets.
Weighing both the benefits and the drawbacks of a broad, multi-target framework leads to the balanced inference that its holistic nature is capable of being either an advantage or a drawback.
Therefore, the correct answer is The holistic nature of the post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) can be a boon or a bane.
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Top CLAT Questions
- In the realm of contemporary literature, the interplay between character and setting is a nuanced dance that shapes the narrative’s essence. The setting, often described with painstaking detail, becomes more than a backdrop; it becomes a character, influencing the plot and character development.
Consider, for instance, the barren expanse of the desert in Jhumpa Lahiri’s The Namesake. The arid landscape mirrors the sense of isolation felt by the protagonist, Gogol, as he navigates his identity crisis in a foreign land. The relentless sun and vast sands are not mere descriptions; they are the silent witnesses to his inner turmoil.
On the other end of the literary spectrum, there is Arundhati Roy’s The God of Small Things. The lush, vibrant Kerala backwaters are not just the setting; they are a character woven into the fabric of the story. The teeming, humid landscape reflects the complex web of human relationships and secrets that unravel in the narrative. This interplay is not confined to contemporary literature alone. In Shakespeare’s timeless tragedy Macbeth, the eerie and foreboding setting of the Scottish moors casts a dark shadow over the characters’ actions. The moors, shrouded in mist and mystery, serve as an ever-present omen of the impending tragedy. - The crisis of justice that is the subject matter of discussion in the media today is in fact the crisis of “justice for the middle class”. The main difference between India and the OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) countries is that whereas the middle class in these countries has reasonable access to justice, in India it does not. A vocal and powerful middle class has emerged in India since 1991. It is demanding reasonable access to justice. Much of the judicial reform effort will help meet this demand…
The question of justice for the poor is, however, an altogether different challenge. No country in the world has been able to secure justice for the poor. Most of the jails of the richest countries are filled with the poorest. The “masses” are more often victims of the criminal justice system than of crime. In India as well, jails are almost exclusively filled with the poor. The civil justice system is hardly accessible to them. They are often victimised by lawyers, touts and court staff. They are docket-excluded, a new type of untouchability. The language and the logic—and the colonial and feudal culture—of the judicial system are alien to them. It rarely takes cognisance of their needs and interests.
Their main concern, therefore, is to escape the attention of the justice system, criminal and civil. A landless Dalit person in the interior of Madhya Pradesh once gave me an insightful definition of a court from the perspective of the masses: “A court is a place where you are forcibly taken by the police to be punished; no one goes to a court.” In contrast, many lawyers and judges colloquially define a court as “a temple of justice where rights are protected”.
These sharply divergent visions mean that justice for one section is often injustice for another. Protecting the livelihood of traditional taxi and auto drivers from predatory pricing by corporate app-based taxi providers by imaginatively using the available tools of law to delay their incursion would be seen by the rich and by sections of the middle class as a failure of the judicial system, and possibly as also resulting in a downgrading of the “ease of doing business” measure. However, the masses would see such a judicial intervention as strong evidence of a good justice system. Although the conflict over competing visions of the nation and conflicting demands from social and economic segments have confined judicial reform of judicial administration mainly to “neutral” areas such as process reform, procedural law, technology, planning and court and case management, judge strength, and the workload of judges, there has been considerable improvement in these areas, and the judicial system has improved its performance.
[Extracted, with edits, from “Justice and the Two Ideas of India”, by G. Mohan Gopal, Frontline] - Everything she wanted was here, at Carignano, in Kasauli. Here, on the ridge of the mountain, in this quiet house. It was the place, and the time of life, that she had wanted and prepared for all her life-as she realized on the first day at Carignano, with a great, cool flowering of relief - and at last she had it. She wanted no one and nothing else. Whatever else came, or happened here, would be an unwelcome intrusion and distraction. This she tried to convey to the plodding postman with a cold and piercing stare from the height of the ridge onto his honest bull back. Unfortunately, he did not look up at her on the hilltop but stared stolidly down at the dust piling onto his shoes as he plodded on. A bullock-man, an oafish ox, she thought bitterly. She stepped backwards into the garden and the wind suddenly billowed up and threw the pine branches about as though to curtain her. She was grey, tall and thin and her silk sari made a sweeping, shivering sound and she fancied she could merge with the pine trees and be mistaken for one. To be a tree, no more and no less, was all she was prepared to undertake.
What pleased and satisfied her so, here at Carignano, was its barrenness. This was the chief virtue of all Kasauli of course-its starkness. It had rocks, it had pines, it had light and air. In every direction there was a sweeping view - to the north, of the mountains, to the south, of the plains. Occasionally an eagle swam through this clear unobstructed mass of light and air, that was all. And Carignano, her home on the ridge, had no more than that. Why should it? The sun shone on its white walls. Its windows were open the ones facing north opened on to the blue waves of the Himalayas flowing out and up to the line of ice and snow sketched upon the sky, while those that faced south looked down the plunging cliff to the plain stretching out, flat and sere to the blurred horizon.
Yes, there were some apricot trees close to the house. There were clumps of iris that had finished blooming. There was the kitchen with a wing of smoke lifting out of its chimney and a stack of wood outside its door. But these were incidental, almost unimportant.
[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from “Fire on the Mountain” by Anita Desai] - English literature is a vast and diverse field that has left an indelible mark on the world of letters. From the eloquent plays of William Shakespeare to the complex novels of Jane Austen and the profound poetry of William Wordsworth, English literature offers a window into the human experience. One of the luminaries of English literature is William Shakespeare, often hailed as the greatest playwright in the history of English language. His works, including Hamlet, Macbeth, and Romeo and Juliet, are celebrated for their exploration of human nature, love, ambition, and tragedy. His characters, such as the tormented Hamlet and the star-crossed lovers Romeo and Juliet, continue to captivate readers and audiences worldwide.
The 19th century ushered in a new era of literary giants. Jane Austen’s novels, such as Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility, provide incisive social commentary through the lens of wit and romance. Austen’s heroines, like Elizabeth Bennet and Elinor Dashwood, remain beloved literary figures known for their intelligence and resilience. The Romantic era brought forth poets like William Wordsworth and Samuel Taylor Coleridge, who celebrated * 8 UG the beauty of nature and the emotional intensity of the individual. Wordsworth’s ‘‘I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud’’ and Coleridge’s ‘‘The Rime of the Ancient Mariner’’ are testament to the power of the written words to evoke profound emotions and imagery. Moving towards 20th century, English literature continued to evolve. Virginia Woolf’s ground-breaking novel Mrs. Dalloway explored the inner thoughts and lives of its characters with a modernist narrative style. Dystopian visions, as seen in George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four provided stark warnings about the dangers of totalitarianism and the erosion of individual freedom.
Today, English literature is a global phenomenon, transcending borders and languages. Indian authors like Arundhati Roy, with her novel The God of Small Things, have won prestigious international literary awards. The book not only explores intricate family dynamics but also delves into the broader socio-political landscape of India. In summary, English literature is a testament to the enduring power of storytelling and the written word. It encompasses an array of authors, themes, and styles that continue to captivate and inspire readers across the world. - On the evening of the 10th, General Dyer arrived at Amritsar, and the Deputy-Commissioner handed over the civil power to him. He issued a proclamation by word of mouth that no meetings should be held. Two days later, after there had been no sort of riot, nor murder, General Dyer heard that a meeting was to be held at the Jallianwala Bagh. He proceeded there with about fifty troops, half British, half Indian, and a certain number of Ghurkas, armed with their kukris. The Jallianwala Bagh is an open space, half a mile square, which has one entry wide enough for three persons. The troops got in and lined up on a mound of debris. The walls, seven feet high, and the surrounding houses enclosed the people. There were, too, three alleys through which the people might have been able to pass. Within thirty seconds of the troops getting in, General Dyer gave orders to fire, and the crowd of people, estimated at anything from 5,000 to 20,000, who were sitting on the ground peacefully listening to the mob oratory, were fired on. The result of the troops’ fire into the mass of people we do not know. But we do know that Dyer’s own estimate of the casualties resulting from ten minutes continual individual firing, was 400 to 500 killed and 1,500 wounded. The people were not able to escape. They were people who had not offered any violence and who had not been warned. These people were shot down. After ten minutes, the ammunition was exhausted and the troops marched off, and they left 1,500 wounded there. There were men lying there for two days, dying of thirst, eating the ground, bleeding to death and nobody to look after them. Those who lived nearby came and carried away some of the wounded from the heap of dead and dying, but the unfortunate country people died there miserably of their wounds. This is what is done in 1919 in British India…
Centuries hence you will find Indian children brought up to this spot, just as they visit now the Cawnpore Well, and you can imagine the feelings of these Indians for generations over this terrible business.
[Col. Wedgwood, MP, speaking in the British Parliament, 22 December 1919]
View More Questions