2021年国家公务员考试银保监会计算机岗试题

Critics have long argued that organic agriculture is inefficient, requiring more land to yield the same amount of food. It's true that organic farming produces lower yields, averaging 10 to 20 percent less than conventional.

Advocates contend that environmental advantages of organic agriculture far outweigh the lower yields, and that increasing research and breeding resources for organic system would reduce the yields gap. Sometimes excluded from these arguments is the fact that we already produce enough food to more than feed the world’s 7.4 billion people but do not provide adequate access to all individuals.

In some cases, organic yields can be higher than conventional. For example, in sever drought conditions, which are expected to increase with the climate change in many areas, organic farms can produce as good, if not better yields because of the higher water-holding capacity of organically farmed soils.

What science does tell us is that the mainstream conventional farming systems have provided the growing supplies of food and other products but often at the expense of other sustainability goals.

106、What does science tell us about conventional farming?( )

A、It will not be able to meet global food demand.

B、It is not conductive to sustainable development.

C、It will eventually give way to organic farming.

D、It is going mainstream throughout the world.

107、Why does the author think price premiums of organic food are justifiable?( )

A、They give farmers going organic a big competitive edge.

B、They motivate farmers to continue to upgrade farming technology.

C、Organic farming costs more than conventional farming.

D、Organic farming does long-term good to ecosystem.

材料

For much of the past decade, American and British scientists have been annoyed by the phenomenon known as the French Paradox. Nutritionally speaking, the French have been getting away with murder: They eat all the butter, cream, foie gras， pastry and cheese that their hearts desire, and yet their rates of obesity and heart disease are much lower than ours.

The French eat times as much saturated animal fat as Americans do, and only a third as many die of heart attacks. It's maddening. Baffled, scientists struggled to come up with a few hypotheses: Maybe it was something in the red wine, they said. But while winemakers worldwide celebrated that news, more sober research has suggested that any alcohol-whether Lafite Rothschild, a banana daiquiri or a cold bud-pretty much has the same nice, relaxing effect. So while a little wine is apt to do you good, the French aren't so special in having a drink now and then though the fact that they drink wine moderately and slowly with meals, instead of downing shots at the bar, could make a difference.

After the wine argument, scientists ventured that it must be the olive oil that keeps the French healthy. But this doesn't explain the butter or brie. Then, French scientist Serge Renaud said it's the foie gras that melts away cholesterol. This, too, is dicey; While people in Toulouse—the duck-liver-eating area of France—do indeed have one of the lowest rates of heart disease in the developed world, they actually only eat the delicacy about six times a year. And they're a lot more likely to die of stroke than we are anyway.

Other researchers, perhaps sponsored by the garlic and onion industry, suggested that the French Paradox effect is due to garlic and onions. Claude Fischler, a nutritional sociologist at INSERM, says all these single hypotheses are more wishful thinking than science.

Last May, researchers writing in the British Medical Journal came up with the least cheerful hypothesis of all. They argued that it's just a matter of time before the French—who are in fact eating more hamburgers and French fries these days—catch up with Americans, and begin suffering the same high rates of cardiovascular disease.

These researchers, Malcolm Law and Nicholas Wald, call this the “time lag explanation” for the French Paradox. As far as they are concerned, the McDonaldization (this is a French catch—all terms for the importation of fast food and other American cultural horrors) of France will continue at a frantic pace, and it is as inevitable that Frenchmen will start keeling over（晕倒） of heart attacks as it is that French women will eventually wear jean shorts and marshmallow tennis shoes on the street of Paris.

108、What is French Paradox according to this passage? ( )

A、The French people eat unhealthy food and die of heart attacks each year.

B、The French eat more nutritious food than Americans but don't worry about getting heart diseases.

C、The French are much less likely to suffer from heart disease although they eat lots of fatty food.

D、The French are as likely to die of heart attacks as Americans although they eat less fatty food.

109、What can be learned from the second paragraph? ( )

A、The French drink as much wine as people elsewhere.

B、The French wine has different relaxing effects compared with other wines.

C、Drinking red wine now and then benefits people a lot.

D、The French drink wine in ways different from people of other countries.

110、The underlined word “dicey” (para.3) probably means ( ).

A、satisfactory

B、strange

C、Uncertain

D、interesting

111、In the author’s opinion, the French Paradox has something to do with ( ).

A、red wine

B、olive oil

C、garlic and onions

D、something unknown

112、What can we infer from this passage? ( )

A、The French Paradox is due to the influence of American values.

B、The French Paradox will disappear in time.

C、The McDonaldization of France has little effect on the French's health.

D、There is no such thing as the French Paradox.

材料

Over the past decade, American companies have tried hard to find ways to discourage senior managers from feathering their own nests at the expense of their shareholders. The three most popular reforms have been recruiting more outside directors in order to make boards more independent, linking bosses’ pay to various performance measures, and giving them share options so that they have the same long-term interests as their shareholders.

These reforms have been widely adopted by America’s larger companies, and surveys suggest that many more companies are thinking of following their lead. But have they done any good? Papers published this week by Boston Academy of Management suggest otherwise. The consequences have differed from those intended.

Start with those independent directors. On the face of it, dismissing the boss’s friends from the board and replacing them with outsiders looks a perfect way to make senior managers more accountable. But the Boston papers show that bosses with a boardroom full of outsiders spend much of the board time in building alliances, doing personal favors and generally pleasing the outsiders. All too often, these seductions succeed. For the later two reforms, the papers argue that bosses tend to attend to measures that affect their own incomes and ignore or play down other factors that affect a company’s overall success.In short, bosses are quick to turn every imaginable system of corporate governance to their advantage which is probably why they are the people who are put in charge of things. Here is a paradox for the management theorists-any boss who cannot beat a system designed to keep him or her under control is probably not worth having.

113、According to this passage, what is the purpose of recruiting outside directors? ( )

A、To diversify the company’s business.

B、To increase collaboration among board members.

C、To protect the interests of shareholders.

D、To introduce effective reforms in business operation.