The pie chart below shows the main reasons why agricultural land becomes less productive. The table shows how these causes affected three regions of the world during the 1990s. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The given pie chart illustrates the factors that negatively affect the productivity of globally agricultural lands while the table sheds lights on the percentage of land degradation considering three aforementioned reasons in three different parts of the world, namely, North America, Europe and Oceania during the 1990s.
As can be seen from the pie chart, the core factors for the reduction in farmland productivity is over-grazing and Europe is the most heavily affected area.
Considering the figures provided in the pie chart, the degradation of agricultural land can be attributed to 3 main factors, which are: over-grazing, cutting down trees and heavy cultivation, account for 35%; 30% and 28% respectively. The rest 7% went to other causes.
In terms of the table’s information, European area held the first position with total 23% of farmland was degraded, this was mainly due to deforestation (9.8%) and excess cultivation (7.7%). At the same time, unproductive land in Oceania accounted for 13% mostly because of heavy grazing, made up to 11.3%. On the contrary side, the amount of degraded agricultural land in North America was only 5%, lower than a quarter of that in Europe and nearly half of the figure for Oceania, its land is mostly ruined by over-cultivation (3.3%)
- It is now possible for scientists and tourists to travel to remote natural environments such as the South pole Do the advantages of this development outweigh the disadvantages 78
- The use of social media is replacing face to face interaction among many people in society Do you think the disadvantages outweigh the advantages 89
- Environmental protection is the responsibility of politicians not individuals as individuals can do too little To what extent do you agree or disagree 61
- The table below shows the questionnaire about opinions of club members and general public for the new theatre in one town in 2012 78
- The table below shows the prices of a cup of coffee in 6 cities in Australia in 2010 and 2014 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, so, while, in fact, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 7.0 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 1.00243902439 200% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 33.7804878049 104% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 3.97073170732 227% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1078.0 965.302439024 112% => OK
No of words: 207.0 196.424390244 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.2077294686 4.92477711251 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.79308509922 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.05535601113 2.65546596893 115% => OK
Unique words: 132.0 106.607317073 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.63768115942 0.547539520022 116% => OK
syllable_count: 327.6 283.868780488 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 8.94146341463 78% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 29.0 22.4926829268 129% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 85.5865715197 43.030603864 199% => OK
Chars per sentence: 154.0 112.824112599 136% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.5714285714 22.9334400587 129% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.28571428571 5.23603664747 139% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 3.70975609756 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 1.13902439024 439% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.200367941811 0.215688989381 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0831267043814 0.103423049105 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0769832528934 0.0843802449381 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128620049116 0.15604864568 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0721003033926 0.0819641961636 88% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.9 13.2329268293 135% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.04 61.2550243902 69% => OK
smog_index: 13.0 6.51609756098 200% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.3012195122 142% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.53 11.4140731707 119% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.97 8.06136585366 111% => OK
difficult_words: 51.0 40.7170731707 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 22.0 11.4329268293 192% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.9970731707 124% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.0658536585 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.