Maintaining an ecosystem just to conserve biodiversity will affect its commercial potential as well as the livelihoods dependent on the ecosystem. There is also a conflict between using an ecosystem only for livelihoods, for commercial exploitation, or strictly for conservation. Deforestation caused due to commercial exploitation will lead to indirect harm like floods, siltation problems and microclimatic instability, apart from adversely affecting livelihoods dependent on forests. These conflicts are particularly acute in developing countries where the dependence of people on the ecosystem is significant, and commercial exploitation has the potential to boost national income.

With reference to above passage, the following assumptions have been made:
I. No country needs ecosystems to depend boost national income.
II. Resource-rich countries need to share their resources with those of scant the resources so as to prevent degradation of ecosystems.
Which of the above assumptions is/are valid?

The correct option is Neither I nor II.

Step-by-Step Explanation and Analysis:

Let us evaluate each of the given assumptions based on the provided passage:

1. Evaluation of Assumption I:

"No country needs ecosystems to depend boost national income."

The passage explicitly states that commercial exploitation of ecosystems has the potential to boost national income, particularly in developing countries where reliance on ecosystems is significant. Therefore, assuming that no country needs ecosystems to boost national income directly contradicts the text of the passage. Hence, Assumption I is invalid.

2. Evaluation of Assumption II:

"Resource-rich countries need to share their resources with those of scant the resources so as to prevent degradation of ecosystems."

The passage discusses the conflicts between commercial exploitation, conservation, and local livelihoods within ecosystems, particularly highlighting the adverse effects of deforestation such as floods, siltation, and instability. However, it makes no mention or suggestion regarding resource-sharing between resource-rich and resource-scarce countries. This idea is beyond the scope of the passage. Hence, Assumption II is invalid.

Conclusion:

Since both Assumption I and Assumption II are invalid based strictly on the passage, the correct answer is Neither I nor II.