In an effort to encourage ecologically sustainable forestry practices, an international organization started issuing certifications to wood companies that meet high ecological standards by conserving resources and recycling materials. Companies that receive this certification can attract customers by advertising their products as eco-certified. Around the world, many wood companies have adopted new, ecologically friendly practices in order to receive eco-certification. However, it is unlikely that wood companies in the United States will do the same, for several reasons.
First, American consumers are exposed to so much advertising that they would not value or even pay attention to the eco-certification label. Because so many mediocre products are labeled “new” or “improved”, American consumers do not place much trust in advertising claims in general.
Second, eco-certified wood will be more expensive than uncertified wood because in order to earn eco-certification, a wood company must pay to have its business examined by a certification agency. This additional cost gets passed on to consumers—American consumers tend to be strongly motivated by price, and therefore they are likely to choose cheaper uncertified wood products. Accordingly, American wood companies will prefer to keep their prices low rather than obtain eco-certification.
Third, although some people claim that it always makes good business sense for American companies to keep up with the developments in the rest of the world, this argument is not convincing. Pursuing certification would make sense forAmerican wood companies only if they marketed most of their products abroad. But that is not the case,American wood businesses sell most of their products in the United States, catering to a very large customer base that is satisfied with the merchandise.
Both the article and the lecture talk about the new ecological sustainable forestry approach and its effect on the U.S. wood companies. The article states that this eco-certification won't affects the U.S. wood companies and U.S. people. It provides three reasons of support. On the other hand, the professor does not believe so and refutes all the author's reasons.
First, the article avers that people in U.S. faced a lot of advertisement and then folks won't pay much attention to them. Because many usual companies' product included "new" or 'improved” label people will not get them serious. It will happen for the eco-certification wood goods. However, the professor rebuts this idea by mentioning that people distinguish the difference between a label from the company and one from a third unbiased company with an international reputation. Hence, this eco-certified label can convince them to buy those products.
Second, the article asserts that having this certification will increase the cost of the wood and logically neither companies nor customers want to tolerate these expenses. It concludes that these more expensive wood products won't be successful in sell. Conversely, the professor avers a research showed that if this price difference between the eco-friendly wood and usual wood products is less than five percent as it is for the eco-certified wood products, people will pay for that willingly because they take care about the environment.
Third, the reading claims that American companies which won't sell their products abroad, do not need to take these validations to compete with European wood companies, since U.S. people are their costumers and they buy those products. Controversially, the lecturer believe that it is not about the competition across the board, it is need to take this certification to be able to compete with European companies in the U.S. market, where American companies should compete with European to take advantage of the U.S. market.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-04-18 | sonyeoso | 80 | view |
| 2023-03-16 | Ali_Majlesi | 85 | view |
| 2023-02-12 | zaid | 3 | view |
| 2023-02-02 | Rasika0511 | 70 | view |
| 2022-11-17 | Nina Tsarevich | 80 | view |
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement It is better to make friends with intelligent people than with the people who have a good sense of humor 70
- TPO 30 Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement It is more enjoyable to have a job where you work only three days a week for long hours than to have a job where you work five days a week for shorter hours Use specific 85
- Burning coal in power plants produces a waste product called coal ash a material that contains small amounts of potentially harmful chemicals Environmentalists in the United States are concerned about the damage such harmful chemicals may be doing to the 80
- The sea otter is a small mammal that lives in waters along the western coast of North America from California to Alaska When some sea otter populations off the Alaskan coast started rapidly declining a few years ago it caused much concern because sea otte 80
- TPO 14 Integrated Writing Task Every year forest fires and severe storms cause a great deal of damage to forests in the northwestern United States One way of dealing with the aftermath of these disasters is called salvage logging which is the practic 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... and refutes all the authors reasons. First, the article avers that people in ...
^^^^^^
Line 2, column 148, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'companies'' or 'company's'?
Suggestion: companies'; company's
...h attention to them. Because many usual companies product included 'new' or imp...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 202, Rule ID: EN_UNPAIRED_BRACKETS
Message: Unpaired symbol: '“' seems to be missing
...uct included 'new' or improved” label people will not get them serious....
^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... convince them to buy those products. Second, the article asserts that having ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, first, hence, however, if, second, so, then, third, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 22.412803532 152% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1686.0 1373.03311258 123% => OK
No of words: 315.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.35238095238 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.95431921356 2.5805825403 114% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.52380952381 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 515.7 419.366225166 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 79.3019610124 49.2860985944 161% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.428571429 110.228320801 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.14285714286 7.06452816374 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.165404447972 0.272083759551 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0590122385265 0.0996497079465 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0504756601063 0.0662205650399 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.105732662101 0.162205337803 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0275509283893 0.0443174109184 62% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 13.3589403974 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 53.8541721854 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.05 12.2367328918 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 63.6247240618 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.2008830022 134% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.