rakeshd347 wrote:In theory, Papua New Guinea could be a substantial exporter of tropical crops. In actuality, it is not. The reason is that 97 percent of all land is owned by clans and cannot be bought or sold by individuals, and thus the kinds of realignment of properties that would be necessary to achieve maximum production for export have been impossible to achieve.

The answer to which of the following questions would be most relevant to evaluating the adequacy of the explanation given above?
(A) Who owns the 3 percent of the land in Papua New Guinea that is not owned by clans?
(B) What percentage of Papua New Guinea's current production of tropical crops is consumed within the country?
(C) How much longer is land ownership by clans expected to remain the prevailing cultural pattern in Papua New Guinea?
(D) Which of the tropical crops currently grown in Papua New Guinea could be exported if there were a surplus for export?
(E) How does Papua New Guinea's current production capacity for tropical crops compare with the maximum capacity that property realignment would make possible?

Please explain. OA coming soon. It is a gmat prep paper test question.

This question at hand is why Papua New Guinea is not a substantial exporter of tropical crops.
According to the passage, the reason is that properties cannot be realigned to achieve maximum possible production.
The assumption is that there is a LINK between the realignment of property and the exportation of tropical crops.

Rephrase the answer choices as EXTREME STATEMENTS.
Rephrased as an extreme statement, the correct answer choice will either strengthen or weaken the link between the realignment of property and the exportation of tropical crops.

E: Papua New Guinea's current production capacity for tropical crops is MUCH LOWER than the maximum capacity that property realignment would make possible.
Rephrased as an extreme statement, this answer choice strengthens the conclusion that the realignment of property could lead to an increase in production and thus to the exportation of tropical crops.

The correct answer is E.

Remaining answer choices:
Group X owns the 3 percent of the land in Papua New Guinea that is not owned by clans.
A high percentage of Papua New Guinea's current production of tropical crops is consumed within the country.
Land ownership by clans is expected to remain the prevailing cultural pattern in Papua New Guinea for a lot longer.
Crop X is one of the tropical crops currently grown in Papua New Guinea that could be exported if there were a surplus for export.
None of these answer choices strengthens or weakens the link between the realignment of property and the exportation of tropical crops.

My Choice is E. Below is the reasoning

(A) Who owns the 3 percent of the land in Papua New Guinea that is not owned by clans?
Does not matter who owns the 3 percent since that is not what the question addresses.


(B) What percentage of Papua New Guinea's current production of tropical crops is consumed within the country?
We are not talking about consumption here. Irrelevant


(C) How much longer is land ownership by clans expected to remain the prevailing cultural pattern in Papua New Guinea?
We are not talking about how long in the future this will be feasible. Irrelevant

(D) Which of the tropical crops currently grown in Papua New Guinea could be exported if there were a surplus for export?
We are talking about export of crops not a specific crop..so this is out of scope as well

(E) How does Papua New Guinea's current production capacity for tropical crops compare with the maximum capacity that property realignment would make possible?
This is the only option that relates to the question asked. Udnerstanding this will help us evaulate if there is indeed a difference of land being owned by clans than by individuals.

Hope this helps.

IMO also E is the only acceptable answer.