Spread the love

Relationship between Ecological Footprint and Human Development Index (HDI)

2022 SOCIOLOGY-COMPLETE SOLUTIONS

The ecological sustainability of human settlements is part of the relationship between humans and their natural, social and built environments. Also called human ecology, it broadens the f

To include the work of sustainable development of human health

Human needs such as the availability and quality of air, water, food and shelter are also the ecological basis for sustainable development, addressing public health risk through investment in ecosystem services can be a powerful and transformative force for sustainable development, Which in this sense, extends to all species.

Environmental sustainability is concerned with the natural environment and how it is sustained and remains diverse and productive. Since natural resources are derived from the environment, the condition of air, water and climate is of particular concern. Outline of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report

Current knowledge about scientific,

Technical and socio-economic information related to climate change, and a list of adaptation and mitigation options.

Environmental sustainability requires society to design activities to meet human needs while preserving the planet’s life support systems. It emphasizes, for example, the sustainable use of water, the use of renewable energy, and sustainable material supplies (such as harvesting wood from forests at a rate that maintains biomass and biodiversity).

An unsustainable situation occurs when natural capital (the sum total of nature’s resources) is used faster than it can be replenished. need stability

that human activity only uses nature

Resources at the rate at which they can be naturally replenished. The concept of sustainable development is inherently intertwined with the concept of carrying capacity. Theoretically, the long-term consequence of environmental degradation is its inability to sustain human life. Such a decline on a global scale should mean an increase in human mortality, until populations fall to a level that the degraded environment can support. If the decline continues beyond a certain tipping point or critical threshold, it will eventually lead to extinction for humanity.

Sustainable agriculture involves environmentally friendly methods of farming that allow the production of crops or

livestock without harm to human or

natural system. This includes preventing adverse effects on soil, water, biodiversity, nearby or downstream resources, as well as those working or living on the farm or in neighboring areas. The concept of sustainable agriculture extends interactively, rather than passing on a conserved or improved natural resource, biological, and economic basis that has become depleted or polluted. Elements of sustainable agriculture include permaculture, agroforestry, mixed farming, multiple cropping and crop rotation. This includes agricultural methods that do not harm the environment, smart agricultural technologies that enhance the quality environment for humans to thrive, and

reclaiming and transforming deserts

The Ranch (Herman Daly, 2017).

ecological crisis

Never in the entire history has our planet Earth seen the magnitude of ecological crises that we are experiencing today. The carrying capacity of the earth has become too much due to the pollution of water, air and land on a daily basis. Scientists, scholars and even governments around the world have realized that the global environment is changing rapidly as a result of global warming and climate change induced by human industrial and domestic emissions of greenhouse gases. Related environmental crises such as floods, desertification, drought, loss of biodiversity, erratic rainfall patterns, overgrazing, pollution, and so on have affected the lives of millions of people across the world. Millions of livelihoods have been destroyed, cultures have changed, communities have been displaced as the effects of climate change devastate communities globally. The nature of climate change suggests that the global environment is at risk and human societies are at greater risk as human beings themselves are at risk; This is because environmental problems do not respect any national boundaries, they can be local in cause but global in effect.

Man’s contribution to this environmental quagmire cannot be overemphasized, since the advent of the Industrial Revolution in 18th and 19th century Europe and the spread of industrialization around the world, the incidence of environmental degradation has skyrocketed. Therefore, to understand contemporary global environmental problems, one must first understand the nature and operation of modern industrial society. One may ask what is the concern of sociology with the study of environmental problems. Did the classical sociologists include environmental issues in their theorizing? The answer to these questions is not far-fetched, if sociology studies the interaction of human society and human groups, and human society does not exist in a vacuum, it operates within a limited space called the environment, and both

Institutions influence and shape each other’s existence, so the environment is the subject of sociological investigation. The sub-discipline that studies this society-environment-relationship is called environmental sociology. According to Catton and Dunlap (1978 cited in King and McCarthy 2009: 9) environmental sociology should examine how humans change their environment and also how they are affected by their environment. He developed a “new ecological paradigm” that focuses on the society-environment relationship.

represented an early attempt to locate the This new ecological paradigm is a conscious attempt to challenge the perceived anthropocentrism of classical sociology (i.e. the emphasis on environmental processes in early sociological theory) by including environmental forces as objective variables in social explanations (Gross and Heinrich, 2010: 3). ) Anthony Giddens (2009: 159) supported this stand when he argued that the founders of early sociology – Marx, Durkheim and Weber – paid little attention to what we now call ‘environmental issues’ (p. 159). In contrast, Butel (1986 cited in Hannigan 2006:8) believes that arguably the trinity of Marx, Durkheim and Weber had an underlying environmental dimension to their work, although this was never brought to the fore , largely because their American translators and interpreters favored social structural interpretations over physical or environmental interpretations.

However there have been attempts to show that classical sociologists captured the society-environment relationship in their theory and these include the work of Caton 2002; West 1984; Bellamy Foster 1999; Dickens 2004; Dunlop et al. 2002; Murphy 1997; Verdu 2010 and so on. Accordingly, Giddens (ibid) believes that the role of sociology in the study and analysis of environmental issues can be summarized as follows: First, sociology can provide an account of how patterns of human behavior interact with natural processes. create pressure on the environment; Second, sociology can help us understand how environmental problems are distributed. Third, sociology can help us evaluate policies and proposals aimed at providing solutions to environmental problems.

Environment

There is no generally accepted definition of the term environment among scholars and this is because the term environment means different things to different people (Sibiri 2009). For Enger and Smith (2004), the environment is anything that affects an organism during its lifetime. From this point of view, the environment encompasses the web of relationships of human beings. whatever human beings do, whether in a social, economic, political, technological, cultural or religious context

Guided by the limits of your environment. Similarly, Cunningham and Cunningham (2004) state that environment refers to all the circumstances and conditions that surround an organism or group of organisms. He further expanded his definition of environment as the social and cultural conditions that affect an individual.

or community. According to Varika (cited in Okaba 2005) although environment means different things to different people, it is defined as a physical environment, conditions, circumstances etc. in which people live. For him, the environment includes nature which is the physical part of the physical world including all the phenomena of the physical world including plants, animals, landscape, etc. and the entire ecosystem, the biological community of interacting organisms. Waripamo (cited in Jack 2014) states that the environment is more concerned with the conditions that support the existence of human beings. For him, environment means a large set of elements which include water, air, land and all plants and man himself; the other animals living in it and above all the interrelationships that exist between these or any of them. Overall, the way one views the environment, it is the total conditions that surround an organism (biological or social) during its life that facilitate or hinder the development and survival of that organism.

components of the environment

Burstein, J. (1996) claimed that environment is made up of two categories; living and non-living. He called the living component of the environment “biotic”, which includes plants, birds, mushrooms, insects, etc. Other non-living components of the environment, which he called “abiotic”, include things like water, soil, air temperature, air, and wind. the sunlight. He emphasized that the environment is an interaction of biotic and abiotic factors.

These biotic and abiotic components of the environment are further divided into four categories:

Lithosphere (Land): Outer layers of earth’s soil e.g. Rocks, sediments and soil.
Atmosphere (Air): The layer of gases that extends from the surface of the earth to the outer limits of our planet for about 100 km.
Hydrosphere (Water): The layers of water that cover our planet oceans, lakes, rivers, streams and ice sheets Ice and water in the soil.

Biosphere: It is the thinnest layer, consisting of organic matter such as plants and animals. This layer covers most of the land surface and extends into the atmosphere and into deep water bodies. Human beings are part of the biosphere and exist by interacting with the other three spheres.

An environment is therefore a system or community of biotic and abiotic components that are maintained by the interactions of food chains and energy cycles as seen in food webs.

Environment – Society Relations

The history of man and human society can be clearly described, characterized by the continuous interaction between man and his environment. It is interesting to note that this interaction between man and environment has changed over time.

has been constant and the nature of this interaction is changing as human societies change in their organisation, structure and advances in technology (Sibiri 2009). Human society does not exist in a vacuum but within a physical environment, so the importance of this relationship is underlined in the sense that human existence is entirely dependent on the environment to maintain its welfare needs (food, shelter). depends on capacity. more clothes). Environmental sustainability, on the other hand, is also bound by man’s judicious use of the physical environment and its innumerable resources, which ensure and guarantee the real source of man’s continued existence (Okaba 2005).

However, as the human population grows, with associated urbanization and technological advancement, man has not been as judicious in his use of environmental resources (food, water, energy, mineral resources, forests and wildlife) over time as he has been able to sustain his basic needs. Struggles to meet needs. In an effort to meet the growing demands of a larger society, it encroaches on the environment. Therefore, the relationship between man and his environment can be measured and summarized by defining the functions of the environment. Thus, Schaefer and Laman (1986) pointed out three basic functions of the environment which are basic prerequisites for human life, these include: (a) that the environment provides essential resources for life (air, water and raw materials) provides; (b) that the environment also serves as a waste reservoir, e.g. body waste, garbage and sewage; (c) Human beings and other living organisms live in it.

Therefore, as highlighted above, the interaction of man with the environment is based on the ability of the environment to provide these three basic functions to man and his society. Historically,

The human population was small and life was simple. The human waste was purely organic i.e. biodegradable material, which acted as a source of food for the decomposers. The relationship between man and his environment was reciprocal and symbiotic because an ecological system exists in balance and equilibrium. However, environmental pollution began to occur as the population grew, generating more waste than the ecosystem could absorb. Humans invest in advanced technology for a better society

ya samudaay. varika (okaaba 2005 mein idea for exploitation of natural resources, which subjugated the ecosystem. agriculture alters species mix, timber harvesting for industries leads to deforestation, arid and semi-arid lands Overgrazing of animals leads to desertification, aquatic ecosystems are polluted by agricultural chemical runoff and industrial wastes result in biodiversity loss and extinction. The inability of species to adapt to changes in their environments. As a result of rapid population growth. increased demands on Earth’s resources, leading to rapid environmental degradation, and potentially severe global climate change. Human impact on land has been enormous, as land-use has changed, natural Vegetation has been cleared for agricultural use and urbanization has increased, resources have been created, minerals have been extracted, and more land has been developed for recreational purposes. Deforestation of boreal and tropical forests, grass, land and degradation of wetlands and desertification Widespread concern is now expressed over Karan. Such destruction of natural ecosystems has resulted in decreased biodiversity, and soil depletion, In efforts to counter the harmful effects of land abuse in the regions, exotic plants and animals are being carefully monitored and They are being encouraged. Human influence on the soil has also caused some significant damage, usually due to poor agricultural practices, excessive drainage, poor irrigation, and compaction by heavy vehicles and animals. The cumulative effects of these can be devastating for countries whose economies are heavily dependent on agriculture. Correcting these poor practices and improving soil quality require an understanding of soil chemistry and nutrient supply cycles. Oceans and seas cover more than two-thirds of the Earth’s surface. It is thought that life almost certainly evolved from the sea and that there is more species diversity in the sea than anywhere else on Earth. Many food chains and food webs begin with organisms living in the seas and oceans. The ocean-atmosphere system controls the global climate. This is a sensitive thermostat. The seas and oceans are rich in food and mineral resources. However, over-exploitation and population

Threat to this huge life. Humans think that the vastness of the ocean makes it an ideal place for virtually every type of waste, including toxic chemicals and nuclear waste. Exploiting the Earth’s resources inevitably produces waste, some of which may be hazardous or toxic. For the past few decades, most waste has been disposed of without any real concern for damage to ecosystems and often under the auspices of “not in my backyard”.

Evidently, this society-environment interaction which is anthropocentric (human-centred) in nature has led to what is known as contemporary global environmental change (Verdu 2010).

and they are manifested in the following: depletion of the ozone layer, global warming and climate change. The concept climate change refers to any change in climate resulting from both natural variability and anthropogenic factors. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) (1992) in its Article 1 defines climate change as ‘climate change’ that is directly or indirectly attributable to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere And what is in addition to this. Natural climate variability observed over comparable time periods” (Onuoha 2008). These changes in global climate have both environmental and social implications for human society. To corroborate this point, Radclift and Woodgate (2010) claim that ‘the notion of an environmental singularity has been reinforced in recent years as a result of the widespread attention to global environmental change and global warming; These events lead to the final manifestation of the biophysical environment as an integral global biospheric and atmospheric system, the degradation of which will have consequences for all people on Earth. The environmental effects of climate change include the melting of glaciers and a rise in sea level that leads to perennial flooding; draft; loss of biodiversity; desertification; Deforestation etc. In turn, the social consequences of these climate change-related environmental problems include displacement of human populations by floods and droughts, famine, hunger and migration, health epidemics, loss of economic livelihoods, etc. Scarcity of resources such as water and land scarcity leads to food insecurity and forced migration with the potential for resource conflict between groups. Loss of biodiversity has detrimental effects on cultural knowledge among local groups/societies etc.

ecological modernization theory

Ecological modernization theory, in contrast to the previous theories highlighted earlier (which equate economic development with environmental welfare), offers some degree of optimism in the relationship between society and the environment. This principle is concerned with the practicality of achieving environmental improvements through the transformation of production and consumption patterns to environmentally friendly technologies (Barrett and Fisher 2005). According to Spargren and Mol (1992: 334) ecological modernization means an ecological switch to the industrialization process.

A direction that takes into account the maintenance of the existing livelihood base. The model is based on the work of the German author, Huber (1982; 1985 cited in Hannigan 2009), who analyzes ecological modernization as a historical phase of modern society. In Huber’s scheme, an industrial society develops through three stages: (1) industrial success; (2) the construction of an industrial society; and (3) the ecological switchover of the industrial system through a process of ‘super-industrialisation’, made possible by a new technology: the invention and dissemination of microchip eco-friendly technology. Barrett and Fisher (2005:4) suggest that the theory has two key components: first, the theory clearly describes environmental improvements as being economically viable; In fact, entrepreneurial agents and economic/market dynamics are seen as playing a leading role in bringing about the necessary ecological change. Second, in the context of the expectation of continued economic growth, ecological modernization reflects the emergence of a coalition of political actors promoting the political feasibility of environmental protection. These two components are associated with the increasing independence (or loosening of restrictions) of the ecological sector from the political and economic spheres in state and industrial policy-making (Spargren and Mol 1992). In his analysis of the theory, Giddens (2009: 195) argues that ecological modernization theorists affirm the fact that modernization has brought economic prosperity but also environmental destruction, so business as usual is no longer possible. Not there. However, in salvaging the precarious situation, it rejects radical environmentalist solutions, such as de-industrialisation advocated by neo-Marxists. Instead they focus on technological innovation and the use of market mechanisms to bring about positive results, change methods of production and reduce pollution. a source of. In fact he argues that an ecological form of evolution is theoretically

It is possible and that if consumers demand environmentally sound production methods and products, the market mechanism will be forced to try and deliver them (Giddens 2009; Spargren and Moll 1992). An example of such ecological modernization technology is the introduction of catalytic converters and emissions controls on motor vehicles, which has been delivered within a short period of time and shows that advanced technologies can make a big difference to greenhouse gas emissions. Emphasis on recycling waste instead of dumping it in landfill

Paper, plastic, etc. reduce waste and help save trees. Accordingly, Mol and Sonnenfeld (2000 cited in Giddens 2009) hold that ecological modernization theory emphasizes that five social and institutional structures must be designed ecologically:

Need to transfer:

Science and Technology to work towards the invention and delivery of sustainable technologies
Markets and Economic Agents: Providing incentives for environmentally friendly outcomes.
Nation-State: To shape the market conditions that allow this to happen
Social movements: putting pressure on business and the state to move in an ecological direction.
Ecological Ideologies: Helping to persuade more and more people to join the ecological modernization of the society.

Dryzek (cited in Barrett and Fischer 2005: 5) in 1997 identifies five ecologically modern societies—Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden; Japan stands out in the environmental stakes in large part because of the energy-efficiency of its economy.

In evaluating ecological modernization theory, Hannigan (2009) concluded that ecological modernization ideologues should be commended for attempting to stake a rational position among ‘destructive’ environmentalists who preach that the Earth Nothing short of de-industrialisation will suffice to save the world from destruction. ecological Armageddon and capital proponents who prefer a business as usual approach (Sutton 2004: 146 cited in Hannigan, ibid).

Environmental Ethics and Worldview

Individuals and groups conceive of different perceptions of the environment; Thus developing a diverse worldview and attitude towards the environment. There are three major environmental approaches that inform the three major environmental ethics, as discussed below: Each of these ethical positions has its own code of conduct against which ecological mortality can be measured.

Anthropocentrism – development / exploitative ethics

Anthropocentrism is a human-centered attitude towards the environment. Environmental anthropocentrism is the view that all environmental responsibility stems from human interests alone. Only human beings are morally significant beings and have direct moral status. The environment is vital to human well-being and survival; Therefore, the indirect duty of man towards the environment derived from human interest is

It is a worldview or attitude that supports the exploitation of the environment for human development without caution. Adherents of this approach argue that the environment is self-sustaining and thus human exploitation has no effect on the ecological balance.

The early colonists belong to this group, they developed a careless attitude towards resources. This was due to an environment of opportunity and rising expectations with the new availability of land. Nature was seen as an obstacle that had to be tamed and overcome in order for society to progress, as popular ideas of nature ‘in the raw’ or nature ‘red in tooth and claw’ suggest. According to Giddens (2009: 157), for a minority of peoples, nature and society were seen as separate, but nature was not seen as needing to be tamed. Bryan (1991) argued that for early colonists, wilderness areas and raw natural resources uncontrolled by humans were unproductive and worthless unless human labor was mixed with them. The process of converting crude oil into fuel. To support their exploitative position they use the theological rationalization that ‘God appointed man to dominate the earth’ (see Genesis 1:28), so man cannot take advantage of the vacant land, but inhabit it. and by culture.

Furthermore, the exploiters see no shortage of raw materials, as these resources are valuable only when combined with human labor which is the real scarce resource. they

barely recognize waste as a byproduct of transforming raw resources (Bryan 1991: 77). The attitudes and actions of the exploiters are guided by their two-pronged principles:

Postulate of utility:- which asserts that the production of goods for human use is a good thing. It symbolizes the value of productivity for human use.

Postulate of abundance:- It states that ‘any natural resource, before it can be converted into a ‘product’ by humans, can be replaced by a substitute resource without a significant increase in the cost of production. It formalizes the view that no actual waste is involved in the waste of raw resources (Bryan, op.cit). The two axioms constitute an approach to growth and development that cannot support a moral rejection of raw products or the “waste” of the systems that produce such products.

Biocentrism – The Preservation Ethic

Biocentrism is a life-centred attitude towards the biological diversity of the environment. Life-centered theory holds that all forms of life have an inherent right to exist. It considers nature and all forms of life to be special in itself. Nature has intrinsic value or inherent value beyond human appropriation. Biocentrism therefore advocates the protection of the environment and all life forms free from human interference.

Environmental protection, therefore, is the setting aside of natural resources to prevent contact with humans or damage caused by certain human activities, such as logging, mining, hunting, and fishing

to be replaced by new human activities such as tourism and recreation. , John Muir, who was the first president of the Sierra Club in 1892, was a leading proponent of the conservation movement. Muir views his quest to preserve nature as ethical, he advocates for ‘righteous management’. He raised his voice against human arrogance which judges nature only according to human values. listen to them:

“How narrow are we selfish, conceited creatures in our sympathies! How blind to the rights of our fellow mortals! Although alligators, snakes etc. naturally repel us, they are not mystical evil. They are… part of God’s family, not fallen, not corrupt and they are taken care of

the same kind of tenderness and love that is offered to angels in heaven or saints on earth” (Bryan, 1991: 7).

Muir rejected the axiom of abundance advanced by the exploitation and growth school, but he reinterpreted the axiom of utility. He objected to the common argument that nature is valuable only because of human uses. To him it is arrogant, egotistical and insensitive to the needs of other beings (Byron, ibid: 79). He justified the preservation of the beauty of nature because he believed that the experience of nature heals the alienation of modern industrial society; In short communication with nature and its beauty will promote higher consciousness in man.

He questioned the utility axiom because of its human-centred approach. He saw wild nature as a means to spiritually inspire awe. For example, river valleys are sacred places for them, so nature can be protected by modifying the principle of utilitarianism, i.e. by recognizing non-material and non-consumptive human values such as beauty, pleasure and spiritual fulfillment.

According to Brain (ibid: 80), Muir rejected both the utility and abundance theories because of the following:

i) It neglected human spirituality.
ii) It is based on the concept of being anthropocentric i.e. it is human centered.

Finally, Muir put forward ‘axioms of values’ which included:

i) some are not clearly expressed

Accepted the utility of nature for humans.

ii) A commitment to the “spiritual usefulness” of nature to man.

iii) the belief that nature, viewed in a larger perspective, was God (Bryan, ibid).

Ecocentrism – Conservation Policy

Ecocentrism is an environment-centered attitude. It emphasizes an environmental or ecological balance. It maintains that the environment derives direct ethical consideration and not merely from human (anthropocentric) and animal/plant (biocentric) interests. Accordingly, the ecological claim of radical ecologists that nature should be placed ‘at the center of moral concern’,

Politics and Scientific Studies’ (Sutton 2004: 78 cited in Hannigan 2009). It is related to scientific conservationism but extends rational thought to the whole earth and forever.

Therefore protectionism emphasizes efficiency of resource use and sustainable development. It recognizes the desirability of a decent standard of living but works towards a balance between the use of resources and the availability of resources. The policy emphasizes on a balance between all round development and full protection. It stresses that rapid and uncontrolled growth in population and economy is self-defeating in the long run. The goal of this ethic is “people living together indefinitely in a world”. The protectionist movement began in America in the late 19th century. This movement was a reaction against the dominant trend of exploitation. They responded to the ghastly destruction with disapproval i.e. moral disgust (Bryan, 1991).

Most conservationists view natural ecosystems and other species as resources and are primarily concerned with the ‘judicious use of resources’. The leading proponent is Guilford Pinchot, who was the first official forester of the United States. This group judges all questions according to the criteria of the largest number for the largest number in the long run. Unlike protectionists, protectionists allow some degree of industrial development, albeit within sustainable limits. Pinchot therefore rejected the axiom of abundance, but not the axiom of utility. Conservationists emphasize the avoidance of waste in the current pursuit of economic growth.

Pinchot defined resource conservation as “the maximization of the material well-being of all people” (Bryan, ibid: 78). So the resource should be used wisely and for humane purposes. In his words, “The first great fact about conservation is that it stands for development … Its first principle is the use of the natural resources that exist on this continent for the benefit of those who now live here” (Bryan , ibid: 7).

continuous development

The different worldviews and attitudes of exploiters, conservationists and conservationists largely guide and influence their perceptions, thoughts, actions and responses to the environment and consequently their position towards environmental sustainability. Environmental sustainability is concerned with the effect that

Actions taken in the present have an impact on the options available in the future. therefore evolutionary research should not be

Endangering or compromising the environment and resources for the next generation. Thus, how do environmental attitudes affect environmental sustainability? For example, an exploitative attitude is certainly the opposite of environmental sustainability. By the way, the destruction of the environment has always been the result of such lackadaisical attitude. Conservationist and protectionist approaches ensure environmental sustainability. However, conservationists allow some degree of industrial development which the protectionist fights for total protection, so such an attitude would definitely hinder human development to some extent. Overall, both are done through activism through lobbying and passivity of laws and regulations to conserve natural resources.

A closer look at the origins of the concept of sustainable development reveals that in 1983, the United Nations General Assembly established the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), consisting of scientists from all walks of life, headed by Crowe Harlem Brundtland. was made. , The commission submitted its report in 1987, commonly known as the Brundtland Report, titled “Our Common Future”. The report warned that the greedy pattern of development is largely responsible for environmental pollution and degradation of natural resources. The report concludes that the solution to this problem lies in adopting a new pattern of development called ‘sustainable development’.

According to the World Commission on Environment, sustainable development can be defined as “development that meets the needs of the present generation without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (Asthana and Asthana, 2012). concept of slack

Inefficient development is consistent with the wise use of resources promoted by conservationists. This means that development processes must guarantee environmental protection not only for today, but also for future generations. It advocates eco-friendly technologies that do not harm the environment, in this regard environmental sustainability is synonymous with the principles of not only resource conservation but also ecological modernization.

2022 SOCIOLOGY-COMPLETE SOLUTIONS

SOCIOLOGY IN ENGLISH: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLuVMyWQh56R3KgAeBpmbY8Gv6201xh2dQ

OUR TOP COURSES

This course is very important for Basics GS for IAS /PCS and competitive exams

**Army*

*Police**

*Group c*

*Forest guard*

https://www.udemy.com/course/gk-gs-course-for-all-competetive-exams-in-two-months/?couponCode=BC88E2C64C8ABDBB959E

*Complete General Studies Practice in Two weeks*

https://www.udemy.com/course/gk-and-gs-important-practice-set/?couponCode=CA7C4945E755CA1194E5

**General science* *and* *Computer*