Even though the advancement technology has been applied and increased the outcome in agriculture, a great number of people are still suffering from severely hunger. In this composition, I will examine and analyze the possible root cause and give out potential solution for this problem.
First, a steep rise in population in last twenty years would be a major reason, especially in developing countries. The duration of food growth is impossible to be easily increased by technology due to food safety concern. As a result, the production of food would not catch the pace of rapidly increasing population, which would cause the shortage of food all over the world. In addition, the wastage of food could be another reason why people in urban are starving. For example, many restaurants are cooking in bulk and the customers cannot consume all foods prepared in advance. The leftover food will be disposed in order to avoid any problem caused by stale food. Therefore, these two reasons would cause people starving.
Controlling the growth of population could be a solution that ensures the balance between the production of food and the population. In general, well educated people is very like to remain a small family. Therefore, government could provide free education to attract more people getting educated. This would make positive impact on the growth of population without human right harassment. Moreover, restaurants could change their strategy to serve it's customer by demand. The leftover materials could be cook and distribute to people who are hungry at the end of the day.
In conclusion, keeping the balance between the production of food and the population would solve starvation problem. And restaurants could help starving people in urban area by distributing free food cooked by leftover materials.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 145, Rule ID: ADVISE_VBG[5]
Message: The verb 'help' is used with infinitive: 'to starve' or 'starve'.
Suggestion: to starve; starve
...ion problem. And restaurants could help starving people in urban area by distributing fr...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, moreover, so, still, therefore, well, for example, in addition, in conclusion, in general, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 15.0 7.85571142285 191% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 7.30460921844 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 8.0 24.0651302605 33% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 41.998997996 107% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 8.3376753507 264% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1536.0 1615.20841683 95% => OK
No of words: 292.0 315.596192385 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2602739726 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13376432452 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76968212084 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 176.041082164 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.568493150685 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 477.9 506.74238477 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 7.0 2.52805611222 277% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 26.6750275244 49.4020404114 54% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 90.3529411765 106.682146367 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.1764705882 20.7667163134 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.70588235294 7.06120827912 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.9879759519 201% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.155030527708 0.244688304435 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0514351682584 0.084324248473 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0369945382565 0.0667982634062 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.102371690835 0.151304729494 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0560084164082 0.056905535591 98% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 13.0946893788 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 50.2224549098 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.93 12.4159519038 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.48 8.58950901804 99% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 78.4519038076 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.