I believe the answer is B and D
Answer:
Advantages
They have the ability to experiment freely with innovative approaches and, if necessary, to take risks.
They are flexible in adapting to local situations and responding to local needs and therefore able to develop integrated projects, as well as sectoral projects.
They enjoygood rapport with people and can render micro-assistance to very poor peope as they can identify those who are most in need and tailor assistance to their needs.
They have the ability to communicate at all levels, from the neighbourhood to the top levels of government.
They are able to recruit both experts and highly motivated staff with fewer restrictions than the government.
Disadvantages
Paternalistic attitudes restrict the degree of participation in programme/project design.
Restricted/constrained ways of apporach to a problem or area.
Redued replicability of an idea, due to non-representativeness of the project or selected area, relatively small project coverage, dependence on outside financial resources, etc.
"Territorial possessiveness" of an area or project reduces cooperation between agencies, seen as threatening or competitive.
Explanation:
A. Wudi
-The Emperor Wu (141-87 BCE) finally abandoned Legalism in favor of Confucianism and also made it illegal for anyone who followed the philosophy of Han Feizi or Shang Yang to hold public office.
Answer: the representation of states in Congress.
<em>The Great Compromise and the Three-Fifths Compromise both focused on </em><em>the representation of states in Congress.</em>
Both of these compromises were devised during the United States Constitutional Convention in 1787. The Great Compromise resolved a dispute between small population states and large population states. The large population states wanted representation in Congress to be based on a state's population size. The smaller states feared this would lead to unchecked dominance by the big states; they wanted all states to receive the same amount of representation. The Great Compromise created a bicameral (two-chamber) legislature. Representation in the House of Representatives would be based on population. In the Senate, all states would have the same amount of representation, by two Senators.
The Three-Fifths Compromise was a way of accounting (somewhat) for the population of slaves in states that permitted slavery. For taxation and representation purposes, the question was whether slaves should count in the population figures. (They were not considered voting citizens at that time.) The Three-Fifths Compromise said that three out of every five slaves could be counted when determining a state's population size for determining how many seats that state would receive in the House of Representatives.
