Poor countries should become rich first and reduce CO 2 emissions later. Or should they start to deal with it right now? What is your viewpoint on this issue?
Sample Response
While having lifted themselves up from poverty and agricultural economics, the industrialised nations have left many environmental issues caused by the increased amount of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) they have produced. From the economic perspective, some people are seriously convinced that poor developing countries ought to consider enhancing their economic status first without taking into account the reduction of CO 2 emissions. Nevertheless, this essay will elaborate from both economic and environmental standpoints that developing nations should think about reducing CO 2 emissions now whilst improving their economics.
First, environment issues are more severe than the economic status. As obviously shown by news on CNN or BBC, there are many terrible skin diseases happening in the developed world due to the drastic increase of Ultraviolet radiation that penetrates the Ozone layers--destroyed by greenhouse gases. Without proper management of the CO 2 emissions, the global warming will not only affect locally but also globally. Remarkably, it will cause more much national budgets to effectively tackle the problems than to reduce the CO 2 emissions prior to the occurrence of environmental issues, which certainly is not a benefit for the poor countries.
Second, using technologies that are based on the burning of fossil fuels is not way better than utilising renewable energy sources. Alternatively, to become richer, poor and developing countries do not necessarily need use fossil fuels for energy consumption. A case in point is the use of solar energy and hydroelectric power. These two environmental-friendly options are cheaper than using the petroleum to generate power, which costs much money and, in return, produces CO 2, harming the environment. Furthermore, reducing the emissions of CO 2 will also be a brilliant idea when it comes to developing tourism sector. Tourists are visiting countries which are refreshing and free from environmental problems. No one wants to absorb toxic airs. In this regard, the developing nations who care much about the reduction of CO 2 emissions will be able to efficiently attract people to visit, which also gives rise to the economic growth.
Taking everything into consideration, we can come to a conclusion that the reduction of CO 2 emissions is more vital for developing nations to get rich in a long run than to deal with the far-reaching consequences of the environmental problems later.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Correct economic term Original: agricultural economics Suggested revision: agrarian economies Why it matters: Agrarian economies describes national economies based mainly on agriculture.
- 2. Use causal wording Original: have left many environmental issues Suggested revision: have caused many environmental problems Why it matters: Cause environmental problems expresses the intended relationship more clearly and naturally.
- 3. Correct article choice Original: the Suggested revision: an Why it matters: The indefinite article is appropriate when introducing one analytical perspective.
- 4. Use correct noun Original: economics Suggested revision: economies Why it matters: Economies refers to countries' economic systems, while economics is the academic discipline.
- 5. Use adjective form Original: environment Suggested revision: environmental Why it matters: Environmental is the adjective required to modify issues.
- 6. Remove the article Original: the global warming Suggested revision: global warming Why it matters: Global warming is normally used without the definite article when naming the phenomenon generally.
- 7. Complete the structure Original: affect locally but also globally Suggested revision: have effects locally but also globally Why it matters: Affect is transitive and therefore cannot stand here without an object.
- 8. Use formal comparison Original: is not way better than Suggested revision: is no better than Why it matters: No better than is the concise standard comparison, while way is informal and awkward after not.
- 9. Add infinitive marker Original: need use Suggested revision: need to use Why it matters: Need takes a to-infinitive in this affirmative construction.
- 10. Use adverb modifier Original: environmental-friendly Suggested revision: environmentally friendly Why it matters: The adverb environmentally modifies the adjective friendly.
- 11. Remove the article Original: using the petroleum Suggested revision: using petroleum Why it matters: Petroleum is an uncountable substance noun and does not take the here in this general reference.
- 12. Add required article Original: developing tourism sector Suggested revision: developing the tourism sector Why it matters: The singular countable noun sector needs a determiner here.
Suggested Rewrites
- agricultural economics agrarian economies
- have left many environmental issues have caused many environmental problems
- the an
- economics economies
- environment environmental
- the global warming global warming
Why this response received Band 7.0
The response presents a clear position and builds a coherent case that environmental action can support rather than delay economic development. Its main limitation is that several supporting claims, especially the link between carbon dioxide, ozone damage, and skin disease and the assumption that renewable power is cheaper, are insufficiently accurate or qualified. The highest priority is to use sounder, more specific evidence while retaining the strong economic-environmental comparison.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
The essay answers the question directly, sustains a clear viewpoint, and develops multiple relevant reasons for immediate action.
Support the position with more accurate and carefully qualified environmental and economic reasoning rather than broad causal claims.
Coherence and Cohesion
The argument follows a logical progression from environmental urgency to cleaner development and tourism, with clear paragraphing.
Strengthen links within the body paragraphs so examples follow more explicitly from each central claim instead of relying on mechanical sequencing.
Lexical Resource
The response shows good range in discussing emissions, energy, tourism, and economic development, but awkward collocations recur.
Replace unnatural phrases such as more much national budgets, toxic airs, and environmental-friendly options with precise idiomatic wording.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
A variety of complex structures is attempted successfully, although recurring article, verb-pattern, and noun-form errors reduce control.
Review articles and verb complements in phrases such as need to use fossil fuels and in the long run, then edit complex sentences for accuracy.
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
Poor countries should become rich first and reduce CO 2 emissions later. Or should they start to deal with it right now? What is your viewpoint on this issue?
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.