The two provided tables show the values of sold coffee and bananas carrying the Fairtrade label in five countries in Europe, for 1999 and 2004.
Overall, the Fairtrade coffee experienced growth in sales in all five countries in the given period. However, it is noticeable that bananas with the same label had higher total sales in both years, although sales increase for this product was not universal among nations between 1999 and 2004.
When it comes to the producer-friendly coffee sales in Europe, the UK was the leader with €1.5 million in 1999, and whopping €20 million just five years later. The Fairtrade coffee sales roughly doubled in Belgium and Switzerland in half a decade, to the level of €3 million and €6 million in two nations, respectively. On the other hand, Sweden and Denmark had marginal sales growth of just €200 thousand by 2004, from their respective initial levels of €0.8 million and €1.8 million in 1999.
Fairtrade bananas were sold in larger volumes than coffee. Here, Switzerland was the biggest consumer, with threefold rise in sales between 1999 and 2004, when the sales hit €47 million. Modest €1 million worth of bananas was sold in the UK in 1999. By 2004, this number surged more than five times, reaching €5.5 million. Belgium had even larger rise in sales, going from €0.6 million to €4 million in five years. However, Sweden and Denmark were the countries where the Fairtrade bananas sales dropped, from around €2 million to about €1 million.
- The maps below show the village of Stokeford in 1930 and 2010. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 35
- Countries are becoming more and more similar because people are able to buy the same products anywhere in the world. Do you think this is positive or negative development? 89
- The chart below gives information on the percentage of British people giving money to charity by age range for the years 1990 and 2010.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. Write at le 73
- Some people work for the same organisation all their working life. Others think that it is better to work for different organisations.Discuss both these views and give your own opinion. 73
- The first chart below shows how energy is used in an average Australian household. The second chart shows the greenhouse gas emissions which result from this energy use.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make compar 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, so, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 6.8 147% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 33.7804878049 121% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1272.0 965.302439024 132% => OK
No of words: 251.0 196.424390244 128% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06772908367 4.92477711251 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98032404683 3.73543355544 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.34899668624 2.65546596893 88% => OK
Unique words: 127.0 106.607317073 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.505976095618 0.547539520022 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 344.7 283.868780488 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 8.94146341463 134% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.8864538706 43.030603864 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.0 112.824112599 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9166666667 22.9334400587 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.5 5.23603664747 48% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 3.70975609756 189% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.09268292683 122% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.32374970489 0.215688989381 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.144035540872 0.103423049105 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0867202859999 0.0843802449381 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.253847820892 0.15604864568 163% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0861353686449 0.0819641961636 105% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 13.2329268293 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 68.1 61.2550243902 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 10.3012195122 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 11.4140731707 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.84 8.06136585366 97% => OK
difficult_words: 51.0 40.7170731707 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.4329268293 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.0658536585 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.