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
The opposite of the adjective in “the hardest hit” (2nd paragraph) is:
weakest.
toughest.
strongest.
most complex.
most challenging.
🔐 Abrir GABARITO
🔐 Abrir QUESTÃO COMENTADA (leitura guiada + pegadinhas)
🧭 Leitura orientada
A questão avalia antônimos em contexto. O foco é identificar o oposto do adjetivo em “the hardest hit”, expressão que indica quem sofreu o maior impacto.
🔍 Análise do trecho
No segundo parágrafo, o texto afirma que low-income people e as economias mais pobres são “the hardest hit”, isto é, os mais afetados pela alta de energia e alimentos.
O antônimo lógico de hardest hit (mais atingido / mais impactado) é weakest, entendido aqui como menos resistente / mais fraco em oposição direta à intensidade do impacto sofrido.
🧠 Núcleo de sentido
A oposição não é de complexidade, desafio ou força moral, mas de grau de impacto sofrido. Assim, o contraste correto recai sobre weakest.
🔍 Análise alternativa por alternativa (com pegadinhas)
(A) ✅ Correta — GABARITO
Weakest é o antônimo adequado dentro do eixo
“intensamente atingido” × “menos resistente/mais fraco”.
(B) ❌ Errada
Pegadinha: toughest é sinônimo de forte/resistente,
não o oposto de hardest hit.
(C) ❌ Errada
Pegadinha: strongest também indica força,
indo na direção contrária ao pedido.
(D) ❌ Errada
Pegadinha: most complex trata de complexidade,
sem relação com impacto sofrido.
(E) ❌ Errada
Pegadinha: most challenging refere-se a dificuldade,
não à intensidade do impacto.
🧠 Resumo B3GE™ Master
✔ Questão de antônimo em contexto.
✔ Hardest hit = mais afetado.
✔ Oposto buscado: menor resistência/impacto → weakest.
✔ Eliminar opções fora do eixo semântico “impacto”.
🔎 Gabarito confirmado: (A)