Pular para o conteúdo principal

Questão de Inglês — Interpretação de texto | Reading comprehension — FGV 2024

InglêsInterpretação de texto | Reading comprehension
Código
fg084370
Banca
FGV
Órgão
EPE
Ano
2024
Nível
Superior
Cargo
Advogado
Text I


Energy Transition in a Transnational World


       Within the sphere of environmental law, the climate crisis is increasingly understood to be an intersectional challenge that implicates and exacerbates existing systemic challenges and prevailing pathways of inequality. From this vantage point climate change also creates opportunities for rethinking the role of law in limiting the destructive impacts of climate change and moving towards a more sustainable and equitable world in the process. This view is advanced by the climate justice movement, which is swelling in influence worldwide. Drawing from the environmental justice movement, the climate justice movement exposes not only how social and economic inequality has led to and perpetuates patterns of climate change, but also how climate change deepens inequality by disproportionately affecting the most vulnerable members of society. Climate justice seeks greater emphasis on this issue and advocates on the part of those most affected by climate change. The movement envisions a world which simultaneously curtails the negative effects of climate change and reshapes existing social, political, and economic relationships along the way.


      Amidst the overlapping crises of modern times, the modern climate justice movement is reviving dialogue at the intersection of feminism, environmentalism, social and economic justice, and other progressive law reform movements, as well as creating the space and momentum for intersectional ideas to flourish. For lawyers and legal scholars, the opportunity is to see climate change and environmental degradation within its broader social context and to seize upon the rule of law as a powerful tool for change. 


      Nowhere are these intersecting challenges as acute as in the context of energy. One of the principal aims of the climate justice movement is to achieve a just and equitable transition from an extractive economy to a regenerative economy. This requires transitioning from fossil fuel-dependent to low and zero-carbon economies. However, the pathways for overhauling energy systems worldwide remain indeterminate. Energy systems are evolving in response to a combination of law and policy changes, developments in energy technologies, and market forces. Moreover, given both the entrenched nature of fossil fuel economies and the varied social, political, economic, and environmental factors that shape energy transition, pathways to decarbonization are bound to be beset with complex trade-offs, such as those between energy security and environmental objectives, or between energy choice and economies of scale. The precise contours of these systemic changes vary from country to country, and remain under-explored both within their national contexts and from a broader transnational perspective. This knowledge gap is critical. Understanding how, why, and to what end states are restructuring their energy economies is essential for transitioning to more environmentally sustainable and just societies worldwide. In short, this is an area in need of experimentation and iterative learning. It is a subject ripe for greater scholarly focus, particularly at the transnational level, where improved learning and sharing is indispensable for achieving the global-level shifts needed to address climate change. Adapted from: Etty, Thijs et al. “Energy Transition in a Transnational World.” Transnational Environmental Law 10.2 (2021): 197–204. Available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/transnational-environmentallaw/article/energy-transition-in-a-transnationalworld/9F9D4229588B39C0E5916DFBE82EA046 
The text concludes by stating that studies in the area are
  1. Atimely.
  2. Bflawless.
  3. Cexhaustive.
  4. Ddispensable.
  5. Eoverwhelming.
Revelar gabarito e comentário

GabaritoA — timely.

Comentário gerado por IA. É um apoio ao estudo, ancorado em fontes, mas pode conter imprecisões — confira sempre na fonte oficial (lei, súmula, edital e gabarito da banca). Encontrou um erro? Use “Reportar”.

Reading Comprehension – Concluding Opinion

Gabarito: letra A. O texto conclui que a área é “ripe for greater scholarly focus”, expressão que indica oportunidade e pertinência – ou seja, os estudos são timely (oportunos, adequados ao momento). O trecho final do último parágrafo afirma explicitamente que o tema necessita de experimentação e aprendizado iterativo, e que está maduro para mais atenção acadêmica.

“In short, this is an area in need of experimentation and iterative learning. It is a subject ripe for greater scholarly focus, particularly at the transnational level…”

A palavra “ripe” (maduro, pronto) carrega o sentido de algo que chegou no momento certo, sinônimo de timely. As demais alternativas contradizem o texto, que reconhece lacunas de conhecimento e a necessidade de mais pesquisa.

Alternativa A — ✅ Correta ⟵ GABARITO

Timely (oportuno, em boa hora) espelha exatamente a ideia de “ripe for greater scholarly focus”: o momento é propício para se aprofundar os estudos na área.

Alternativa B — ❌ Incorreta

Flawless (impecável, sem falhas) é oposto ao que o texto afirma. O último parágrafo diz que há “knowledge gap” e necessidade de “experimentation and iterative learning”, ou seja, longe de ser perfeito.

Alternativa C — ❌ Incorreta

Exhaustive (exaustivo, completo) também vai contra o texto. O autor aponta que as pesquisas são “under-explored” e que existe uma “knowledge gap”, portanto o estudo não é exaustivo.

Alternativa D — ❌ Incorreta

Dispensable (dispensável, desnecessário) é o oposto da conclusão. O texto afirma que a área precisa de “greater scholarly focus” e que o aprendizado e compartilhamento são “indispensable” para enfrentar as mudanças climáticas.

Alternativa E — ❌ Incorreta

Overwhelming (avassalador, esmagador) não se encaixa. O texto não diz que os estudos são esmagadores ou excessivos; pelo contrário, defende que eles são necessários e oportunos.

Link permanente: /questoes/fg084370