India's economic footprint, given its population, still remains small compared to the US, the European Union or China. It has much to learn from other economies, yet must implement solutions that fit its unique circumstances. India especially needs an effective long- term regulatory system based on collaboration rather than the current top- down approach. Regulations seek desirable outcomes yet are repeatedly used as political tools to push one agenda or another. Often, regulations fail to consider impacts on jobs and economic growth - or less restrictive alternatives. Regulations may be used to protect local markets at the expense of more widely shared prosperity in the future. Additionally, regulations inevitably result in numerous unintended consequences. In today's hyper competitive global economy, regulations need to be viewed as "weapons" that seek cost- justified social and environmental benefits while improving the economic well- being of most citizens. On the basis of the above passage, the following assumptions have been made : In today's global economy, 1. regulations are not effectively used to protect local markets. 2. social and environmental concerns are generally ignored by the governments across the world while implementing the regulations. Which of the above assumptions is/are valid ?

Here's a brief analysis of each assumption based on the passage: Assumption 1: "regulations are not effectively used to protect local markets." The passage states: "Regulations may be used to protect local markets at the expense of more widely shared prosperity in the future." This implies that while regulations might succeed in protecting local markets, this comes at a cost to broader economic well-being. From the perspective of achieving "more widely shared prosperity" (which the author advocates for as a desirable outcome for regulations), using them to protect local markets "at the expense" of this wider prosperity means they are *not effectively used* for the overall good. Thus, the author assumes that the current use of regulations for local market protection is not effective in achieving shared prosperity. This assumption is valid. Assumption 2: "social and environmental concerns are generally ignored by the governments across the world while implementing the regulations." The passage concludes by stating: "regulations need to be viewed as 'weapons' that seek cost- justified social and environmental benefits while improving the economic well-being of most citizens." The use of "need to be viewed as" strongly suggests that regulations are *not currently* adequately considering or prioritizing these social and environmental benefits. If they were, there would be no need for such a strong prescriptive statement. Therefore, the author assumes that these concerns are generally ignored or not adequately addressed in current regulatory practices. This assumption is valid. Since both assumptions are valid based on the passage, option C is the correct answer. The final answer is C