He main reason that grant proposal reviewers with a conflict of interest should remove themselves from the review process is because:
a. having a conflict of interest means an individual does not have the time to perform the review.
b. having a conflict of interest means an individual does not have the relevant expertise to perform the review.
c. their removal lessens the chance that bias will affect the review process.
d. the author of the proposal may learn about the situation.

c. Their removal lessens the chance that bias will affect the review process.

Explanation:

Judgments must be guided by the primary interest, ie the legal and institutional resolution of the conflict. This requires the independence and impartiality of the conflict mediator. When an intermediary has a secondary interest in the conflict, he or she may let their interest influence the decision making process. It is therefore important for the reviewer to withdraw during the process when in a conflict of interest situation. It is an ethical question.

For example, a conciliator of a labor dispute will hold a conciliation hearing. When parties enter, he realizes that he knows one of the stakeholders. He should immediately declare the conflict and ask another reviewer to act on the case to avoid contamination of interest as he knows a party and could benefit that party.

every society, in order to meet the needs of it's people, has to answer three basic questions:

- what should we produce?

- how should we produce it?

- for whom should we produce it?

this questions must be answered in order to, option b, aid in production decisions.

every country can't produce everything, no matter how rich their land is. it may be a matter of technology, resources or geographical conditions. so, these three questions must be resolved in order to get the most of the production of each land.

hope this !