研究所、轉學考(插大)、學士後-英文題庫下載題庫

     In the past two decades, mass tree-planting campaigns like this one have gained popularity as a salve for many of our modern__35.__from climate change to the extinction crisis. Companies and billionaires love these campaigns. So do politicians. Really, what's not to like about trees? They suck up carbon emissions naturally while providing resources for wildlife and humans – and they're even nice to look at. It sounds like a win-win-win. 

      There's just one problem: These campaigns often don't work, and sometimes they can even fuel deforestation. In one recent study in the journal Nature, for example, researchers examined long-term restoration efforts in northern India, a country that has invested huge amounts of money into planting over the last 50 years. The authors found "no evidence" that planting offered substantial climate benefits or supported the livelihoods of local communities. The study is among the most comprehensive analyses of restoration projects to date, but it's just one example in a litany of failed campaigns that call into question the value of big tree-planting campaigns. Often, the allure of bold targets __36.__ the challenges involved in seeing them through, and the underlying forces that destroy ecosystems in the first place. 

       Instead of focusing on planting huge numbers of trees, we should focus on growing trees for the long haul, protecting and restoring ecosystems beyond just forests, and empowering the local communities that are best positioned to care for them. [excerpt taken and adapted from The surprising downsides to planting trillions of trees by Benji Jones, Vox]