Statement–Courses of Action (inter-state project governance): Orissa and Andhra Pradesh have agreed in principle to constitute a joint control board for improved control, management, and productivity of several inter-state multipurpose projects; which course(s) of action follow—encouraging other neighbouring states to form similar boards, or disallowing the proposed board on the assumption that such joint boards are always ineffective?

Given data

• Two specific states plan a joint control board for inter-state projects.
• Courses proposed: (I) Other neighbouring states should set up such boards. (II) The proposed board should not be allowed to function as such boards are always ineffective.

Concept/Approach (avoid unwarranted generalization and biased dismissal)
A valid course must follow from the statement. The statement provides no evidence about outcomes of similar boards elsewhere, nor about universal ineffectiveness.

Step 1: Evaluate Course I
Recommending that all other states form similar boards generalizes beyond the provided context without evidence; the statement does not justify replication.

Step 2: Evaluate Course II
Pre-emptively blocking the board assumes inevitable failure; the statement actually indicates intended benefits, not proven ineffectiveness.

Verification/Alternative
A reasonable follow-up (not among options) would be to allow the board to function and evaluate its performance.

Common pitfalls
Projecting conclusions to other states (hasty generalization) or rejecting the initiative with a blanket negative assumption.

Final Answer
Neither I nor II follows.