Many people believe that companies and individuals should pay to clean up the environment in proportion to the amount of pollution they have produced. To what extent to you agree or disagree?
Sample Response
It is often argued that people should be charged in accordance with the amount of pollution they produce. While I accept that certain organisations should be penalised for this, I believe that every individual should not be forced to pay a fine. There are several reasons why the giant entrepreneurs should pay for contaminating the land. Having penalised with a specific amount of money factories will help the government to raise money which can be used in a variety of long-term and rationalised measures to mitigate the pollution from the earth. This will also deter them from producing more garbage and pollution. Take London as an example, where governments have invested recently a hefty amount of money in public transportation, in particular, local buses which have been designed to be much more efficient than the older ones. So these vehicles discharge fewer combustible pollutants into the air. Also, these self-centered companies sometimes exploit natural resources such as forests, water land and agricultural lands, beyond all their limits just to increase the profit. If these companies are not obliged to share the amount of money, which is required to curb pollutions, they will become more short-sighted (or greedy) in terms of making more money without even caring about the impact on climate change and environment. However, I would argue that every individual should not be liable to pay recommended fine. It is unrealistic that we can stop people from polluting the universe merely by imposing charges. Because people need electricity to enjoy technologies, a farmland to grow crops and an accommodation to live, food to eat as well as a mean of transportation to travel. Furthermore, if people from devastated backgrounds are charged more for the impact they have on climate; it will create an upheaval situation where lower-income groups would not be able to pay even for their daily necessities. In conclusion, organisations who are earning millions of pounds by exploiting natural resources should only be obliged to share the amount of money in curbing the pollution rather than all the common citizens.
IELTS Writing Correction
- 1. Fix negative scope Original: every individual should not be forced Suggested revision: not every individual should be forced Why it matters: Placing not before every clearly expresses that the exemption applies to some individuals rather than none.
- 2. Use accurate noun phrase Original: the giant entrepreneurs Suggested revision: large companies Why it matters: Entrepreneurs are people, whereas the argument concerns organisations that produce pollution.
- 3. Avoid category overlap Original: garbage and pollution Suggested revision: pollution Why it matters: Garbage is already a form of pollution here, so the paired nouns are unnecessarily repetitive.
- 4. Use natural environmental term Original: combustible pollutants Suggested revision: harmful emissions Why it matters: Harmful emissions is the appropriate term for pollutants discharged by vehicles.
- 5. Use formal description Original: self-centered companies Suggested revision: profit-driven companies Why it matters: Profit-driven conveys the intended criticism in a precise academic register.
- 6. Separate list items Original: water land Suggested revision: water, land Why it matters: A comma is required because water and land are separate resources in the list.
- 7. Use uncountable noun Original: lands Suggested revision: land Why it matters: Land is normally uncountable when referring generally to a natural resource.
- 8. Clarify the limit Original: beyond all their limits Suggested revision: beyond sustainable limits Why it matters: Sustainable limits states clearly what kind of excessive exploitation is meant.
- 9. Use possessive plural Original: increase the profit Suggested revision: increase their profits Why it matters: The plural companies require a matching possessive and the countable plural profits.
- 10. Use precise financial verb Original: share the amount of money, which Suggested revision: contribute the money that Why it matters: Contribute naturally describes paying towards a cost, and that introduces the defining clause correctly.
- 11. Use uncountable pollution Original: pollutions Suggested revision: pollution Why it matters: Pollution is uncountable when referring generally to environmental contamination.
- 12. Clarify possession and articles Original: impact on climate change and environment Suggested revision: their impact on the climate and the environment Why it matters: The possessive identifies whose impact is meant, and both environmental nouns need appropriate articles here.
Suggested Rewrites
- every individual should not be forced not every individual should be forced
- the giant entrepreneurs large companies
- garbage and pollution pollution
- combustible pollutants harmful emissions
- self-centered companies profit-driven companies
- water land water, land
Why this response received Band 6.0
The response maintains a clear distinction between corporate and individual responsibility and offers several relevant reasons, with enough vocabulary and sentence variety to communicate the argument. However, it largely overlooks the question's requirement that payment be proportional to pollution, and some examples do not directly support the claims. The priority is to address proportional liability explicitly and develop each point with tightly relevant evidence.
IELTS Writing Criteria Scores
Task Response
A clear position is developed on who should pay, but proportional payment is insufficiently addressed and some support is only partly relevant.
Explain directly whether both groups should pay in proportion to their emissions and use examples that demonstrate that principle.
Coherence and Cohesion
The argument has a generally discernible progression, but the single-paragraph presentation and occasionally loose links weaken organisation.
Separate the introduction, corporate argument, individual argument, and conclusion into purposeful paragraphs with clearer internal progression.
Lexical Resource
There is a good range of topic vocabulary, but frequent imprecise collocations such as 'giant entrepreneurs' and 'devastated backgrounds' reduce accuracy.
Choose conventional, precise expressions such as 'large corporations', 'disadvantaged households', and 'environmental remediation'.
Grammatical Range and Accuracy
A mix of simple and complex structures is attempted, but recurring problems with articles, sentence fragments, word order, and plurals remain evident.
Prioritise complete clause structures and accurate article and noun forms, especially in longer sentences.
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
Many people believe that companies and individuals should pay to clean up the environment in proportion to the amount of pollution they have produced. To what extent to you agree or disagree?
Your response
Write the task yourself, then compare your choices with the annotated response.