Question

​Ambrosia, a small country in the Mediterranean​ region, has an​ agriculture-based economy. In recent​ years, a decline in global trade barriers has led to a massive increase in agricultural production in Ambrosia. The government of Ambrosia has claimed that this expansion has increased the​ country's GDP and also improved the overall welfare of its people by increasing employment opportunities.​ However, critics of the government have claimed that this expansion has actually made the people of Ambrosia worse off. Which of the​ following, if​ true, would support the​ critics' argument?

Answer 1

A) The expansion was made possible by an expansion of pesticide use that has damaged the natural environment.

Step-by-step explanation:

If the expansion of Ambrosia's agriculture-based economy required the extensive and massive use of pesticides, then Ambrosia's environment will be severely affected, thus making the general population of Ambrosia worse off. Pesticides can a double damage since they pollute the environment, e.g. water sources, and they also cause degradation of soil. Both effects are extremely negative for the environment and in the short and the long run the people of Ambrosia will suffer because of this.