Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Jun 0612:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Struggling to find the right strategies to score a 99 %ile on GMAT Focus? Riya (GMAT 715) boosted her score by 100-points in just 15 days! Discover how the right mentorship, tailored strategies, and an unwavering mindset can transform your GMAT prep.
Jun 0701:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
Jun 0803:00 PM PDT
-04:00 PM PDT
15 Full-length GMAT FE mocks with insightful analytics, weakness diagnosis, and video explanations!
Jun 0808:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
A powerful GMAT course taught live online + 6 months of access to TTP OnDemand GMAT Masterclass included! Mon/Wed June 8, 2026 →August 12, 2026 8:00pm-10:00pm EST
Jun 1006:00 AM PDT
-06:15 PM PDT
Register for the GMAT Club Virtual MBA Spotlight Fair – the world’s premier event for serious MBA candidates. This is your chance to hear directly from Admissions Directors at nearly every Top 30 MBA program..
Jun 1111:00 AM EDT
-01:00 PM EDT
TTP GMAT OnDemand gives serious students 400+ hours of expert video instruction, the full TTP course, AI support, weekly office hours, and a 715+ score guarantee—all built for elite GMAT score improvement.
Do expenditures on road construction projects represent good investments for communities? The taxpaying public will never know because community planners rarely analyze road projects as investments. The benefits that local residents will receive from a new or improved road, such as increased efficiency, fewer accidents, and reduced vehicle operating costs, as well as the potential regional impacts on jobs, population, and income, should be measured. These benefits should then be compared with the total construction costs of the project, such as planning and design, land purchases, construction, and costs for moving utility lines. Only then will any investment in building or improving roads be made with reasonable confidence.
Both the economist and ecologist offer guidance for planners who are considering whether to undertake road construction projects.
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
25%
(medium)
Question Stats:
71% (02:44) correct
29%
(02:55)
wrong
based on 1374
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
1. Based on the information given, which one of the following can be most logically inferred?
| The ecologist faults community planners generally for not considering the effect of converting land to industrial or residential use. | |
| The economist would allow road construction to proceed even if it would threaten sensitive ecosystems. | |
| Both the economist and ecologist offer guidance for planners who are considering whether to undertake road construction projects. | |
| Both the economist and the ecologist consider the regional economic impacts of road construction projects. | |
| Neither the economist nor the ecologist provides clear criteria for determining whether a road project should be undertaken. |
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
Both the economist and ecologist offer guidance for planners who are considering whether to undertake road construction projects.
The economist is more intent on endorsing road construction projects than the ecologist is.: No
The economist and the ecologist are both concerned with the criteria on which community planners base decisions.: Yes
The ecologist is concerned with how road projects can affect the quality of life within communities, whereas the economist is not.: No
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
25%
(medium)
Question Stats:
63% (00:57) correct
37%
(01:07)
wrong
based on 1445
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
2. For each of the following statements, select Yes if the statement is supported by the information provided. Otherwise select No.
| Yes | No | |
| The economist is more intent on endorsing road construction projects than the ecologist is. | ||
| The economist and the ecologist are both concerned with the criteria on which community planners base decisions. | ||
| The ecologist is concerned with how road projects can affect the quality of life within communities, whereas the economist is not. |
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
The economist is more intent on endorsing road construction projects than the ecologist is.: No
The economist and the ecologist are both concerned with the criteria on which community planners base decisions.: Yes
The ecologist is concerned with how road projects can affect the quality of life within communities, whereas the economist is not.: No
The road’s planned route could be altered to avoid the sensitive ecosystem at no additional cost.: Acceptable
The road would provide a significant economic benefit to neighboring communities.: Not Acceptable
Mitigating the threat to the sensitive ecosystem would cost an additional $1 million.: Not Acceptable
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
35%
(medium)
Question Stats:
61% (01:07) correct
39%
(01:16)
wrong
based on 1402
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
3. In the columns, select Acceptable for each detail that would make the new road acceptable under the standards provided by both the economist and the ecologist, based on the information provided. Otherwise, select Not acceptable.
| Acceptable | Not Acceptable | |
| The road’s planned route could be altered to avoid the sensitive ecosystem at no additional cost. | ||
| The road would provide a significant economic benefit to neighboring communities. | ||
| Mitigating the threat to the sensitive ecosystem would cost an additional $1 million. |
ShowHide Answer
Official Answer
The road’s planned route could be altered to avoid the sensitive ecosystem at no additional cost.: Acceptable
The road would provide a significant economic benefit to neighboring communities.: Not Acceptable
Mitigating the threat to the sensitive ecosystem would cost an additional $1 million.: Not Acceptable
Solving this question helps.
Taking a timed set of similar questions in
GMAT Club Forum Quiz →
is even better.
11 Jul 2020, 10:22
Kudos
Bookmarks
1)C,since both economist and ecologist are talking about the impacts of road construction project and whether to carry it.
2)a)No,since no one is endorsing the project rather one is looking the impact and benefits of the project for people and the other is looking the impact on environment.
b)Yes,both are concerned with how the planners base their decision,I mean is it via public good or via ecological/environmental considerations
c)No,there is no such bias mentioned in the above para, it's just that both are talking of two different cases.
3) Statement 2 & 3 are directly not acceptable since 2 only talks about the economic benefits,which only satisfies the economist criteria and here there might be negative environmental impacts,while in statement 3 it is only talking about the ecosystem and not about the economy,thus looking on only one side of the coin
While statement 1 talks about ecology (avoiding any problems to environment by planning the road) and economy(since cost saving is there,which ultimately saves taxpayers money and road is also constructed ,thus economic benefits are also there) ,so both economist and ecologist are happy
Posted from my mobile device
2)a)No,since no one is endorsing the project rather one is looking the impact and benefits of the project for people and the other is looking the impact on environment.
b)Yes,both are concerned with how the planners base their decision,I mean is it via public good or via ecological/environmental considerations
c)No,there is no such bias mentioned in the above para, it's just that both are talking of two different cases.
3) Statement 2 & 3 are directly not acceptable since 2 only talks about the economic benefits,which only satisfies the economist criteria and here there might be negative environmental impacts,while in statement 3 it is only talking about the ecosystem and not about the economy,thus looking on only one side of the coin
While statement 1 talks about ecology (avoiding any problems to environment by planning the road) and economy(since cost saving is there,which ultimately saves taxpayers money and road is also constructed ,thus economic benefits are also there) ,so both economist and ecologist are happy
Posted from my mobile device
General Discussion
rohan.garg971
20 Dec 2023, 19:52
Kudos
Bookmarks
In Q3, I think the 1st statement is still Not acceptable - we are not given any information whether the proposed route alteration can change the benefits or not.
