U15  Science and Its Development

科学及其发展

Creating a Better International Community for All

       Reading Comprehension

       (包括“答案与题解”)

       Notes

       课文参考译文

       练习

         ●Cloze

●Reading Passages(包括“疑难长句翻译与注解”)

         ●Translation

●Writing(包括“审题指导”)

Creating a Better International Community for All

The time has arrived for a fundamental re-thinking of the strategy for co-operation between rich and poor, with the avowed aim of helping the poorest of the poor back on to their own feet to join the race for human betterment. Four steps could change the shape of our global community.

First, rich and poor need to learn to talk together. As a start, the world’s democracies, rich and poor, should join in a quest for common action. Once again the rich G8 met in 1999 without the presence of the developing world. This rich-country summit should be the last of its kind. A G16 for the new millennium should include old and new democracies such as Brazil, India, South Korea, Nigeria, Poland and South Africa.

Second, rich and poor countries should direct their urgent attention to the mobilisation of science and technology for poor-country problems. The rich countries should understand that the IMF and the World Bank are by themselves not equipped for that challenge. The specialised UN agencies have a great role to play, especially if they also act as a bridge between the activities of advanced-country and developing-country scientific centres. They will be able to play that role, however, only after the United States pays its debts to the UN and ends its unthinking hostility to the UN system. We will also need new and creative institutional alliances. A Millennium Vaccine Fund, which guaranteed future markets for malaria, tuberculosis and AIDS vaccines, would be the right place to start. The vaccine-fund approach is administratively straightforward, desperately needed and within our technological reach. Similar efforts to merge public and private science activities will be needed in agricultural biotechnology.

Third, just as knowledge is becoming the undisputed centrepiece of global prosperity, the global regime on intellectual property rights requires a new look. The United States prevailed upon the world to toughen patent codes and cut down on intellectual piracy. But now transnational corporations and rich-country institutions are patenting everything from the human genome to rainforest biodiversity. The poor will be ripped off unless some sense and equity are introduced into this runaway process. Moreover, the system of intellectual property rights must balance the need to provide incentives for innovation against the need of poor countries to get the results of innovation. The current struggle over AIDS medicines in South Africa is but an early warning shot in a much larger struggle over access to the fruits of human knowledge. The issue of setting global rules for the uses and development of new technologies—especially the controversial biotechnologies—will again require global co-operation, not the strong-arming of the few rich countries.

Fourth, and perhaps toughest of all, we need a serious discussion about long-term finance for the international public goods. The rich countries are willing to talk about every aspect except money: money to develop new malaria, tuberculosis and AIDS vaccines; money to spur biotechnology research in food-scarce regions; money to help tropical countries adjust to climate changes imposed on them by the richer countries. The World Bank makes mostly loans, and loans to individual countries at that. It does not finance global public goods.

We will need, in the end, to put real resources in support of our hopes. A global tax on carbon-emitting fossil fuels might be the way to begin. Even a very small tax, less than that which is needed to correct humanity’s climate-deforming overuse of fossil fuels, would finance a greatly enhanced supply of global public goods. No better time to start than as the new millennium begins.

1. According to the author, the 1999 G8 summit              .

 ［A］ ignored the need of the developing countries for growth

 ［B］ should have discussed issues that interested the poor

 ［C］ was the last meeting without the presence of developing countries

 ［D］ should have invited developing countries to participate

2. It is implied in the third paragraph that UN agencies are not able to play a more active role in helping the poor countries because               .

 ［A］ the IMF and the World Bank have not provided enough financial support to them

 ［B］ the United States does not give due support to the United Nations

 ［C］ the Millennium Vaccine Fund does not collect enough money from public and private agencies

 ［D］ these agencies have made no efforts to merge public and private activities and act as a bridge between them

3. The lack of AIDS medicines in South Africa is mentioned to demonstrate              .

 ［A］ the danger of AIDS spreading worldwide if not controlled by coordinated efforts

 ［B］ the failure of poor countries to share the achievements made in science 

 ［C］ the injustice done to the poor countries by their former colonists

 ［D］ the consequences resulting from people’s lack of scientific knowledge

4. Which of the following constitutes the greatest challenge in bettering our global community?

 ［A］ Transferring new patents to the countries in need.

 ［B］ Establishing UN agencies to take care of the poor countries.

 ［C］ Recruiting enough money for global public benefits. 

 ［D］ Setting up a proper channel for dialogue between the rich and the poor.

5. In the text “the new millenium” refers to              .

 ［A］ one thousand years beginning from 2000

 ［B］ the cooperation between rich and poor countries

 ［C］ the economically emerging countries

 ［D］ the renewed effort to cope with environmental issues

答案与题解

1.［D］   意为：本应该邀请发展中国家参加。

参阅第二段。注意，这里对1999年西方八国首脑会议没有邀请第三世界国家提出了批评，认为这种会最好不要再开。但这并不意味着1999年召开的这次会议是最后一次西方八国首脑会议。另外，本文并没有说明会议讨论的内容，因此我们不知道讨论没讨论穷国的事情。

2.［B］   意为：美国没有给联合国应有的支持。

第三段第四句提到，只有当美国付清欠联合国的债务（指会费），并放弃对联合国的敌对态度之后，联合国的那些专门机构才能起到其桥梁作用。由此可见，美国对联合国没有尽到它应尽的义务，致使联合国机构无法起到应有的作用。

［A］ 意为：国际货币基金组织和世界银行没有对它们提供足够的支持。

［C］ 意为：千年疫苗基金会没有从公共和私人机构那里募集到足够资金。

［D］ 意为：这些机构没有尽力协调公共和私人活动，没有起到二者之间的桥梁作用。

3.［B］   意为：穷国没有能够分享科学成果。

第四段最后三句的意思显然是说由于知识产权的存在和缺乏国际合作，穷国无法享有新的科研成果。这里，南非艾滋病的问题仅仅是一个例子。

［A］ 意为：如果不协作控制艾滋病，它会有在全球范围内传播的危险。

［C］ 意为：穷国的前宗主国对穷国的不公正（待遇）。

4.［C］   意为：为增进全球公共利益募集足够的钱。

为改进国际社会的现状，作者在本文提到了五个方面的工作。其中第四方面在作者看来最难以实现（toughest of all）。

5.［A］

该词指一个千年，这里具体指从2000年～3000年这一段时间。

Notes

1．the rich G8 指八国集团，八国包括美、英、法、德、意、加拿大、日本和俄罗斯。

2．IMF 是International Monetary Fund 这几个英文字的缩写，即国际货币基金组织。

3．to be ripped off 是美国俚语，意思是受到欺诈或被人敲竹杠。

4.  at that “而且还……”的意思。

课文参考译文

为所有人创造一个更好的国际社会

对穷国和富国之间的合作战略进行根本反思的时刻到了，公开宣布的目的就是帮助穷国中最穷的国家重新站起来，加入改善人类环境的竞赛。有四个步骤可能改变我们全世界的面貌。

首先，富国和穷国需要学会在一起交谈。作为开端，世界上的民主国家，包括富国和穷国，应当探求共同行动。八国集团在1999年开会时又没有邀请发展中国家参加。这次富国峰会应当是最后一次这样的会议了。新千年的十六国集团会议应当包括老的和新的民主国家，如巴西、印度、韩国、尼日利亚、波兰和南非。

其次，富国和穷国应当紧急关注的是调动科学和技术来解决穷国的问题。富国应当懂得，国际货币基金组织和世界银行本身并没有做好应付这个挑战的准备。联合国专门机构能发挥巨大的作用，尤其是在这些专门机构也作为先进国家和发展中国家科学中心的活动之间的桥梁的条件下。但是，只有在美国还清它欠联合国的债务并且终止其对联合国系统的轻率的敌对态度之后，联合国的专门机构才能发挥那种作用。我们还需要建立新的和创造性的联盟机构。建立新千年疫苗基金组织应该是恰当的开端。这个基金组织是疟疾、肺结核病和艾滋病等疫苗的未来市场的保证。建立疫苗基金组织的办法从行政管理层面来说是简单的、亟须的，而且也是我们的技术能力所能办到的。在农业生物工程方面需要做出类似的努力来把公私两方面的科学活动合并在一起。

第三，正如知识正变成全球繁荣的无可争辩的中心一样，全球知识产权制度需要一个新的面貌。美国劝说全世界强化专利法规，减少侵犯专利的现象。但是，跨国公司和富国机构对从人类基因组到热带雨林生物多样化的每件事都拥有了专利。除非把某种智慧和公正引进这个失控的进程，否则穷国就会受到欺诈。此外，知识产权制度必须使鼓励创新的需要与穷国获得创新结果的需要保持平衡。目前在南非出现的有关艾滋病药物的斗争只不过是在获得人类知识成果的更大规模的斗争中打出的一颗预警子弹而已。为使用和开发新技术——尤其是引起争议的生物工程——确定全球规则的问题将再次要求全球合作，而不是要求少数几个富国使用暴力。

第四，也许是最难的一点，我们需要认真讨论国际公益事业的长期资金问题。富国愿意谈论各方面的问题，但钱除外：研发疟疾、肺结核和艾滋病的新疫苗的钱，在食品缺乏的地区促进生物工程研究的钱，帮助热带国家适应富国所强加给他们的气候变化的钱。世界银行主要是提供贷款的，而且它还向个别国家提供了贷款。但世界银行并不提供用于全球公益事业的资金。

我们最终需要投入真正的资源以支持我们的希望。全球对碳排放矿物燃料征税可能是一个开端。即使征收非常少的税——低于用来纠正人类过分使用矿物燃料而对气候造成的变化所需要的税——也能为全球公益事业极大地增加资金供给。把新千年作为开始时间是最好不过了。