Question

Difficulty: HardPassage Assumptions and Underlying Premises

Read the passage given below carefully:

To alleviate acute seasonal groundwater stress and curtail heavy agricultural power subsidies, state distribution companies (discoms) have proposed replacing flat-rate agricultural electricity tariffs with time-of-day (ToD) solar-linked metering. Under this scheme, farmers receive heavily subsidized electricity exclusively during peak daylight hours when grid-tied solar generation is abundant, while drawing power during non-solar hours incurs a premium tariff. Advocates argue that this pricing structure will incentivize farmers to schedule heavy irrigation during peak solar production windows, thereby smoothing grid loads and reducing reliance on expensive thermal peaking plants. However, agricultural economists point out that most smallholder farmers operate shared, low-capacity tubewell pumps that require continuous low-voltage supply over extended multi-day intervals to adequately saturate heavy clay soils. Consequently, restricting subsidized power to rigid afternoon slots will compel smallholders to invest in high-capacity pumps or pay premium tariffs, neutralizing the intended financial benefits.

Based on the passage above, evaluate whether the following statement represents a necessary underlying assumption of the agricultural economists' argument:

"The argument assumes that smallholder farmers will not shift their production toward alternative crop varieties that require shorter, less continuous irrigation cycles."

Answer: Answer

Answer

The statement is TRUE. The economists' argument logically depends on the assumption that farmers will not switch to crop varieties with shorter, flexible irrigation cycles.
The statement is correct (True) because the economists' objection depends on the unstated premise that farmers cannot or will not change their agricultural practices to fit the new power schedule. If crop choices were modified to require only brief daylight irrigation, the restricted power slots would suffice, invalidating the economists' prediction of financial harm.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the core argument and conclusion
The agricultural economists argue that restricting subsidized electricity to peak daylight hours will fail to save costs for smallholders, forcing them to buy high-capacity pumps or pay premium non-solar rates due to continuous multi-day soil saturation requirements.
Isolating the explicit premises and conclusion is essential before identifying hidden assumptions.
2
Apply the Negation Test to the candidate assumption
Negate the statement: 'Farmers WILL shift to alternative crop varieties requiring shorter, less continuous irrigation cycles.'
An assumption is a necessary, unstated premise without which the main argument breaks down.
3
Evaluate the impact of the negated statement on the conclusion
If farmers transition to low-water, short-cycle crops, they can easily irrigate within daylight slots using existing equipment without paying premium tariffs or buying new pumps. The economists' claim of inevitable financial burden is rendered invalid.
Since negating the statement destroys the conclusion, the original statement is a strictly necessary underlying premise.

Key Concept

Passage Assumptions and Negation Test
Rate this question