Question:
Instructions: Read the following passage and answer the question based on it.
TRIPs agreement provides a comprehensive set of global trade rules for the protection of copyright, patents, trademarks, industrial designs, trade secrets, semiconductor layout designs, and geographical indications, that apply to all member countries irrespective of their levels of development, natural and human endowments and history. Every member country has been asked by the WTO to amend its national patent law to conform to that universal globalized format for legislation relating to pharmaceutical, agrochemical, food, alloys, etc. Under Article 65, the developed countries have been asked to change their laws within another five years, and the less developed countries within an additional five years. The least developed countries have been asked to make those changes by 2005 AD.
This attempt at global standardisation and uniformity by way of the TRIPs agreement is in conflict with the main thrust of the Rio Earth Summit of 1992 that set out the conditions for sustainable development. These two reveal two contrasting types of international approaches and norms. While the 1992 Earth Summit and the 1993 Convention on Biodiversity (CBD) focused on 'diversity' as being fundamental to sustain life and development, TRIPs and WTO are pushing for 'conformity' to international standardized norms on patents, services, labour, investment and what not, irrespective of their history, ecology, level of economic development, etc. But despite their diametrically opposed viewpoints, 170 countries signed CBD upholding the need for diversity, and 50 countries signed the TRIPs agreement in 1994 claiming the urgency of uniformity, with a very large element of common signatories (130) in both.
The Convention on Biodiversity (CBD), in its Article 16.5, specifically asserts that intellectual property rights must not be in conflict with conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, a provision that has been totally ignored by those who composed the TRIPs agreement. While in the case of agriculture the higher yield of patented products induces farmers to switch from a more varied production pattern, the resulting narrowing of the genetic base makes the economy and society more vulnerable to plant disease and epidemics. It is true that the move towards cultivation of a smaller number of higher yielding varieties and the uniform spread of the same variety over a large space predates the present debate on patents, particularly since the introduction of green revolution technology in the mid-sixties, but there can be no doubt that the latter has brought about a qualitative change in the scenario and has created the possibility of a vast quantitative change too in that direction. So far no attempt has been made to reconcile the two conflicting approaches of CBD and TRIPs. If diversity is so important for sustaining life, how can WTO demand conformity to standardised global formats?
The author points out that intellectual property rights and their administration mechanism
Instructions: Read the following passage and answer the question based on it.
TRIPs agreement provides a comprehensive set of global trade rules for the protection of copyright, patents, trademarks, industrial designs, trade secrets, semiconductor layout designs, and geographical indications, that apply to all member countries irrespective of their levels of development, natural and human endowments and history. Every member country has been asked by the WTO to amend its national patent law to conform to that universal globalized format for legislation relating to pharmaceutical, agrochemical, food, alloys, etc. Under Article 65, the developed countries have been asked to change their laws within another five years, and the less developed countries within an additional five years. The least developed countries have been asked to make those changes by 2005 AD.
This attempt at global standardisation and uniformity by way of the TRIPs agreement is in conflict with the main thrust of the Rio Earth Summit of 1992 that set out the conditions for sustainable development. These two reveal two contrasting types of international approaches and norms. While the 1992 Earth Summit and the 1993 Convention on Biodiversity (CBD) focused on 'diversity' as being fundamental to sustain life and development, TRIPs and WTO are pushing for 'conformity' to international standardized norms on patents, services, labour, investment and what not, irrespective of their history, ecology, level of economic development, etc. But despite their diametrically opposed viewpoints, 170 countries signed CBD upholding the need for diversity, and 50 countries signed the TRIPs agreement in 1994 claiming the urgency of uniformity, with a very large element of common signatories (130) in both.
The Convention on Biodiversity (CBD), in its Article 16.5, specifically asserts that intellectual property rights must not be in conflict with conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, a provision that has been totally ignored by those who composed the TRIPs agreement. While in the case of agriculture the higher yield of patented products induces farmers to switch from a more varied production pattern, the resulting narrowing of the genetic base makes the economy and society more vulnerable to plant disease and epidemics. It is true that the move towards cultivation of a smaller number of higher yielding varieties and the uniform spread of the same variety over a large space predates the present debate on patents, particularly since the introduction of green revolution technology in the mid-sixties, but there can be no doubt that the latter has brought about a qualitative change in the scenario and has created the possibility of a vast quantitative change too in that direction. So far no attempt has been made to reconcile the two conflicting approaches of CBD and TRIPs. If diversity is so important for sustaining life, how can WTO demand conformity to standardised global formats?
The author points out that intellectual property rights and their administration mechanism
Show Hint
Trace what the passage says happens to crop variety once patented seeds spread, then match that effect to the options.
Updated On: Jul 14, 2026
- is throttling the interest of global biodiversity
- is working to help sustain global biodiversity
- is being sustained by global biodiversity
- is what the global biodiversity needs
Show Solution
Verified By Collegedunia
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
Step 1: Understanding the Question:
We need to find the author's view on how intellectual property rights, as run through the TRIPs agreement, affect global biodiversity.
Step 2: Key Formula or Approach:
In a passage-based question like this, find the sentences that directly link the two ideas named in the question, here "intellectual property rights" and "biodiversity," and read what the author says about that link, rather than picking an option that only sounds plausible.
Step 3: Detailed Explanation:
The passage sets up a clear contrast: TRIPs and the WTO push for conformity to one global patent standard, while the CBD and the Rio Earth Summit push for diversity as the basis of sustaining life. The passage also states that CBD's Article 16.5 says intellectual property rights must not conflict with conserving biodiversity, and that this provision has been totally ignored by those who wrote TRIPs.
The passage then gives a concrete example: patented, higher yield crop products push farmers away from varied production and towards fewer, more uniform crop varieties. This narrows the genetic base of what is grown, which makes crops more open to disease and epidemics. This is a direct case of intellectual property rights working against biodiversity, not for it.
Step 4: Final Answer:
Option B is wrong because the passage shows TRIPs undermining biodiversity, not sustaining it. Option C is wrong because the passage never says biodiversity sustains intellectual property rights, if anything the relationship runs the other way. Option D is wrong because the author never claims biodiversity needs this kind of conformity, the opposite point is made. The passage shows that IP rights under TRIPs choke off biodiversity, matching option A.
\[ \boxed{\text{Option A: is throttling the interest of global biodiversity}} \]
We need to find the author's view on how intellectual property rights, as run through the TRIPs agreement, affect global biodiversity.
Step 2: Key Formula or Approach:
In a passage-based question like this, find the sentences that directly link the two ideas named in the question, here "intellectual property rights" and "biodiversity," and read what the author says about that link, rather than picking an option that only sounds plausible.
Step 3: Detailed Explanation:
The passage sets up a clear contrast: TRIPs and the WTO push for conformity to one global patent standard, while the CBD and the Rio Earth Summit push for diversity as the basis of sustaining life. The passage also states that CBD's Article 16.5 says intellectual property rights must not conflict with conserving biodiversity, and that this provision has been totally ignored by those who wrote TRIPs.
The passage then gives a concrete example: patented, higher yield crop products push farmers away from varied production and towards fewer, more uniform crop varieties. This narrows the genetic base of what is grown, which makes crops more open to disease and epidemics. This is a direct case of intellectual property rights working against biodiversity, not for it.
Step 4: Final Answer:
Option B is wrong because the passage shows TRIPs undermining biodiversity, not sustaining it. Option C is wrong because the passage never says biodiversity sustains intellectual property rights, if anything the relationship runs the other way. Option D is wrong because the author never claims biodiversity needs this kind of conformity, the opposite point is made. The passage shows that IP rights under TRIPs choke off biodiversity, matching option A.
\[ \boxed{\text{Option A: is throttling the interest of global biodiversity}} \]
Was this answer helpful?
0
0
Top SNAP English Questions
- A group of words that share the same spelling and the same pronunciation but have different meanings; e.g. left (opposite of right) and left (past tense of leave)
- Read the passage and then determine the best choice for an answer from the questions given below. Base your choice on what this passage states directly or implies, not on any information you may have got from else where.
"The emancipation of women", James Joyce told one of his friends, "has caused the greatest revolution in our time."
Other modernists agree: Virginia Woolf, claiming that in a about 1910 "human character changed" and illustrating the new balance between the sexes, urged, "Read the 'Agamemon' and see whether your sympathies are not almost entirely with Clytemnestra". D.H. Lawrence wrote "perhaps the deepest fight for 200 years and more has been the fight for women's independence".
But if modernist writers considered women's revolt against men's domination as one of their "greatest" and "deepest" themes, only recently, perhaps in the past 15 years has literary criticism begun to catch up with it. Not that the images of sexual antagonism that abound in modern literature have gone unremarked - far from it. We are able to see in literary works the perspective we bring to them and now that women are enough to make a difference in reforming canons and interpreting literature, the landscapes of literary history and the features of individual books have begun to change. - Choose the correct sentence
- Fill in the blanks and choose the correct definition for the punctuation.
______ is used to indicate possession. - Fill in the blanks and choose the correct definition for the punctuation.
______ is used to mark the end of declarative and imperative sentences.
View More Questions
Top SNAP Reading Comprehension Questions
- Read the passage and then determine the best choice for an answer from the questions given below. Base your choice on what this passage states directly or implies, not on any information you may have got from else where.
"The emancipation of women", James Joyce told one of his friends, "has caused the greatest revolution in our time."
Other modernists agree: Virginia Woolf, claiming that in a about 1910 "human character changed" and illustrating the new balance between the sexes, urged, "Read the 'Agamemon' and see whether your sympathies are not almost entirely with Clytemnestra". D.H. Lawrence wrote "perhaps the deepest fight for 200 years and more has been the fight for women's independence".
But if modernist writers considered women's revolt against men's domination as one of their "greatest" and "deepest" themes, only recently, perhaps in the past 15 years has literary criticism begun to catch up with it. Not that the images of sexual antagonism that abound in modern literature have gone unremarked - far from it. We are able to see in literary works the perspective we bring to them and now that women are enough to make a difference in reforming canons and interpreting literature, the landscapes of literary history and the features of individual books have begun to change. - D. H. Lawrence-1885-1930: The Supreme Triumph For man, the vast marvel is to be alive. For man as for flower and beast and bird, the supreme triumph is to be most vividly, most perfectly alive. Whatever the unborn and the dead may know, they cannot know the beauty, the marvel of being alive in the flesh. The dead may look after the afterwards. But the magnificent here and now of life in the flesh is ours, and ours alone, and ours only for a time. We ought to dance with rapture, that we should be alive and in the flesh, and part of the living, incarnate cosmos. I am part of the sun as my eye is the part of me. That I am part of the earth my feet below know the perfectly, and my blood is part of the sea. My soul knows that I am a part of the human race, my soul is an inorganic part of the great human soul, as my spirit is a part of my nation. In my own very self, I am part of my family. There is nothing of me that is alone and absolute except my mind, and we shall find that the mind has no existence by itself, it is only the glitter of the sun on the surface of the waters. - Apocalypse, 1931.
- Read the following Passage carefully and answer the questions below :
A TED talk (the acronym stands for Technology, Entertainment, and Design) is one of the routes to academic stardom that didn’t exist a decade ago. (The 30th anniversary celebration aside, curators only began posting fame-making free online videos in 2006.) Although TED plays an inordinate role in setting the tone for how ideas are conveyed—not only because of the reach of its videos but also through spinoffs like regional “TEDx” events and the TED Radio Hour, one of the few places nonpolicy intellectuals get substantial on-air time—it’s just one of a number of platforms that are changing the ecology of academic celebrity. These include similar ideas-in-nuggets conclaves, such as the Aspen Ideas Festival and PopTech, along with huge online courses and—yes, still—blogs. These new, or at least newish, forms are upending traditional hierarchies of academic visibility and helping to change which ideas gain purchase in the public discourse.
In a famous essay, “The Unbearable Ugliness of Volvos,” first published in the early 90s, the literary scholar Stanley Fish wrote that “the flourishing of the lecture circuit has brought with it new sources of extra income ... [and] an ever-growing list of stages on which to showcase one’s talents, and geometric increase in the availability of the commodities for which academics yearn, attention, applause, fame, and ultimately, adulation of a kind usuallyreserved for the icons of popular culture.” Fish was Exhibit A among professors taking advantage of such trends, and his trailblazing as a lit-crit celebrity inspired the dapper, globe-trotting littheory operator Morris Zapp, a character in David Lodge’s academic satire Small World. But the world Fish was describing, where no one could live-tweet the lectures, let alone post the talks for worldwide distribution, now seems sepiatoned. “If David Lodge’s Morris Zapp were alive and kicking today,” observes John Holbo, an associate professor of philosophy at the National University of Singapore, and blogger at Crooked Timber and the Valve, “he’d be giving a TED talk, not an MLA talk. Which is to say: He wouldn’t be doing Theory. He probably wouldn’t be in an English department.” - Read the following Passage carefully and answer the questions below :
A spectre is haunting the world, just as Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote in the Communist Manifesto of 1848. This time, however, it is not the spectre of communism but that of neoliberalism. Just as Marx and Engels reported of ‘a holy alliance to exorcise this spectre,’ there is once again an alliance, whether holy or unholy, that has formed to chase the ghost of neoliberalism from the world stage. In any case, it is a curious alliance that has committed to fighting neoliberalism: Religious leaders and artists, environmental activists and globalisation critics, politicians of the left and the right as well as trade unionists, commentators and academics. They all share a passion to unmask neoliberalism as an inhuman, anti-social, and potentially misanthropic ideology or as a cynical exercise by strangely anonymous forces that wish to exploit the world to their own advantage.
The members of this colourful alliance against neoliberalism are as united in their opposition to neoliberalism as they are diverse. This suggests that neoliberalism cannot be too clearly defined as a concept. Rather, it is a broad umbrella under which very different groups with various points of view can meet. In the church of anti-neoliberalism, there is a place for anyone who believes that neoliberalism stands in the way of reaching his or her political goals. This may also explain the lack of any clear and coherent definition of neoliberalism among its dissenters.
Yet the most curious characteristic of neoliberalism is the fact that these days hardly anyone self-identifies as a neoliberal. In former times, ideological debates were fought between, say, conservatives and socialists, collectivists and individualists. While there may not have been any other agreement between these opposing groups, at least they would have agreed about their respective identities. A socialist would not have felt offended by a conservative calling him a socialist and vice-versa. In present-day debates around neoliberalism, on the other hand, most accused of holding ‘neoliberal’ views would not accept being called ‘neoliberal.’ Either they would insist on being something else (whether it is ‘liberal,’ ‘classical liberal,’ or ‘libertarian’), or they would simply claim to be misunderstood by their opponents. In any case, scarcely anybody wants to be a ‘neoliberal’ any more. For example, in an online survey of the readers of Andrew Norton’s blog, out of more than 1,200 participants not a single person selfidentified with the term, while ‘classical liberal,’ ‘conservative,’ and ‘libertarian’ were strong responses. These are strange debates indeed when the enemy you are fighting claims he does not exist. - We can never make our beliefs regarding the world certain. Even scientific theory of a most rigorous and well-confirmed nature is likely to change over a decade or even tomorrow. If we refuse to even try to understand, then it is like resigning from the human race. Undoubtedly life of an unexamined kind is worth living in other respects—as it is no mean thing to be a vegetable or an animal. It is also true that a man wishes to see this speculation domain beyond his next dinner.
From the above passage it is clear that the author believes that
View More Questions
Top SNAP Questions
- In a retail outlet, the average revenue was Rs.10,000 per day over a 30 day period. During this period, the average revenue on weekends (total 8 days) was Rs. 20,000 per day. What was the average daily revenue on weekdays?
- Two different prime numbers X and Y, both are greater than 2, then which of the following must be true?
- It takes 6 hours for pump A, used alone, to fill a tank of water. Pump B alone takes 8 hours to fill the same tank. A, B and another pump C all together fill the tank in 2 hours. How long would pump C take, used alone, to fill the tank?
- A swimming pool can be filled by pipe A in 3 hours and by pipe B in 6 hours, each pump working on its own. At 9 am, pump A is started. At what time will the swimming pool be filled if pump B is started at 10 am?
- The sum of prime numbers that are greater than 60, but less than 70 is :
View More Questions