Some people think that countries should produce foods their population eats and import less food as much as possible. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

The question of whether countries should locally produce foods to satisfy citizens’ demands or rely on the food import of foreign countries has always sparked a vigorous debate. This essay aims at examining both views and asserts with the perspectives that becoming food-independent is not always feasible for all countries in the world.

On the one hand, the policy of food self-sufficiency might bring several benefits to citizens and the environment. Firstly, locally produced food tends to be more affordable for residents since the cost of food delivery and imported levy are reduced. As a result, the financial constraint of food purchasing,burdening on underprivileged people’s shoulders can be significantly allerviated. Secondly, ensuring a secure food production can be advantageous for the environment due to the reduction of fuel consumption and carbon footprint released by the transport of food. As a result, the impact of air pollution as well as global warming caused by the excessive release of carbon dioxide and fossil fuel burning can be considerably reduced.

On the other hand, while the merits of food produced locally are evident, I would argue that this policy is not a practical goal for many nations. Several countries which are suffering from harsh geographical conditions and extreme weather might struggle with producing enough food quantity to satisfy their residents’ demand. As a result, leaning on foreign countries for food production seems to be an inevitable resort for these countries to deal with the difficulties of local food manufacturing. A typical example of this scenario can be seen in Japan, where catastrophic natural disasters such as tornado or earthquake regulary happen. Therefore, the prospects of all-year-round agricultural cultivation seems to be impossible, leading to the inevitable dependence on foreign food import.

In conclusion, notwithstanding undeniable advantages of food self sufficiency, this essay still advocates the notion that the practicality and feasibility of food indenpence policy is not always valid and applicable to all countries.

Gợi ý nâng cấp từ vựng

Errors and Improvements:

"the food import of foreign countries" -> "foreign food imports"
Explanation: "the food import of foreign countries" is awkward phrasing. "Foreign food imports" is a more concise and natural way to express the same idea.
"This essay aims at examining both views and asserts with the perspectives" -> "This essay aims to examine both perspectives and asserts that"
Explanation: The original phrase is wordy and unclear. The suggested alternative is more concise and grammatically correct.
"As a result, the financial constraint of food purchasing,burdening on underprivileged people’s shoulders" -> "As a result, the financial burden of food purchasing on underprivileged people can be significantly alleviated."
Explanation: The original sentence is grammatically incorrect and lacks clarity. The suggested alternative improves the structure and clarity of the sentence.
"advantageous for the environment due to the reduction of fuel consumption and carbon footprint released by the transport of food" -> "beneficial for the environment, as it reduces fuel consumption and the carbon footprint associated with food transportation."
Explanation: The suggested alternative enhances the formality of the sentence and clarifies the relationship between local food production and environmental benefits.
"burdening on underprivileged people’s shoulders" -> "burden on the shoulders of underprivileged individuals"
Explanation: The original phrase is awkward. The suggested alternative provides a smoother and more formal expression.
"the merits of food produced locally are evident, I would argue" -> "while the merits of locally produced food are evident, I would argue"
Explanation: The original phrasing is informal. The suggested alternative maintains the meaning while presenting it in a more formal and academic manner.
"this policy is not a practical goal" -> "achieving this policy is not always practical"
Explanation: The suggested alternative rephrases the sentence to improve clarity and formality.
"Several countries which are suffering from harsh geographical conditions and extreme weather might struggle" -> "Several countries facing harsh geographical conditions and extreme weather may struggle"
Explanation: The suggested alternative streamlines the expression and improves the overall flow of the sentence.
"leaning on foreign countries for food production seems to be an inevitable resort" -> "relying on foreign countries for food production appears to be an inevitable recourse"
Explanation: The suggested alternative uses more formal language while maintaining the meaning of the original sentence.
"the difficulties of local food manufacturing" -> "the challenges of local food production"
Explanation: The suggested alternative replaces "manufacturing" with "production" for a more appropriate and formal term in this context.
"A typical example of this scenario can be seen in Japan" -> "Japan serves as a typical example of this scenario"
Explanation: The suggested alternative provides a more formal structure to the sentence.
"notwithstanding undeniable advantages of food self sufficiency" -> "despite the undeniable advantages of food self-sufficiency"
Explanation: The suggested alternative replaces "notwithstanding" with "despite" for a more formal and precise expression.

Band điểm Task Response ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Task Response: 6

Answer All Parts of the Question:
- Detailed explanation: The essay adequately addresses both perspectives of the prompt, discussing the benefits of food self-sufficiency while acknowledging the challenges some countries face due to geographical conditions. Relevant examples, such as the case of Japan, are presented to support the argument.
- How to improve: To enhance completeness, consider explicitly stating your position in the introduction and conclusion, providing a clearer roadmap for the reader.
Present a Clear Position Throughout:
- Detailed explanation: The essay maintains a clear position that leans towards the idea that food self-sufficiency is not universally feasible. The stance is evident in both supporting arguments and the concluding statement.
- How to improve: Ensure that the thesis statement clearly outlines the position in the introduction. Additionally, consistently reiterate the stance throughout the essay to reinforce clarity.
Present, Extend, and Support Ideas:
- Detailed explanation: The essay effectively presents ideas with examples, such as the affordability and environmental benefits of locally produced food. Each point is extended and supported adequately.
- How to improve: To enhance development, consider providing more depth to the counterargument. Discussing potential solutions or compromises would add complexity to the analysis.
Stay on Topic:
- Detailed explanation: The essay remains on topic throughout, discussing the merits of food self-sufficiency and the challenges some countries face. There are no significant deviations.
- How to improve: Be cautious not to overgeneralize; some statements, like "this policy is not a practical goal for many nations," might be seen as too sweeping. Consider providing nuanced statements and acknowledging exceptions.

General Comments:
The essay effectively addresses the prompt, presenting a well-structured argument with supporting examples. To improve further, focus on explicitly stating your position, consistently reinforcing it, and providing more nuanced statements, especially in discussing challenges faced by certain nations. Additionally, consider expanding on the counterargument for a more comprehensive analysis. Overall, a solid response.

Band điểm Coherence & Cohesion ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Coherence and Cohesion: 6

Organize Information Logically:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a clear structure with an introduction, body paragraphs presenting different perspectives, and a conclusion. However, the logical flow within paragraphs could be enhanced. For instance, in the second paragraph, the transition from discussing the benefits of locally produced food to the challenges faced by certain countries is somewhat abrupt. This affects the overall coherence as the connection between ideas is not smoothly established.
- How to improve: To improve the logical organization, consider adding transitional phrases between ideas and paragraphs. For example, use phrases like "Moreover," or "In contrast," to guide the reader through the shift in focus. This will create a more cohesive and interconnected essay.
Use Paragraphs:
- Detailed explanation: The essay uses paragraphs to organize ideas but could benefit from a more consistent structure. While the introduction and conclusion are appropriately developed as separate paragraphs, the body paragraphs could be more distinct. Ensure that each body paragraph has a clear central idea and supporting details.
- How to improve: Work on creating topic sentences for each body paragraph that clearly convey the main point. Additionally, maintain a consistent structure within each paragraph, with a clear introduction, body, and conclusion for each idea presented. This will enhance the overall readability and effectiveness of the essay.
Use a Range of Cohesive Devices:
- Detailed explanation: The essay employs some cohesive devices, such as "on the one hand" and "on the other hand," to indicate contrasting ideas. However, there is room for improvement in the variety and sophistication of cohesive devices used. For instance, a greater use of transition words and phrases within sentences and paragraphs could enhance the overall coherence.
- How to improve: Expand the use of cohesive devices by incorporating a wider range of transition words (e.g., "Furthermore," "However," "Nevertheless") and pronouns to refer back to previously mentioned concepts. This will contribute to a smoother flow and better connectivity between ideas, ultimately elevating the coherence of the essay.

Band điểm Lexical Resource ước lượng: 6

Band Score for Lexical Resource: 6

Use a Wide Range of Vocabulary:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a reasonable range of vocabulary, incorporating terms such as "food self-sufficiency," "burdening," "allerviated," "carbon footprint," and "undeniable advantages." However, the vocabulary could be more diverse, with some repetition of terms like "food production" and "foreign countries."
- How to improve: To enhance the lexical range, consider using synonyms and exploring varied expressions. For instance, instead of frequently using "food production," you might use terms like "agricultural output" or "nutritional cultivation" where appropriate.
Use Vocabulary Precisely:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a generally precise use of vocabulary. For instance, the phrases "financial constraint," "carbon footprint," and "undeniable advantages" are used with precision. However, there are instances where the language could be more specific. For example, the term "harsh geographical conditions" could be elaborated to provide a clearer picture.
- How to improve: Aim for specificity in your word choice. Rather than using broad terms, provide more details. Instead of "harsh geographical conditions," you could specify the challenges, such as "arid landscapes" or "mountainous terrains," to offer a more precise description.
Use Correct Spelling:
- Detailed explanation: The essay displays a generally satisfactory level of spelling accuracy. However, there are some minor spelling errors, such as "allerviated" (alleviated) and "indenpence" (independence).
- How to improve: Proofreading is crucial. Take the time to review your essay carefully to catch and correct spelling errors. Additionally, consider using spelling and grammar tools to aid in identifying and rectifying such issues.

Overall, while the essay demonstrates a reasonable command of vocabulary and spelling, improvements in lexical diversity and precision, along with meticulous proofreading, can contribute to enhancing the overall lexical resource score.

Band điểm Grammatical Range & Accuracy ước lượng: 7

Band Score for Grammatical Range and Accuracy: 7

Use a Wide Range of Structures:
- Detailed explanation: The essay exhibits a reasonable variety of sentence structures. There is evidence of complex sentences, such as "The question of whether…debate" and "Secondly, ensuring a secure…reduction of fuel consumption." However, there is room for improvement in the diversity of sentence structures. For instance, a more extensive use of compound and compound-complex sentences could enhance the overall sophistication of the writing.
- How to improve: Consider incorporating more compound and compound-complex sentences to add complexity and variety to your writing. Additionally, experiment with sentence length for a more dynamic flow. For example, instead of relying solely on longer sentences, strategically use short sentences for emphasis.
Use Grammar and Punctuation Accurately:
- Detailed explanation: The essay demonstrates a generally accurate use of grammar and punctuation. However, there are instances of minor grammatical errors and punctuation issues. For example, in the sentence "financial constraint of food purchasing, burdening on underprivileged people’s shoulders," there is a lack of parallelism in the construction, and the word "allerviated" contains a typographical error. Additionally, there are places where commas could be used more effectively to enhance clarity.
- How to improve: Pay close attention to parallelism in sentence construction. Revise sentences for clarity, ensuring that each part of a sentence is structurally similar. Proofread carefully to catch typographical errors. Work on the appropriate use of commas to enhance clarity and avoid confusion. Consider seeking feedback from peers or using grammar-checking tools to catch these minor issues.

Overall, this essay demonstrates a solid command of grammatical range and accuracy, earning a Band Score of 7. To enhance your score further, focus on incorporating a wider range of sentence structures and refining grammar and punctuation for greater precision and clarity.

Bài sửa mẫu

The question of whether countries should produce the foods their population consumes or rely on foreign food imports has always sparked a vigorous debate. This essay aims to examine both perspectives and asserts that achieving complete food independence is not always feasible for all countries in the world.

On the one hand, the policy of food self-sufficiency might bring several benefits to citizens and the environment. Firstly, locally produced food tends to be more affordable for residents since the cost of food delivery and imported levies are reduced. As a result, the financial burden of food purchasing on underprivileged people can be significantly alleviated. Secondly, ensuring secure food production can be beneficial for the environment, as it reduces fuel consumption and the carbon footprint associated with food transportation. Consequently, the impact of air pollution and global warming caused by the excessive release of carbon dioxide and fossil fuel burning can be considerably reduced.

On the other hand, while the merits of locally produced food are evident, I would argue that achieving this policy is not always practical for many nations. Several countries facing harsh geographical conditions and extreme weather may struggle with producing enough food quantity to satisfy their residents’ demand. Therefore, relying on foreign countries for food production appears to be an inevitable recourse for these nations to deal with the challenges of local food production. Japan serves as a typical example of this scenario, where catastrophic natural disasters such as tornadoes or earthquakes regularly happen. Therefore, the prospects of all-year-round agricultural cultivation seem impossible, leading to the inevitable dependence on foreign food imports.

In conclusion, notwithstanding the undeniable advantages of food self-sufficiency, this essay still advocates the notion that the practicality and feasibility of the food independence policy are not always valid and applicable to all countries.