Questões para Concursos

Text III Aside from the difficulties of operating a decidedly multinational staff organization, once it is formed, the problem of reconciling the principle of equitable geographical distribution of recruits with that of “securing the highest standards of efficiency, competence, and integrity” is a formidable one. This delicate task was politically imposed upon the League of Nations secretary-general, and is constitutionally required of his counterpart in the United Nations. For better or for worse, recruitment policy cannot be based exclusively upon the criterion of the individual’s personal qualifications; in the field of international employment, the relevant irrelevancy is not “whom do you know” but “where are you from?” From a strictly administrative point of view, there is some positive value in securing broad nationality distribution, even at the expense of sheer quality; for some purposes, a slightly incompetent man’s nationality may make him more useful than a more expert civil servant of inappropriate nationality. For the most part, however, the Charter principle of geographical distribution is a concession to political necessity. It licenses a kind of international spoils system in which states seek to nourish their national self-esteem by securing an adequate quota of international jobs for their citizens. Ironically, perhaps, because it is politically necessary it is also politically and administratively desirable; what shall it profit an international organization to maintain its administrative purity and lose its own members or their political support? Inis L. and Claude Jr. Swords into Plowshares: The Problems and Progress of International Organization. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1984, pp. 196-197 (adapted).

Text V Urbanization is one of the defining trends of this century and a key driver of development. By 2050, around 70% of the world’s population will be living in cities and towns. Asia and Africa will collectively account for a significant majority of the urban growth rate, a development that reflects the growth of both ‘megacities’ and smaller urban settlements in both regions over the past three decades. Today, cities produce around 80% of the global GDP and this importance is likely to continue. Cities also use 75% of global energy and are responsible for 70% of global carbon emissions. Accompanying the pace and extent of urbanization are a number of positive and negative trends — from increased economic opportunities and improvements in lives and livelihoods, through to the potential for greater urban-rural disparity, lower quality of life, and conflict. One thing is clear, cities across the world play a critical role in driving sustainable development. However, cities today face numerous vulnerabilities and threats. Without proper planning, policies, and support, urbanization often leads to unnecessary risks and costs, preventing cities from reaching their full potential. Cases such as urban sprawls and the proliferation of informal settlements are increasing, and the communities who reside in such areas often suffer from the poor provision of public services (or lack of) such as healthcare or waste management systems. As their population grows, cities also become more complex, making long-term planning and city management a challenge. Amongst the numerous challenges that policymakers must tackle include those that are environmental, those pertaining to resource allocation, and even social challenges such as reducing intra-city inequalities. Cities are providing a wide range of opportunities and possibilities for its citizens and, in order for them to be fully harnessed, cities should be built for and together with its citizens to fully unlock their potential. This includes taking into account the various needs and aspirations of people, making sure that everyone can have equal and inclusive access to services and create urban spaces and environments to enhance livability. Internet: (adapted)

Text V Urbanization is one of the defining trends of this century and a key driver of development. By 2050, around 70% of the world’s population will be living in cities and towns. Asia and Africa will collectively account for a significant majority of the urban growth rate, a development that reflects the growth of both ‘megacities’ and smaller urban settlements in both regions over the past three decades. Today, cities produce around 80% of the global GDP and this importance is likely to continue. Cities also use 75% of global energy and are responsible for 70% of global carbon emissions. Accompanying the pace and extent of urbanization are a number of positive and negative trends — from increased economic opportunities and improvements in lives and livelihoods, through to the potential for greater urban-rural disparity, lower quality of life, and conflict. One thing is clear, cities across the world play a critical role in driving sustainable development. However, cities today face numerous vulnerabilities and threats. Without proper planning, policies, and support, urbanization often leads to unnecessary risks and costs, preventing cities from reaching their full potential. Cases such as urban sprawls and the proliferation of informal settlements are increasing, and the communities who reside in such areas often suffer from the poor provision of public services (or lack of) such as healthcare or waste management systems. As their population grows, cities also become more complex, making long-term planning and city management a challenge. Amongst the numerous challenges that policymakers must tackle include those that are environmental, those pertaining to resource allocation, and even social challenges such as reducing intra-city inequalities. Cities are providing a wide range of opportunities and possibilities for its citizens and, in order for them to be fully harnessed, cities should be built for and together with its citizens to fully unlock their potential. This includes taking into account the various needs and aspirations of people, making sure that everyone can have equal and inclusive access to services and create urban spaces and environments to enhance livability. Internet: (adapted)

Text V Urbanization is one of the defining trends of this century and a key driver of development. By 2050, around 70% of the world’s population will be living in cities and towns. Asia and Africa will collectively account for a significant majority of the urban growth rate, a development that reflects the growth of both ‘megacities’ and smaller urban settlements in both regions over the past three decades. Today, cities produce around 80% of the global GDP and this importance is likely to continue. Cities also use 75% of global energy and are responsible for 70% of global carbon emissions. Accompanying the pace and extent of urbanization are a number of positive and negative trends — from increased economic opportunities and improvements in lives and livelihoods, through to the potential for greater urban-rural disparity, lower quality of life, and conflict. One thing is clear, cities across the world play a critical role in driving sustainable development. However, cities today face numerous vulnerabilities and threats. Without proper planning, policies, and support, urbanization often leads to unnecessary risks and costs, preventing cities from reaching their full potential. Cases such as urban sprawls and the proliferation of informal settlements are increasing, and the communities who reside in such areas often suffer from the poor provision of public services (or lack of) such as healthcare or waste management systems. As their population grows, cities also become more complex, making long-term planning and city management a challenge. Amongst the numerous challenges that policymakers must tackle include those that are environmental, those pertaining to resource allocation, and even social challenges such as reducing intra-city inequalities. Cities are providing a wide range of opportunities and possibilities for its citizens and, in order for them to be fully harnessed, cities should be built for and together with its citizens to fully unlock their potential. This includes taking into account the various needs and aspirations of people, making sure that everyone can have equal and inclusive access to services and create urban spaces and environments to enhance livability. Internet: (adapted)

Text V Urbanization is one of the defining trends of this century and a key driver of development. By 2050, around 70% of the world’s population will be living in cities and towns. Asia and Africa will collectively account for a significant majority of the urban growth rate, a development that reflects the growth of both ‘megacities’ and smaller urban settlements in both regions over the past three decades. Today, cities produce around 80% of the global GDP and this importance is likely to continue. Cities also use 75% of global energy and are responsible for 70% of global carbon emissions. Accompanying the pace and extent of urbanization are a number of positive and negative trends — from increased economic opportunities and improvements in lives and livelihoods, through to the potential for greater urban-rural disparity, lower quality of life, and conflict. One thing is clear, cities across the world play a critical role in driving sustainable development. However, cities today face numerous vulnerabilities and threats. Without proper planning, policies, and support, urbanization often leads to unnecessary risks and costs, preventing cities from reaching their full potential. Cases such as urban sprawls and the proliferation of informal settlements are increasing, and the communities who reside in such areas often suffer from the poor provision of public services (or lack of) such as healthcare or waste management systems. As their population grows, cities also become more complex, making long-term planning and city management a challenge. Amongst the numerous challenges that policymakers must tackle include those that are environmental, those pertaining to resource allocation, and even social challenges such as reducing intra-city inequalities. Cities are providing a wide range of opportunities and possibilities for its citizens and, in order for them to be fully harnessed, cities should be built for and together with its citizens to fully unlock their potential. This includes taking into account the various needs and aspirations of people, making sure that everyone can have equal and inclusive access to services and create urban spaces and environments to enhance livability. Internet: (adapted)

Text I Despite the tricky and life-threatening relationship between Paleolithic humans and the megafauna that comprised so much of their environment, twentieth-century scholars tended to claim cave art as evidence of an unalloyed triumph for our species. It was a “great spiritual symbol,” of a time when “man had just emerged from a purely zoological existence, when instead of being dominated by animals, he began to dominate them.” But the child-like and highly stylized stick figures found in caves do not radiate triumph. By the standards of our own time, they are excessively self-effacing and, compared to the animals portrayed around them, pathetically weak. While twentieth-century archeologists tended to solemnize prehistoric art as “magico-religious” or “shamanic,” today’s more secular viewers sometimes detect a vein of sheer silliness. India’s Mesolithic rock art portrays few human stick figures; those that are portrayed have been described by modern viewers as “comical,” “animalized” and “grotesque.” As Judith Thurman wrote about the artists, “despite their penchant for naturalism, rarely did they choose to depict human beings, and then did so with a crudeness that smacks of mockery.” But who are they mocking, other than themselves and, by extension, their distant descendants, ourselves? Of course, our reactions to Paleolithic art may bear no connection to the intentions or feelings of the artists. Yet there are reasons to believe that Paleolithic people had a sense of humor not all that dissimilar from our own. Barbara Ehrenreich. The Humanoid Stain. Later on. Internet: (adapted).

Text I Despite the tricky and life-threatening relationship between Paleolithic humans and the megafauna that comprised so much of their environment, twentieth-century scholars tended to claim cave art as evidence of an unalloyed triumph for our species. It was a “great spiritual symbol,” of a time when “man had just emerged from a purely zoological existence, when instead of being dominated by animals, he began to dominate them.” But the child-like and highly stylized stick figures found in caves do not radiate triumph. By the standards of our own time, they are excessively self-effacing and, compared to the animals portrayed around them, pathetically weak. While twentieth-century archeologists tended to solemnize prehistoric art as “magico-religious” or “shamanic,” today’s more secular viewers sometimes detect a vein of sheer silliness. India’s Mesolithic rock art portrays few human stick figures; those that are portrayed have been described by modern viewers as “comical,” “animalized” and “grotesque.” As Judith Thurman wrote about the artists, “despite their penchant for naturalism, rarely did they choose to depict human beings, and then did so with a crudeness that smacks of mockery.” But who are they mocking, other than themselves and, by extension, their distant descendants, ourselves? Of course, our reactions to Paleolithic art may bear no connection to the intentions or feelings of the artists. Yet there are reasons to believe that Paleolithic people had a sense of humor not all that dissimilar from our own. Barbara Ehrenreich. The Humanoid Stain. Later on. Internet: (adapted).

Text I Despite the tricky and life-threatening relationship between Paleolithic humans and the megafauna that comprised so much of their environment, twentieth-century scholars tended to claim cave art as evidence of an unalloyed triumph for our species. It was a “great spiritual symbol,” of a time when “man had just emerged from a purely zoological existence, when instead of being dominated by animals, he began to dominate them.” But the child-like and highly stylized stick figures found in caves do not radiate triumph. By the standards of our own time, they are excessively self-effacing and, compared to the animals portrayed around them, pathetically weak. While twentieth-century archeologists tended to solemnize prehistoric art as “magico-religious” or “shamanic,” today’s more secular viewers sometimes detect a vein of sheer silliness. India’s Mesolithic rock art portrays few human stick figures; those that are portrayed have been described by modern viewers as “comical,” “animalized” and “grotesque.” As Judith Thurman wrote about the artists, “despite their penchant for naturalism, rarely did they choose to depict human beings, and then did so with a crudeness that smacks of mockery.” But who are they mocking, other than themselves and, by extension, their distant descendants, ourselves? Of course, our reactions to Paleolithic art may bear no connection to the intentions or feelings of the artists. Yet there are reasons to believe that Paleolithic people had a sense of humor not all that dissimilar from our own. Barbara Ehrenreich. The Humanoid Stain. Later on. Internet: (adapted).

Text I Despite the tricky and life-threatening relationship between Paleolithic humans and the megafauna that comprised so much of their environment, twentieth-century scholars tended to claim cave art as evidence of an unalloyed triumph for our species. It was a “great spiritual symbol,” of a time when “man had just emerged from a purely zoological existence, when instead of being dominated by animals, he began to dominate them.” But the child-like and highly stylized stick figures found in caves do not radiate triumph. By the standards of our own time, they are excessively self-effacing and, compared to the animals portrayed around them, pathetically weak. While twentieth-century archeologists tended to solemnize prehistoric art as “magico-religious” or “shamanic,” today’s more secular viewers sometimes detect a vein of sheer silliness. India’s Mesolithic rock art portrays few human stick figures; those that are portrayed have been described by modern viewers as “comical,” “animalized” and “grotesque.” As Judith Thurman wrote about the artists, “despite their penchant for naturalism, rarely did they choose to depict human beings, and then did so with a crudeness that smacks of mockery.” But who are they mocking, other than themselves and, by extension, their distant descendants, ourselves? Of course, our reactions to Paleolithic art may bear no connection to the intentions or feelings of the artists. Yet there are reasons to believe that Paleolithic people had a sense of humor not all that dissimilar from our own. Barbara Ehrenreich. The Humanoid Stain. Later on. Internet: (adapted).

Text I Despite the tricky and life-threatening relationship between Paleolithic humans and the megafauna that comprised so much of their environment, twentieth-century scholars tended to claim cave art as evidence of an unalloyed triumph for our species. It was a “great spiritual symbol,” of a time when “man had just emerged from a purely zoological existence, when instead of being dominated by animals, he began to dominate them.” But the child-like and highly stylized stick figures found in caves do not radiate triumph. By the standards of our own time, they are excessively self-effacing and, compared to the animals portrayed around them, pathetically weak. While twentieth-century archeologists tended to solemnize prehistoric art as “magico-religious” or “shamanic,” today’s more secular viewers sometimes detect a vein of sheer silliness. India’s Mesolithic rock art portrays few human stick figures; those that are portrayed have been described by modern viewers as “comical,” “animalized” and “grotesque.” As Judith Thurman wrote about the artists, “despite their penchant for naturalism, rarely did they choose to depict human beings, and then did so with a crudeness that smacks of mockery.” But who are they mocking, other than themselves and, by extension, their distant descendants, ourselves? Of course, our reactions to Paleolithic art may bear no connection to the intentions or feelings of the artists. Yet there are reasons to believe that Paleolithic people had a sense of humor not all that dissimilar from our own. Barbara Ehrenreich. The Humanoid Stain. Later on. Internet: (adapted).