Introduction / Context:
The government launches facilitation counters for foreign tourists, staffed by trained personnel. The rationale and feasibility depend on certain background beliefs about staffing and expected benefits.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- I: Sufficient trained staff exists to operate counters across shifts.
- II: Offering services at airports will improve tourist experience and help increase inflows.
- III: A majority of foreign tourists need many services on arrival.
Concept / Approach:
- A plan’s feasibility (I) and goal-orientation (II) are typically assumed; otherwise the initiative would be impractical or pointless.
- However, the plan does not require the strong quantifier “majority” for III; significant demand is enough, not necessarily more than 50% of tourists.
Step-by-Step Solution:
I is necessary: Without adequate trained staff, “manned by trained staff” cannot be realized sustainably.II is necessary: The policy presumes beneficial impact on tourism (improved satisfaction leading to higher inflow).III is too strong: Even if many (but not a majority) need services, the counters remain justified. Thus III is not required.
Verification / Alternative check:
Rejecting I or II renders the initiative infeasible or purposeless. Rejecting III leaves the initiative intact because “majority” is not essential.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only III ignores feasibility and purpose; II and III exaggerates demand; All includes an unnecessary majority claim; None ignores I and II.
Common Pitfalls:
Confusing “significant” with “majority”; policies can serve large minorities effectively.
Final Answer:
Only I and II are implicit
Discussion & Comments