Many researchers regard Thailand’s

recent economic growth, as reflected by its

gross domestic product (GDP) growth rates,

Line as an example of the success of a modern

(5) technological development strategy based

on the market economics of industrialized

countries. Yet by focusing solely on aggre-

gate economic growth data as the measure

of Thailand’s development, these research-

(10) ers have overlooked the economic impact of

rural development projects that improve

people’s daily lives at the village level—

such as the cooperative raising of water

buffalo, improved sanitation, and the devel-

(15) opment of food crops both for consumption

and for sale at local markets; such projects

are not adequately reflected in the country’s

GDP. These researchers, influenced by

Robert Heilbroner’s now outdated develop-

(20) ment theory, tend to view nontechnological

development as an obstacle to progress.

Heilbroner’s theory has become doctrine in

some economics textbooks: for example,

Monte Palmer disparages nontechnological

rural development projects as inhibiting

constructive change. Yet as Ann Kelleher’s

two recent case studies of the Thai villages

Non Muang and Dong Keng illustrate, the

nontechnological-versus-technological

(30) dichotomy can lead researchers not only to

overlook real advances achieved by rural

development projects but also mistakenly to

conclude that because such advances are

initiated by rural leaders and are based on

(35) traditional values and practices, they retard

“real” economic development.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GWD-6-Q36:

It can be inferred from the passage that the term “real” in line 36 most likely refers to economic development that is

1. based on a technological development strategy
2. not necessarily favored by most researchers
3. initiated by rural leader
4. a reflection of traditional values and practices
5. difficult to measure statistically

37题也不会阿，请高人指教