Many agriculturally intensive areas of the world are beginning to enco

Many agriculturally intensive areas of the world are beginning to encounter water scarcity problems.

What does “agriculturally intensive areas” mean?

Those areas that are intensive in an agricultural sense, i.e., those areas in which there is a lot of agricultural activity.

These areas are beginning to encounter a shortage of water.

As a result, many farmers in these areas are likely to reduce their output as the water supply they need in order to maintain production shrinks.

Because these areas are experiencing a water shortage, many farmers will not get the water supply they need to maintain their existing production level. Thus, they are likely to reduce their output.

However, one group of farmers in such a region plans to increase their production by implementing techniques for water conservation.

“However” indicates a contrast.

There is one group of farmers in one such water-shortage region – this group has a plan to achieve a goal.

The plan: Implement techniques for water conservation

The goal: Increase their production

Please note that the passage presents a bunch of facts; there is no argument and thus no conclusion here.





We’re looking for an option that supports the prediction.

Which prediction?

The prediction that the group’s plan will succeed.

When will the group’s plan succeed?

When it achieves its goal.

The plan is “implementing techniques for water conservation”, and the goal is “increasing their production”.

The group’s plan will succeed when

Implementing techniques for water conservation WILL LEAD to an increase in their production.

Thus, we’re looking for an option that supports the above statement.

(I believe many people don’t spend time to become clear about what EXACTLY the passage gives us and the question asks, just as people don’t spend time simplifying the given information and question in Data Sufficiency questions in quant. However, as you might have already realized, the time spent gaining clarity about what we are looking for significantly increases our clarity level while evaluating the options.)





(A) Farmers that can gain a larger share of the food market in their regions will be better positioned to control more water resources.

Incorrect. Ask yourself whether this option supports “Implementing techniques for water conservation WILL LEAD to increasing their production”.

The answer is No.

This option has ZERO IMPACT on our prediction.

Let’s start with a variation:

(A1) Farmers that can increase their production will be better positioned to control more water resources.

I have replaced the phrase ‘Farmers that can gain a larger share of the food market in their regions’ with the phrase ‘Farmers that can increase their production’.

What impact does this variation have on the prediction?

This variation talks about the situation in which some farmers have already achieved the goal. What happens when the goal has been met is irrelevant. Our concern is whether the plan will lead to the goal.

The original option talks about the situation when some farmers have already increased their production (achieved the goal) or other farmers have reduced their production (another reason for a larger market share). In that case, they perhaps have gained a larger share of the food market.

However, what happens when the goal has been met (or when market share has become larger even for some other reason) is none of our concern.

Our concern is whether our plan will lead to our goal.

(B) Most agricultural practices in areas with water shortages are water intensive.

Incorrect. This option has NO IMPACT on our prediction.

Whether the agricultural practices are water intensive (i.e., let’s say they use 100 litres of water per unit of land) or are not water intensive (i.e., let’s say they use 10 litres of water per unit of land) is not relevant. In either case, the plan can work equally effectively – we can conserve, let’s say, 10% water to have scope for 10% more production.

I believe the reason some people mark this option is that they think,

“If the agricultural practices are water intensive, there is a lot of scope of water conservation.”

Perhaps, everything else equal, we can conserve more water from water intensive activities than from activities that are not water intensive.

However, more water thus saved is not expected to result in more production in areas with water intensive agriculture. (vis-a-vis less water in areas with agriculture that is not water intensive)

Why?

Let’s take the same example of 100 litres of water per unit of land in areas with water intensive agriculture (area A, let’s say) and of 10 litres of water per unit of land in areas that do not not have water intensive agriculture* (area B, let’s say).

If you save 10 litres of water in area A, you’ll be able to grow on an additional 0.1 unit of land, and if you save 1 litre of water in area B, you’ll be able to grow on the same additional area of 0.1 units of land.

Thus, more water saved is not equivalent to more production.

So, whether the areas are water intensive or not has no impact on our prediction that implementing techniques for water conservation WILL LEAD to increasing their production.

*Side note: The passage deals with areas that are agriculturally intensive. The agriculture in these areas may or may not be water intensive.

(C) Other regions of the world not facing water shortages are Likely to make up for the reduction in agricultural output.

Incorrect. Option C indicates that the overall supply of agricultural output in the market will not go down.

However, we’re not concerned about the overall supply.

We’re just concerned about the prediction about a specific group of farmers.

(D) Demand for agricultural products in the group's region is not expected to decline.

Incorrect. Whether the demand for agricultural products increases, remains the same, declines or even becomes ZERO has NO IMPACT on our prediction. As long as implementing techniques for water conservation leads to an increased production for our farmers, our prediction works. Whether these farmers are able to sell this increased production or not is NONE of our concern.

(E) More than half the water used for agriculture in the farmers’ region is lost to evaporation or leakage from irrigation channels.

Correct. ‘Lost to evaporation’ and ‘leakage’ are both bad things. It seems that more than half the water used for agriculture is wasted.

This option indicates that there is a lot of scope for water conservation.

Think about it. If there were no scope for water conservation, would implementing techniques for water conservation lead to water conservation?

No.

In such a case, would we be able to predict an increase in production?

No.

Thus, knowing that there is a lot of scope for water conservation increases the chances that implementing the techniques for water conservation will lead to increased production.

Thus, this option supports our prediction.

Many agriculturally intensive areas of the world are beginning o encounter water scarcity problems. As a result, many farmers in these areas are likely to reduce their output as the water supply they need in
order to maintain production shrinks. However, one group of farmers in such a region plans to increase their production by implementing techniques tor water conservation.
Which of the following, it true, would most strongly support the prediction that the group's plan will succeed?

Now what is the plan?
to increase their production by implementing techniques for water conservation

Now we need to support a prediction that the group's plan will succeed.

Pre-thinking:

What we need is a reason to believe that water conservation will lead to increase in savings of enough water so as to increase the production. What if the farmers in the group were not using the water in an effective manner as water was available in abundance. With this pre-thinking let's do the POE.


(A) Farmers that can gain a larger share of the food market in their regions will be better positioned to control more water resources.

This is out of scope. First we don't know farmers in the said group have a larger share of the food market so that they are better positioned to control more water resources. Even if they can control more water resources, then it may be possible that they have little incentive to conserve water. This doesn't give us any reason to believe that water conservation will lead to increase production.

(B) Most agricultural practices in areas with water shortages are water intensive.
This option doesn't give us any reason to believe that water conservation will lead to increase production. Agricultural practices are water intensive but we don't know if water conservation will meet the demand.

(C) Other regions of the world not facing water shortages are likely to make up for the reduction in agricultural output.
We are not really concerned about the dynamics of the overall agricultural output. We need something that will help us believe how that one group will increase output by conserving water. This option is out of scope.

(D) Demand tor agricultural products in the group's region is not expected to decline.
This option also does not help us believe how that one group will increase output by conserving water.

(E) More than halt the water used tor agriculture in the farmers’ region is lost to evaporation or leakage from irrigation channels.

This is inline with the pre-thinking. If more than half of the water is lost to evaporation or leakage from irrigation channels, then this gives us a strong reason to believe that water conservation will help in meeting the demands for even an increased production.

Many agricultural intensive areas of the world are beginning to encounter water scarcity problems.
As a result, many farmers in these areas are likely to reduce their output as the water supply they need in order to maintain production shrinks.
However, one group of farmers in such a region plans to increase their production by implementing techniques for water conservation.
Which of the following, if true, would most strongly support the prediction that the group’s plan will succeed?
(A) Farmers that can gain a larger share of the food market in their regions will be better positioned to control more water resources.
(it is not about control it is about conservation and scarcity.)
(B) Most agricultural practices in areas with water shortages are water- intensive.
(this does not explain anything about the plan.)
(C) Other regions of the world not facing water shortages are likely to make for the reduction in agricultural output.
(other regions are not of consideration-OFS)
(D) Demand for agricultural products in the group’s region is not expected to decline.
(this does not help to say anything about the plan's success)
(E) More than half of the water used for agricultural in the farmers region is lost to evaporation or leakage from irrigation channels.
(so by conservation they can increase their productivity .i.e., plan would be a success)

Hi Team,



I was stuck between option B & E

B-- Since the practices are water intensive, It is more likely water conservation techniques would improve productivity
E-- Most water is lost due to evaporation/leakages from irrigation channels; more water conserved with lead to more water availability and increase in productivity




Why option E (OA)


Many agriculturally intensive areas of the world are beginning to encounter water scarcity problems. As a result, many farmers in these areas are likely to reduce their output as the water supply they need in order to maintain production shrinks. However, one group of farmers in such a region plans to increase their production by implementing techniques for water conservation.

Which of the following, it true, would most strongly support the prediction that the group's plan will succeed?


(A) Farmers that can gain a larger share of the food market in their regions will be better positioned to control more water resources.

(B) Most agricultural practices in areas with water shortages are water intensive.

(C) Other regions of the world not facing water shortages are Likely to make up for the reduction in agricultural output.

(D) Demand for agricultural products in the group's region is not expected to decline.

(E) More than half the water used for agriculture in the farmers’ region is lost to evaporation or leakage from irrigation channels.

Hi guest1708
I am not an expert but I did get to the right answer when I practiced this question and I hope this helps.
My thinking process was as follows:

Implementing techniques for water conservation-----> increase in production

Option E says: More than half the water used for agriculture in the farmers’ region is lost to evaporation or leakage from irrigation channels.

Let’s assume the fact given in option E to be true for a moment. Our premise says, “As a result, many farmers in these areas are likely to reduce their output as the water supply they need in order to maintain production shrinks”. If there is a shrinkage due to the fact provided in option E (which we have to assume to be true) then the water conservation techniques might help in the success of the plan as these techniques can mitigate the shrinkage of water due to evaporation or leakage (as given in option E).

Now let’s assume option B to be true for a moment which says, “Most agricultural practices in areas with water shortages are water intensive”. In other words, farmers use a lot of water for their agricultural practices in most areas where there are water shortages.
I think this option at best tells us why there are water shortages in most areas with water intensive agricultural practices but our question is asking us, which of the following option, if true, support the prediction that the group's plan (water conservation technique) will work?

We have to strengthen our summary “Implementing techniques for water conservation-----> increase in production”
Therefore, if we consider the fact in option E to be true, then the water conservation technique implemented above might actually work.

Hope this helps!

So firstly remember on such questions - ALWAYS focus on the conclusion.

It says these farmers are likely to succeed with their plan because they are looking to increase their production by implementing techniques for water conservation

The key is "water conservation".

Now, B says
Most agricultural practices in areas with water shortages are water intensive.

This is true for both the farmers - those who are going to increase the production and those who are going to lower it. How does this information provide us with any insights on how one group might benefit while the other does not?

Always look for a difference between the 2 groups - usually on the GMAT CR stimulus you will have some kind of a bifurcation - understand what would help differentiate one group from the other.

E says:

More than half the water used for agriculture in the farmers’ region is lost to evaporation or leakage from irrigation channels.

This gives me a strong reason why water conservation will succeed.

Think about it - what if we negate it. What if I were to say most of the water is from the ground and that itself has dried up. Then what would "conserving" it do?

Hope this helps,

Just saying - the question itself says IF TRUE that means we have to assume it is true not for a moment - but kind of permanently. If you know what I am saying :D

Arun

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.