如何养活世界(来自经济学人的英语阅读精品,含翻译)
经济学人两篇+翻译
Disney Star Wars, Disney and myth-makingHow one company came to master the business of storytellingFROM a galaxy far, far away to a cinema just down the road: “The Force Awakens”, the newest instalment of the Star Wars saga, is inescapable this Christmas. The first Star Wars title since Lucasfilm, the owner of the franchise, was acquired by Disney in 2012 for $4.1 billion, it represents more than just the revival of a beloved science-fiction series. It is the latest example of the way Disney has prospered over the past decade from a series of shrewd acquisitions (see article). Having bought Pixar, Marvel and Lucasfilm, Disney has skilfullycapitalised on their intellectual property—and in so doing, cemented its position as the market leader in the industrialisation of mythology. Its success rests on its mastery of the three elements of modern myth-making: tropes, technology and toys.From Homer to Han SoloStart with the tropes. Disney properties, which include everything from “Thor” to “Toy Story”, draw on well-worn devices of mythic structure to give their stories cultural resonance. Walt Disney himself had an intuitive grasp of the power of fables. George Lucas, the creator of Star Wars, is an avid student of the work of Joseph Campbell, an American comparative mythologist who outlined the “monomyth” structure in which a hero answers a call, is assisted by a mentor figure, voyages to another world, survives various trials and emerges triumphant. Bothfilm-makers merrily plundered ancient mythology and folklore. The Marvel universe goes even further, directly appropriating chunks of Greco-Roman and Norse mythology. (This makes Disney's enthusiasm for fierce enforcement of intellectual-property laws, and the seemingly perpetual extension of copyright, somewhat ironic.)The internal mechanics of myths may not have changed much over the ages, but the technology used to impart them certainly has. That highlights Disney's second area of expertise. In Homer's day, legends were passed on in the form of dactylic hexameters; modern myth-makers prefer computer graphics, special effects, 3D projection, surround sound and internet video distribution,among other things. When Disney bought Lucasfilm it did not just acquire the Star Wars franchise; it also gained Industrial Light & Magic, one of the best special-effects houses in the business, whose high-tech wizardry is as vital to Marvel's Avengers films as it is to the Star Wars epics. And when Disney was left behind by the shift to digital animation, it cannily revitalised its own film-making brand by buying Pixar, a firm as pioneering in its field as Walt Disney had been in hand-drawn animation. Moreover, modern myths come in multiple media formats. The Marvel and Star Wars fantasy universes are chronicled in interlocking films, television series, books, graphic novels and video games. Marvel's plans are mapped out until the mid-2020s.But these days myths are also expected to take physical form as toys, merchandise and theme-park rides. This is the third myth-making ingredient. Again, Walt Disney led the way, licensing Mickey Mouse and other characters starting in the 1930s, and opening the original Disneyland park in 1955. Mr Lucas took cinema-related merchandise into a new dimension, accepting a pay cut as director in return for all the merchandising rights to Star Wars—a deal that was to earn him billions. Those rights now belong to Disney, and it is making the most of them: sales of “The Force Awakens” merchandise, from toys to clothing, are expected to be worth up to $5 billion alone in the coming year. In all, more than $32 billion-worth of Star Wars merchandise has been sold since 1977, according to NPD Group, a market-research firm. Even Harry Potter and James Bond are scruffy-looking nerf-herders by comparison.Those other franchises are reminders that Disney's approach is not unique. Other studios are doing their best to imitate its approach. But Disney has some of the most valuable properties and exploits them to their fullest potential. It is particularly good at refreshing and repackaging its franchises to encourage adults to revisit their childhood favourites and, in the process, to introduce them to their own children. This was one reason why Pixar, whose films are known for their cross-generational appeal, was such a natural fit. Now the next generation is being introduced to Star Wars by their nostalgic parents. At the same time, Disney has extended its franchises by adding sub-brands that appeal to particular age groups: children's television series spun off from Star Wars, for example, or darker, more adult tales from the Marvel universe, such as the “Daredevil” and “Jessica Jones” series on.Do, or do not—there is no tryWhat explains the power of all this modern-day mythology? There is more to it than archetypal storytelling, clever technology and powerful marketing. In part, it may fill a void left by the decline of religion in a more secular world. But it also provides an expression for today's fears.T he original “Star Wars” film, in which a band of plucky rebels defeat a technological superpower, was a none-too-subtle inversion of the Vietnam war. The Marvel universe, originally a product of the cold-war era, has adapted well on screen to a post-9/11 world of surveillance and the conspiratorial mistrust of governments, large corporations and the power of technology. Inuncertain times, when governments and military might seem unable to keep people safe or stay honest, audiences take comfort in the idea of superheroes who ride to the rescue. Modern myths also have the power to unify people across generations, social groups and cultures, creating frameworks of shared references even as other forms of media consumption become ever more fragmented.Ultimately, however, these modern myths are so compelling because they tap primordial human urges—for refuge, redemption and harmony. In this respect they are like social-media platforms, which use technology to industrialise social interaction. Similarly, modern myth-making, reliant though it is on new tools and techniques, is really just pushing the same old buttons in stone-age brains. That is something that Walt Disney understood instinctively—and that the company he founded is now exploiting so proficiently.迪士尼星球大战,迪士尼和神话创造一个公司如何成为兜售故事的商业传奇从遥远的星际抵达你周边的电影院—《星球大战7：原力觉醒》这部星战系列的最新影片就在圣诞期间上映，不容错过。
高三英语课文04
Scientists continue to develop new types of plants which produce heavier crops. They are also developing new types of plants that can be grown in poor soil or even sand, and that are less likely to be attacked by pests and diseases.
王兵: 嗨，卡尔，你点菜了吗？
CARL: No, I'm just looking at the menu. Are you hungry?
卡尔：还没有，我正在看菜单。你饿了吧？
WB: Yes, I sure am. I got up late and went without breakfast. Right now I could eat an ox.
总之，饥饿是当今世界的一大问题。究竟有多少人在挨饿，没有人能够说得清楚。但是，据认为，世界上有五亿人，也就是十个人中有一个，吃不饱饭。每年饿死的人大约有4,000万。
Various things can be done to increase the food supply in the world. The area of farmland can be increased by irrigation. Take the Aswan Dam in Egypt for example, where desert land can now be used for growing crops. The same has happened in the west of the USA, particularly for the growing of fruit. Farmers can increase their corn crops three times simply by watering their fields. In Europe, Holland continues to increase its area of farmland by pumping water from low-lying areas.
考研英语阅读理解外刊原文经济学人
We must pay the cost of carbon if we are to cut it让每一个人都有减排的动力Shouldn’t we be doing more to respond to the climate emergency? It’s a natural question to ask. But, perhaps, we should turn the question around, and ask: why haven’t we solved the climate change problem already?为了应对气候紧急状态，我们难道不应该多做一点事情？这是个很自然的问题。
然而，也许我们应该反过来问：为什么我们还没有解决气候变化问题？Economics suggests a ready answer: externalities. Unfortunately, the concept of externalities is a century old, and it shows. So why do economists persist in using this dusty old term, and is it still useful?经济学给出了一个现成的答案：外部性。
可是，外部性的概念存在了一个世纪之久，而且得到了印证。
那么，经济学家们为什么还要使用这个陈旧的术语呢？它是否仍然有用？An externality is a cost — or sometimes, a benefit — that is not borne by either the buyer or the seller of a product. And, if neither has to bear the cost, neither has much reason to care.外部性是一种成本（有时是一种好处），是产品的买方和卖方都无需承担的成本。
《新交际英语阅读教程4》参考译文U7 Economy and Trade 文章翻译
第七单元译文Part B去全球化到底发生了什么?托马斯·P·M·巴奈特1 在严重的危机中，冷静的头脑很少会占据主导地位——至少在公共话语中是这样。
因此，就在一年前，我们从许多专家——以及兴高采烈的活动人士——那里听到，全球化正处于垂死边缘:全球经济正面临一场大规模永久性解体。
这将是对20世纪90年代活跃的全球化所具有的一切特征的一种不可阻挡的和确切的逆转，充满了最高层次的社会和政治动荡。
在有效地重现上世纪30年代大萧条(Great Depression)的过程中，我们甚至面临着重新爆发大国战争的不可思议的前景。
2 这种充满恐惧的视角并不局限于边缘。
《华尔街日报》(The Wall Street Journal)引用了“转向内部的危险”，而《经济学人》(The Economist)则哀叹“世界一体化在几乎所有方面都在后退”。
《华盛顿邮报》同样提到了“全球经济正在衰退”，而《新共和》则警告说，“如果你认为全球化正在破坏稳定，那就等着看去全球化会带来什么后果吧。
”用作家瓦尔登·贝娄(Walden Bellow)的话来说，全球化“最终名誉扫地”。
人们普遍认为，贝娄创造了“去全球化”一词。
3 唉，现实世界显然没有领会到这一点。
4 在一定程度上，去全球化确实发生了，其中包括大量外来工的反向流动，从而减少了流向较贫穷经济体的至关重要的全球汇款。
然而，发达经济体在2009年设法小幅增加了对世界贫困人口的官方发展援助，尽管国民总收入出现了损失，消费、财富持有量和政府信用都大幅下降。
5 与此同时，崛起的主要经济体的发展严重停滞，而他们对能源和商品的需求却依然飙升，这种需求继续支撑着大量的发展中经济体的发展。
总而言之，全球化首次真正意义上的全球性衰退提醒所有人，贫穷仍然是件糟糕的事情，生活在充满活力、积极进取的经济体中(或依赖于贸易)要好得多。
6 至于陷入广泛的政治和军事混乱，我们当然认为欧盟正处于生存危机之中——确切地说，这不是一个新景象。
英文外刊对英语专业学生的重要性及其精读方法——以《经济学人》为例
172020年20期总第512期ENGLISH ON CAMPUS英文外刊对英语专业学生的重要性及其精读方法——以《经济学人》为例文/吴彦泽【摘要】当今英语专业学生不仅要掌握相应的英语语言知识，还要以语言为媒介更好地了解英语国家的社会与文化，发挥英语在全球化大背景下起到的桥梁作用。
英文外刊涵盖面广、时效性强，因此阅读英文外刊不仅可以提升学生的英语语言运用能力，还可以帮助其更好地了解英语国家社会文化。
本文将从多方面探讨英文外刊对英语专业学生的重要性以及以《经济学人》为例介绍英文外刊的精读方法。
【关键词】英文外刊；英语专业；重要性；精读方法【作者简介】吴彦泽，山东师范大学外国语学院。
大量的语言输入是学习好一种语言的前提，而阅读又在语言输入的方式中占据了举足轻重的地位。
对于英语专业的学生来说，大量的地道英语也就是我们常说的“authentic English”的输入显得尤为重要。
那么应该通过阅读什么材料来获得地道的英语输入呢？读英文外刊。
英文外刊内容包罗万象，题材丰富多彩并且时效性强，紧密结合当下英语国家社会时事热点。
通过阅读英文外刊，英语专业学生可以更好地了解当下英语国家的社会与文化。
一、英文外刊对英语专业学生的重要性1.英文外刊的重要性在《高等学校英语专业教学大纲》中的体现。
在英语专业四级考试中，阅读理解的分值为20分，占到了总分数的20%。
而在2015修改过后的《高校英语专业八级考试大纲中》，更是将英语专业八级考试中阅读理解的分数从20分提高到了30分，占到了考试总分值的30%。
英语专业四级、专业八级考试对于英语专业学生的重要性不言而喻，一定程度上是学生未来工作的一块敲门砖。
阅读能力也反映了英语专业学生的英语综合能力。
而英语专业四级考试、英语专业八级考试阅读理解题目的选材有很大一部分是来自于像《经济学人》这样的英文外刊。
由此我们不难看出，加强对英文外刊的阅读训练可以提高英语专业学生的英语能力。
2.关注文章中词汇的运用。
662.6月英语四级阅读理解(二)翻译
2021年6月英语四级阅读理解〔二〕翻译Some of the world’s most significant problems never hit headlines. One example comes from agriculture. Food riots and hunger make news. But the trend lying behind these matters is rarely talked about. This is the decline in the growth in yields of some of the world’s major crops.A new study by the University of Minnesota and McGill University in Montreal looks at where, and how far, this decline is occurring。
一些世界上最有影响的问题从不上头条新闻。
其中一个例子就是农业问题。
粮食暴动和饥饿产生新闻，但躺在这些问题背后的趋势却很少被谈及。
这是因为一些世界主要农作物产区的产量在下降。
蒙特利尔的明尼苏达和麦吉尔大学的一项新研究着眼于研究这种正在发生的下降趋势在哪，还有多远。
The authors take a vast number of data points for the four most important crops: rice, wheat corn and soybeans(大豆). They find that on between 24% and 39% of all harvested areas, the improvement in yields that tood place before the 1980s slowed down in the 1990s and 2000s。
新发展大学英语阅读与写作4课文翻译Looking good by doing good寻找好行善
Looking good by doing good[Jan 15th 2009]Economics focusLooking good by doing goodJan 15th 2009From The Economist print editionRewarding people for their generosity may be counterproductiveIllustration by Jac Depczyk A LARGE plaque in the foyer of Boston’s Institute for Contemporary Art (ICA), a museum housed in a dramatic glass and metal building on the harbour’s edge, identifies its most generous patron s. Visitors who stop to look will notice that some donors—including two who gave the ICA over $2.5m—have chosen not to reveal their names. Such reticence is unusual: less than 1% of private gifts to charity are anonymous. Most people (including the vast majority of the ICA’s patrons) want their good deeds to be talked about. In “Richistan”, a book on America’s new rich, Robert Frank writes of the several society publications in Florida’s Palm Beach which exist largely to publicise the charity of its well-heeled residents (at least before Bernard Madoff’s alleged Ponzi scheme left some of them with little left to give).As it turns out, the distinction between private and public generosity is helpful in understanding what motivates people to give money to charities or donate blood, acts which are costly to the doer and primarily benefit others. Such actions are widespread, and growing. The $306 billion that Americans gave to charity in 2007 was more than triple the amount donated in 1965. And though a big chunk of this comes from plutocrat s like Bill Gates and Warren Buffett, whose philanthropy has attracted much attention, modest earners also give generously of their time and money. A 2001 survey found that 89% of American households gave to charity, and that 44% of adults volunteered the equivalent of 9m full-time jobs. Tax break s explain some of the kindness of strangers. But by no means all.Economists, who tend to think self-interest governs most actions of man, are intrigue d, and have identified several reasons to explain good deeds of this kind. Tax breaks are, ofcourse, one of the main ones, but donors are also sometimes paid directly for their pains, and the mere thought of a thank-you letter can be enough to persuade others to cough up. Some even act out of sheer altruism. But most interesting is another explanation, which is that people do good in part because it makes them look good to those whose opinions they care about. Economists call this “image motivation”.Dan Ariely of Duke University, Anat Bracha of Tel Aviv University, and Stephan Meier of Columbia University sought, through experiments, to test the importance of image motivation, as well as to gain insights into how different motivating factors interact. Their results, which they report in a new paper*, suggest that image motivation matters a lot, at least in the laboratory. Even more intriguingly, they find evidence that monetary incentives can actually reduce charitable giving when people are driven in part by a desire to look good in others’ eyes.The crucial thing about charity as a means of image building is, of course, that it can work only if others know about it and think positively of the charity in question. So, the academics argue, people should give more when their actions are public.To test this, they conducted an experiment where the number of times participants clicked an awkward combination of computer keys determined how much money was donated on their behalf to the American Red Cross. Since 92% of participants thought highly of the Red Cross, giving to it could reasonably be assumed to make people look good to their peers. People were randomly assigned to either a private group, where only the participant knew the amount of the donation, or a public group, where the participant had to stand up at the end of the session and share this information with the group. Consistent with the hypothesis that image mattered, participants exerted much greater effort in the public case: the average number of clicks, at 900, was nearly double the average of 517 clicks in the private case.However, the academics wanted to go a step further. In this, they were influenced by the theoretical model of two economists, Roland Benabou, of Princeton University, and Jean Tirole, of Toulouse University’s Institut d’Economie Industrielle, who formalised the idea that if people do good to look good, introducing monetary or other rewards into the mix might complicate matters. An observer who sees someone getting paid for donating blood, for example, would find it hard to differentiate between the donor’s intrinsic “goodness” and his greed.Blood moneyThe idea that monetary incentives could be counterproductive has been around at least since 1970, when Richard Titmuss, a British social scientist, hypothesised that paying people to donate blood would reduce the amount of blood that they gave. But Mr Ariely and his colleagues demonstrate a mechanism through which such confound ing effects could operate. They presumed that the addition of a monetary incentive should have much less of an impact in public (where it muddle s the image signal of an action) than in private (where the image is not important). By adding a monetary reward for participants to theirexperiment, the academics were able to confirm their hypothesis. In private, being paid to click increased effort from 548 clicks to 740, but in public, there was next to no effect. The trio also raise the possibility that cleverly designed rewards could actually draw out more generosity by exploiting image motivation. Suppose, for example, that rewards were used to encourage people to support a certain cause with a minimum donation. If that cause then publicised those who were generous well beyond the minimum required of them, it would show that they were not just “in it for the money”. Behavioural economics may yet provide charities with some creative new fund-raising techniques.寻找好行善[ 2009年1月15日]经济焦点寻找好行善2009年1月15日来自经济学人印刷版回报人民的慷慨可能会适得其反插图由江淮Depczyk在波士顿当代艺术学院（ICA ），装在一个巨大的玻璃和金属建筑海港的边缘博物馆大厅一个大匾，确定其最慷慨的赞助人。
1带翻译
1、1、金融用语：受取手形：应收票据；外貨ポジジョン：外汇头寸；公定歩合：法定贴现率；最割引率：再贴现率；つなぎ融資：过渡性融资；変動為替レート：浮动汇率2、股市用语：上げ幅：升幅；先安：看跌；そこを割る：跌破最低大关；持ち合い：暂告平息；軟調：疲软3、缩略语：ADBゕジゕ開発銀行（亚洲开发银行）；CIEC 国際経済協力会議（国际经济合作会议）；GA TT関税貿易一般協定（国际关税和贸易总协定）；FAO 国連食料農業機構（联合国粮农组织）；IMF 国際通貨基金（国际货币基金组织）；JICA国際協力事業団（日本国际事业协力团）OPEC石油輸出国機構（石油输出国组织）；UNDP国連開発計画（联合国开发计划署）一、经济类文章○円の国際化変動相場制の第二の不均衡は、日本の貿易収支の大幅な黒字である。
確かに第二次石油ショックの直後こそ貿易収支は赤字またはわずかな黒字だったが、数年後には大幅黒字が復活している。
79年の第二次石油ショックの後も、79－80年こそ、貿易収支は２０億ドル前後の赤字、経常収支は大幅の赤字だったが、81年以降再び黒字を増やし、83年には経常収支も黒字となった。
85年、86年は貿易収支各461億ドル、828億ドル、経常収支は各350億ドル、492億ドルの黒字である。
普通ならとっくに円高となってよさそうだが、そうならなかったのは、日本からゕメリカへ莫大な金利稼ぎの長期資本が流出したからである。
この時期の貿易黒字の急増は、日本の輸出努力とともに、ゕメリカのドル高のあおりを受けたと見るのが正しいだろう。
かつては通貨レートは貿易の動きに依存していたが、現在では、資本収支の動きが大きな影響を持つようになっている。
それだけに、貿易摩擦問題が通貨レート調整によって解決する見通しは少ない。
むしろ日本側は、経常収支の黒字を対外投資の推進に振り向け、円高を避けてきた。
实行浮动汇率制度的第二个不均衡问题是日本的贸易收支顺差大幅度。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
[2009.11.17]How to feed the world如何养活世界Nov 19th 2009From The Economist print editionBusiness as usual will not do it一切照旧已不再可行IN 1974 Henry Kissinger, then America’s secretary of state, told the first world food conference in Rome that no child would go to bed hungry within ten years. Just over 35 years later, in the week of another United Nations food summit in Rome, 1 billion people will go to bed hungry.1974年，在罗马举行的第一届世界粮食会议上，当时的美国国务卿亨利•基辛格宣称10年内将没有小孩再饿着肚子入睡。
而35年之后的罗马，在又一届联合国粮食峰会在罗马召开的这一周内，仍有10亿人饿着肚子上床睡觉。
This failure, already dreadful, may soon get worse. None of the underlying agricultural problems which produced a spike in food prices in 2007-08 and increased the number of hungry people has gone away. Between now and 2050 the world’s populat ion will rise by a third, but demand for agricultural goods will rise by 70% and demand for meat will double. These increases are in a sense good news in that they are a result of rising wealth in poor and middle-income countries. But they will have to happen without farmers clearing large amounts of new land (there is some scope for expansion, but not much) or using up lots more water (in parts of the world, water supplies are stretched to their limit or beyond). Moreover, they will take place while farmers also wrestle with the consequences of climate change, which, on balance, will do more harm than good to farmland round the world.这样的失败虽已甚为可怕，但很快将会变得更糟。
现存的农业问题推动了2007-08年粮食价格的上涨，使饥饿人数有所增加，而这些问题无一得到解决。
现在至2050年间，世界人口将增长1/3，但农产品需求将上涨70%，而肉类需求更将翻番。
这些增长在一定意义上是个好消息，因为这是中低收入国家财富增长的结果。
但是伴随这些增长的却是一些不容乐观的景象：农民无法清理出大量的新地（可耕地有扩大的空间，但并不多），更多的水资源会被耗尽（在世界某些地方，供水量已至其极限甚至超过了极限）。
此外，与此同时农民还需应对气候变化造成的影响。
总的来说，气候变化对其全球的耕地来说将是弊大于利的。
It may be too late to avoid another bout of price rises. Despite a global recession and the largest grain harvest on record in 2008, food prices are heading up again. Still, countries have a brief window of opportunity in which to set long-term policy goals without being distracted by panic measures. They need to do two things: invest in the productive capacity of agriculture and improve the operation of food markets.或许想避免下一轮的价格上涨为时已晚。
尽管全球经济衰退，而2008年收获了有记录以来的最大丰收，但食物价格仍再次上扬。
然而，各国仍存在一丝机会，能够在避免恐慌措施的同时，制定长期政策目标。
他们要做两件事：投资增加农业生产能力，改善食物市场运作方式。
Governments have done one but not the other. Over the past year investment has risen faster than anyone expected. But distrust of markets and a reaction against farm trade are growing. Unless governments restrain those impulses, they will undermine the gains from rising investment.政府仅为其一而未做其二。
过去的一年间，投资增速快于任何人预期。
但市场的不信任及对农产品贸易的抵制正在增加。
除非政府能够抑制这股潮流，否则增加的投资收益将为其所破坏。
The quarter-century slumber1/4世纪的沉睡For most of the past 25 years, investment in agriculture has declined relentlessly. In 2005 most developing countries were investing only around 5% of public revenues in farming. The share of Western aid going to agriculture fell by around three-quarters between 1980 and 2006. This disinvestment laid waste to productivity. During the Green Revolution of the 1960s, staple-crop yields were rising by 3-6% a year. Now they are rising by only 1-2% a year; in poor countries, yields are flat.过去25年间的大多时候，农业投资都在无情下跌。
2005年，多数发展中国家公共收入中仅有5%用于投资农业。
西方对农业的援助比例，自1980至2006年间降低了近3/4。
投资缩水导致产能的浪费。
在20世纪60年代绿色革命时期，大宗作物单产一年便提高了3-6%。
而现在一年仅提升1-2%。
在贫困国家，产量并未提高。
Fortunately, the food-price spike of 2007-08 shocked governments out of their quarter-century of neglect. The World Bank and many rich countries have doubled the money they put into poor countries’ farming. In the poor countries themselves, agriculture has gone from being a sideshow for the government—something the minister of agriculture does—into its main event, which everyone needs to worry about. This is as it should be: farming is far and away the single most important economic activity in most poor places.幸运的是，2007-08年间，食物价格的上涨将政府从1/4世纪中的怠惰中惊醒。
世界银行及许多富裕国家成倍增加了其对贫困国家农业的投资力度。
而对贫困国家自身，农业也不再是场仅有农业部长参与的余兴节目，而成为人人都需思考的头等大事。
这才是他所应该成为的样子：农业生产无疑是贫困地区唯一首要的经济活动。
Some of the new splurge of public money is going on safety-net programmes for poor farmers, which are justified on anti-poverty grounds: three-quarters of the world’s poorest live in rural areas. But the money will pay dividends in the long run only if it improves farmers’ access to market. Lack of reliable markets is the biggest barrier to rural development, since without them farmers have little incentive to grow more. So the increase in rural road-building is welcome, asare measures to improve the operations of local markets by (for instance) spreading price information and building grain stores. There is also a case for temporarily subsidising better seeds and fertilisers in places where local markets are failing to provide them: this is an example of correcting market failure.挥霍公款的新作之一便是进行针对贫农的安全网计划。