Questões de Vestibular Comentadas sobre interpretação de texto | reading comprehension em inglês

Foram encontradas 680 questões

Ano: 2022 Banca: CESPE / CEBRASPE Órgão: UNB Prova: CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032741 Inglês
  Freedom is a general term, like liberty, independence, autonomy, and equality. In reality, freedom cannot be absolute; no one can be completely free. Your talents, family situation, job, wealth, cultural norms, and laws against murder, for example, constrain and circumscribe your choices. And then there is the freedom of others, which necessarily limits yours.
  Broadly speaking, your rights, whatever they may be, define the limits to your freedom. In the Western tradition of freedom, these are your civil and political rights, including your freedom of speech, religion, and association. Some philosophers see these not only as morally justified rights in themselves, but also as the means for fulfilling other possible rights, like happiness.
  The international justification for your freedom is by reference to human rights, those due to you as a human being and object of international conventions. The most basic of all these rights are those defining what governments cannot do to you. In effect, these human rights define what many mean by democratic freedom. Your freedom of thought, expression, religion, association, is basic, as are the secret ballot, periodic elections, and the right to representation. In short, these rights say that you have a right to be free. This is universal: we all have internationally defined and protected human rights.

Rudolph Joseph Rummel. Why should you be
free?.Internet:<www.hawaii.edu> (adapted). 
Judge the follow item concerning the ideas and linguistic features of the previous text.

If the ideas defended in the text were applied to the global context of relations among countries, it would be correct to conclude that countries, in general, are never completely independent.  
Alternativas
Ano: 2022 Banca: CESPE / CEBRASPE Órgão: UNB Prova: CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032738 Inglês
  The crisis in the Portuguese Empire was already underway in 1807, with some underlying causes found further back in time. It created the conditions for the political split between Brazil and Portugal, a development that virtually nobody imagined at the start of the 19th century. The process that started in 1807 prompted the separation and defined its most lasting results: the emergence of a Brazilian state and nation that would consolidate itself over the next century preserving its distinctive features. The independence process was strongly marked by progressive distancing between the past and the future. In this sense, the self-proclaimed revolutionary nature of the independence process fits neatly into the broader political and intellectual context of the time, full of conceptual innovations.
  The continuity of Brazilian independence is, however, still the most common aspect highlighted by most historians and nonhistorians. It is true that the creation of the Empire of Brazil neither abolished slavery, nor upended social hierarchies for the vast majority of the population, nor modified the highly concentrated nature of land distribution and its overwhelming focus on sustaining an export economy built during centuries of Portuguese colonization. Yet, given the innovations involved in the creation of the Empire of Brazil and their significance in the first decades of the 19th century, the understanding of this history gains depth, complexity, and consistency if one replaces the simple and banal idea of preservation of slavery, social hierarchies, territoriality or monarchy with that of re-creation and reorganization of these elements. If not seen in this light, the history of Brazilian independence silences an array of diverse voices and actors who had been growing increasingly accustomed to participating in politics since the end of the previous century.

João Paulo Pimenta. Independence: Change and
Continuity. In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Latin
American History. Internet:<www.oxfordre.com> (adapted).
Based on the text presented, judge the follow item. 

The word “Yet”, in the third sentence of the second paragraph, introduces a statement that stands in contrast to what the author writes about the creation of the Empire of Brazil in the preceding sentences. 
Alternativas
Ano: 2022 Banca: CESPE / CEBRASPE Órgão: UNB Prova: CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032737 Inglês
  The crisis in the Portuguese Empire was already underway in 1807, with some underlying causes found further back in time. It created the conditions for the political split between Brazil and Portugal, a development that virtually nobody imagined at the start of the 19th century. The process that started in 1807 prompted the separation and defined its most lasting results: the emergence of a Brazilian state and nation that would consolidate itself over the next century preserving its distinctive features. The independence process was strongly marked by progressive distancing between the past and the future. In this sense, the self-proclaimed revolutionary nature of the independence process fits neatly into the broader political and intellectual context of the time, full of conceptual innovations.
  The continuity of Brazilian independence is, however, still the most common aspect highlighted by most historians and nonhistorians. It is true that the creation of the Empire of Brazil neither abolished slavery, nor upended social hierarchies for the vast majority of the population, nor modified the highly concentrated nature of land distribution and its overwhelming focus on sustaining an export economy built during centuries of Portuguese colonization. Yet, given the innovations involved in the creation of the Empire of Brazil and their significance in the first decades of the 19th century, the understanding of this history gains depth, complexity, and consistency if one replaces the simple and banal idea of preservation of slavery, social hierarchies, territoriality or monarchy with that of re-creation and reorganization of these elements. If not seen in this light, the history of Brazilian independence silences an array of diverse voices and actors who had been growing increasingly accustomed to participating in politics since the end of the previous century.

João Paulo Pimenta. Independence: Change and
Continuity. In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Latin
American History. Internet:<www.oxfordre.com> (adapted).
Based on the text presented, judge the follow item. 

The passage “the broader political and intellectual context of the time, full of conceptual innovations” (in the last sentence of the first paragraph) could be correctly rewritten as a context of greater political and intellectual changes happening during an era when all innovations were of an abstract nature, without changing its meaning.
Alternativas
Ano: 2022 Banca: CESPE / CEBRASPE Órgão: UNB Prova: CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032734 Inglês
  The crisis in the Portuguese Empire was already underway in 1807, with some underlying causes found further back in time. It created the conditions for the political split between Brazil and Portugal, a development that virtually nobody imagined at the start of the 19th century. The process that started in 1807 prompted the separation and defined its most lasting results: the emergence of a Brazilian state and nation that would consolidate itself over the next century preserving its distinctive features. The independence process was strongly marked by progressive distancing between the past and the future. In this sense, the self-proclaimed revolutionary nature of the independence process fits neatly into the broader political and intellectual context of the time, full of conceptual innovations.
  The continuity of Brazilian independence is, however, still the most common aspect highlighted by most historians and nonhistorians. It is true that the creation of the Empire of Brazil neither abolished slavery, nor upended social hierarchies for the vast majority of the population, nor modified the highly concentrated nature of land distribution and its overwhelming focus on sustaining an export economy built during centuries of Portuguese colonization. Yet, given the innovations involved in the creation of the Empire of Brazil and their significance in the first decades of the 19th century, the understanding of this history gains depth, complexity, and consistency if one replaces the simple and banal idea of preservation of slavery, social hierarchies, territoriality or monarchy with that of re-creation and reorganization of these elements. If not seen in this light, the history of Brazilian independence silences an array of diverse voices and actors who had been growing increasingly accustomed to participating in politics since the end of the previous century.

João Paulo Pimenta. Independence: Change and
Continuity. In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Latin
American History. Internet:<www.oxfordre.com> (adapted).
Based on the text presented, judge the follow item. 

Not only does the text oppose the ideas of continuity and innovation in the context of Brazilian independence, but it also indicates that historians do not have a unanimous view on the topic.
Alternativas
Ano: 2022 Banca: CESPE / CEBRASPE Órgão: UNB Prova: CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032733 Inglês
  The crisis in the Portuguese Empire was already underway in 1807, with some underlying causes found further back in time. It created the conditions for the political split between Brazil and Portugal, a development that virtually nobody imagined at the start of the 19th century. The process that started in 1807 prompted the separation and defined its most lasting results: the emergence of a Brazilian state and nation that would consolidate itself over the next century preserving its distinctive features. The independence process was strongly marked by progressive distancing between the past and the future. In this sense, the self-proclaimed revolutionary nature of the independence process fits neatly into the broader political and intellectual context of the time, full of conceptual innovations.
  The continuity of Brazilian independence is, however, still the most common aspect highlighted by most historians and nonhistorians. It is true that the creation of the Empire of Brazil neither abolished slavery, nor upended social hierarchies for the vast majority of the population, nor modified the highly concentrated nature of land distribution and its overwhelming focus on sustaining an export economy built during centuries of Portuguese colonization. Yet, given the innovations involved in the creation of the Empire of Brazil and their significance in the first decades of the 19th century, the understanding of this history gains depth, complexity, and consistency if one replaces the simple and banal idea of preservation of slavery, social hierarchies, territoriality or monarchy with that of re-creation and reorganization of these elements. If not seen in this light, the history of Brazilian independence silences an array of diverse voices and actors who had been growing increasingly accustomed to participating in politics since the end of the previous century.

João Paulo Pimenta. Independence: Change and
Continuity. In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Latin
American History. Internet:<www.oxfordre.com> (adapted).
Based on the text presented, judge the follow item. 

From the excerpt “The process that started in 1807” (in the third sentence of the first paragraph)”, it can be correctly concluded that the author is referring to the transfer of the Portuguese royal family to Brazil.
Alternativas
Ano: 2022 Banca: CESPE / CEBRASPE Órgão: UNB Prova: CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032729 Inglês


  On May 13th, 1822, a group of 186 women sent Maria Leopoldina the Letter from the Bahian Women to Her Royal Highness Dona Leopoldina, congratulating her on her role in the patriotic rulings of her husband, Prince Regent Dom Pedro. The document acknowledged the contribution made by the then princess and empress-to-be to ensuring her husband’s permanence in Brazil, which they believed was a key factor in gaining independence from Portugal. “Far more than just a letter, it is a political manifesto,” notes historian Maria de Lourdes Viana Lyra. “At that time, in Brazil, women were given a subordinate role restricted to private household and family affairs. Outside the domestic sphere, women were made invisible, but that did not stop them from mobilizing politically to fight for independence in a variety of ways,” she states.
  In addition to isolated actions led by famous figures, there were other many significant actions that are still largely unknown to the general public, more specifically, those related to instances of collective mobilization of women active in the public arena during the fight for Brazilian independence. Historian Andréa Slemian expands on the matter. “Throughout this process, many women expressed themselves through letters, manifestos, and other texts. Thus, the nascent press in Brazil played an important role, not only by publishing these women’s ideas regarding independence on editorial pages, for example, but also by serving as a mouthpiece for views supporting women’s rights,” notes Slemian.

Ana Paula Orlandi. Unafraid to fight.
Internet: :<www.revistapesquisa.fapesp.br> (adapted).
Considering the ideas and linguistic aspects of the text above, judge the follow item.

The statement that, in general, women were to be concerned solely with their homes and families is explained by the gender-based division of social tasks and roles in effect at that time in Brazil.
Alternativas
Ano: 2022 Banca: CESPE / CEBRASPE Órgão: UNB Prova: CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032727 Inglês


  On May 13th, 1822, a group of 186 women sent Maria Leopoldina the Letter from the Bahian Women to Her Royal Highness Dona Leopoldina, congratulating her on her role in the patriotic rulings of her husband, Prince Regent Dom Pedro. The document acknowledged the contribution made by the then princess and empress-to-be to ensuring her husband’s permanence in Brazil, which they believed was a key factor in gaining independence from Portugal. “Far more than just a letter, it is a political manifesto,” notes historian Maria de Lourdes Viana Lyra. “At that time, in Brazil, women were given a subordinate role restricted to private household and family affairs. Outside the domestic sphere, women were made invisible, but that did not stop them from mobilizing politically to fight for independence in a variety of ways,” she states.
  In addition to isolated actions led by famous figures, there were other many significant actions that are still largely unknown to the general public, more specifically, those related to instances of collective mobilization of women active in the public arena during the fight for Brazilian independence. Historian Andréa Slemian expands on the matter. “Throughout this process, many women expressed themselves through letters, manifestos, and other texts. Thus, the nascent press in Brazil played an important role, not only by publishing these women’s ideas regarding independence on editorial pages, for example, but also by serving as a mouthpiece for views supporting women’s rights,” notes Slemian.

Ana Paula Orlandi. Unafraid to fight.
Internet: :<www.revistapesquisa.fapesp.br> (adapted).

Considering the ideas and linguistic aspects of the text above, judge the follow item.


Even though the press supported women who were in favor of Brazilian independence, it did not help them in their struggle for their rights.

Alternativas
Ano: 2022 Banca: CESPE / CEBRASPE Órgão: UNB Prova: CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032726 Inglês


  On May 13th, 1822, a group of 186 women sent Maria Leopoldina the Letter from the Bahian Women to Her Royal Highness Dona Leopoldina, congratulating her on her role in the patriotic rulings of her husband, Prince Regent Dom Pedro. The document acknowledged the contribution made by the then princess and empress-to-be to ensuring her husband’s permanence in Brazil, which they believed was a key factor in gaining independence from Portugal. “Far more than just a letter, it is a political manifesto,” notes historian Maria de Lourdes Viana Lyra. “At that time, in Brazil, women were given a subordinate role restricted to private household and family affairs. Outside the domestic sphere, women were made invisible, but that did not stop them from mobilizing politically to fight for independence in a variety of ways,” she states.
  In addition to isolated actions led by famous figures, there were other many significant actions that are still largely unknown to the general public, more specifically, those related to instances of collective mobilization of women active in the public arena during the fight for Brazilian independence. Historian Andréa Slemian expands on the matter. “Throughout this process, many women expressed themselves through letters, manifestos, and other texts. Thus, the nascent press in Brazil played an important role, not only by publishing these women’s ideas regarding independence on editorial pages, for example, but also by serving as a mouthpiece for views supporting women’s rights,” notes Slemian.

Ana Paula Orlandi. Unafraid to fight.
Internet: :<www.revistapesquisa.fapesp.br> (adapted).
Considering the ideas and linguistic aspects of the text above, judge the follow item.

In the title of the letter alluded to in the first paragraph, the word “her” is used four times with the same meaning and could correctly be replaced by his in all four cases, had the letter been written to the Prince.
Alternativas
Ano: 2022 Banca: CESPE / CEBRASPE Órgão: UNB Prova: CESPE / CEBRASPE - 2022 - UNB - Vestibular - Inglês |
Q2032725 Inglês


  On May 13th, 1822, a group of 186 women sent Maria Leopoldina the Letter from the Bahian Women to Her Royal Highness Dona Leopoldina, congratulating her on her role in the patriotic rulings of her husband, Prince Regent Dom Pedro. The document acknowledged the contribution made by the then princess and empress-to-be to ensuring her husband’s permanence in Brazil, which they believed was a key factor in gaining independence from Portugal. “Far more than just a letter, it is a political manifesto,” notes historian Maria de Lourdes Viana Lyra. “At that time, in Brazil, women were given a subordinate role restricted to private household and family affairs. Outside the domestic sphere, women were made invisible, but that did not stop them from mobilizing politically to fight for independence in a variety of ways,” she states.
  In addition to isolated actions led by famous figures, there were other many significant actions that are still largely unknown to the general public, more specifically, those related to instances of collective mobilization of women active in the public arena during the fight for Brazilian independence. Historian Andréa Slemian expands on the matter. “Throughout this process, many women expressed themselves through letters, manifestos, and other texts. Thus, the nascent press in Brazil played an important role, not only by publishing these women’s ideas regarding independence on editorial pages, for example, but also by serving as a mouthpiece for views supporting women’s rights,” notes Slemian.

Ana Paula Orlandi. Unafraid to fight.
Internet: :<www.revistapesquisa.fapesp.br> (adapted).

Considering the ideas and linguistic aspects of the text above, judge the follow item.



It can be correctly inferred from the text that the general public is unaware of many different facts which led to Brazilian independence.

Alternativas
Ano: 2021 Banca: CECIERJ Órgão: CEDERJ Prova: CECIERJ - 2021 - CEDERJ - Vestibular - Língua Inglesa - 2022.1 |
Q1859703 Inglês

TEXT 2

Imagem associada para resolução da questão

Available from: www.nature.com/naturemedicine. Access: 10 Oct. 2021. Adapted.


The linking word “although” (underlined in two sentences of the text) establishes a contrast between ideas, and it may be replaced by “but”. The alternative which correctly expresses the ideas which are contrasted in the two sentences is: 

Alternativas
Ano: 2021 Banca: CECIERJ Órgão: CEDERJ Prova: CECIERJ - 2021 - CEDERJ - Vestibular - Língua Inglesa - 2022.1 |
Q1859702 Inglês

TEXT 1

Imagem associada para resolução da questão

Avaiable from:<https://twitter.com/dalupton/status/1291675856926998530>   Access: 10 Oct. 2021.


In the comic strip, all the characters are answering a question. It may be inferred, from their answers, that this question is:
Alternativas
Ano: 2021 Banca: FUVEST Órgão: USP Prova: FUVEST - 2021 - USP - Vestibular - Edital 2022 |
Q1858896 Inglês

Imagem associada para resolução da questão


Considerando os elementos visuais e verbais da figura, é possível interpretar a fala da mulher como 

Alternativas
Ano: 2018 Banca: INEP Órgão: UFMS Prova: INEP - 2018 - UFMS - Processo Seletivo - Vestibular UFMS |
Q1803276 Inglês

Read Text to answer question.


The article analyzes the relationship of Indigenous Peoples with the public policy of Social Assistance (AS) in Brazil. Based on data collected during field work carried out in 2014, will analyze the case of the Indigenous Reserve of Dourados, Mato Grosso do Sul. In the first part, I characterize the unequal relationship between society and national state with Indigenous Peoples to, then approach the Welfare State politics as an opportunity to face the violation of rights resulting from the colonial siege. Then we will see if Dourados to illustrate the dilemmas and possibilities of autonomy and indigenous role faced with this public policy. It is expected to contribute to the discussion of statehood pointing concrete cases where the local implementation of AS policy is permeable to a greater or lesser extent, the demands of Indigenous Peoples by adaptation to their social organizations and worldviews.


(BORGES, Júlio César. Brazilian society has made us poor: Social Assistance and ethnic autonomy of Indiggenous Peoples. The case of Dourados, Mato Grosso do Sul. Horiz. antropol. Disponível em: <http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&pid=S0104-71832016000200303&lng=en&nrm=iso&tlng=en>. Acesso em: 10 nov. 2018).

Read the comic to answer question.


Imagem associada para resolução da questão


According to the comic, it is correct to affirm that:

Alternativas
Ano: 2021 Banca: UECE-CEV Órgão: UECE Prova: UECE-CEV - 2021 - UECE - Prova de Conhecimentos Gerais |
Q1802352 Inglês

T E X T

Britain, Norway and the United States join forces with businesses to protect tropical forests.


    Britain, Norway and the United States said Thursday they would join forces with some of the world’s biggest companies in an effort to rally more than $1 billion for countries that can show they are lowering emissions by protecting tropical forests. The goal is to make intact forests more economically valuable than they would be if the land were cleared for timber and agriculture.


    The initiative comes as the world loses acre after acre of forests to feed global demand for soy, palm oil, timber and cattle. Those forests, from Brazil to Indonesia, are essential to limiting the linked crises of climate change and a global biodiversity collapse. They are also home to Indigenous and other forest communities. Amazon, Nestlé, Unilever, GlaxoSmithKline and Salesforce are among the companies promising money for the new initiative, known as the LEAF Coalition.


    Last year, despite the global downturn triggered by the pandemic, tropical deforestation was up 12 percent from 2019, collectively wiping out an area about the size of Switzerland. That destruction released about twice as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as cars in the United States emit annually.


    “The LEAF Coalition is a groundbreaking example of the scale and type of collaboration that is needed to fight the climate crisis and achieve net-zero emissions globally by 2050,” John Kerry, President Biden’s senior climate envoy, said in a statement. “Bringing together government and privatesector resources is a necessary step in supporting the large-scale efforts that must be mobilized to halt deforestation and begin to restore tropical and subtropical forests.” 

    An existing global effort called REDD+ has struggled to attract sufficient investment and gotten mired in bureaucratic slowdowns. This initiative builds on it, bringing private capital to the table at the country or state level. Until now, companies have invested in forests more informally, sometimes supporting questionable projects that prompted accusations of corruption and “greenwashing,” when a company or brand portrays itself as an environmental steward but its true actions don’t support the claim.


    The new initiative will use satellite imagery to verify results across wide areas to guard against those problems. Monitoring entire jurisdictions would, in theory, prevent governments from saving forestland in one place only to let it be cut down elsewhere.


    Under the plan, countries, states or provinces with tropical forests would commit to reducing deforestation and degradation. Each year or two, they would submit their results, calculating the number of tons of carbon dioxide reduced by their efforts. An independent monitor would verify their claims using satellite images and other measures. Companies and governments would contribute to a pool of money that would pay the national or regional government at least $10 per ton of reduced carbon dioxide.


    Companies will not be allowed to participate unless they have a scientifically sound plan to reach net zero emissions, according to Nigel Purvis, the chief executive of Climate Advisers, a group affiliated with the initiative. “Their number one obligation to the world from a climate standpoint is to reduce their own emissions across their supply chains, across their products, everything,” Mr. Purvis said. He also emphasized that the coalition’s plans would respect the rights of Indigenous and forest communities.


From: www.nytimes.com/April 22, 2021

As for the companies which will be part of the LEAF coalition, they must have the commitment to
Alternativas
Ano: 2021 Banca: UECE-CEV Órgão: UECE Prova: UECE-CEV - 2021 - UECE - Prova de Conhecimentos Gerais |
Q1802351 Inglês

T E X T

Britain, Norway and the United States join forces with businesses to protect tropical forests.


    Britain, Norway and the United States said Thursday they would join forces with some of the world’s biggest companies in an effort to rally more than $1 billion for countries that can show they are lowering emissions by protecting tropical forests. The goal is to make intact forests more economically valuable than they would be if the land were cleared for timber and agriculture.


    The initiative comes as the world loses acre after acre of forests to feed global demand for soy, palm oil, timber and cattle. Those forests, from Brazil to Indonesia, are essential to limiting the linked crises of climate change and a global biodiversity collapse. They are also home to Indigenous and other forest communities. Amazon, Nestlé, Unilever, GlaxoSmithKline and Salesforce are among the companies promising money for the new initiative, known as the LEAF Coalition.


    Last year, despite the global downturn triggered by the pandemic, tropical deforestation was up 12 percent from 2019, collectively wiping out an area about the size of Switzerland. That destruction released about twice as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as cars in the United States emit annually.


    “The LEAF Coalition is a groundbreaking example of the scale and type of collaboration that is needed to fight the climate crisis and achieve net-zero emissions globally by 2050,” John Kerry, President Biden’s senior climate envoy, said in a statement. “Bringing together government and privatesector resources is a necessary step in supporting the large-scale efforts that must be mobilized to halt deforestation and begin to restore tropical and subtropical forests.” 

    An existing global effort called REDD+ has struggled to attract sufficient investment and gotten mired in bureaucratic slowdowns. This initiative builds on it, bringing private capital to the table at the country or state level. Until now, companies have invested in forests more informally, sometimes supporting questionable projects that prompted accusations of corruption and “greenwashing,” when a company or brand portrays itself as an environmental steward but its true actions don’t support the claim.


    The new initiative will use satellite imagery to verify results across wide areas to guard against those problems. Monitoring entire jurisdictions would, in theory, prevent governments from saving forestland in one place only to let it be cut down elsewhere.


    Under the plan, countries, states or provinces with tropical forests would commit to reducing deforestation and degradation. Each year or two, they would submit their results, calculating the number of tons of carbon dioxide reduced by their efforts. An independent monitor would verify their claims using satellite images and other measures. Companies and governments would contribute to a pool of money that would pay the national or regional government at least $10 per ton of reduced carbon dioxide.


    Companies will not be allowed to participate unless they have a scientifically sound plan to reach net zero emissions, according to Nigel Purvis, the chief executive of Climate Advisers, a group affiliated with the initiative. “Their number one obligation to the world from a climate standpoint is to reduce their own emissions across their supply chains, across their products, everything,” Mr. Purvis said. He also emphasized that the coalition’s plans would respect the rights of Indigenous and forest communities.


From: www.nytimes.com/April 22, 2021

Still about the countries which will receive financial support from the coalition to reduce emissions and deforestation, the text mentions that they will
Alternativas
Ano: 2021 Banca: UECE-CEV Órgão: UECE Prova: UECE-CEV - 2021 - UECE - Prova de Conhecimentos Gerais |
Q1802350 Inglês

T E X T

Britain, Norway and the United States join forces with businesses to protect tropical forests.


    Britain, Norway and the United States said Thursday they would join forces with some of the world’s biggest companies in an effort to rally more than $1 billion for countries that can show they are lowering emissions by protecting tropical forests. The goal is to make intact forests more economically valuable than they would be if the land were cleared for timber and agriculture.


    The initiative comes as the world loses acre after acre of forests to feed global demand for soy, palm oil, timber and cattle. Those forests, from Brazil to Indonesia, are essential to limiting the linked crises of climate change and a global biodiversity collapse. They are also home to Indigenous and other forest communities. Amazon, Nestlé, Unilever, GlaxoSmithKline and Salesforce are among the companies promising money for the new initiative, known as the LEAF Coalition.


    Last year, despite the global downturn triggered by the pandemic, tropical deforestation was up 12 percent from 2019, collectively wiping out an area about the size of Switzerland. That destruction released about twice as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as cars in the United States emit annually.


    “The LEAF Coalition is a groundbreaking example of the scale and type of collaboration that is needed to fight the climate crisis and achieve net-zero emissions globally by 2050,” John Kerry, President Biden’s senior climate envoy, said in a statement. “Bringing together government and privatesector resources is a necessary step in supporting the large-scale efforts that must be mobilized to halt deforestation and begin to restore tropical and subtropical forests.” 

    An existing global effort called REDD+ has struggled to attract sufficient investment and gotten mired in bureaucratic slowdowns. This initiative builds on it, bringing private capital to the table at the country or state level. Until now, companies have invested in forests more informally, sometimes supporting questionable projects that prompted accusations of corruption and “greenwashing,” when a company or brand portrays itself as an environmental steward but its true actions don’t support the claim.


    The new initiative will use satellite imagery to verify results across wide areas to guard against those problems. Monitoring entire jurisdictions would, in theory, prevent governments from saving forestland in one place only to let it be cut down elsewhere.


    Under the plan, countries, states or provinces with tropical forests would commit to reducing deforestation and degradation. Each year or two, they would submit their results, calculating the number of tons of carbon dioxide reduced by their efforts. An independent monitor would verify their claims using satellite images and other measures. Companies and governments would contribute to a pool of money that would pay the national or regional government at least $10 per ton of reduced carbon dioxide.


    Companies will not be allowed to participate unless they have a scientifically sound plan to reach net zero emissions, according to Nigel Purvis, the chief executive of Climate Advisers, a group affiliated with the initiative. “Their number one obligation to the world from a climate standpoint is to reduce their own emissions across their supply chains, across their products, everything,” Mr. Purvis said. He also emphasized that the coalition’s plans would respect the rights of Indigenous and forest communities.


From: www.nytimes.com/April 22, 2021

Countries that will benefit from the investments of the LEAF coalition, will have to
Alternativas
Ano: 2021 Banca: UECE-CEV Órgão: UECE Prova: UECE-CEV - 2021 - UECE - Prova de Conhecimentos Gerais |
Q1802349 Inglês

T E X T

Britain, Norway and the United States join forces with businesses to protect tropical forests.


    Britain, Norway and the United States said Thursday they would join forces with some of the world’s biggest companies in an effort to rally more than $1 billion for countries that can show they are lowering emissions by protecting tropical forests. The goal is to make intact forests more economically valuable than they would be if the land were cleared for timber and agriculture.


    The initiative comes as the world loses acre after acre of forests to feed global demand for soy, palm oil, timber and cattle. Those forests, from Brazil to Indonesia, are essential to limiting the linked crises of climate change and a global biodiversity collapse. They are also home to Indigenous and other forest communities. Amazon, Nestlé, Unilever, GlaxoSmithKline and Salesforce are among the companies promising money for the new initiative, known as the LEAF Coalition.


    Last year, despite the global downturn triggered by the pandemic, tropical deforestation was up 12 percent from 2019, collectively wiping out an area about the size of Switzerland. That destruction released about twice as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as cars in the United States emit annually.


    “The LEAF Coalition is a groundbreaking example of the scale and type of collaboration that is needed to fight the climate crisis and achieve net-zero emissions globally by 2050,” John Kerry, President Biden’s senior climate envoy, said in a statement. “Bringing together government and privatesector resources is a necessary step in supporting the large-scale efforts that must be mobilized to halt deforestation and begin to restore tropical and subtropical forests.” 

    An existing global effort called REDD+ has struggled to attract sufficient investment and gotten mired in bureaucratic slowdowns. This initiative builds on it, bringing private capital to the table at the country or state level. Until now, companies have invested in forests more informally, sometimes supporting questionable projects that prompted accusations of corruption and “greenwashing,” when a company or brand portrays itself as an environmental steward but its true actions don’t support the claim.


    The new initiative will use satellite imagery to verify results across wide areas to guard against those problems. Monitoring entire jurisdictions would, in theory, prevent governments from saving forestland in one place only to let it be cut down elsewhere.


    Under the plan, countries, states or provinces with tropical forests would commit to reducing deforestation and degradation. Each year or two, they would submit their results, calculating the number of tons of carbon dioxide reduced by their efforts. An independent monitor would verify their claims using satellite images and other measures. Companies and governments would contribute to a pool of money that would pay the national or regional government at least $10 per ton of reduced carbon dioxide.


    Companies will not be allowed to participate unless they have a scientifically sound plan to reach net zero emissions, according to Nigel Purvis, the chief executive of Climate Advisers, a group affiliated with the initiative. “Their number one obligation to the world from a climate standpoint is to reduce their own emissions across their supply chains, across their products, everything,” Mr. Purvis said. He also emphasized that the coalition’s plans would respect the rights of Indigenous and forest communities.


From: www.nytimes.com/April 22, 2021

The text mentions situations in which sometimes companies have tried to fund projects in defense of tropical forests, but were prey to circumstances related to
Alternativas
Ano: 2021 Banca: UECE-CEV Órgão: UECE Prova: UECE-CEV - 2021 - UECE - Prova de Conhecimentos Gerais |
Q1802348 Inglês

T E X T

Britain, Norway and the United States join forces with businesses to protect tropical forests.


    Britain, Norway and the United States said Thursday they would join forces with some of the world’s biggest companies in an effort to rally more than $1 billion for countries that can show they are lowering emissions by protecting tropical forests. The goal is to make intact forests more economically valuable than they would be if the land were cleared for timber and agriculture.


    The initiative comes as the world loses acre after acre of forests to feed global demand for soy, palm oil, timber and cattle. Those forests, from Brazil to Indonesia, are essential to limiting the linked crises of climate change and a global biodiversity collapse. They are also home to Indigenous and other forest communities. Amazon, Nestlé, Unilever, GlaxoSmithKline and Salesforce are among the companies promising money for the new initiative, known as the LEAF Coalition.


    Last year, despite the global downturn triggered by the pandemic, tropical deforestation was up 12 percent from 2019, collectively wiping out an area about the size of Switzerland. That destruction released about twice as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as cars in the United States emit annually.


    “The LEAF Coalition is a groundbreaking example of the scale and type of collaboration that is needed to fight the climate crisis and achieve net-zero emissions globally by 2050,” John Kerry, President Biden’s senior climate envoy, said in a statement. “Bringing together government and privatesector resources is a necessary step in supporting the large-scale efforts that must be mobilized to halt deforestation and begin to restore tropical and subtropical forests.” 

    An existing global effort called REDD+ has struggled to attract sufficient investment and gotten mired in bureaucratic slowdowns. This initiative builds on it, bringing private capital to the table at the country or state level. Until now, companies have invested in forests more informally, sometimes supporting questionable projects that prompted accusations of corruption and “greenwashing,” when a company or brand portrays itself as an environmental steward but its true actions don’t support the claim.


    The new initiative will use satellite imagery to verify results across wide areas to guard against those problems. Monitoring entire jurisdictions would, in theory, prevent governments from saving forestland in one place only to let it be cut down elsewhere.


    Under the plan, countries, states or provinces with tropical forests would commit to reducing deforestation and degradation. Each year or two, they would submit their results, calculating the number of tons of carbon dioxide reduced by their efforts. An independent monitor would verify their claims using satellite images and other measures. Companies and governments would contribute to a pool of money that would pay the national or regional government at least $10 per ton of reduced carbon dioxide.


    Companies will not be allowed to participate unless they have a scientifically sound plan to reach net zero emissions, according to Nigel Purvis, the chief executive of Climate Advisers, a group affiliated with the initiative. “Their number one obligation to the world from a climate standpoint is to reduce their own emissions across their supply chains, across their products, everything,” Mr. Purvis said. He also emphasized that the coalition’s plans would respect the rights of Indigenous and forest communities.


From: www.nytimes.com/April 22, 2021

Statistics related to deforestation in tropical forests show that in 2020 it
Alternativas
Ano: 2021 Banca: UECE-CEV Órgão: UECE Prova: UECE-CEV - 2021 - UECE - Prova de Conhecimentos Gerais |
Q1802347 Inglês

T E X T

Britain, Norway and the United States join forces with businesses to protect tropical forests.


    Britain, Norway and the United States said Thursday they would join forces with some of the world’s biggest companies in an effort to rally more than $1 billion for countries that can show they are lowering emissions by protecting tropical forests. The goal is to make intact forests more economically valuable than they would be if the land were cleared for timber and agriculture.


    The initiative comes as the world loses acre after acre of forests to feed global demand for soy, palm oil, timber and cattle. Those forests, from Brazil to Indonesia, are essential to limiting the linked crises of climate change and a global biodiversity collapse. They are also home to Indigenous and other forest communities. Amazon, Nestlé, Unilever, GlaxoSmithKline and Salesforce are among the companies promising money for the new initiative, known as the LEAF Coalition.


    Last year, despite the global downturn triggered by the pandemic, tropical deforestation was up 12 percent from 2019, collectively wiping out an area about the size of Switzerland. That destruction released about twice as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as cars in the United States emit annually.


    “The LEAF Coalition is a groundbreaking example of the scale and type of collaboration that is needed to fight the climate crisis and achieve net-zero emissions globally by 2050,” John Kerry, President Biden’s senior climate envoy, said in a statement. “Bringing together government and privatesector resources is a necessary step in supporting the large-scale efforts that must be mobilized to halt deforestation and begin to restore tropical and subtropical forests.” 

    An existing global effort called REDD+ has struggled to attract sufficient investment and gotten mired in bureaucratic slowdowns. This initiative builds on it, bringing private capital to the table at the country or state level. Until now, companies have invested in forests more informally, sometimes supporting questionable projects that prompted accusations of corruption and “greenwashing,” when a company or brand portrays itself as an environmental steward but its true actions don’t support the claim.


    The new initiative will use satellite imagery to verify results across wide areas to guard against those problems. Monitoring entire jurisdictions would, in theory, prevent governments from saving forestland in one place only to let it be cut down elsewhere.


    Under the plan, countries, states or provinces with tropical forests would commit to reducing deforestation and degradation. Each year or two, they would submit their results, calculating the number of tons of carbon dioxide reduced by their efforts. An independent monitor would verify their claims using satellite images and other measures. Companies and governments would contribute to a pool of money that would pay the national or regional government at least $10 per ton of reduced carbon dioxide.


    Companies will not be allowed to participate unless they have a scientifically sound plan to reach net zero emissions, according to Nigel Purvis, the chief executive of Climate Advisers, a group affiliated with the initiative. “Their number one obligation to the world from a climate standpoint is to reduce their own emissions across their supply chains, across their products, everything,” Mr. Purvis said. He also emphasized that the coalition’s plans would respect the rights of Indigenous and forest communities.


From: www.nytimes.com/April 22, 2021

According to John Kerry, the LEAF coalition constitutes an essential endeavor towards the
Alternativas
Ano: 2021 Banca: UECE-CEV Órgão: UECE Prova: UECE-CEV - 2021 - UECE - Prova de Conhecimentos Gerais |
Q1802346 Inglês

T E X T

Britain, Norway and the United States join forces with businesses to protect tropical forests.


    Britain, Norway and the United States said Thursday they would join forces with some of the world’s biggest companies in an effort to rally more than $1 billion for countries that can show they are lowering emissions by protecting tropical forests. The goal is to make intact forests more economically valuable than they would be if the land were cleared for timber and agriculture.


    The initiative comes as the world loses acre after acre of forests to feed global demand for soy, palm oil, timber and cattle. Those forests, from Brazil to Indonesia, are essential to limiting the linked crises of climate change and a global biodiversity collapse. They are also home to Indigenous and other forest communities. Amazon, Nestlé, Unilever, GlaxoSmithKline and Salesforce are among the companies promising money for the new initiative, known as the LEAF Coalition.


    Last year, despite the global downturn triggered by the pandemic, tropical deforestation was up 12 percent from 2019, collectively wiping out an area about the size of Switzerland. That destruction released about twice as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as cars in the United States emit annually.


    “The LEAF Coalition is a groundbreaking example of the scale and type of collaboration that is needed to fight the climate crisis and achieve net-zero emissions globally by 2050,” John Kerry, President Biden’s senior climate envoy, said in a statement. “Bringing together government and privatesector resources is a necessary step in supporting the large-scale efforts that must be mobilized to halt deforestation and begin to restore tropical and subtropical forests.” 

    An existing global effort called REDD+ has struggled to attract sufficient investment and gotten mired in bureaucratic slowdowns. This initiative builds on it, bringing private capital to the table at the country or state level. Until now, companies have invested in forests more informally, sometimes supporting questionable projects that prompted accusations of corruption and “greenwashing,” when a company or brand portrays itself as an environmental steward but its true actions don’t support the claim.


    The new initiative will use satellite imagery to verify results across wide areas to guard against those problems. Monitoring entire jurisdictions would, in theory, prevent governments from saving forestland in one place only to let it be cut down elsewhere.


    Under the plan, countries, states or provinces with tropical forests would commit to reducing deforestation and degradation. Each year or two, they would submit their results, calculating the number of tons of carbon dioxide reduced by their efforts. An independent monitor would verify their claims using satellite images and other measures. Companies and governments would contribute to a pool of money that would pay the national or regional government at least $10 per ton of reduced carbon dioxide.


    Companies will not be allowed to participate unless they have a scientifically sound plan to reach net zero emissions, according to Nigel Purvis, the chief executive of Climate Advisers, a group affiliated with the initiative. “Their number one obligation to the world from a climate standpoint is to reduce their own emissions across their supply chains, across their products, everything,” Mr. Purvis said. He also emphasized that the coalition’s plans would respect the rights of Indigenous and forest communities.


From: www.nytimes.com/April 22, 2021

The initiative effort of countries and companies to protect tropical forests is in line with the attempt to
Alternativas
Respostas
21: C
22: C
23: E
24: C
25: C
26: C
27: E
28: E
29: C
30: D
31: A
32: E
33: A
34: B
35: D
36: A
37: C
38: B
39: A
40: D