Based on the above passage, the following assumptions have been made: 1. Growing enough food for future generation will be a challenge. 2. Corporate farming is a viable option for food security in poor countries. Which of the above assumptions is/are valid?

Re-examined as an assumptions question: an assumption must be an unstated premise necessary for the passage, not a possible implication.

1. Growing enough food for future generation will be a challenge — Not valid. If the passage argues about improving distribution/access or critiques a particular farming model, it need not presuppose that total food production itself will be insufficient. So this is not a necessary underlying assumption.

2. Corporate farming is a viable option for food security in poor countries — Not valid. This is a specific policy conclusion, not a premise that must be assumed unless the passage explicitly rests on it.

Therefore, neither 1 nor 2 is a valid assumption.