Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain.
For the last two centuries, human civilization has constantly degraded it’s natural surroundings, in form of cutting down forests or displacing wild animals from their natural habitat. This has led to a dramatic decline in the size of wildlife globally over the past centuries. Most of the environmentalists would agree with the stated argument. However, in my opinion, this strategy is not suitable for developing nations and even for developed nations, they should try a conservation approach rather than a preservation one.
First, let’s discuss the case for developing nations, the main problem faced by these countries are poverty and hunger. Consider a country like UAE which faces a shortage of space to provide people with a shelter, the decision by the government to conserve area might not go well with its citizens. That same land could have been used to create housing opportunities which in turn will generate jobs for the people. Governments in these nations will refrain from implementing policies which will only exacerbate unemployment. These preservation programs can only be implemented at the cost of valuable job opportunities for the locals.
Now, let’s consider the case of developed nations, here the problems of hunger and house shortage are not severe as compared to their counterparts. If the nation implements preservation programs there can be no human activities in that area, but by devising a conservation program low pollution activities such as tourism can be operated in that area, which will allow for sustainable development. Efforts can be made to minimize the impact on the environment without compromising the needs of future generations. Such program of development along with conservation will also be acceptable to the public as well as environmentalists.
To conclude, I would like to say that developing nations should focus on problems like poverty and hunger whereas the developed nations should try to create programs which can ensure a sustainable development without sacrificing any opportunities for the future generations.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-30 | lanhhoang | 83 | view |
| 2020-01-18 | wenki31 | 58 | view |
| 2019-12-29 | Sumaiya Mila | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-04 | Md. Kawsar Ahmed | 50 | view |
| 2019-11-14 | chapagain08 | 50 | view |
- Claim: The emergence of the online "blogosphere" has significantly weakened the quality of political discourse in the United States.Reason: When anyone can publish political opinions easily, standards for covering news and political topics will inevitably 50
- According to a recent report from our marketing department, during the past year, fewer people attended Super Screen-produced movies than in any other year. And yet the percentage of positive reviews by movie reviewers about specific Super Screen movies a 58
- Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain. 50
- A recent study of Dura-Socks customers suggests that our company is wasting the money it spends on its patented Endure manufacturing process, which ensures that our socks are strong enough to last for two years. We have always advertised our use of the En 32
- The best way for a society to prepare its young people for leadership in government, industry, or other fields is by instilling in them a sense of cooperation, not competition. 50
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, so, well, whereas, as to, such as, as well as, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 19.5258426966 46% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.4196629213 137% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 14.8657303371 40% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 33.0505617978 48% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 58.6224719101 78% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 12.9106741573 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1777.0 2235.4752809 79% => OK
No of words: 324.0 442.535393258 73% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.48456790123 5.05705443957 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24264068712 4.55969084622 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.1874976652 2.79657885939 114% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 215.323595506 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.564814814815 0.4932671777 115% => OK
syllable_count: 556.2 704.065955056 79% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 3.10617977528 32% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.38483146067 68% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 20.2370786517 69% => 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: 23.0 23.0359550562 100% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.3005413658 60.3974514979 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 126.928571429 118.986275619 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.1428571429 23.4991977007 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.5 5.21951772744 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 10.2758426966 39% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.288712573925 0.243740707755 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0871418539785 0.0831039109588 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0594152571843 0.0758088955206 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.172638924551 0.150359130593 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0144021494879 0.0667264976115 22% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 14.1392134831 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 48.8420337079 81% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.1743820225 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.8 12.1639044944 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.21 8.38706741573 110% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 100.480337079 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.2143820225 100% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.