People think that countries should produce foods that their population eats and import less food as much as possible. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Sample Response
Some people believe that countries should produce their own food for their citizens and reduce the amount of food that is imported. Personally, I totally agree with this point of view.
There are several reasons why a country should produce its own food for its population, one of which is the creation of more jobs. When the demand for domestically produced food grows within a country, there will be more job opportunities available for local people in farming and food processing industries, leading to a reduction in unemployment rates. Secondly, it may be easier to control food quality when it is produced domestically, as authorities can easily monitor farms and food processing plants, in order to maintain safe, hygienic food standards.
Additionally, food imports should be reduced due to a number of reasons. Firstly, putting barriers on importing food can help to boost a country’s economy by eliminating the competition that local companies face with foreign products, allowing them to be more profitable and contribute to the national economy. Furthermore, food importation can have negative environmental impacts due to the large amounts of carbon emissions released from the transportation of products all around the world via planes, trucks, and ships. By reducing food imports, countries can play their part in helping to protect the environment, rather than contributing to environmental issues such as climate change.
In conclusion, I believe that each country should invest in the development of its agricultural industry to provide food for the population itself, and import as little as possible.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Add definite article Original: farming and food processing industries Suggested revision: the farming and food-processing industries Why it matters: The definite article helps identify the two industry sectors being discussed.
- 2. Remove unnecessary comma Original: plants, in order Suggested revision: plants in order Why it matters: No comma should separate the main verb phrase from its purpose phrase.
- 3. Improve collocation Original: safe, hygienic food standards Suggested revision: safe, hygienic standards for food Why it matters: This phrasing makes it clear that the standards apply to food.
- 4. Use concise phrasing Original: due to a number of reasons Suggested revision: for several reasons Why it matters: ‘For several reasons’ is more direct and idiomatic in this context.
- 5. Use natural collocation Original: putting barriers on importing food Suggested revision: imposing barriers on food imports Why it matters: Governments ‘impose barriers’, and the noun phrase ‘food imports’ is more natural here.
- 6. Use concise verb form Original: help to boost Suggested revision: help boost Why it matters: The bare infinitive after ‘help’ is concise and fully grammatical here.
- 7. Correct competition phrasing Original: with Suggested revision: from Why it matters: Companies face competition ‘from’ products or competitors, not ‘with’ products.
- 8. Use countable quantity Original: amounts Suggested revision: quantities Why it matters: ‘Emissions’ is plural and is more naturally quantified with ‘quantities’.
- 9. Use direct wording Original: released from the transportation of products Suggested revision: generated by transporting products Why it matters: This replacement states the source of the emissions more directly and naturally.
- 10. Remove wordiness Original: play their part in helping to protect Suggested revision: help protect Why it matters: The shorter verb phrase preserves the meaning without redundant wording.
Suggested Rewrites
- farming and food processing industries the farming and food-processing industries
- plants, in order plants in order
- safe, hygienic food standards safe, hygienic standards for food
- due to a number of reasons for several reasons
- putting barriers on importing food imposing barriers on food imports
- help to boost help boost
Why this response received Band 8.0
The essay answers the question directly, maintains a consistent position, and develops several relevant economic, regulatory, and environmental reasons in a well-controlled structure. The principal limitation is that a few claims, especially about restricting imports and eliminating competition, are stated rather broadly rather than qualified. To improve further, add a brief acknowledgement of practical trade-offs and refine a few slightly awkward collocations.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
A clear position is fully maintained and supported with several relevant, well-explained reasons covering domestic production and reduced imports.
Qualify the broad claim about import barriers by acknowledging a practical limitation or condition while preserving the clear stance.
Coherence and Cohesion
Ideas are sequenced logically in focused paragraphs, and cohesive devices guide the reader clearly throughout.
Vary the opening transitions in the body paragraphs so the organisation feels slightly less enumerative.
Lexical Resource
The response uses a wide and precise range of topic vocabulary, with only occasional slightly awkward collocations.
Refine phrases about competition with foreign products and emissions from transportation to make them more idiomatic and exact.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
A wide range of complex sentence forms is used accurately, with most sentences error-free and punctuation well controlled.
Polish minor comma placement and phrasing in longer sentences to make already accurate structures more concise.
Write this task while it is fresh
Try the same task now. It helps you remember the feedback and write better next time.
IELTS Writing Task 2
People think that countries should produce foods that their population eats and import less food as much as possible. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.