Write the right answer to the question based on the context passage.

[Q]: At an early meeting of the British Sociological Association's "Activism in Sociology Forum" members met to discuss how we might play a more campaigning role in the world outside the academy. Pragmatically, academics tend to work long hours. We are faced with multiple and competing demands: teaching, administration, publishing, marketing, research, grant-bidding, and so on. The REF has ramped up the requirement to demonstrate the efficacy of our research in "the real world" (our impact upon society, economy, and culture rather than upon knowledge per se, or upon the academic discipline). Maybe here – I suggested, as my contribution to the meeting – was a chance for those of us interested in progressing social justice to lever officially sanctioned space, in our busy day-to-day lives, to do more of this sort of work? Maybe we should welcome the REF impact agenda?
I learned afterwards that eminent British sociologists, whom I respect enormously, regarded such a viewpoint as "naïve" and "embarrassing". Indeed, critics interpret REF as just one mode of the heightened, neoliberal, managerial control that is degrading academic life and infesting universities. So, how should we think about the REF impact agenda?
Because of its obvious connections with social improvement and reform through policy action, social policy is regarded as one disciplinary area that is well-placed to meet and benefit from the impact agenda. Yet there has been surprisingly little concerted discussion amongst scholars about REF and impact. This is despite the fact that many millions of pounds of public funding accrue to the proposed or claimed impact of research (with monies channelled through research councils to individual projects or via regular, six-yearly centralised assessments of the quality of research in university departments). In addition, there is substantial funding directed toward the "impact industry"; the consultants, think tanks, PR firms, funding schemes, new software programmes, impact managers, specialist impact case study authors, etc., that have become embedded in the academy. Question: Who are faced with multiple and competing demands?
[A]: academics


[Q]: SEOUL, SOUTH KOREA — During his first year in office, South Korean President Moon Jae-in's persistent pursuit of diplomacy, often working in parallel with U.S. President Donald Trump's "maximum pressure" campaign, played a significant role in persuading North Korea to engage in talks to end its nuclear program.
"Before the extreme measures might have been chosen by the United States, he gave diplomacy another chance to succeed," said Bong Young-shik, a political analyst with the Yonsei University's Institute for North Korean Studies in Seoul.
A year ago this week, Moon, a former human rights lawyer and candidate for the progressive Democratic Party, won a special presidential election held after former conservative President Park Geun-hye was impeached for her involvement in a bribery and corruption scandal. This year, Park was sentenced to 24 years in prison during criminal trial related to the scandal in which she was charged with abuse of power, coercion and bribery.
Moon assumed power at a time of increasing tensions, not just concerning North Korea's accelerated nuclear and ballistic missile tests, but also China's imposing of informal economic sanctions against South Korea for deploying the U.S. THAAD missile defense system, and the Trump administration's talk of possible military action to end the North's efforts to develop a nuclear armed intercontinental missile that could strike the U.S. mainland.
In his inaugural address in May 2017, Moon promised to engage in shuttle diplomacy with Washington, Beijing and Pyongyang to work out a peaceful solution to the growing crisis.
In a July speech in Berlin, President Moon laid out his vision for inter-Korean reconciliation that called for peaceful co-existence of the two Korean governments, but also said that denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula is "the absolute condition for peace."
But unlike past progressive South Korean governments that provided unconditional economic assistance, the Moon administration complied with economic sanctions in place and offered only cooperation on humanitarian aid and exchanges. Seoul also balanced its outreach efforts with maintaining strong support for the U.S. alliance, for joint military deterrence, and for imposing increasingly harsh U.S.-led economic sanctions against North Korea. Question: What main issue does President Moon constantly want to address during his speeches?
[A]: His desire to have a peaceful solution


[Q]: The frenetic lifestyle that many people live today is very harmful. Rushing here and there, being constantly on call, balancing multiple layers of responsibility may give you a sense of accomplishment – even make you feel important, but it takes a huge toll on every aspect of life.
When you constantly push yourself to take on more and more challenges, it is easy to lose sight of why you wanted to be successful in the first place. For many, the reason was to be able to spend less time working and enjoy life more.  A frenetic, high-pressure lifestyle creates exactly the opposite.
There is a very dark side to constantly pushing yourself to produce more and more. Unfortunately, it creeps up on you and becomes a serious case of self-negligence.
When you are busy and driven every minute of every day and well into the evening, it is easy to neglect important things in life that keep you healthy, happy, and create quality of life.  A continual stream of urgent tasks that must be completed will overshadow the not-so-urgent, but important activities that make life worth living.
It is not just physical well-being that is neglected – mental and emotional well-being also suffer when there is no time for self-care.
When your daily schedule is crammed to overflowing one of the first areas of neglect is your diet. Eating regular, nutritious meals become a thing of the past. You are not only too busy to sleep or even take a deep breath now and then, there is no time to prepare decent meals
Convenience foods, frozen dinners, take out and fast foods become the norm. It is a steady diet of additive filled, sugar and fat-filled dishes, loaded with empty calories that provide minimal nutrition and damage the body. It is impossible to sustain any level of good health on such a diet. Question: What will suffer in one's life along with physical well-being?
[A]:
mental and emotional well-being


