Can anyone explain the reasoning behind choosing option c over b?

Waiting for good explanation why b wrong and c right

Posted from my mobile device

Because of the economic slowdown, there is a large drop in the number of new projects sanctioned by the government. At the same time, the average spending per project has gone up.

Which one of the following, if true, best explains the increase in the average spending per project?

A) The project spending by the government had risen over the last few years before the economic slowdown.
B) Owing to the economic slowdown, many low-budget government projects have been shelved.
C) Crucial projects in larger public interest continue to receive government funding.
D) The economy is expected to slip further in the coming few months.
E) Economic slowdown has made the government refocus on its priorities, pushing projects lower in the list.




Though I would agree 'Sanctioned' would have made the Option B airtight, But I dont think there is still any option better than that, more so Option C

low budget Projects are shelved --> It means they are not funded as of now and hence only high budgets are funded and hence the AVERAGE spending gone up

in option C - Crucial Projects in larger project does not automatically means Costly projects or thats what I believe

IMO - B is still better option

So according to me, B cannot be right because, the argument says "Because of the economic slowdown, there is a large drop in the number of new projects sanctioned by the government. At the same time, the average spending per project has gone up." which means that there is a drop in number of new sanctions.
Consider that there were 90 projects initially each with average budget x dollars, and say previous year the government has sanctioned a 10 more, making the total no. of projects 100 and average budget y dollars.
Now, y could be greater or lesser than x, based on the budget of the 10 new projects.

From the argument, we know that there is a drop in new sanctions. So consider that there were 5 sanctions this time(which is a drop from previous number i.e. 10), making the total as 105 projects and average budget say z dollars.

Option B) Owing to the economic slowdown, many low-budget government projects have been shelved.
says that of the 100 previous projects, that were sanctioned previously before economic slow down, the low budget ones are removed. This cannot give any solid explanation or evidence for the fact that there is an increase in average budget of the projects on right now. This can help only if we are sure of the fact that incoming 5 projects(which is after a drop in no. of incoming projects sanctioned) have an average budget more than the "low-budget" projects that are shelved.


Having said that, I still am not completely convinced why C is the right choice because it doesn't draw a sound connection between "Critical" and budget of the project.

For me it is still vague and unclear
consider this- "talking about option B it tells that low budgeted products are shelved and also new projects are not sanctioned by the government."
very simple example-cost of projects earlier 50,40,30,20 its average cost is around 35{50+40+30+
20/4}
but when some low budgets are shelved say 30 and 20 be eliminated so the average of 50 and 40 is 45 which is in fact greater than earlier... this solves the problem...
BUT, now lets look at the option C it talks about that some crucial project in public interest continued to receive government funding remember.
now,keeping one thing in mind is that these projects are the old ones and not new projects and also it doesn't mention whether they are low budgeted.. so accordingly the average cost should remain same because no new ones are sanctioned but the average cost increases it doesn't clear how the average increases. SO FOR ME B IS STILL STRONG OVER C....PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW MY REASONING IS WRONG??