Ecoefficiency (measures to minimize environmental impact through the

Question

Ecoefficiency (measures to minimize environmental impact through the reduction or elimination of waste from production processes) has become a goal for companies worldwide, with many realizing significant cost savings from such innovations. Peter Senge and Goran Carstedt see this development as laudable but suggest that simply adopting ecoefficiency innovations could actually worsen environmental stresses in the future. Such innovations reduce production waste but do not alter the number of products manufactured nor the waste generated from their use and discard; indeed, most companies invest in ecoefficiency improvements in order to increase profits and growth. Moreover, there is no guarantee that increased economic growth from ecoefficiency will come in similarly ecoefficient ways, since in today’s global markets, greater profits may be turned into investment capital that could easily be reinvested in old-style eco-inefficient industries. Even a vastly more ecoefficient industrial system could, were it to grow much larger, generate more total waste and destroy more habitat and species than would a smaller, less ecoefficient economy. Senge and Carstedt argue that to preserve the global environment and sustain economic growth, businesses must develop a new systemic approach that reduces total material use and total accumulated waste. Focusing exclusively on ecoefficiency, which offers a compelling business case according to established thinking, may distract companies from pursuing radically different products and business models.   1 
 1. The primary purpose of the passage is to

(A) explain why a particular business strategy has been less successful than was once anticipated
(B) propose an alternative to a particular business strategy that has inadvertently caused ecological damage
(C) present a concern about the possible consequences of pursuing a particular business strategy
(D) make a case for applying a particular business strategy on a larger scale than is currently practiced
(E) suggest several possible outcomes of companies’ failure to understand the economic impact of a particular business strategy

2 
 2. The passage mentions which of the following as a possible consequence of companies’ realization of greater profits through ecoefficiency?

(A) The companies may be able to sell a greater number of products by lowering prices.
(B) The companies may be better able to attract investment capital in the global market.
(C) The profits may be reinvested to increase economic growth through ecoefficiency.
(D) The profits may be used as investment capital for industries that are not ecoefficient.
(E) The profits may encourage companies to make further innovations in reducing production waste.

3 
 3. The passage implies that which of the following is a possible consequence of a company’s adoption of innovations that increase its ecoefficiency?

(A) Company profits resulting from such innovations may be reinvested in that company with no guarantee that the company will continue to make further improvements in ecoefficiency.
(B) Company growth fostered by cost savings from such innovations may allow that company to manufacture a greater number of products that will be used and discarded, thus worsening environmental stress.
(C) A company that fails to realize significant cost savings from such innovations may have little incentive to continue to minimize the environmental impact of its production processes.
(D) A company that comes to depend on such innovations to increase its profits and growth may be vulnerable in the global market to competition from old-style eco-inefficient industries.
(E) A company that meets its ecoefficiency goals is unlikely to invest its increased profits in the development of new and innovative ecoefficiency measures.

GMATNinja · Accepted Answer

There are a couple of issues with answer choice (B).

First, (B) says that the business strategy discussed in the passage " has inadvertently caused ecological damage. " For this to be accurate, we need some evidence from the passage that ecoefficiency has  already  caused ecological damage.

That's not quite right -- Senge and Carstedt actually argue that "simply adopting ecoefficiency innovations could actually worsen environmental stresses  in the future. "

In addition, (B) states that the primary purpose of the passage is to "propose an alternative" to ecoefficiency. It's true that Senge/Carstedt believe that "businesses must develop a new systemic approach that reduces total material use and total accumulated waste." But is that actually proposing an alternative?

Not really -- they are just saying that businesses must somehow come up with a new approach that fixes the issues of ecoefficiency. They haven't actually proposed a way to accomplish that goal.

For those reasons, you can eliminate (B) for question #1.

I hope that helps!

BukrsGmat · Answer

Ecoefficiency (measures to minimize environmental impact through the reduction or elimination of waste from production processes) has become a goal for companies worldwide, with many realizing significant cost savings from such innovations. Peter Senge and Goran Carstedt see this development as laudable but suggest that simply adopting ecoefficiency innovations could actually worsen environmental stresses in the future. Such innovations reduce production waste but do not alter the number of products manufactured nor the waste generated from their use and discard; indeed, most companies invest in ecoefficiency improvements in order to increase profits and growth. Moreover, there is no guarantee that increased economic growth from ecoefficiency will come in similarly ecoefficient ways, since in today's global markets, greater profits may be turned into investment capital that could easily be reinvested in old-style eco-inefficient industries. Even a vastly more ecoefficient industrial system could, were it to grow much larger, generate more total waste and destroy more habitat and species than would a smaller, less ecoefficient economy. Senge and Carstedt argue that to preserve the global environment and sustain economic growth, businesses must develop a new systemic approach that reduces total material use and total accumulated waste. Focusing exclusively on ecoefficiency, which offers a compelling business case according to established thinking, may distract companies from pursuing radically different products and business models.

The passage implies that which of the following is a possible consequence of a company's adoption of innovations that increase its ecoefficiency?

A) Company profits resulting from such innovations may be reinvested in that company with no guarantee that the company will continue to make further improvements in ecoefficiency.  Wrong: author does not tell if they r going to improve further or not ..but he tells they might invest in eco in-efficient industries

B) Company growth fostered by cost savings from such innovations may allow that company to manufacture a greater number of products that will be used and discarded, thus worsening environmental stress.
   Correct : Clearly mentioned in the passage

C) A company that fails to realize significant cost savings from such innovations may have little incentive to continue to minimize the environmental impact of its production processes.
   Wrong: we are not discussing about losses the company will bear if not adopting these innvoations

D) A company that comes to depend on such innovations to increase its profits and growth may be vulnerable in the global market to competition from old-style eco-inefficient industries.
   Wrong: Shell game ...few words make the whole sentence wrong...no where written they will be vulnerable to old style industries

E) A company that meets its ecoefficiency goals is unlikely to invest its increased profits in the development of new and innovative ecoefficiency measures.
   Nothing is said about further development, only written they are likely to invest in in-efficient indutsies

GMATNinja · Answer

Question 1  
 
First, let’s consider the author’s purpose throughout the course of the passage:

Initially, the author introduces ecoefficiency and the view of two individuals that it could actually harm the environment. 
 Then, the author explains how ecoefficiency could harm the environment. 
 Finally, the author recommends an alternative approach that, while including ecoefficiency, would preserve the environment.

The question asks that we identify the author’s primary purpose. With that in mind, here’s (D):

The particular business strategy discussed in the passage is ecoefficiency. The problem with (D) is that the author does not contend that  ecoefficiency  should be practiced on a larger scale. Rather, the author points out the potential harmful effects of ecoefficiency, and then he/she recommends  additional  factors that must be taken into account (total material use and accumulated waster). But these two factors are not addressed by ecoefficiency, and the author does not argue that ecoefficiency should be applied on a larger scale. Eliminate (D).

And here’s (C):

As we said above, the particular business strategy discussed is ecoefficiency. The author begins by introducing the strategy and goes on to discuss the possible harmful effects of that strategy. This is precisely what (C) describes, so it is the best answer choice.

I hope that helps!

GMATPill · Answer

The answer to Q4 is C and you can get that when you outline the passage on your first read - connecting the dots.

As you read the answer choices, it's important that you make clear what "a particular business strategy" refers to.

Answer choice D states this:
D. make a case for applying a particular business strategy on a larger scale than is
currently practiced

Key Points
1. What is this "particular business strategy"?
2. Is there a case for applying it on a larger scale than currently practiced?

1. After your first read of the passage, you should be able to break down the following:

First sentence is an introduction of what ecoefficiency is: that it's a goal!
Second sentence provides the PERSPECTIVE: provides peter and goran's perspective. What is this perspective? That ADOPTING ecoefficiency innovations WORSEN the environment!
Next 3 points of the passage help support this perspective: that THIS BUSINESS STRATEGY is bad for the environment for 3 reasons.
Lastly, Peter/Goran encourage folks to focus on ALTERNATIVES, not what they are currently doing which is focusing on ecoefficiency innovations.

The question is a "PRIMARY PURPOSE" - type question. We know it MUST connect the dots throughout the passage in order to qualify as being a correct answer.

So.....applying a business strategy on larger scale....?

Hmmm.....actually, no!. The perspective in this passage is that the current business strategy is BAD. They should be focusing on ALTERNATIVES, not making that strategy even bigger than it is!

So if you used sentence structure to help you breakdown and figure out the author's PERSPECTIVE, you should be able to see that D is COMPLETELY WRONG!

When it comes to reading comprehension passages, you really need to use sentence structure to help you figure out what PERSPECTIVE the author is taking.

THis question is actually from the Official Guide and as such, I did a video tutorial explaining my thought process as I read this passage for the first time. It's only available for my members but if you want to browse the other demos, you'll start seeing that piecing together sentence structure is going to be the key to DOMINATING the RC Section of the GMAT Exam.

Video Explanation
https://www.gmatpill.com/special/verbal- ... iency.html

mattce · Answer

Question 5:  According to the passage,  an exclusive pursuit of ecoefficiency may cause  companies to

Upon a quick scan of the passage, or recalling from our first reading, we can see that the answer is given in the last sentence of the passage:

"Focusing exclusively on ecoefficiency, which offers... thinking,  may distract companies from pursuing radically different products and business models "

A. neglect the development of alternative business models and products 
- this is essentially an exact rephrasing of our desired answer

B. keep the number of products that they manufacture unchanged 
- this refers to the NUMBER of products, as opposed to the type
- we are concerned that companies will not pursue different products; we don't care about the number of them

JarvisR · Answer

~6 mins all correct.

In Q4 I was between B and C, which  IMO  can easily trap in test condition, if you don't pay close attention.
 
Q4: The primary purpose of the passage is to
B. propose an alternative to a particular business strategy that has inadvertently caused ecological damage
>> 
Senge and Carstedt argue that to preserve the global environment and sustain economic growth, businesses  must develop a new systemic approach that reduces total material use and total accumulated waste. .

They are just saying that an alternative approach must be developed to fix the current drawbacks but that approach is not mentioned. 
 
 ]
Focusing exclusively on ecoefficiency, which offers a compelling business case according to established thinking, may distract companies from pursuing radically different
products and business models.

C. present a concern about the possible consequences of pursuing a particular business strategy
>> Correct.

tejanaraharisetti · Answer

Hi Experts,

The primary purpose of the passage is to
A. explain why a particular business strategy has been less successful than was once anticipated
B. propose an alternative to a particular business strategy that has inadvertently caused ecological damage
C. present a concern about the possible consequences of pursuing a particular business strategy
D. make a case for applying a particular business strategy on a larger scale than is currently practiced
E. suggest several possible outcomes of companies??? failure to understand the economic impact of a particular business strategy

Would you please explain the approach for this question. I cant able to figure out why OA is C instead of B. The passage states that though companies are implementing ecoefficient strategies, eventually they are leading to more environmental damage because of using more products and discarding them. Isn't the last sentence in the passage proposing an alternative?

kornn · Answer

Dear  VeritasKarishma   DmitryFarber   MartyTargetTestPrep   GMATGuruNY   GMATNinja   GMATninja2 ,
 
  DOUBT 1.   Does choice C. and E. convey the same meaning?
I think the highlighted parts are very similar.

DOUBT 2.  I think Q2 choice C. and E. are the  opposite  of Q3 choice E.
That means if Q2 choice C. and E. are wrong, Q3 choice E. should be right because they are the polar opposite of each other right? (Either side has to be right!)

More specifically, why can't we infer Q3 choice E. from this part of the passage:

GMATNinja · Answer

To answer your first question: the passage defines ecoefficiency as "measures to minimize environmental impact through the reduction or elimination of waste from production processes." So yes -- "ecoefficiency" and "reducing production waste" are pretty much synonymous.

However, that doesn't mean that the  rest  of (C) and (E) for question 2 are saying the exact same thing. More importantly, question 2 and question 3 are different questions! Just because an answer choice is  wrong  for one of those questions doesn't necessarily mean that the answer choice is  false  or that it's wrong for the other question.

Finally, just because two statements are polar opposites doesn't mean that one is right and one is wrong. Take these opposing statements, for example:

A) The sky is 100% filled with clouds.
B) There are no clouds in the sky.  
If the sky is actually   partly  cloudy , then both of these statements would be wrong, even though they are opposites.

Every question and answer choice is unique, so unfortunately we just have to roll up our sleeves and carefully consider the subtle nuances of each. Let's start with choices (C) and (E) from Question 2. Remember, we're looking for something   mentioned   as a "possible consequence of companies’ realization of greater profits through ecoefficiency":

The passage simply does not tell us that companies are going to use their profits (earned through ecoefficiency) to increase their economic growth  through MORE ecoefficiency,  so (C) is out.

The author tells us that "there is  no guarantee  that increased economic growth from ecoefficiency will come in similarly ecoefficient ways." So, the passage definitely doesn't mention that ecoefficiency  may encourage  companies to make further innovations to reduce production waste. (E) is out as well.

Question 3 asks which answer choice is   implied   as a "possible consequence of a company’s adoption of innovations that increase its ecoefficiency." Let's consider choice (E):

Here's the most relevant evidence from the passage (which may look familiar): "there is  no guarantee  that increased economic growth from ecoefficiency will come in similarly ecoefficient ways, since in today’s global markets, greater profits  may  be turned into investment capital that could easily be reinvested in old-style eco-inefficient industries."

So, does this imply that companies are  unlikely  to invest increased profits in new ecoefficiency measures? Nope -- "no guarantee" just means that it might happen, or it might not. "Unlikely" is a stronger term, and is not supported by the evidence in the passage.

Similarly, just because greater profits  MAY  be used to reinvest in old-style eco-inefficient industries does not necessarily mean that a company will not invest its increased profits in the development of new and innovative ecoefficiency measures. Again, we have no idea how likely/unlikely a company is to do this.

Notice the use of the word "may" in choice (B). We are told that "most companies invest in ecoefficiency improvements in order to increase profits and growth." And since the ecoefficiency innovations "do NOT alter the number of products manufactured nor the waste generated from their use and discard," it's reasonable to infer that this increase in profits and growth  might  allow the company to increase production, which in turn  might  worsen environmental stress.

We can't really infer whether this consequence is LIKELY or UNLIKELY, but we can certainly infer that it MIGHT happen -- and that's exactly what's indicated in choice (B), making it a better choice than (E).

I hope that helps!

homersimpsons · Answer

OE 
Q1. The primary purpose of the passage is to
A. explain why a particular business strategy has been less successful than was once anticipated
B. propose an alternative to a particular business strategy that has inadvertently caused ecological damage
C. present a concern about the possible consequences of pursuing a particular business strategy
D. make a case for applying a particular business strategy on a larger scale than is currently practiced
E. suggest several possible outcomes of companies’ failure to understand the economic impact of a particular business strategy
 Main idea 
This question requires understanding the passage as a whole. The passage starts out defining a goal— ecoefficiency—that has become popular among companies throughout the world and that would be expected to bring overall ecological benefits. It then immediately introduces Senge and Carstedt, who have concerns about this idea. The rest of the passage is devoted to explaining their concerns, though the passage does not present a particular alternative strategy.
A. The passage never discusses whether ecoefficiency is or is not successful but only the possible consequences of it.
B. Lines 26–28 state that Senge and Carstedt believe that a new systemic approach must be found, but a particular alternative strategy is never offered.
C.  Correct . After defining ecoefficiency, the rest of the passage is devoted to describing the concerns Senge and Carstedt have about it as a goal for companies.
D. The passage reports on particular concerns about the strategy and does not advocate expanding its adoption.
E. The passage is concerned with environmental impact, not economic impact.
 The correct answer is C.

Q2. The passage mentions which of the following as a possible consequence of companies’ realization of greater profits through ecoefficiency?
A. The companies may be able to sell a greater number of products by lowering prices.
B. The companies may be better able to attract investment capital in the global market.
C. The profits may be reinvested to increase economic growth through ecoefficiency.
D. The profits may be used as investment capital for industries that are not ecoefficient.
E. The profits may encourage companies to make further innovations in reducing production waste.
 Supporting ideas 
This question asks for identification of an example given in the passage of what could result from the greater profits that may come with ecoefficiency. Such profits are specifically mentioned only in lines 14 and 17. The increased growth and profits referred to in line 14 are associated with increased waste generated indirectly by ecoefficient companies. The growth and profits referred to in line 17 are associatedwith investment of this capital in industries that may not be ecoefficient.
A. The prices of companies’ products are not mentioned in the passage.
B. Greater investment in ecoefficient companies by outside sources is not mentioned in the passage.
C. The passage mentions increased profits from ecoefficiency but not the use of these profits to then increase growth through further ecoefficiency.
D.  Correct . Lines 14–19 state explicitly that company profits from ecoefficiency may be invested in eco-inefficient industries.
E. The passage does not discuss whether companies will use increased profits from ecoefficiency to become more ecoefficient.
 The correct answer is D.

Q3. The passage implies that which of the following is a possible consequence of a company’s adoption of innovations that increase its ecoefficiency?
A. Company profits resulting from such innovations may be reinvested in that company with no guarantee that the company will continue to make further improvements in ecoefficiency.
B. Company growth fostered by cost savings from such innovations may allow that company to manufacture a greater number of products that will be used and discarded, thus worsening environmental stress.
C. A company that fails to realize significant cost savings from such innovations may have little incentive to continue to minimize the environmental impact of its production processes.
D. A company that comes to depend on such innovations to increase its profits and growth may be vulnerable in the global market to competition from old-style eco-inefficient industries.
E. A company that meets its ecoefficiency goals is unlikely to invest its increased profits in the development of new and innovative ecoefficiency measures.
 Inference 
The answer to this question will be an inference about what may result from a company’s increased ecoefficiency. The passage suggests several outcomes from such an increase: a general worsening of the environment; a tendency for companies to manufacture more of particular products, which will then be thrown away by consumers; the possibility that increased profits will result in greater investment in industries that are not ecoefficient; and even the possibility that ecoefficiency might allow so much growth that more total waste will be produced and more overall wildlife habitat destroyed.
A. The passage suggests generally that ecoefficiency will increase companies’ profits, but there is no suggestion that these companies will therefore then abandon ecoefficiency as a goal.
B.  Correct.  Lines 6–12 strongly suggest that it is possible that the increased growth that may come from ecoefficiency may result in more products being manufactured, which may result in more waste as those products are discarded by consumers.
C. The passage does not suggest that ecoefficiency may fail to increase a company’s profits.
D. The passage suggests that ecoefficiency has allowed many companies to increase profits, but it does not suggest that eco-inefficient companies are more profitable or competitive in the global marketplace.
E. As with answer choice (A), there is no suggestion that companies are likely to abandon ecoefficient strategies once they have realized increased profits from such strategies.
 The correct answer is B.

mSKR · Answer

Hi  VeritasKarishma  ma'm  GMATNinja   AjiteshArun

I still don't understand how come A could not be the answer for Q3. What's wrong with A.

While solving the question, the idea expressed in option A and option B is very well matching with the content in the passage at the right place.

When I read the text, option A glares to me 
 Moreover, there is no guarantee that increased economic growth from ecoefficiency will come in similarly ecoefficient ways, since in today’s global markets, greater profits may be turned into investment capital that could easily be reinvested in old-style eco-inefficient industries.

Above posts, rejected A because :
Option talks about further improvements
but passage talks about investment in old-style eco-inefficient industries which actually means no guarantee that they would further improve in ecoefficiency.

When i read the below text, option B glares to me。
 Even a vastly more ecoefficient industrial system could, were it to grow much larger, generate more total waste and destroy more habitat and species than would a smaller, less ecoefficient economy.

Both A and B have soft language, "may“ . so both can mean this side or that side. Both options can be implied .

I don't know how to reject A and choose B in my first attempt. What if such question appears in exam. How to avoid wasting time in switching between A and B.
Please suggest.

Thanks!

AjiteshArun · Answer

Hi  mSKR ,

That part of the passage says something slightly different.

Moreover, there is no guarantee that increased economic growth from ecoefficiency will come in similarly ecoefficient ways, since in today’s global markets,  greater profits may be turned into investment capital that could easily be reinvested in old-style eco-inefficient industries .

This is  ~  (1) ecoefficiency → (2) profits → (3) (global) investment capital → (4) investment in NON-ecoefficient industries

The most likely interpretation of this is that  the companies in step (1) are different from those in step (4) . That is, companies that pursue eco-efficiency could generate profits that may then be reinvested in companies that don't pursue eco-efficiency.

As for your question, I'm absolutely sure that what you pointed out is possible. It's just that it is not implied  in the passage .

This option says that companies that pursue eco-efficiency may reinvest their profits in themselves and then (they may) stop making further improvements in eco-efficiency.  Not continuing to make  further  improvements in eco-efficiency, however, doesn't mean that they would suddenly become "old-style eco-inefficient".

Manoj1998 · Answer

GMATNinja, can u explain the main purpose of passage- and Y it is Option C and not Option D

JenniferMassey · Answer

Can someone please explain this question ?

2. The passage mentions which of the following as a possible consequence of companies’ realization of greater profits through ecoefficiency?

(A) The companies may be able to sell a greater number of products by lowering prices.
(B) The companies may be better able to attract investment capital in the global market.
(C) The profits may be reinvested to increase economic growth through ecoefficiency.
(D) The profits may be used as investment capital for industries that are not ecoefficient.
(E) The profits may encourage companies to make further innovations in reducing production waste.

From the passage 
Today’s global markets, greater profits may be turned into investment capital that could easily be reinvested in old-style eco-inefficient industries
- INDUTRIES ARE OLD STYLE BUT ECO INEFFICIENT WHEREAS OPNION (D) SAYS NOT EFFICIENT INDUSTRIES

Posted from my mobile device

GMATNinja · Answer

Question 2 
 
I'm not sure I fully understand your question, but here's one thought: "inefficient" and "not efficient" are synonymous -- both mean that these industries  do not  take measures to reduce their environmental impact.

So (D) is a great fit with what the author mentions in the passage. Companies may use the profits from ecoefficiency to invest in things that are NOT eco-efficient (or, said another way, eco- in efficient).

(D) is the correct answer to question 2.

I hope that helps a bit!

Mug13 · Answer

I understand why C is chosen but could you please elaborate on why E is wrong for the Main purpose question

GMATNinja · Answer

Let's start by identifying the author's goals in this passage:

To present the viewpoint that ecoefficiency (a business strategy) could worsen environmental stresses    To support this this viewpoint by describing the ways ecoefficiency could impact the environment

Let's now consider (E):

The primary purpose of the passage is to demonstrate how ecoefficiency could worsen environmental stresses. How is this different from (E)?

Notice the passage never talks about "companies' failure to understand" the economic impact of ecoefficiency. In fact, companies have apparently understood the  economic  impacts of ecoefficiency quite well, as they use it to achieve cost-savings and increase profits. Rather, the passage talks about the potential environmental impacts of ecoefficiency when it's economic impacts are  correctly  understood.

For that reason, we can eliminate (E).

I hope that helps!

waytowharton · Answer

KarishmaB

Could you please help me with Que 1 The primary purpose of the passage is to

(B) propose an alternative to a particular business strategy that has inadvertently caused ecological damage

Doubt - Can we reject option B only after reading the first word "propose"? Since author is not proposing, Senge and Carstedt propose that businesses must develop a new systemic approach.

KarishmaB · Answer

No, we cannot. The problem with (B) is its use of present perfect tense ("has inadvertently caused ecological damage") though we are given to understand that this is what could happen in the future. 
By quoting Peter Senge and Goran Carstedt, the author is proposing an alternative strategy.

Ecoefficiency (measures to minimize environmental impact through the

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Reading Comprehension (RC) Questions

Ecoefficiency (measures to minimize environmental impact through the

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards