Writing Feedback / The chart provides information about UK immigration, emigration and net migration; IELTS TASK 1 [2]

International migration in UK

The chart provides information about UK immigration, emigration and net migration between the years of 1990 and 2008.

It can be explicitly observed that while there was an increase in the number of both immigrants and emigrants, the figure for immigration was much more significant over the given period. Net immigration reached its peak in the year 2004.

In 1999, the number of people moving to the UK for inhabitancy was roughly 400,000 compared to nearly 300,000 recorded emigrants. There was a stable rise in immigration, which achieved approximately 600,000 people by 2004. In contrast, immigration initially showed a steady trend before rising to around 380,000 people in 2003.

Net immigration had 200,000 people by 1999 and experienced an inconsiderable change from 1999 to 2003. This figure later peaked with about 250,000 people, which was followed by fluctuations and dropped to around 180,000 people at the end of the period.

• 
  hinh52.jpg
  

Writing Feedback / IELTS QUESTION: People should only buy locally grown food. To what extent do you agree or disagree? [2]

In recent years, there has been an increase in the proposition that people should just rely on locally sourced food due to its favourable impacts at both individual and societal levels. I, however, could not concur with this perspective due to the following analysis regarding the economic and food safety realms.

It is undeniable that the consumption of foods produced locally can foster the development of the regional economy. Empowered by a dedicated local consumer base, local entrepreneurs can flourish and expand their operations, generating a rise in employment opportunities within the community. This can have a ripple effect in which the spending power of the employed workforce is fueled, ultimately securing the well-being of the domestic economy. Despite this, sole reliance on locally grown foods can put consumers at a financial disadvantage. It can be attributed to the premium prices of these products stemming from small-scale production. This setback is further exacerbated as the weather changes over the course of a year, imposing additional financial strain on low-income households.

Enhanced nutritional value is the second benefit of local food choices. Non-local foods, during transportation over long distances, can be subjected to nutrient depletion because of light-induced chemical reactions. By prioritising locally produced foods, consumers can optimise the nutritional contents of their meals. However, it is also crucial to acknowledge that local foods have a higher potential for food contamination in comparison to their commercially produced equivalents. It is because while large-scale farms usually operate under rigorous quality control procedures, local farmers may lack the capacity to implement similar food safety protocols, increasing the risks of foodborne illnesses to consumers of local foods.

In conclusion, while admitting that local food could offer considerable positive impacts on nutrition and local economic wellness, I contend that the proposition for its sole consumption is flawed due to the aforementioned unfavourable impacts of locally produced foods.

Writing Feedback / IELTS QUESTION: Are GMOs as a viable solution to feed the increasing population? [2]

I would like to express my deepest thanks for your feedback in advance!

Essay question: With a growing world population, one of the most pressing issues is feeding a huge population. Some people think that GM (Genetically Modified) foods offer a viable solution to this problem. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

It is believed that GMOs are potential efficacious measures for feeding the ever-growing population. I partially concur with this notion because while acknowledging the potential of foods with genetic modification to tackle the challenge of food shortages, I am deeply concerned about their downsides.

It is indisputable that genetically modified foods can address world hunger by enhancing food security in two path ways. First, thanks to DNA alternation techniques, these foods possess beneficial traits, allowing them to withstand harsh weather and diseases, major interruptions of food supplies. This benefit leads to higher yields and thus relieves food shortages. Secondly, despite being genetically engineered, GM crops are safe for consumption. It is attributed to the fact that they are strictly regulated by FDA, a trustworthy regulatory body, and must pass the standard food safety assessment before being introduced to the market.

Nevertheless, I believe that genetically modified foods are not reliable solutions to the global food crisis for two reasons. The most obvious one is that their competitive advantages do not solve the inequality in food distribution, which is the root cause of this issue. The rationale behind this is that genetically modified foods are primarily accessible in First World instead of Third World countries where the majority of residents are undernourished. The second rationale is that despite being endorsed by FDA as free of health hazards, the long-term impacts of genetically engineered products are still being studied. This implies a situation where the potential health risks of allergic reactions, mutations in DNA, and gene transfer are still uncertain.

In conclusion, although I agree that GMOs, which feature favourable genetic characteristics and reliable endorsement, could be a powerful tool in the fight against global hunger, I doubt their viability as a viable solution to this challenge due to their irrelevance to unequal food access and unforeseen health consequences for human wellbeing.