Summer is Coming! Join the Game of Timers Competition to Win Epic Prizes. Registration is Open. Game starts Mon July 1st.

It is currently 18 Jul 2019, 16:42

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Some have argued that open-access fisheries will always be subject to

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Find Similar Topics 
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
D
Status: Manager
Joined: 27 Oct 2018
Posts: 464
Location: Egypt
Concentration: Strategy, International Business
GPA: 3.67
WE: Pharmaceuticals (Health Care)
GMAT ToolKit User
Some have argued that open-access fisheries will always be subject to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 22 Jun 2019, 07:48
1
1
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  45% (medium)

Question Stats:

65% (02:12) correct 35% (02:20) wrong based on 151 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics


Some have argued that open-access fisheries will always be subject to more exploitation than are private fisheries. The reasoning is that each fisher-man will be more likely to over fish open-access fisheries because he alone reaps the benefits, while the costs of mitigating measures to prevent the collapse of over-exploited fisheries is borne by all. Despite this, one study of 250 common-access fisheries and 103 private fisheries showed that the open-access fisheries were less exploited than the private ones.

In relation to the claim above, the answer to which of the following questions would be most valuable in assessing the significance of the study above?

(A) Were the fisherman who used the common-access fisheries as prosperous as those who used the private fisheries?

(B) Did any of the fishermen in the study have a preference for using common-access fisher-ies over private fisheries?

(C) Did any of the fishermen in the study fish only common-access fisheries, and no private fisheries?

(D) Did the private and open-access fisheries in the study have an equivalent level of marine life before any of them were used for fishing?

(E) Did any of the fishermen in the study use both common-access and private fisheries?

_________________
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
P
Joined: 05 Jul 2018
Posts: 284
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Technology
GRE 1: Q162 V149
GPA: 3.6
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Reviews Badge CAT Tests
Re: Some have argued that open-access fisheries will always be subject to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2019, 01:42
2
Quote:
Some have argued that open-access fisheries will always be subject to more exploitation than are private fisheries. The reasoning is that each fisher-man will be more likely to over fish open-access fisheries because he alone reaps the benefits, while the costs of mitigating measures to prevent the collapse of over-exploited fisheries is borne by all. Despite this, one study of 250 common-access fisheries and 103 private fisheries showed that the open-access fisheries were less exploited than the private ones.

In relation to the claim above, the answer to which of the following questions would be most valuable in assessing the significance of the study above?


Now here we have a study between Open Fisheries and Private Fisheries which concludes that the open fisheries were less exploited than the private fisheries although the expectation was just opposite.
Now to evaluate this, which essentially means to either strengthen/weaken the conclusion what is the information that is critical to be known. Just thinking out loud, it seems that if we knew some comparison metrics between the 2 facilities which compared on some common parameter, it would have helped. Now with these thoughts in mind let's look at the answer choices

Quote:
(A) Were the fisherman who used the common-access fisheries as prosperous as those who used the private fisheries?

Well, what would the prosperity of fisherman tell us about the 2 facilities (Open/Private Fisheries)? Almost, nothing. Maybe you can think that if the fisherman accessing the open fisheries are better off, maybe they were less keep to exploit the facility. But this will be too much beyond the scope of argument will require a lot of hypothetical information. Thus, on the above grounds, this is not a valid answer.

Quote:
(B) Did any of the fishermen in the study have a preference for using common-access fisher-ies over private fisheries?

Now this option may have had some effect on the conclusion and could have qualified as a Contender option, only if that modifier [b][color=#ed1c24]any was not there and instead we had a modifier like Most/many. With the presence of the modifier any which may be just 1 fisherman, we have no solid ground to expect anything from this answer. Hence we can easily get rid off this option[/color][/b]

Quote:
(C) Did any of the fishermen in the study fish only common-access fisheries, and no private fisheries?

Not valid on the same ground as B


(D) Did the private and open-access fisheries in the study have an equivalent level of marine life before any of them were used for fishing?
Now, this looks a very logical answer in line with what we thought in the initial phase while dissecting the argument. We were looking for some sort of valid comparison between the two types of fisheries and this one does exactly the same. This one provides us with marine life comparison between the two fisheries. Now if the open fisheries were already much richer in terms of marine life then it could very well explain why open fisheries were less exploited than the private fisheries. Hence, this IMO is the best answer choice to evaluate the given argument

(E) Did any of the fishermen in the study use both common-access and private fisheries?
Not valid on the same ground as B
_________________
Intern
Intern
avatar
B
Joined: 21 Feb 2019
Posts: 22
Re: Some have argued that open-access fisheries will always be subject to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2019, 09:06
Hi Bunuel,

Do u mean to say if the private fishes had more marine lives, open fishes ld be less exploited?

Posted from my mobile device
Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 26 Jul 2018
Posts: 56
Re: Some have argued that open-access fisheries will always be subject to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 27 Jun 2019, 12:07
saukrit wrote:
Quote:
Some have argued that open-access fisheries will always be subject to more exploitation than are private fisheries. The reasoning is that each fisher-man will be more likely to over fish open-access fisheries because he alone reaps the benefits, while the costs of mitigating measures to prevent the collapse of over-exploited fisheries is borne by all. Despite this, one study of 250 common-access fisheries and 103 private fisheries showed that the open-access fisheries were less exploited than the private ones.

In relation to the claim above, the answer to which of the following questions would be most valuable in assessing the significance of the study above?


Now here we have a study between Open Fisheries and Private Fisheries which concludes that the open fisheries were less exploited than the private fisheries although the expectation was just opposite.
Now to evaluate this, which essentially means to either strengthen/weaken the conclusion what is the information that is critical to be known. Just thinking out loud, it seems that if we knew some comparison metrics between the 2 facilities which compared on some common parameter, it would have helped. Now with these thoughts in mind let's look at the answer choices

Quote:
(A) Were the fisherman who used the common-access fisheries as prosperous as those who used the private fisheries?

Well, what would the prosperity of fisherman tell us about the 2 facilities (Open/Private Fisheries)? Almost, nothing. Maybe you can think that if the fisherman accessing the open fisheries are better off, maybe they were less keep to exploit the facility. But this will be too much beyond the scope of argument will require a lot of hypothetical information. Thus, on the above grounds, this is not a valid answer.

Quote:
(B) Did any of the fishermen in the study have a preference for using common-access fisher-ies over private fisheries?

Now this option may have had some effect on the conclusion and could have qualified as a Contender option, only if that modifier [b][color=#ed1c24]any was not there and instead we had a modifier like Most/many. With the presence of the modifier any which may be just 1 fisherman, we have no solid ground to expect anything from this answer. Hence we can easily get rid off this option[/color][/b]

Quote:
(C) Did any of the fishermen in the study fish only common-access fisheries, and no private fisheries?

Not valid on the same ground as B


(D) Did the private and open-access fisheries in the study have an equivalent level of marine life before any of them were used for fishing?
Now, this looks a very logical answer in line with what we thought in the initial phase while dissecting the argument. We were looking for some sort of valid comparison between the two types of fisheries and this one does exactly the same. This one provides us with marine life comparison between the two fisheries. Now if the open fisheries were already much richer in terms of marine life then it could very well explain why open fisheries were less exploited than the private fisheries. Hence, this IMO is the best answer choice to evaluate the given argument

(E) Did any of the fishermen in the study use both common-access and private fisheries?
Not valid on the same ground as B

Isn't it that if marine content is high in open seas more would be the exploitation?
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
D
Status: Manager
Joined: 27 Oct 2018
Posts: 464
Location: Egypt
Concentration: Strategy, International Business
GPA: 3.67
WE: Pharmaceuticals (Health Care)
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: Some have argued that open-access fisheries will always be subject to  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 07 Jul 2019, 21:02
1
krishnabalu wrote:
Isn't it that if marine content is high in open seas more would be the exploitation?


According to the author, exploitation means "over-fishing".
so if private-access fisheries has low marine content, it will be easy to get exploited/over-fished even if few fishermen used it,
and if open access fisheries has high marine content, it will be difficult to get exploited/over-fished even if more fishermen used it.

so if the answer for "D" is yes, it will weaken the study because if both fisheries had high marine content, the private ones will be less likely exploited because of less number of fishermen for the same high marine content, and if both fisheries had low marine content, the open ones will more likely exploited because of more number of fishermen for same low marine content.
But if the answer is No, it will open a door for predicting that the marine content of open-access fisheries may be high enough to withstand the high usage by fishermen.
_________________
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Some have argued that open-access fisheries will always be subject to   [#permalink] 07 Jul 2019, 21:02
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Some have argued that open-access fisheries will always be subject to

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  





Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne