How is the relation between knowledge and control visible in colonial deforestation?

Correct answer: Through maps measurement and classification the state could control resources

The direct answer is option A: maps, measurement and classification helped the colonial state control forest resources. Knowledge here did not mean neutral learning alone; it was also used for administration. Officials surveyed land, prepared maps, measured forest areas, recorded tree species and classified forests according to their usefulness or administrative status. These records helped the state mark boundaries, decide which areas could be exploited, reserve valuable timber and restrict the customary activities of local communities. In this way, knowledge strengthened political and economic power. Option A is correct because mapping and classification made forests easier for the government to identify, manage, tax, regulate and use. Option B is wrong because colonial surveys generally increased state control rather than handing forests back to local people. Option C is wrong because measurement did not end the demand for timber; railways, ships, construction and industries continued to require large quantities of wood. Option D is wrong because classification was directly connected with forest policy: reserved, protected or village forests could receive different rules and restrictions. The key idea is the knowledge-power relationship: the state first gathered information and then used that information to make laws and enforce control. Memory cue: map it, classify it, regulate it—knowledge became administrative power.