The food travels thousands of miles from farm to consumer.

Some people think it would be better to

our environment and economy if people only ate local produced food. What extent do the advantages
outweigh disadvantages?
Nowadays, supermarkets are stocked with food products from around the world. Some individuals
are of the opinion that this imported food has detrimental effect on our economy and culture and it
would be better if people ate only the local produce. Certainly, the disadvantages of imported food
outweigh the advantages.

On the positive side, transporting goods over a long distance gives us a lot of choices. We can taste a
variety of fruits and vegetables from all parts of the world. For example, about ten years ago, we
hardly saw kiwi fruit which is from New Zealand. But, now it has a place on every fruit stand.
Secondly, many people get employment in this field. Small farmers have a chance to expand globally
and it increases the overall economy of the country. Finally, it helps in developing good relations
between countries which helps in international cooperation and peace. If countries are dependent
upon one anothers economic success then armed conflict would be less likely.
On the other hand, importing food can have a negative effect on local culture. This can be seen in
countries such as Japan where imported food has become more popular than traditional, local
produce, eroding peoples understanding of their own food traditions. Although some would claim
that this is a natural part of economic development, in an increasingly global world. I feel strongly
that any loss of regional culture would be detrimental.
A second major reason to reduce imports is the environmental cost. Currently, many food imports
such as fruit, are transported thousands of miles by road, sea and air, making the produce more
expensive to buy and increasing pollution from exhaust fumes. Despite the fact that trade in food
exports has existed for many years, I am convinced that a reduction would bring significant financial
and environmental gains.
In conclusion, I am certain that if people ate locally produced food, it would have environmental
benefits. It would also benefit the local economy because, in time, people would prosper
commercially as the demand for local and regional produce would remain high resisting the
competition from overseas.
Plan followed:
Intro: Certainly, the disadvantages of imported food outweigh the advantages
Para 1: advantages of transporting goods
-

choices

provide employment

develops good relations between countries

Para 2: Negative effects on local culture

Para 3: Negative effect on environment
Conclusion: I am certain that if people ate locally produced food, it would have environmental
benefits

Some developing countries invite large foreign companies to open offices and factories in order to
help their economy. However, others feel that foreign companies should be shut out and instead the
government should help the local companies to contribute to the economic growth. To what extent do
you agree or disagree?(7th Jan 2012 Australia)
It is a highly debatable issue whether multinational companies (MNCs) should be encouraged by the
governments of developing countries or whether the local companies should be promoted. I firmly
believe that MNCs are good for the economic growth. A number of arguments surround my opinion.

There are many advantages of MNCs. To begin with they provide employment that usually pays
better than other available opportunities. What is more, they train local labour with more
sophisticated techniques which in the long run bring benefits to the host country. They also raise the
growth rate of host nation by introducing new investment and new technology. To add to it, they
promote efficient production and bring a broader range of products to the widest possible market.
Furthermore, such MNCs promote improvement or development of various supporting industries or
complementary industries. For example, if an MNC opens in a place, then many businesses open in
the neighbourhood, which cater to the workers working in these MNCs. In this way, they stabilize
and stimulate local economies, and raise standards of living.
Another important advantage of MNCs is that they induce their local rivals to become more
innovative and competitive. For instance, it is a well known fact that Indian company Videocon has
improved its standard to compete with MNCs such as Samsung and Sony. Finally, these companies
promote positive values, such as diversity, and equality for women. They also create an environment
of nonviolence and international cooperation.
To conclude, MNCs may have their negative points, but their pros far outweigh their cons. So, they
should be promoted by the governments of developing countries.
Plan followed:
Intro: I firmly believe that MNCs are good for the economic growth.
Para 1: advantages of MNCs

provide employment

they train local labour with more sophisticated techniques which in the long run bring benefits
to the host country.
Para 2: improvement or development of various supporting industries or complementary industries
Para 3: they induce their local rivals to become more innovative and competitive
Conclusion: MNCs may have their negative points, but their pros far outweigh their cons. So, they
should be promoted by the governments of developing countries

Some people think imported food exerts positive impacts on our lives. To what extent do you agree or
disagree?
Nowadays, supermarkets are stocked with food products from around the world. Some individuals
are of the opinion that this imported food has beneficial effect on us. I beg to differ. I feel that the
local and regional produce is better for us and will discuss why in this essay.

It is certainly the case that importing food can have a negative effect on local culture. This can be
seen in countries such as India where imported food has become more popular than traditional, local
produce. This has eroded peoples understanding of their own food traditions. Earlier, people in India
sat together to eat their traditional meals but the fast food is generally eaten alone sitting in front of
the TV. Although some would claim that this is a natural part of economic development, in an
increasingly global world. I feel strongly that any loss of regional culture would be detrimental.
A second major reason to reduce imports is the environmental cost. Currently, many food imports
such as fruit, are transported thousands of miles by road, sea and air, making the produce more
expensive to buy and increasing pollution from exhaust fumes. Despite the fact that trade in food
exports has existed for many years, I am convinced that a reduction would bring significant financial
and environmental gains. What is more, the local farmer cannot cope up with the stiff competition
and is therefore suffering a lot.
However, many jobs depend on food exports and some less developed countries may even depend on
this trade for economic survival. In spite of this, the importance of developing local trade should not
be undervalued.
In conclusion, I reiterate my views saying that reducing food imports would have cultural and
environmental benefits. What is more, the local economy should, in time, prosper commercially as
the demand for local and regional produce remains high resisting the competition from overseas.
Plan followed:

Intro: Disagree.
Para 1: detrimental effect on local culture
Para 2: Environmental effects
-

costlier

local farmer cannot compete

Para 3: Opponents view and then refute that view

Conclusion: Reiterate opinion

As global trade increases between different countries, many daily necessities are produced in other
countries. Such goods are usually transported a long distance. Do the benefits of this trend outweigh
its drawbacks?
Or
Because of the global economy, many goods including what we use as daily basic produced by other
counties have to be transported for a long distance. To what extent do the advantages outweigh the
disadvantages?
Globalisation has revolutionized our world in many aspects. Now, we dont belong to a big planet
Earth. We belong to a small global village. Everything is available everywhere. There are many
advantages and disadvantages of transporting goods over a long distance. In my opinion, the
advantages outweigh the disadvantages.

On the positive side, transporting goods over a long distance gives us a lot of choices. We can taste a
variety of fruits and vegetables from all parts of the world. For example, about ten years ago, we
hardly saw kiwi fruit which is from New Zealand. But, now it has a place on every fruit stand.
Earlier, we had very few shoe brands like Bata and Carona but now the market is flooded with
Reeboks, Nike, Adidas and other foreign brands.
Secondly, many people get employment in this field. Small businesses have a chance to expand
globally and it increases the overall economy of the country. Finally, it helps in developing good
relations between countries which helps in international co-operation and peace. If countries are
dependent upon one anothers economic success then armed conflict would be less likely.
On the downside, importing goods can have a negative effect on local culture. This can be seen in
countries such as Japan where imported food has become more popular than traditional, local
produce, eroding peoples understanding of their own food traditions. A second major disadvantage is

pollution. When goods are transported thousands of miles by road, sea and air, it increases pollution
from exhaust fumes.
To conclude, importing goods has both merits and demerits but the pros outweigh the cons.
Plan followed
Intro: In my opinion, the advantages outweigh the disadvantages
Para 1: benefits
-

More choices

Para 2: More benefits

-

Jobs

it helps in developing good relations between countries

Para 3: Disadvantages loss of culture and pollution

Conclusion: importing goods has both merits and demerits but the pros outweigh the cons.

Some people think the increasing business and cultural contact between countries brings many
positive effects. Others say it causes the loss of national identities. Discuss on both sides and give
your opinion.
Globalisation has resulted in more business and cultural contacts among different nations. This also
means that in many ways people around the world are becoming more and more similar. This
situation has both pros and cons which I shall discuss in the following paragraphs.

There are many benefits of globalisation. To begin with there are more jobs because of globalisation.
Multinational companies have opened in many parts of the world providing jobs to thousands of
people. Secondly, there is more efficient trade between different countries around the globe thereby
improving the economies of developing countries. People have more opportunities to travel and
therefore have awareness of other cultures. What is more, today people have more choices of
products because of globalisation.
There are also many reasons why people say that national identities are being lost. We eat the same
food, watch the same TV programmes, listen to the same music and wear the same clothes. People
have also started speaking one language, English, in many parts of the world. In fact, English has
become the lingua franca today.

However, I feel that this is a very narrow definition of national identities and nations are as different
as they were ever in the past. Cultural identity is based on far more than just the films we watch or
the clothes we wear. For example, take my own culture of India and compare it to the west. We may
wear any clothes, but we never take the names of elders and call them with respect. In the west, it is
quite OK to call anyone by name. In fact, they appreciate it more. I believe that after knowing about
other cultures, we learn to respect our culture even more. So, some very deep rooted national
identities will always be there.
To conclude, there are more advantages of increasing trade and cultural contact among nations.
Whatever similarities we see today are only on the surface. Total loss of national identities can never
take place.
Plan followed
Intro: This situation has both pros and cons which I shall discuss in the following paragraphs
Para 1: benefits of globalization
-

More jobs

Better trade

More opportunities to travel

More choices

Para 2: Why some people hold the opposite view

We eat the same food, watch the same TV programmes, listen to the same music and wear the
same clothes
Para 3: Own view refuting the opponents view
Conclusion: there are more advantages of increasing trade and cultural contact among nations.
Whatever similarities we see today are only on the surface. Total loss of national identities can never
take place

The speeding up of life in many areas such as travel and communication has negative effects on
society at all levelsindividual, national and global. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is irrefutable that the IT revolution and faster means of travel have affected society at all levels.
However, I disagree that all these effects are negative. The society has also benefited enormously
from this speeding up of life which in other words we can say globalization.

At the individual level, we have more choices, more opportunities to travel, better job prospects and
more awareness and tolerance of other cultures. Due to better communication, people are connected
with their near and dear ones and distances are no longer a barrier. There has been a fall in face-toface communication but the social network of friends that the young generation of today has is far
more than ever before in the history of mankind.
At the national level, countries are getting closer and the boundaries are disappearing. Because of this
fast era of today, nations are developing strong bonds doing successful trade with each other. The rich
nations are opening Multi National Companies in developing countries and thus providing job
opportunities to millions. This is narrowing the gap between the rich and the poor. No doubt the
people working in such companies are underpaid but it is definitely better than being unemployed.
Because of this the economies of the poor countries are improving.
At the global level, nations are joining hands to fight evils such as poverty, disease, terrorism and
global warming. Who has not heard of the Kyoto Protocol. The major feature of the Kyoto Protocol is
that it sets binding targets for 37 industrialized countries and the European community for reducing
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions .
To conclude, the accelerating pace of life has both negative as well as positive effects. However, the
positive effects are much more than negative effects.
Plan followed
Intro: I disagree that all these effects are negative
Para 1: Benefits at individual level
Para 2: Benefits at national level
Para 3: Benefits at global level
Conclusion: the accelerating pace of life has both negative as well as positive effects. However, the
positive effects are much more than negative effects

Air transport is increasingly used to export types of fruits and vegetables to countries where they
cannot be grown or are out of season. Some people say it is a good thing, but other people think it
cant be justified. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Globalisation has revolutionized our world in many aspects. Now, we dont belong to a big planet
Earth. We belong to a small global village. Everything is available everywhere. There are many
advantages and disadvantages of transporting fruits and vegetables over a long distance by air. In my
opinion, the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.

On the positive side, transporting goods over a long distance gives us a lot of choices. We can taste a
variety of fruits and vegetables from all parts of the world. For example, about ten years ago, we
hardly saw kiwi fruit which is from New Zealand. But, now it has a place on every fruit stand.
Moreover, delivery by air is quick. Seasonal fruits and vegetables that are grown in far away
countries can be delivered as soon as possible by keeping the quality and taste unchanged. Only air
transport can cover so long a distance in such a short time to achieve this goal. The United States,
Canada and Western Europe all import tropical agricultural products that grow in tropical climates by
air.
Secondly, many people get employment in this field. Small farmers have a chance to expand globally
and it increases the overall economy of the country. Finally, it helps in developing good relations
between countries which helps in international cooperation and peace. If countries are dependent
upon one anothers economic success then armed conflict would be less likely.
On the downside, importing foods can have a negative effect on local culture. This can be seen in
countries such as Japan where imported food has become more popular than traditional, local
produce, eroding peoples understanding of their own food traditions. A second major disadvantage is
pollution. When goods are transported thousands of miles by road, sea and air, it increases pollution
from exhaust fumes.
To summarise, importing foods by air has both merits and demerits but the pros outweigh the cons.
Plan followed
Intro: In my opinion, the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.
Para 1: More choices
Para 2: Employment and good relations among nations
Para 3: Disadvantages loss of culture and pollution
Conclusion: importing foods by air has both merits and demerits but the pros outweigh the cons

The spread of multinational companies and the increase in globalization produce positive effects for
everyone. Do you agree or disagree?
( IELTS essay question 9th Feb 2012 Australia)
I disagree with the statement that the growing globalization along with the expanding multinational
companies benefits all the people. Although supporters of globalization claim that there are many
benefits of MNCs, they are in fact damaging the quality of life. A number of arguments support my
opinion.

My first argument relates to their products. Supporters of globalization would argue that
multinational companies produce high quality goods available to most people. While this may be true
to some extent, it also means we have less choice of products to buy. When powerful multinational
companies invade local markets with their goods, they often force local companies with fewer
resources to go out of business. In consequence, we are obliged to buy multinational products
whether we like them or not.
Secondly, it is sometimes said that MNCs and globalization are making societies more open. This is
true to some extent but the fact cannot be ignored that as a result the human race is losing its cultural
diversity. If we consumed different products societies all over the world would be more varied. This
can be seen by the fact that we all shop in similar multinational supermarkets and buy identical
products wherever we live.
Thirdly, defenders of multinational companies often point out that they provide employment.
Although this is undoubtedly true it also means we have become more dependent on them which in
turn makes us more vulnerable to their decisions. When, for example, a multinational company
decides to move its production facility to another country, this has an adverse effect on its workers
who lose their jobs. What is more, the jobs MNCs provide are not paid as much as they have to pay
for similar jobs in their country. So, in fact they are exploiting workers of poor nations.
To summarise, multinational companies do have their benefits, but they also have their drawbacks
and not everyone is benefited by them.
Plan followed ( This is an interesting view to support your views)
Intro: Disagree
Para 1: First point of the statement with my refutation relating to more variety
Para 2: Second point of the statement with my refutation relating to loss of cultural diversity
Para 3: Third point of the statement with my refutation relating to Employment
Conclusion: multinational companies do have their benefits, but they also have their drawbacks and
not everyone is benefited by them