Between 1977 and 1987, the country of Ravonia lost about 12,000 jobs in logging and wood processing, representing a 1...

Hannah on October 3 at 07:54AM

Could someone please help explain the correct answer?

Hi all, getting a little wrapped around the axis with this question. Could someone please help explain the rationale behind the correct choice?

1 Reply

Ravi on October 3 at 06:07PM

@Hanna-Anderson,

Happy to help. Let's take a look at (C).

Recall we're looking for an answer choice that helps us resolve the
paradox in the stimulus. The first half of the stimulus tells us that
there's been a substantial decrease in timber jobs. The second half of
the stimulus tells us that there's been a substantial increase in wood
taken from the forests.

Maybe there has been a shift in Ravonia's timber jobs. We're looking
for an answer that helps us to reconcile both halves of the paradox.

(C) says, "Since 1977, a growing proportion of the timber that has
been cut in Ravonia has been exported as raw, unprocessed wood."

(C) has some very interesting implications. If there has been more
wood that has been exported as raw, then there must be a smaller
proportion of the wood that has been and is being devoted to
processing, which would account for the loss in jobs. However, if
there has been more and more timber cut raw, this also helps to
explain the increase in the timber harvest, too. Thus, (C) resolves
the paradox for us.

Hope this helps. Let us know if you have any other questions!