Solving Environmental Problems is the responsibility of International Organization IELTS Writing Task 2

Feb 4, 2023

Solving Environmental Problems is the responsibility of International Organization IELTS Writing Task 2 is an opinion essay. The three sample answers have been provided below. In this IELTS writing task 2; Solving Environmental Problems is the responsibility of International Organization IELTS Writing Task 2, answers begin with identifying both views and are followed by a brief explanation related to the topic. The sample answers in Solving Environmental Problems is the responsibility of International Organization IELTS Writing Task 2, include 3 parts: introduction, body and conclusion. The introduction talks about the opinion and the reason behind it. The body explains and highlights points to support the topic. The conclusion will have the opinion of the candidate.
IELTS writing task 2 evaluates candidates based on the knowledge and views they have expressed. The areas that candidates are assessed on are grammar, vocabulary, and style. IELTS writing score is marked based on band scores. The band scores range from 0 to 9. Since the topics are very diverse, candidates must go through IELTS Writing practice papers to become familiar with a lot of topics.
Check: Get 10 Free IELTS Sample Papers
Check: Register for IELTS Coaching - Join for Free Trial Class Now

Topic: Solving environmental problems should be the responsibility of an international organization rather than each national government. Do you agree or disagree?

Band 8 IELTS Essay

The issue of environmental crisis has been a major concern in recent decades, both globally and nationally. With the increasing urgency of the problem, many organizations have been working tirelessly to find solutions to these issues. However, there is a debate about who should be responsible for addressing these problems. Some believe that tackling an environmental crisis should be the job of a single global governing body, while others argue that the government should be in charge.

Advocates for a global governing body argue that world organizations can do a better job of solving environmental challenges because they have a global perspective and can collaborate with all nations to promote the best potential global development. Furthermore, international organizations have access to funding from many wealthy countries, which can help them quickly solve issues that may be beyond the reach of underdeveloped countries. Moreover, international organizations are not affected by political conditions in the same way that national governments are, allowing them to think and act objectively.

On the other hand, proponents of the government being responsible for environmental issues argue that they are better equipped to understand and address their own country's environmental problems. The government also has a better understanding of how these problems arise, as well as how to involve their people in problem-solving. Furthermore, the government is in charge of the country's education and can ensure that the people have easy access to information. Additionally, foreign organizations may not always be familiar with local difficulties, which can lead to changes in future plans.

In conclusion, both arguments have their merits, and the solution may lie in a combination of the two. If the host country supports and communicates their problems to international organizations and collaborates with them, it could lead to a more comprehensive and effective solution to environmental issues. Global organizations have always been objective in their functioning and have the support of many nations, which can contribute to positive outcomes. However, it is important to recognize the strengths of the government in addressing environmental problems and to utilize their knowledge and expertise to achieve the best possible results.

Band 6.5 IELTS Essay

Climate change and plenty of other environmental challenges have intensified in recent decades, posing a slew of doubts about humankind's long-term viability. Although the idea of a worldwide organization being in charge of these environmental issues rather than each individual country's government sounds reasonable, I disagree.

On the one hand, it must be understood that an international group's responsibility for environmental issues may be riddled with hazards. Unlike local governments, multinational organizations are inextricably linked to the exploitation of natural resources, particularly in poor nations, while ignoring environmental concerns. In reality, several international organizations that come to Vietnam to address deforestation and diminishing animal habitats are accused of colluding with poachers to smuggle precious forests to neighboring countries.

On the one hand, there are numerous advantages in terms of the national government's environmental liability. To begin with, the national government may freely implement legislation to handle a variety of environmental challenges that would not be seen in an international organization. For example, the Vietnamese government has imposed a carbon price on many industrial parks with numerous production facilities, reducing the concentration of polluting particles in the atmosphere, particularly carbon dioxide and methane. Secondly, the national government may use the mainstream media to educate residents about the harmful implications of environmental problems and, as a result, raise their environmental awareness. For example, due to some programs designed to raise awareness about some respiratory diseases caused by climate change, the number of Vietnamese people participating in tree-planting campaigns to restore damaged forests has increased significantly, significantly contributing to the nation's environmental rehabilitation.

In conclusion, I believe that each national government, rather than a multinational government, should be responsible for handling green challenges because of the advantages of freely enacting laws and using the media to enhance citizens' environmental consciousness.

Band 6 IELTS Essay

Some think that environmental issues should be resolved on a global scale, while others contend that they should be addressed at a national level. In my opinion, they should be resolved on a national level because it is the most efficient and correct way to do it.

On the one hand, some people believe that environmental issues should be addressed at the international level. They believe this because global warming, which is mostly caused by the unrestricted use of automobiles, is one of the most pressing environmental concerns that people throughout the world are confronting these days. For example, an assessment on the world environment done by Cambridge University in 2013 revealed that the burning of fossil fuels contributes the most to greenhouse gas emissions. However, I do not believe that autos alone are to blame for these problems.

Others, on the other hand, believe that tackling these environmental issues should be handled at the country level since it is more precise and convenient, and I agree. That is, it will be easier to identify the factors that contribute to pollution within a state, and enacting legal legislation to prevent or restrict such issues will be more accurate on a national level. In other words, it encourages other countries to follow suit, resulting in a worldwide solution to the problem. The Netherlands, for example, established law on forest protection and development in 2013 and has seen a significant reduction in deforestation since then.

To summarise, while there are compelling arguments for addressing environmental challenges on a global scale, I feel that addressing these issues at the country level is a faster and more precise way to address these difficulties.

Check – IELTS Writing Samples