2. 考研
  3. [A] financial aid should be provided to poor countries that are with a wide variety of plants and animals. [B] everyone will sin

[A] financial aid should be provided to poor countries that are with a wide variety of plants and animals. [B] everyone will sin

admin2021-10-14  65
问题 [A] financial aid should be provided to poor countries that are with a wide variety of plants and animals.
[B] everyone will sing the same song and deliver the important information.
[C] the loss of biodiversity may lead to devastating effects on the life of the earth.
[D] as biodiversity is quite complicated, it is not easy to set a single target.
[E] a minimal single number can help to get out of the dilemma of global biodiversity policy and goal setting of quite a long time.
[F] a small number of governments need to make formal requests for scientific advice to the UN convention immediately.
[G] the government needs to set related goals and policies in the process of finding extinction target.
                                       Is a single target the best way to cut biodiversity loss?
    Next year, all eyes will be on Kunming, China, as talks resume on a new set of global goals to protect biodiversity. These are much needed, because most of the existing 20 targets, which were set in 2010 in Aichi, Japan, have failed to make an impact on the rate of biodiversity loss.
    Last month, a team of researchers proposed creating one headline number, suggesting that countries should aim to keep extinctions to "well below" 20 known species every year worldwide.
    The proposal, by Mark Rounsevell at the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology in Germany and his colleagues, is intended to break nearly two decades of failure in global biodiversity policy and target setting. And the idea is gaining traction.
    In an interview with Nature, Elizabeth Mamma Mrema, the new head of the United Nations Convention on Biodiversity, acknowledged that it would be difficult to set a single target because biodiversity is multifaceted. But, if the community succeeds in making it work, she adds; "that will be the best result possible because then it becomes a song everyone will sing, and that everybody can align with to deliver that one key message.
    A target for limiting extinctions is not a new idea, and deserves serious consideration. Its feasibility and consequences should be rigorously assessed by the convention’s own scientific advisory body, and by the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES).
    There are many questions for researchers working in biodiversity to explore. These questions include how to choose which species to conserve, and who should make such choices. Would a single number give equal weight to all threatened species, or should those species that are more important to livelihoods and to ecosystem function be given priority for protection? As the author, Christopher Monroe points out, it is possible for biodiversity loss to result in large and damaging changes to life on Earth without any species going extinct.
    Biodiversity is essential to economic prosperity, food and human health, and the researchers, like Maharaj K. Pandit, the director of the Centre for Inter-Disciplinary Studies of Environment are keen to stress that the creation of one extinction target should not detract from the need for governments to create nationally relevant targets and policies. Some researchers in IPBES also advocate the provision of funding to help countries that are financially poor but biodiversity-rich to meet their goals.
    Certainly, a single target, such as that for climate change, would be simpler to communicate than the Aichi targets. And Monroe is right to acknowledge that, ultimately, biodiversity loss continues because public-policy decisions have not accounted for the costs of replacing the services that species and ecosystems provide to humans.
    Any proposal to consider a single numerical target for biodiversity needs to be similarly assessed. IPBES—working with the UN biodiversity convention’s own scientific advisers—should be called on to advise. For this to happen, a small group of governments need to make a formal request for scientific advice to the UN convention, and they should do so without delay.
Mark Rounsevell and his colleagues propose that
选项
答案E
解析 由Mark Rounsevell and his colleagues可以定位到第二、三段，从第二段可知“a team of researchers proposed creating one headline number”，即“一组研究人员提议拟定一个最低标准”。从第三段可知“The proposal，by Mark Rounsevell at the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology in Germany and his colleagues，is intended to break nearly two decades of failure in global biodiversity policy and target setting”，即“由德国卡尔斯鲁厄技术学院的马克.鲁恩斯维尔和他的同事们提出的这项提案旨在打破全球生物多样性政策和目标设定中将近二十年的失败”。选项[E]为原文的同义转述，其中a minimal single number对应one headline number，dilemma对应failure，quite a long time对应nearly two decades。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/o3Y4777K
0

考研英语二

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)