2021考研初试12月26~27日进行，2021考研初试情况(点击查看》》2021考研初试真题及答案解析专题)，第一时间为考生提供考研真题答案及答案解析内容，同时新东方考研教师将为考生提供视频直播解析。直播入口|考研真题答案专区

Text 2

Last year marked the third year in a row that Indonesia's bleak rate deforestation has slowed in pace. One reason for the turnaround may be the country’s antipoverty program.

In 2007, Indonesia started phasing in a program that gives money to its poorest residents under certain conditions, such as requiring people to keep kids in school or get regular medical care. Called conditional cash transfers or CCTs, these social assistance programs are designed to reduce inequality and break the cycle of poverty. They are already used in dozens of countries worldwide. In Indonesia, the programme has provided enough food and medicine to substantially reduce severe growth problems among children.

But the CCT programs don't generally consider effects on the environment. In fact, poverty alleviation and environmental protection are often viewed as conflicting goals, says Paul Ferraro an economist at Johns Hopkins University.

That’s because economic growth can be correlated with environmental degradation, while protecting the environment is sometimes correlated with greater poverty. However, those correlations don't prove cause and effect. The only previous study analyzing causality, based on an area in Mexico that had instituted CCTs, supported the traditional view. There, as people got more money, some of them may have more cleared land for cattle to raise for meat, Ferraro says.

Such programs do not have to negatively affect the environment, though. Ferraro wanted to see if Indonesia's poverty-alleviation program was affecting deforestation. Indonesia has the third-largest area of tropical forest in the world and one of the highest deforestation rates.

Ferraro analyzed satellite data showing annual forest loss from 2008 to 2012- including during Indonesia’s phase-in of the antipoverty program- in 7, 468 forested villages across 15 provinces. “We see that the program is associated with a 30 percent reduction in deforestation,” Farrow says.

That's likely because the rural poor are using the money as makeshift insurance policies against inclement weather, Ferraro says. Typically, if rains are delayed, people may clear land to plant more rice to supplement their harvest. With the CCTs, individuals instead can use the money to supplement their harvests.

Whether this research translates elsewhere is anybody's guess. Farrow suggests the results may transfer to other parts of Asia, due to commonalities such as the importance of growing rice and market access. And regardless of transferability, the study shows that what's good for people may also be good for the environment. Even if this program didn't reduce poverty. Ferraro says, “the value of the avoided deforestation just for carbon dioxide emissions alone is more than the program costs.”

26. According to the first two paragraph, CCT programmes aim to

[A] Facilitate health-care reform

[B] help poor families get better off

[C] Improve local education systems

[D] lower deforestation rates

27. The study based on an area in Mexico excited to show that

[A] cattle raising has been a major livelihood for the poor

[B] CCT programs have helped preserve traditional lifestyles

[C] antipoverty efforts require the participation of local farmers

[D] economic growth tends to cause environmental degradation

28. In his study about Indonesia, Farrow intends to find out

[A] its acceptance level of CCTs

[B] its annual rate of poverty alleviation

[C] the relation of CCTs to its forest loss

[D] the role of its forests in climate change

29. According to Ferraro, the CCT program in Indonesia is valuable in that

[A] it will benefit other Asian countries

[B] it will reduce regional inequality

[C] it can protect the environment

[D] it can benefit grain production

30. what is the text centred on?

[A] The effects of a program

[B] The debates over a program

[C] The process of a study

[D] The transfer-ability of a study

【正确答案】26. B 27. D 28. C 29. C 30. A

26题：本题的关键词是CCT programmes，具体提问为该计划的目的，定位到第二段第三句be designed to，其后为目的：减少不公平，打破贫困循环。故B“帮助贫困家庭得到更好的生活”正确。A选项和C选项属于无中生有，文章并未提及health care reform(医疗改革)和education system(教育系统)。D选项中的deforestation rates(毁林率)虽然和CCT项目有关，但并不是CCT项目的目的。

27题：本题为例证题，因此答案应为例子所要证明的观点。首先定位至第四段第三句(例子本身)，观点往往在例子前。前面讲到了经济发展和环境恶化有关系，而保护环境和贫困有关系，只是因果关系尚未证明，对应选项D。A中的cattle B中的traditional 都是来自例子本身的干扰，C 中的local farmer属于无中生有，故排除。

28题：本题的关键词是Indonesia和Farrow，具体提问是Farrow想要找出什么。根据关键词可定位至第五段第二句话Ferraro wanted to...，本句意为Farrow想要知道印度尼西亚的扶贫项目是否会影响到砍伐树林，对应C选项，forest loss为deforestation的同义改写。

29题：本题的关键词是valuable( CCT program in Indonesia多次出现，就不再作为本题的核心定位词了)，具体提问是in that 因为什么。定位至最后一段最后一句话，单砍伐森林的价值就高于这一项目的成本，对应C选项，保护环境。A给亚洲国家带来好处、B减少地区性不平等、D有利于粮食生产，均与原文表达不相符，故排除。

30题：回文串线各段的中心内容(首句)，每段都在围绕effect展开，包括对人们的影响，对砍伐森林的影响，对环境保护的影响等等，对应A选项。特别注意，选项若有复数名词出现(effects)，原文必须也是复数(各种影响)。