Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 1 to 10.
Technology, Deterrence and the Battle Against Waste Crime
Illegal waste dumping is frequently dismissed as a local inconvenience; however, in practice it constitutes a highly organised and financially lucrative form of environmental crime. In England alone, such activity is estimated to cost the economy approximately £1 billion annually, while simultaneously imposing long-term ecological and social damage. Against this backdrop, the government has announced the establishment of a 33-member drone unit intended to enhance the detection and investigation of unlicensed waste sites. Far from being a symbolic gesture, this initiative represents a strategic shift towards a more assertive and technology-driven enforcement model. [I]
The announcement coincided with the conviction of Varun Datta at Birmingham Crown Court. Datta orchestrated the illegal disposal of more than 4,000 tonnes of municipal waste across 16 sites, including protected land and a historic manor property. By falsely declaring that the waste would be transported to a licensed facility near Sheffield, he redirected it to unauthorised locations nationwide. [II] The court ordered him to repay over £1 million, reflecting the financial benefits derived from his activities, in addition to compensation and prosecution costs. [III] Although his custodial sentence was suspended, the substantial financial penalty was intended to undermine the economic incentives that often make waste crime attractive to organised groups.
Central to the revised strategy is the expanded role of the Environment Agency, which now integrates advanced surveillance technologies into its investigative framework. Several drones will be equipped with lidar systems capable of generating highly detailed topographical maps, enabling authorities to identify concealed or rapidly changing dumping sites. Officials argue that such innovation is necessary because organised offenders have become increasingly adept at exploiting regulatory gaps and avoiding conventional inspections. In this sense, technological monitoring is presented not as an optional enhancement but as a proportionate response to evolving criminal methods. [IV]
Nevertheless, questions remain regarding whether surveillance and financial penalties alone can deliver sustained deterrence. Critics contend that suspended prison sentences may dilute the perceived severity of the offence, potentially weakening the overall message of zero tolerance. Moreover, effective enforcement is resource-intensive and depends upon coordination between national regulators, local authorities and private landowners. Without consistent collaboration and long-term funding, even sophisticated technology may struggle to reverse entrenched patterns of illegal disposal.
Ultimately, while drones and harsher penalties are unlikely to eradicate waste crime entirely, they signal an effort to recalibrate the balance of risk and reward that has historically favoured offenders. By combining technological precision with legal accountability, policymakers appear determined to demonstrate that environmental crime will no longer remain a low-risk, high-profit enterprise.
(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/am)
According to paragraph 1, the establishment of the drone unit is best understood as an attempt to ______.
offset the economic losses caused by environmental offences
increase the number of personnel responsible for environmental compliance
address illegal dumping through a more proactive and technology-oriented enforcement approach
replace conventional inspection methods with fully automated monitoring systems
Cụm “According to paragraph 1” yêu cầu chỉ tìm mục đích của việc lập đơn vị drone trong đoạn 1.
“intended to enhance the detection and investigation of unlicensed waste sites” cho thấy mục tiêu là tăng cường phát hiện và điều tra các bãi rác trái phép.
“a strategic shift towards a more assertive and technology-driven enforcement model” khớp với cách thực thi chủ động hơn và dựa vào công nghệ.
Chọn C vì diễn đạt đầy đủ mục tiêu xử lý nạn đổ rác bất hợp pháp bằng phương thức thực thi chủ động và công nghệ hơn. A sai vì drone unit không nhằm bù đắp thiệt hại kinh tế; B chỉ suy diễn từ số lượng thành viên; D sai vì bài không nói thay thế hoàn toàn kiểm tra truyền thống bằng hệ thống tự động.
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 1 to 10.
Technology, Deterrence and the Battle Against Waste Crime
Illegal waste dumping is frequently dismissed as a local inconvenience; however, in practice it constitutes a highly organised and financially lucrative form of environmental crime. In England alone, such activity is estimated to cost the economy approximately £1 billion annually, while simultaneously imposing long-term ecological and social damage. Against this backdrop, the government has announced the establishment of a 33-member drone unit intended to enhance the detection and investigation of unlicensed waste sites. Far from being a symbolic gesture, this initiative represents a strategic shift towards a more assertive and technology-driven enforcement model. [I]
The announcement coincided with the conviction of Varun Datta at Birmingham Crown Court. Datta orchestrated the illegal disposal of more than 4,000 tonnes of municipal waste across 16 sites, including protected land and a historic manor property. By falsely declaring that the waste would be transported to a licensed facility near Sheffield, he redirected it to unauthorised locations nationwide. [II] The court ordered him to repay over £1 million, reflecting the financial benefits derived from his activities, in addition to compensation and prosecution costs. [III] Although his custodial sentence was suspended, the substantial financial penalty was intended to undermine the economic incentives that often make waste crime attractive to organised groups.
Central to the revised strategy is the expanded role of the Environment Agency, which now integrates advanced surveillance technologies into its investigative framework. Several drones will be equipped with lidar systems capable of generating highly detailed topographical maps, enabling authorities to identify concealed or rapidly changing dumping sites. Officials argue that such innovation is necessary because organised offenders have become increasingly adept at exploiting regulatory gaps and avoiding conventional inspections. In this sense, technological monitoring is presented not as an optional enhancement but as a proportionate response to evolving criminal methods. [IV]
Nevertheless, questions remain regarding whether surveillance and financial penalties alone can deliver sustained deterrence. Critics contend that suspended prison sentences may dilute the perceived severity of the offence, potentially weakening the overall message of zero tolerance. Moreover, effective enforcement is resource-intensive and depends upon coordination between national regulators, local authorities and private landowners. Without consistent collaboration and long-term funding, even sophisticated technology may struggle to reverse entrenched patterns of illegal disposal.
Ultimately, while drones and harsher penalties are unlikely to eradicate waste crime entirely, they signal an effort to recalibrate the balance of risk and reward that has historically favoured offenders. By combining technological precision with legal accountability, policymakers appear determined to demonstrate that environmental crime will no longer remain a low-risk, high-profit enterprise.
(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/am)
The word “assertive” in paragraph 1 is closest in meaning to ______.
temporary and flexible
experimental and innovative
hesitant and cautious
forceful and determined
“Assertive” mô tả một mô hình thực thi mạnh mẽ hơn, không chỉ mang tính biểu tượng.
Cụm “Far from being a symbolic gesture” nhấn mạnh sự nghiêm túc của sáng kiến.
“Strategic shift” và “technology-driven enforcement model” cho thấy chính phủ chuyển sang cách xử lý chủ động, quyết liệt hơn.
Trong chủ đề chống tội phạm môi trường, “assertive” mang sắc thái mạnh và cứng rắn.
Chọn D vì “forceful and determined” phù hợp với nghĩa mạnh mẽ, quyết đoán của “assertive”.
A sai vì “assertive” không có nghĩa tạm thời; B nhấn mạnh tính thử nghiệm, mới lạ; C trái nghĩa vì thể hiện sự do dự, thận trọng.
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 1 to 10.
Technology, Deterrence and the Battle Against Waste Crime
Illegal waste dumping is frequently dismissed as a local inconvenience; however, in practice it constitutes a highly organised and financially lucrative form of environmental crime. In England alone, such activity is estimated to cost the economy approximately £1 billion annually, while simultaneously imposing long-term ecological and social damage. Against this backdrop, the government has announced the establishment of a 33-member drone unit intended to enhance the detection and investigation of unlicensed waste sites. Far from being a symbolic gesture, this initiative represents a strategic shift towards a more assertive and technology-driven enforcement model. [I]
The announcement coincided with the conviction of Varun Datta at Birmingham Crown Court. Datta orchestrated the illegal disposal of more than 4,000 tonnes of municipal waste across 16 sites, including protected land and a historic manor property. By falsely declaring that the waste would be transported to a licensed facility near Sheffield, he redirected it to unauthorised locations nationwide. [II] The court ordered him to repay over £1 million, reflecting the financial benefits derived from his activities, in addition to compensation and prosecution costs. [III] Although his custodial sentence was suspended, the substantial financial penalty was intended to undermine the economic incentives that often make waste crime attractive to organised groups.
Central to the revised strategy is the expanded role of the Environment Agency, which now integrates advanced surveillance technologies into its investigative framework. Several drones will be equipped with lidar systems capable of generating highly detailed topographical maps, enabling authorities to identify concealed or rapidly changing dumping sites. Officials argue that such innovation is necessary because organised offenders have become increasingly adept at exploiting regulatory gaps and avoiding conventional inspections. In this sense, technological monitoring is presented not as an optional enhancement but as a proportionate response to evolving criminal methods. [IV]
Nevertheless, questions remain regarding whether surveillance and financial penalties alone can deliver sustained deterrence. Critics contend that suspended prison sentences may dilute the perceived severity of the offence, potentially weakening the overall message of zero tolerance. Moreover, effective enforcement is resource-intensive and depends upon coordination between national regulators, local authorities and private landowners. Without consistent collaboration and long-term funding, even sophisticated technology may struggle to reverse entrenched patterns of illegal disposal.
Ultimately, while drones and harsher penalties are unlikely to eradicate waste crime entirely, they signal an effort to recalibrate the balance of risk and reward that has historically favoured offenders. By combining technological precision with legal accountability, policymakers appear determined to demonstrate that environmental crime will no longer remain a low-risk, high-profit enterprise.
(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/am)
Why are lidar-equipped drones presented as a necessary component of the revised enforcement strategy?
They symbolise a broader governmental commitment to technological modernisation in environmental governance.
They reduce the overall administrative burden associated with prosecuting environmental offences nationwide.
They improve the accuracy of detecting concealed dumping sites that traditional inspection procedures may overlook.
They prevent offenders from exploiting sentencing inconsistencies within the judicial system.
Tập trung vào đoạn nói về vai trò của lidar-equipped drones và lý do công nghệ này cần thiết.
Bài cho biết lidar tạo bản đồ địa hình rất chi tiết, giúp cơ quan chức năng xác định các bãi đổ rác bị che giấu hoặc thay đổi nhanh.
Tội phạm ngày càng biết lợi dụng kẽ hở quản lý và né tránh kiểm tra thông thường, nên công nghệ này giúp phát hiện chính xác hơn.
Chọn C vì khớp trực tiếp với chức năng phát hiện bãi đổ rác ẩn; A sai vì chỉ nêu ý nghĩa biểu tượng, B không được đề cập, còn D nói về sự không nhất quán trong tuyên án, không liên quan đến lidar.
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 1 to 10.
Technology, Deterrence and the Battle Against Waste Crime
Illegal waste dumping is frequently dismissed as a local inconvenience; however, in practice it constitutes a highly organised and financially lucrative form of environmental crime. In England alone, such activity is estimated to cost the economy approximately £1 billion annually, while simultaneously imposing long-term ecological and social damage. Against this backdrop, the government has announced the establishment of a 33-member drone unit intended to enhance the detection and investigation of unlicensed waste sites. Far from being a symbolic gesture, this initiative represents a strategic shift towards a more assertive and technology-driven enforcement model. [I]
The announcement coincided with the conviction of Varun Datta at Birmingham Crown Court. Datta orchestrated the illegal disposal of more than 4,000 tonnes of municipal waste across 16 sites, including protected land and a historic manor property. By falsely declaring that the waste would be transported to a licensed facility near Sheffield, he redirected it to unauthorised locations nationwide. [II] The court ordered him to repay over £1 million, reflecting the financial benefits derived from his activities, in addition to compensation and prosecution costs. [III] Although his custodial sentence was suspended, the substantial financial penalty was intended to undermine the economic incentives that often make waste crime attractive to organised groups.
Central to the revised strategy is the expanded role of the Environment Agency, which now integrates advanced surveillance technologies into its investigative framework. Several drones will be equipped with lidar systems capable of generating highly detailed topographical maps, enabling authorities to identify concealed or rapidly changing dumping sites. Officials argue that such innovation is necessary because organised offenders have become increasingly adept at exploiting regulatory gaps and avoiding conventional inspections. In this sense, technological monitoring is presented not as an optional enhancement but as a proportionate response to evolving criminal methods. [IV]
Nevertheless, questions remain regarding whether surveillance and financial penalties alone can deliver sustained deterrence. Critics contend that suspended prison sentences may dilute the perceived severity of the offence, potentially weakening the overall message of zero tolerance. Moreover, effective enforcement is resource-intensive and depends upon coordination between national regulators, local authorities and private landowners. Without consistent collaboration and long-term funding, even sophisticated technology may struggle to reverse entrenched patterns of illegal disposal.
Ultimately, while drones and harsher penalties are unlikely to eradicate waste crime entirely, they signal an effort to recalibrate the balance of risk and reward that has historically favoured offenders. By combining technological precision with legal accountability, policymakers appear determined to demonstrate that environmental crime will no longer remain a low-risk, high-profit enterprise.
(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/am)
Which of the following best summarises paragraph 3?
Waste crime has expanded primarily because enforcement agencies underestimated its economic impact.
Traditional inspection systems remain adequate despite the emergence of new technological tools.
Regulatory authorities are restructuring investigative practices to address increasingly adaptive criminal strategies.
Organised offenders have shifted towards less profitable but more discreet disposal methods.
Cụm “Central to the revised strategy” và “expanded role of the Environment Agency” cho thấy cơ quan quản lý đang điều chỉnh cách điều tra.
Đoạn văn nêu việc tích hợp drone và lidar để hiện đại hóa giám sát, vì tội phạm ngày càng biết khai thác kẽ hở và tránh kiểm tra thông thường.
Công nghệ mới là phản ứng phù hợp trước các phương thức phạm tội đang thay đổi.
Chọn C vì khái quát đúng việc cơ quan chức năng tái cấu trúc hoạt động điều tra để đối phó với chiến lược tội phạm ngày càng thích nghi.
A sai vì đoạn không nói nguyên nhân chính là đánh giá thấp thiệt hại kinh tế; B sai vì kiểm tra truyền thống không còn đủ hiệu quả; D sai vì không đề cập việc chuyển sang phương thức ít lợi nhuận hơn.
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 1 to 10.
Technology, Deterrence and the Battle Against Waste Crime
Illegal waste dumping is frequently dismissed as a local inconvenience; however, in practice it constitutes a highly organised and financially lucrative form of environmental crime. In England alone, such activity is estimated to cost the economy approximately £1 billion annually, while simultaneously imposing long-term ecological and social damage. Against this backdrop, the government has announced the establishment of a 33-member drone unit intended to enhance the detection and investigation of unlicensed waste sites. Far from being a symbolic gesture, this initiative represents a strategic shift towards a more assertive and technology-driven enforcement model. [I]
The announcement coincided with the conviction of Varun Datta at Birmingham Crown Court. Datta orchestrated the illegal disposal of more than 4,000 tonnes of municipal waste across 16 sites, including protected land and a historic manor property. By falsely declaring that the waste would be transported to a licensed facility near Sheffield, he redirected it to unauthorised locations nationwide. [II] The court ordered him to repay over £1 million, reflecting the financial benefits derived from his activities, in addition to compensation and prosecution costs. [III] Although his custodial sentence was suspended, the substantial financial penalty was intended to undermine the economic incentives that often make waste crime attractive to organised groups.
Central to the revised strategy is the expanded role of the Environment Agency, which now integrates advanced surveillance technologies into its investigative framework. Several drones will be equipped with lidar systems capable of generating highly detailed topographical maps, enabling authorities to identify concealed or rapidly changing dumping sites. Officials argue that such innovation is necessary because organised offenders have become increasingly adept at exploiting regulatory gaps and avoiding conventional inspections. In this sense, technological monitoring is presented not as an optional enhancement but as a proportionate response to evolving criminal methods. [IV]
Nevertheless, questions remain regarding whether surveillance and financial penalties alone can deliver sustained deterrence. Critics contend that suspended prison sentences may dilute the perceived severity of the offence, potentially weakening the overall message of zero tolerance. Moreover, effective enforcement is resource-intensive and depends upon coordination between national regulators, local authorities and private landowners. Without consistent collaboration and long-term funding, even sophisticated technology may struggle to reverse entrenched patterns of illegal disposal.
Ultimately, while drones and harsher penalties are unlikely to eradicate waste crime entirely, they signal an effort to recalibrate the balance of risk and reward that has historically favoured offenders. By combining technological precision with legal accountability, policymakers appear determined to demonstrate that environmental crime will no longer remain a low-risk, high-profit enterprise.
(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/am)
According to the passage, the financial penalty imposed on Datta was intended to ______.
remove the financial motivation behind organised waste crime
compensate local authorities for technological investment
replace imprisonment as the primary form of punishment
highlight the symbolic importance of environmental protection
Tìm đoạn nói trực tiếp về mục đích của khoản phạt tài chính đối với Datta.
Cụm từ “the substantial financial penalty was intended to undermine the economic incentives” cho biết khoản phạt nhằm làm suy yếu động lực kinh tế.
Tội phạm rác thải hấp dẫn các nhóm có tổ chức vì lợi ích tiền bạc; do đó, khoản phạt nhắm vào động cơ tài chính này.
Chọn A vì phù hợp với mục đích làm mất động lực tài chính của tội phạm rác thải có tổ chức; B, C, D sai vì bài không nói khoản phạt dùng để bù chi phí công nghệ, thay thế hình phạt tù hoặc nhấn mạnh ý nghĩa biểu tượng của bảo vệ môi trường.
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 1 to 10.
Technology, Deterrence and the Battle Against Waste Crime
Illegal waste dumping is frequently dismissed as a local inconvenience; however, in practice it constitutes a highly organised and financially lucrative form of environmental crime. In England alone, such activity is estimated to cost the economy approximately £1 billion annually, while simultaneously imposing long-term ecological and social damage. Against this backdrop, the government has announced the establishment of a 33-member drone unit intended to enhance the detection and investigation of unlicensed waste sites. Far from being a symbolic gesture, this initiative represents a strategic shift towards a more assertive and technology-driven enforcement model. [I]
The announcement coincided with the conviction of Varun Datta at Birmingham Crown Court. Datta orchestrated the illegal disposal of more than 4,000 tonnes of municipal waste across 16 sites, including protected land and a historic manor property. By falsely declaring that the waste would be transported to a licensed facility near Sheffield, he redirected it to unauthorised locations nationwide. [II] The court ordered him to repay over £1 million, reflecting the financial benefits derived from his activities, in addition to compensation and prosecution costs. [III] Although his custodial sentence was suspended, the substantial financial penalty was intended to undermine the economic incentives that often make waste crime attractive to organised groups.
Central to the revised strategy is the expanded role of the Environment Agency, which now integrates advanced surveillance technologies into its investigative framework. Several drones will be equipped with lidar systems capable of generating highly detailed topographical maps, enabling authorities to identify concealed or rapidly changing dumping sites. Officials argue that such innovation is necessary because organised offenders have become increasingly adept at exploiting regulatory gaps and avoiding conventional inspections. In this sense, technological monitoring is presented not as an optional enhancement but as a proportionate response to evolving criminal methods. [IV]
Nevertheless, questions remain regarding whether surveillance and financial penalties alone can deliver sustained deterrence. Critics contend that suspended prison sentences may dilute the perceived severity of the offence, potentially weakening the overall message of zero tolerance. Moreover, effective enforcement is resource-intensive and depends upon coordination between national regulators, local authorities and private landowners. Without consistent collaboration and long-term funding, even sophisticated technology may struggle to reverse entrenched patterns of illegal disposal.
Ultimately, while drones and harsher penalties are unlikely to eradicate waste crime entirely, they signal an effort to recalibrate the balance of risk and reward that has historically favoured offenders. By combining technological precision with legal accountability, policymakers appear determined to demonstrate that environmental crime will no longer remain a low-risk, high-profit enterprise.
(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/am)
According to paragraph 4, which of the following factors is identified as essential for achieving sustained effectiveness in combating illegal waste crime?
Sustained inter-agency cooperation supported by consistent financial and institutional resources.
Comprehensive public awareness initiatives designed to discourage community-level participation.
Exclusive reliance on advanced aerial surveillance technologies across affected regions.
The immediate introduction of mandatory prison sentences for all environmental offences.
Câu hỏi yêu cầu tìm yếu tố thiết yếu để đạt hiệu quả bền vững trong việc chống đổ rác trái phép.
Đoạn 4 nêu việc thực thi hiệu quả phụ thuộc vào sự phối hợp giữa cơ quan quản lý quốc gia, chính quyền địa phương và chủ đất tư nhân.
Đoạn văn cũng khẳng định nếu thiếu hợp tác ổn định và tài trợ dài hạn, ngay cả công nghệ hiện đại cũng khó phát huy hiệu quả.
Chọn A vì nêu đúng sự phối hợp liên cơ quan cùng nguồn lực tài chính và thể chế ổn định. B, C, D sai vì lần lượt không được đề cập, trái với ý đoạn văn về việc không thể chỉ dựa vào công nghệ, và không có yêu cầu áp dụng ngay án tù bắt buộc cho mọi vi phạm.
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 1 to 10.
Technology, Deterrence and the Battle Against Waste Crime
Illegal waste dumping is frequently dismissed as a local inconvenience; however, in practice it constitutes a highly organised and financially lucrative form of environmental crime. In England alone, such activity is estimated to cost the economy approximately £1 billion annually, while simultaneously imposing long-term ecological and social damage. Against this backdrop, the government has announced the establishment of a 33-member drone unit intended to enhance the detection and investigation of unlicensed waste sites. Far from being a symbolic gesture, this initiative represents a strategic shift towards a more assertive and technology-driven enforcement model. [I]
The announcement coincided with the conviction of Varun Datta at Birmingham Crown Court. Datta orchestrated the illegal disposal of more than 4,000 tonnes of municipal waste across 16 sites, including protected land and a historic manor property. By falsely declaring that the waste would be transported to a licensed facility near Sheffield, he redirected it to unauthorised locations nationwide. [II] The court ordered him to repay over £1 million, reflecting the financial benefits derived from his activities, in addition to compensation and prosecution costs. [III] Although his custodial sentence was suspended, the substantial financial penalty was intended to undermine the economic incentives that often make waste crime attractive to organised groups.
Central to the revised strategy is the expanded role of the Environment Agency, which now integrates advanced surveillance technologies into its investigative framework. Several drones will be equipped with lidar systems capable of generating highly detailed topographical maps, enabling authorities to identify concealed or rapidly changing dumping sites. Officials argue that such innovation is necessary because organised offenders have become increasingly adept at exploiting regulatory gaps and avoiding conventional inspections. In this sense, technological monitoring is presented not as an optional enhancement but as a proportionate response to evolving criminal methods. [IV]
Nevertheless, questions remain regarding whether surveillance and financial penalties alone can deliver sustained deterrence. Critics contend that suspended prison sentences may dilute the perceived severity of the offence, potentially weakening the overall message of zero tolerance. Moreover, effective enforcement is resource-intensive and depends upon coordination between national regulators, local authorities and private landowners. Without consistent collaboration and long-term funding, even sophisticated technology may struggle to reverse entrenched patterns of illegal disposal.
Ultimately, while drones and harsher penalties are unlikely to eradicate waste crime entirely, they signal an effort to recalibrate the balance of risk and reward that has historically favoured offenders. By combining technological precision with legal accountability, policymakers appear determined to demonstrate that environmental crime will no longer remain a low-risk, high-profit enterprise.
(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/am)
Where in the passage would the following sentence best fit?
“This case therefore served as a practical illustration of the economic logic underpinning organised waste crime.”
[III]
[IV]
[II]
[I]
“This case” chỉ vụ việc cụ thể và “economic logic” nói về lợi ích kinh tế của tội phạm có tổ chức.
Vì vậy, câu chèn có chức năng kết luận, minh họa cho vụ án Datta.
Tại [I], văn bản mới chuyển từ chính sách chung sang vụ án nên “This case” chưa có đối tượng quy chiếu. Tại [II], diễn biến vụ án chưa kết thúc nên câu kết luận xuất hiện quá sớm.
Tại [III], câu trước nêu “financial benefits derived from his activities”, liên kết trực tiếp với “economic logic”; câu sau tiếp tục bàn về tác dụng răn đe của hình phạt. Tại [IV], chủ đề là công nghệ giám sát, không phù hợp với vụ án Datta.
A đúng vì [III] nối trực tiếp lợi ích tài chính của vụ án với logic kinh tế của tội phạm có tổ chức; B, C, D sai vì lần lượt lệch chủ đề công nghệ, kết luận quá sớm khi vụ án chưa hoàn tất, và đặt câu trước khi vụ án cụ thể được giới thiệu.
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 1 to 10.
Technology, Deterrence and the Battle Against Waste Crime
Illegal waste dumping is frequently dismissed as a local inconvenience; however, in practice it constitutes a highly organised and financially lucrative form of environmental crime. In England alone, such activity is estimated to cost the economy approximately £1 billion annually, while simultaneously imposing long-term ecological and social damage. Against this backdrop, the government has announced the establishment of a 33-member drone unit intended to enhance the detection and investigation of unlicensed waste sites. Far from being a symbolic gesture, this initiative represents a strategic shift towards a more assertive and technology-driven enforcement model. [I]
The announcement coincided with the conviction of Varun Datta at Birmingham Crown Court. Datta orchestrated the illegal disposal of more than 4,000 tonnes of municipal waste across 16 sites, including protected land and a historic manor property. By falsely declaring that the waste would be transported to a licensed facility near Sheffield, he redirected it to unauthorised locations nationwide. [II] The court ordered him to repay over £1 million, reflecting the financial benefits derived from his activities, in addition to compensation and prosecution costs. [III] Although his custodial sentence was suspended, the substantial financial penalty was intended to undermine the economic incentives that often make waste crime attractive to organised groups.
Central to the revised strategy is the expanded role of the Environment Agency, which now integrates advanced surveillance technologies into its investigative framework. Several drones will be equipped with lidar systems capable of generating highly detailed topographical maps, enabling authorities to identify concealed or rapidly changing dumping sites. Officials argue that such innovation is necessary because organised offenders have become increasingly adept at exploiting regulatory gaps and avoiding conventional inspections. In this sense, technological monitoring is presented not as an optional enhancement but as a proportionate response to evolving criminal methods. [IV]
Nevertheless, questions remain regarding whether surveillance and financial penalties alone can deliver sustained deterrence. Critics contend that suspended prison sentences may dilute the perceived severity of the offence, potentially weakening the overall message of zero tolerance. Moreover, effective enforcement is resource-intensive and depends upon coordination between national regulators, local authorities and private landowners. Without consistent collaboration and long-term funding, even sophisticated technology may struggle to reverse entrenched patterns of illegal disposal.
Ultimately, while drones and harsher penalties are unlikely to eradicate waste crime entirely, they signal an effort to recalibrate the balance of risk and reward that has historically favoured offenders. By combining technological precision with legal accountability, policymakers appear determined to demonstrate that environmental crime will no longer remain a low-risk, high-profit enterprise.
(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/am)
The word “they” in paragraph 5 refers to ______.
organised criminal groups
drones and harsher penalties
policymakers and regulators
patterns of illegal disposal
Tìm “they” trong câu: “drones and harsher penalties are unlikely to eradicate waste crime entirely, they signal an effort...”
“They” đứng ngay sau cụm “drones and harsher penalties”, nên thay thế chính cụm này.
Câu sau nhắc lại hai biện pháp: công nghệ qua “drones” và hình phạt pháp lý nghiêm khắc hơn qua “harsher penalties”.
Vì vậy, cách quy chiếu này phù hợp với toàn đoạn.
B đúng vì chỉ “drones and harsher penalties” là cụm danh từ số nhiều đứng ngay trước “they” và phù hợp nghĩa; A, C, D sai vì lần lượt chỉ nhóm tội phạm, người làm chính sách và các mô hình đổ thải, không phải đối tượng được nhắc lại trong câu.
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 1 to 10.
Technology, Deterrence and the Battle Against Waste Crime
Illegal waste dumping is frequently dismissed as a local inconvenience; however, in practice it constitutes a highly organised and financially lucrative form of environmental crime. In England alone, such activity is estimated to cost the economy approximately £1 billion annually, while simultaneously imposing long-term ecological and social damage. Against this backdrop, the government has announced the establishment of a 33-member drone unit intended to enhance the detection and investigation of unlicensed waste sites. Far from being a symbolic gesture, this initiative represents a strategic shift towards a more assertive and technology-driven enforcement model. [I]
The announcement coincided with the conviction of Varun Datta at Birmingham Crown Court. Datta orchestrated the illegal disposal of more than 4,000 tonnes of municipal waste across 16 sites, including protected land and a historic manor property. By falsely declaring that the waste would be transported to a licensed facility near Sheffield, he redirected it to unauthorised locations nationwide. [II] The court ordered him to repay over £1 million, reflecting the financial benefits derived from his activities, in addition to compensation and prosecution costs. [III] Although his custodial sentence was suspended, the substantial financial penalty was intended to undermine the economic incentives that often make waste crime attractive to organised groups.
Central to the revised strategy is the expanded role of the Environment Agency, which now integrates advanced surveillance technologies into its investigative framework. Several drones will be equipped with lidar systems capable of generating highly detailed topographical maps, enabling authorities to identify concealed or rapidly changing dumping sites. Officials argue that such innovation is necessary because organised offenders have become increasingly adept at exploiting regulatory gaps and avoiding conventional inspections. In this sense, technological monitoring is presented not as an optional enhancement but as a proportionate response to evolving criminal methods. [IV]
Nevertheless, questions remain regarding whether surveillance and financial penalties alone can deliver sustained deterrence. Critics contend that suspended prison sentences may dilute the perceived severity of the offence, potentially weakening the overall message of zero tolerance. Moreover, effective enforcement is resource-intensive and depends upon coordination between national regulators, local authorities and private landowners. Without consistent collaboration and long-term funding, even sophisticated technology may struggle to reverse entrenched patterns of illegal disposal.
Ultimately, while drones and harsher penalties are unlikely to eradicate waste crime entirely, they signal an effort to recalibrate the balance of risk and reward that has historically favoured offenders. By combining technological precision with legal accountability, policymakers appear determined to demonstrate that environmental crime will no longer remain a low-risk, high-profit enterprise.
(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/am)
Which of the following can be inferred from the passage?
Regulatory agencies previously lacked both legal authority and technological capacity to address illegal dumping effectively.
The expansion of drone surveillance reflects widespread public dissatisfaction with current environmental policies.
Most individuals involved in illegal disposal activities are unaware of the long-term ecological consequences.
Organised waste crime has persisted partly because the anticipated financial returns have historically exceeded the perceived risks of enforcement.
Đây là câu hỏi suy luận, nên đáp án không nhất thiết được trích nguyên văn.
Cần tìm ý có thể suy ra trực tiếp từ các chi tiết liên quan.
Bài mô tả tội phạm rác thải là hoạt động có tổ chức và mang lại lợi nhuận cao; hình phạt tài chính nhằm làm suy yếu động cơ kinh tế.
Cụm “cán cân rủi ro và phần thưởng trước đây nghiêng về người phạm tội” cho thấy lợi ích từng vượt perceived risk of enforcement.
D đúng vì suy luận rằng tội phạm có tổ chức tiếp diễn một phần do lợi nhuận dự kiến từng lớn hơn rủi ro bị xử lý; A sai vì bài không nói thiếu cả thẩm quyền pháp lý lẫn năng lực công nghệ, B sai vì không đề cập sự bất mãn của công chúng, C sai vì không nói phần lớn người phạm tội không biết hậu quả sinh thái.
Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D on your answer sheet to indicate the best answer to each of the following questions from 1 to 10.
Technology, Deterrence and the Battle Against Waste Crime
Illegal waste dumping is frequently dismissed as a local inconvenience; however, in practice it constitutes a highly organised and financially lucrative form of environmental crime. In England alone, such activity is estimated to cost the economy approximately £1 billion annually, while simultaneously imposing long-term ecological and social damage. Against this backdrop, the government has announced the establishment of a 33-member drone unit intended to enhance the detection and investigation of unlicensed waste sites. Far from being a symbolic gesture, this initiative represents a strategic shift towards a more assertive and technology-driven enforcement model. [I]
The announcement coincided with the conviction of Varun Datta at Birmingham Crown Court. Datta orchestrated the illegal disposal of more than 4,000 tonnes of municipal waste across 16 sites, including protected land and a historic manor property. By falsely declaring that the waste would be transported to a licensed facility near Sheffield, he redirected it to unauthorised locations nationwide. [II] The court ordered him to repay over £1 million, reflecting the financial benefits derived from his activities, in addition to compensation and prosecution costs. [III] Although his custodial sentence was suspended, the substantial financial penalty was intended to undermine the economic incentives that often make waste crime attractive to organised groups.
Central to the revised strategy is the expanded role of the Environment Agency, which now integrates advanced surveillance technologies into its investigative framework. Several drones will be equipped with lidar systems capable of generating highly detailed topographical maps, enabling authorities to identify concealed or rapidly changing dumping sites. Officials argue that such innovation is necessary because organised offenders have become increasingly adept at exploiting regulatory gaps and avoiding conventional inspections. In this sense, technological monitoring is presented not as an optional enhancement but as a proportionate response to evolving criminal methods. [IV]
Nevertheless, questions remain regarding whether surveillance and financial penalties alone can deliver sustained deterrence. Critics contend that suspended prison sentences may dilute the perceived severity of the offence, potentially weakening the overall message of zero tolerance. Moreover, effective enforcement is resource-intensive and depends upon coordination between national regulators, local authorities and private landowners. Without consistent collaboration and long-term funding, even sophisticated technology may struggle to reverse entrenched patterns of illegal disposal.
Ultimately, while drones and harsher penalties are unlikely to eradicate waste crime entirely, they signal an effort to recalibrate the balance of risk and reward that has historically favoured offenders. By combining technological precision with legal accountability, policymakers appear determined to demonstrate that environmental crime will no longer remain a low-risk, high-profit enterprise.
(Adapted from https://www.theguardian.com/am)
Which of the following best summarises the passage?
Illegal dumping primarily results from limited public awareness rather than coordinated criminal activity.
Financial sanctions represent the single most effective mechanism for addressing environmental offences nationwide.
The government is adopting a multifaceted strategy combining technology with financial and legal deterrents to rebalance criminal incentives.
Drone surveillance will gradually replace conventional inspections and permanently eliminate organised waste crime.
Bài viết mô tả đổ rác trái phép là tội phạm môi trường có tổ chức và sinh lợi cao.
Chính phủ chuyển sang mô hình cưỡng chế dựa trên công nghệ với đơn vị drone.
Vụ Varun Datta nhấn mạnh vai trò của chế tài tài chính và pháp lý, trong khi drone và lidar hỗ trợ phát hiện các bãi rác bị che giấu.
Bài cũng cho biết chỉ giám sát hoặc phạt tiền là chưa đủ; cần phối hợp và tài trợ lâu dài.
Chọn C vì nêu đúng chiến lược đa diện, kết hợp công nghệ với các biện pháp tài chính và pháp lý để làm giảm lợi ích của tội phạm; A sai vì bài khẳng định tính chất có tổ chức, B sai vì tiền phạt không phải biện pháp duy nhất, còn D sai vì drone không thay thế hoàn toàn kiểm tra truyền thống và không thể xóa bỏ tội phạm vĩnh viễn.
| Câu | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Đáp án | C | D | C | C | A | A | A | B | D | C |
Đang xem 10 câu đầu của đề
Đề có tất cả 40 câu. Làm bài để xem lời giải tất cả câu hỏi.
Đăng nhập để làm bài