Standard economics treats the environment as an externality—a side effect not captured in market prices. Ecological economists argue this framing is backwards: the economy is a subsystem of the environment, entirely dependent on ecological systems for resources and waste absorption. When economic growth degrades these systems, it undermines the foundation on which all economic activity depends. This reconceptualization has implications for how we measure progress beyond GDP.
It can be inferred from the text that
standard economics and ecological economics share identical frameworks
how we frame the economy-environment relationship may shape which policies seem rational
environmental systems have no relationship to economic activity
GDP is the only valid measure of societal progress
Correct Answer: B
Choice B is the best answer. Different frameworks lead to different policy implications.
- Context clues: One views environment as externality, another as foundation; reconceptualization has "implications" for measuring progress.
- Meaning: Different framings suggest different approaches as rational.
- Verify: If the relationship is framed differently, different policies follow logically.
💡 Strategy: When a passage contrasts frameworks, infer that framework choice affects conclusions.
Choice A is incorrect because ecological economics says the standard framing is "backwards." Choice C is incorrect because economy is "entirely dependent on ecological systems." Choice D is incorrect because the text suggests measuring progress "beyond GDP."