The concept of 'ecological footprint' has gained significant traction in environmental policy discussions. It measures the demand placed on Earth's ecosystems by human activities, expressed as the area of biologically productive land and water required to produce resources and absorb waste. While this metric offers a clear, quantifiable way to compare consumption across nations, critics argue that it oversimplifies complex environmental impacts. For instance, it fails to account for the toxicity of certain pollutants or the depletion of non-renewable resources. Moreover, the calculation assumes a uniform productivity of land, ignoring regional variations in ecosystem health. Despite these limitations, the ecological footprint remains a powerful communicative tool, translating abstract environmental degradation into a tangible spatial metaphor that resonates with policymakers and the public alike.
❓ 지문에 따르면, 생태발자국 지표에 대한 주요 비판은 무엇인가?
A. A. 정책 입안자들이 이해하기에는 너무 복잡하다.
B. B. 그것은 오염물질의 독성이나 재생 불가능한 자원 고갈을 고려하지 않는다.
C. C. 그것은 모든 지역의 토지 생산성을 과대평가한다.
D. D. 이는 탄소 배출에만 초점을 맞추며, 다른 환경 영향을 무시한다.
✅ 正确答案
B. It does not consider the toxicity of pollutants or non-renewable resource depletion.
IELTS Reading Tips
Skim the questions first, underline keywords, then locate in the passage
Watch for paraphrasing; correct answers are often reworded
Be wary of absolute statements (all, always, never) — usually wrong
Pay attention to content after transition words (however, but, yet)
Manage time: about 20 minutes per passage; skip difficult questions first