The concept of 'ecological footprint' has gained prominence as a metric for assessing human demand on natural resources. It quantifies the amount of biologically productive land and water area required to produce the resources consumed and to absorb the wastes generated, given prevailing technology and resource management practices. While originally applied to individuals, the footprint is now frequently used to compare nations, revealing stark disparities: high-income countries often exhibit footprints several times larger than their own biophysical capacity, thereby relying on global resource flows. Critics argue that the metric oversimplifies complex environmental impacts by aggregating diverse land types and ignoring factors such as toxicity or biodiversity loss. Nonetheless, proponents maintain that its intuitive appeal and ability to communicate sustainability limits make it a valuable educational and policy tool, despite methodological limitations.
❓ Согласно тексту, какая из следующих позиций является критикой метрики экологического следа?
A. Он не учитывает различия в уровнях национального дохода.
B. Оно чрезмерно подчёркивает роль технологий в использовании ресурсов.
C. Это упрощает сложные воздействия на окружающую среду, объединяя различные типы земель и опуская такие вопросы, как токсичность.
D. Это слишком сложно для понимания широкой аудиторией.
✅ 正确答案
It simplifies complex environmental impacts by combining various land types and omitting issues like toxicity.
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