Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardCourse of Action

Context: Due to a rapid surge in commercial high-rise developments within the city's designated coastal ecological boundary, civil engineers have documented critical land subsidence and recurring localized flooding resulting from the severe obstruction of natural subsurface drainage channels.

Proposed Remedies:
I. The municipal corporation must immediately issue blanket demolition orders for all newly constructed commercial complexes in the zone to organically restore the historical drainage pathways.
II. The administration should enforce a temporary moratorium on new construction approvals in the affected sector and initiate an urgent hydrological survey to design a compensatory artificial drainage grid.

Which of the following represents the logically sound evaluation of the proposed remedies?

  1. A
    Only proposed remedy I follows.
  2. Only proposed remedy II follows.Answer
  3. C
    Neither proposed remedy I nor II follows.
  4. D
    Both proposed remedies I and II follow.

Answer

Only proposed remedy II follows.
The correct evaluation validates only the second remedy. A valid course of action must be feasible, practical, and proportional to the problem. Halting new construction temporarily while commissioning a scientific study to build alternative drainage (Remedy II) is a standard and measured administrative response. In contrast, immediately demolishing all recently built complexes (Remedy I) is an extreme, legally fraught, and disproportionately destructive measure.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the core problem presented in the context.
The problem is land subsidence and localized flooding caused by commercial high-rise developments blocking natural drainage in a coastal ecological zone.
Understanding the exact nature and cause of the problem is required to evaluate whether a proposed remedy is relevant and proportional.
2
Evaluate Proposed Remedy I for feasibility, proportionality, and side effects.
Remedy I suggests immediate blanket demolition of all new commercial complexes.
This is an extreme, disproportionate administrative action. It ignores statutory protocols, would cause massive economic and legal repercussions, and is not a practical immediate step compared to engineering solutions.
3
Evaluate Proposed Remedy II for feasibility, proportionality, and side effects.
Remedy II suggests a temporary halt on new permits and commissioning a hydrological survey to build an artificial drainage grid.
This action is practical, addresses the root cause systematically without causing disproportionate harm, and provides a scientifically sound path forward.

Key Concept

Evaluating the feasibility and proportionality of administrative responses to infrastructural and ecological crises.
Rate this question

Topics

Course of Action

More questions from this topic