Cause–Effect Analysis (Effect → Probable Cause):\nEffect — Government permits airlines to levy peak-time congestion charges for flights landing 6:00–10:00 AM.\nWhich is the most probable cause?

Introduction / Context:
The effect is a policy change allowing congestion charges during a well-defined time window. We must select the underlying operational cause that rationally motivates such a price mechanism.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Effect: Permission for peak-time congestion charges (6:00–10:00 AM landings).
• Airports experience concentrated demand during peak hours.

Concept / Approach:
Congestion pricing aims to internalize external costs (delays, queues, fuel burn). The best cause should explain why peak hours specifically warrant a surcharge.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Peak-hour stacks/holding patterns increase fuel consumption and delays.2) Allowing a congestion fee encourages schedule spreading and recovers extra costs—aligned with economic theory.3) Options (a) and (b) are speculative and do not justify the specific time-window logic; (d) asserts an outcome, not a cause, and exaggerates the policy’s scope.

Verification / Alternative check:
Congestion fees are a standard instrument where slot scarcity and airborne holding are common.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
(a) lacks evidence and is coercive, not causal; (b) reverses direction (a tax increase would itself be an effect); (d) is not a cause and overstates “unlimited.”

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing political bargaining with operational economics.

Final Answer:
Option (c): Routine peak-hour holding and fuel costs motivate congestion charges.