To best protect threatened plants, inefficient national parks should be sold

游客2023-08-28  24

问题     To best protect threatened plants, inefficient national parks should be sold off and the proceeds used to buy more cost-effective ones. So says Richard Fuller at the University of Queensland in St. Lucia, Australia, who reckons that replacing 1 per cent of Australia’s protected areas could significantly increase the number of vegetation types being protected.
    Worldwide, there are 100,000 regions dedicated to bio-diversity maintenance, covering 12 per cent of countries’ land and territorial waters. "Historically, a lot of these areas were designated because we couldn’t use them for economic or agriculture purposes, not for their bio-diversity value," says Fuller. "Consequently, many species and habitats remain inadequately protected." For example, up to 83 per cent of threatened plants are found outside protected areas.
    Fuller says environmentalists who try only to increase the number of protected sites are effectively "adding to an inefficient system". Instead, he says, governments should sell off expensive land of low conservation value and buy new sites instead.
    Fuller’s team has developed a mathematical model to test their theory in Australia. The group divided the country’s landmass(国土)into around 65,000 sections before assigning each a "conservation value" based on the rarity of the vegetation type within it: higher values were given to areas where more native vegetation has been lost. They then divided each section’s conservation value by its financial value, enabling them to rank currently protected areas in terms of cost-effectiveness. In the model, the least cost-effective areas were sold off and the funds used to buy more cost-effective sites.
    For a vegetation type to be considered as "protected" in the team’s model, 15 per cent of the land area it covered must lie in protected areas. Currently, only 18 out of 60 Australian vegetation types are protected by this measure. Replacing just 1 per cent of the least cost-effective areas boosted the number to 54. "We get an enormous increase in efficiency without spending more money," says Fuller.
    "It’s a logical approach with obvious benefits for protected bio-diversity," says Jon Nevill, an environmental consultant in Hampton, Victoria, Australia. "But I have no confidence that governments could effectively manage such a difficult programme." Martin Taylor, a protected areas policy manager at environmental campaign group WWF-Australia, is less complimentary. He says the idea of "trading off protected areas to buy theoretically better ones" is "quite horrifying". Sacrificing a protected area based solely on vegetation types without consideration of native animals or local geography is troublesome, he says. "No area can be written off so lightly as these authors do."
    Fuller defends his approach, saying the study is just a demonstration. "If this idea was to be put into practice you would need to consider these other values." [br] What could be achieved by replacing just 1 per cent of the least cost-effective areas in Australia?

选项 A、The number of protected sites would increase to 54.
B、The protected vegetation types would increase to 54.
C、The land area covered by protected sites would increase by 54%.
D、The cost-effectiveness of protected areas would increase by 54%.

答案 B

解析 根据题干中replacing just 1 per cent of the least cost-effective areas可以快速定位到第5段第3句。解题关键在于弄清the number指的是什么的数量。答案在上一句找。该段第2句说到,澳大利亚60种植被中只有18种得到了保护,因此可以判断这里的the number指的是受保护植物的数目。因此排除A,选B。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/2964848.html
最新回复(0)