Today food travels from thousands of miles from the farm to the consumer. Some people say that it would be better for the economy & environment if people ate food produced from local farmers. Why is this the case? Is it a positive development?
In contemporary society, it takes a long time when victuals generally are produced from the farm’s store and transferred to far destinations to the consumer. Many hold a belief that it creates economic and environmental benefits if residents choose to eat food produced from local farms. To the best of my knowledge, the later point of view is grounded for the following reasons. This essay will present an overview of causes and advantages of this phenomenon.
Firstly, it is note-worthy that the safety of foods having verified origin is widely perceived as the main reason. Nowadays, many sociological studies have shown that although it is invisible, food produced from local farmers does not have toxic materials causing cancer and guarantees the safety of consumer’s health. Secondly, another factor that has added fuel to the fire is the convenience of food transportation among different countries. Therefore, it will be a grave mistake to overlook the fact that it can take several days to import international food transported by the airline. For example, according to the survey conducted by BBC News, this phenomenon is one of the contributive factors impacting on international trade because this does not come without a high price.
In evaluating its impact, it is important to take effects on economy and environment into account. From an economic perspective, it creates new business or jobs for local citizens about producing food, which does a great job in enhancing the standard of their living and affects positively macro-economic performance. A second major advantage is the fact that eating local food plays an instrument in protecting the environment. The export and import of food around the world is accompanied by the increase of global warming due to the carbon emissions produced during the process. According to researches, eating local victuals can reduce the distance that food travels and effects of harmful emissions released from vehicles during transport.
In conclusion, the safe quality of food and transportation difficulties are the main reasons, which have positive chronic effects on economy and environment as mentioned above.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-06-14 | Cholley | 84 | view |
| 2021-10-03 | maiphuong0610 | 84 | view |
| 2021-09-27 | maiphuong0610 | 84 | view |
| 2021-09-27 | maiphuong0610 | 84 | view |
- The charts below show the percentages of the water used in different sectors in Sydney Australia in 1997 and 2007 89
- Some people believe that university education should focus on the skills of employment for the future Others think they should focus on academic study only Discuss both views and give your own opinion 78
- Some people argue that holding sporting events is beneficial to countries development However other people hold the opposite opinion Discuss both views and give your own opinion 61
- The world should have only one government rather than a national government for each country Do the advantages outweigh this advantage 78
- Today food travels from thousands of miles from the farm to the consumer Some people say that it would be better for the economy environment if people ate food produced from local farmers Why is this the case Is it a positive development 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 159, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun hold seems to be countable; consider using: 'Many holds'.
Suggestion: Many holds
...ed to far destinations to the consumer. Many hold a belief that it creates economic and e...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, if, look, second, secondly, so, therefore, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 24.0651302605 91% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 41.998997996 114% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1835.0 1615.20841683 114% => OK
No of words: 342.0 315.596192385 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.36549707602 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30037696126 4.20363070211 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.0279369616 2.80592935109 108% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 176.041082164 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.581871345029 0.561755894193 104% => OK
syllable_count: 575.1 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.6619669415 49.4020404114 82% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.333333333 106.682146367 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.8 20.7667163134 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 7.06120827912 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.29956416653 0.244688304435 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0905911712313 0.084324248473 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0488978108445 0.0667982634062 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.174030301588 0.151304729494 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0414767377528 0.056905535591 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.3 13.0946893788 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 50.2224549098 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.16 12.4159519038 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.81 8.58950901804 114% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 78.4519038076 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.