OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

$\(A, E, G\)$

If it is harder for analysts to make predictions, the economic landscape is likely to be tricky or unstable; the word for the first blank should address that, with something like "fluctuations." Choice (A) shifts matches our prediction, while choices (B) accommodation ("anything that supplies a need or want") and (C) treatises ("a lengthy, formal exposition of a subject") are unsupported by context.

The second blank hinges on idiom: what do you do to "demands?" The credited answer is choice (E) satisfy. Choices (D) undermine ("attack by indirect methods") and (F) sever ("divide into parts") make no sense in this context.

The third blank should describe how analysts have become in light of the recent changes that have made investment decisions more difficult. Look for a word like "cautious." Choice (G) circumspect ("showing unwillingness to act without first weighing the risks or consequences") is a good match because it is logical that analysts would weigh the risks and consequences of their predictions more heavily if there have been recent dramatic shifts in the economic landscape. Choice (H) is wrong because it is not likely that analysts would become sanguine, or "cheerfully optimistic," in the face of possible economic upheaval. Choice (I) tantamount, or "equivalent," does not make sense here.

The credited choices are (A), (E), and (G).