Especialista em Políticas Públicas e Gestão Governamental
🔐 Abrir TEXTO DE APOIO (material-base da questão)
Policymakers face the challenge of supporting both inclusive and sustainable economic development and a healthy environment. While the most desirable policy outcome is one that achieves the greatest environmental benefits while also advancing socioeconomic goals, it is important for policymakers to fully understand the possible trade-offs between these objectives. A better understanding of the broader impacts of environmental policies is crucial to mitigate their adverse effects on competing goals, especially as countries are faced with the arduous task of responding to mounting environmental challenges in economically turbulent times.
Governments are under pressure to scale up and accelerate their ambition on climate and environmental goals. But in taking such action forward, they have to carefully navigate a number of headwinds. These include the long-term impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on both the economy and society, cost-of-living crisis, political tensions and geopolitical crises such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Low-income people and the poorest economies are the hardest hit, primarily due to the steep increases in the price of energy and food.
The level of environmental policy stringency can have an impact on a variety of policy outcomes. Empirical research is crucial to shed light on these interlinkages. Previous research has shown that more stringent environmental policy has achieved significant environmental benefits with little aggregate effect on economic performance. However, localized effects may generate winners and losers, with significant losses for certain sectors, firms or individuals and benefits for others. Nonetheless, at present, the empirical evidence on these distributional aspects is still scarce, despite its crucial role in supporting good policy design. More than ever, regulators need better tools and insights to assess the consequences of environmental policies on the economy and on social outcomes.
QUESTÃO
“In the first paragraph, the word that means “a situation in which you balance two opposing situations or qualities”. (in https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english) is:
goals.
impacts.
benefits.
trade-offs.
challenges.
🔐 Abrir GABARITO
🔐 Abrir QUESTÃO COMENTADA (leitura guiada + pegadinhas)
🧭 Leitura orientada
A questão avalia vocabulário em contexto, exigindo que o candidato identifique no primeiro parágrafo o termo que corresponde à definição apresentada pelo dicionário de Cambridge: “a situation in which you balance two opposing situations or qualities”.
🔍 Localização no texto
No primeiro parágrafo, o texto afirma que é importante para os formuladores de políticas compreenderem os possíveis “trade-offs between these objectives”, referindo-se ao equilíbrio entre benefícios ambientais e objetivos socioeconômicos.
🧠 Núcleo de sentido
O termo trade-offs descreve exatamente a ideia de equilibrar objetivos opostos, aceitando ganhos em um aspecto e possíveis perdas em outro, o que coincide perfeitamente com a definição do dicionário.
🔍 Análise alternativa por alternativa (com pegadinhas)
(A) ❌ Errada
Pegadinha: goals significa objetivos,
mas não expressa a noção de equilíbrio entre opostos.
(B) ❌ Errada
Pegadinha: impacts refere-se a efeitos ou consequências,
não ao ato de balancear situações conflitantes.
(C) ❌ Errada
Pegadinha: benefits indica vantagens,
mas ignora a ideia de concessão ou compensação.
(D) ✅ Correta — GABARITO
Trade-offs significa exatamente
balancear situações ou qualidades opostas,
correspondendo fielmente à definição apresentada.
(E) ❌ Errada
Pegadinha: challenges indica dificuldades,
mas não implica necessariamente equilíbrio entre polos opostos.
🧠 Resumo B3GE™ Master
✔ Questão de vocabulário contextualizado.
✔ Foco em definição de dicionário, não em tradução literal.
✔ Trade-offs = equilíbrio entre ganhos e perdas.
✔ Leitura atenta do primeiro parágrafo é suficiente.
🔎 Gabarito confirmado: (D)