The tables below give information about sales of Fairtrade-labelled coffee and bananas in 1999 and 2004 in five European countries.
The table compares the spending on Fair-labelled coffee and bananas in five different countries in 1999 and 2004.
Generally, the amount of money used in all categories was a downward trend, while that of UK and Switzerland witnessed an upward trend.
About the category of coffee, the figure for Switzerland took the first position at 3 million, which was twice that for the UK (1.5 million) in the first year. While the amount of money used for coffee in Switzerland increased by 3 million, that of the UK rose significantly by 18.5 million from 1999 to 2004. In terms of bananas, the highest expenditure can be seen in the UK during these years surveyed. This was followed by Switzerland’s consumption, increasing gradually from 1 in the first year to 5.5 in the last year.
Regarding the remaining countries, there was a neglected growth in the spending of coffee in Denmark and Sweden, while the figure for Belgium increased nearly twofold from 1 in 1999 to 1.7 million in 2004. About bananas, the amount of money used in Belgium and Sweden declined at an average of 0.95 million for each over the period. By contrast, the category of “Denmark” witnessed a sevenfold increase from 0.6 million in the first year to 4 million the last year.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-06-01 | trpg143 | 56 | view |
| 2023-11-16 | phamquanghmu | 73 | view |
| 2023-11-11 | Daniel3003 | 67 | view |
| 2023-11-11 | Daniel3003 | 67 | view |
| 2023-11-11 | Daniel3003 | 67 | view |
- The pie charts below show the comparison of different kinds of energy production of France in two years 10
- The pie charts above show the comparison of the proportion of energy produced by different sources in an European country in 1995 and 2005 80
- FEWER YOUNG PEOPLE DO FARMING WORK IN RURAL AREAS WHY SHOULD YOUNG PEOPLE ENCOURAGED TO DO FARMING WORK 84
- The graphs below show the percentage of men and women aged 60 64 who were employed in four countries in 1970 and 2000 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- Nowadays more people are choosing to socialize online rather than face to face is this a positive or negative development 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, regarding, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.0 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 33.7804878049 133% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 3.97073170732 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1044.0 965.302439024 108% => OK
No of words: 215.0 196.424390244 109% => OK
Chars per words: 4.85581395349 4.92477711251 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82921379641 3.73543355544 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80993370388 2.65546596893 106% => OK
Unique words: 103.0 106.607317073 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.479069767442 0.547539520022 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 295.2 283.868780488 104% => 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: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.4926829268 102% => OK
Sentence length SD: 29.6685392667 43.030603864 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.0 112.824112599 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.8888888889 22.9334400587 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.0 5.23603664747 57% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.09268292683 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.129392066178 0.215688989381 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0756843209946 0.103423049105 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.130431916971 0.0843802449381 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13680024163 0.15604864568 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.170691926929 0.0819641961636 208% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 13.2329268293 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 65.05 61.2550243902 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.3012195122 96% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.2 11.4140731707 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.86 8.06136585366 98% => OK
difficult_words: 42.0 40.7170731707 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.9970731707 102% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.