With reference to the passage, the following assumptions have been made:
The growing divergence between the fortunes of the agricultural and non-agricultural economy in India could have been reduced/contained by:
- I.adapting large-scale cultivation of commercial crops and viable corporate farming.
- II.providing free insurance for all crops and heavily subsidizing seeds, fertilizers, electricity and farm machinery at par with developed countries.
Which of the above assumptions is/are valid?
Answer & explanation
Answer: (d) Neither I nor II
The passage only records the widening gap between agricultural and non-agricultural growth; it neither diagnoses causes nor suggests remedies. Both statements are specific policy prescriptions, so neither is an assumption the author makes.
- ✗ I The passage offers no remedy for the divergence. Commercial crops and corporate farming are solutions the reader brings in, not something the author relies on.
- ✗ II Free crop insurance and subsidies 'at par with developed countries' are detailed policy prescriptions. Nothing in the passage discusses insurance, subsidies or developed countries.
Remember · If a passage only describes a trend, any assumption offering a specific cure is almost always invalid.
Question and answer: UPSC's official GS Paper II (2025, Series A) — paper ↗ · answer key ↗. Explanation: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify). ·