Organized tours to remote areas and community are becoming more and more popular. Is this a positive or negative development for local people and the environment?
In the global era, there are many tour and travel agencies provided the trip program in remotes areas. One important aspect of this program is increasing the number of tourism in a country. The issue is whether the program is give more positive impact to the development of remote area or rather the opposite?. In my view, the trip program in remote areas is more positive than negative. I hold this view for some reasons which are set out below.
To begin with, most of trip program in remote areas had successful to escalate the amount of interest local community. In some countries, this program had transformed local community into the better level quality of life, from poorer inhabitant to wealthy society. The data from Research Centre for environment Studies the University of Sydney showed that more than 80% tour program in peripheral areas in Asia-Pacific regions had effectual to boost the number of new entrepreneurs from remote areas.
On the other hand, the trip program also had accelerated the transfer of knowledge and information in remote areas. Nowadays, most of inhabitants in remote tourist location utilized technology and gadget for sustaining their environments and promoting their beautiful areas to the world. Referring to global environment Institute stated that more than 70% trip program in remote areas empowering the people for participating in green sustainable program.
However, there are some Non Governmental Organizations (NGO) that criticized the tour program in peripheral areas was alleged as the main actor of environment damage. Unfortunately, there is little evidence to support this view.
Taking everything into consideration, I believe that trip program in remote areas are more profitable and gave more positive impacts than its negatives.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-08-14 | fachryadul92 | 73 | view |
| 2018-12-02 | drtruong92 | 78 | view |
- The graph below shows the fertility rate of women in different Gulf Countries from 1990 to 2000. 67
- The graph below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a European country between 1979 and 2004.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparison where relevant. 61
- post school qualifications in Australia 1999 56
- Children are facing more pressures nowadays from academic social and commercial perspectives What are the causes of these pressures and what measures should be taken to reduce these pressures 68
- In many countries today insufficient respect is shown to older people.What do you think may be the reasons for this?What problems might this cause in society? 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 30, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun tour seems to be countable; consider using: 'many tours'.
Suggestion: many tours
In the global era, there are many tour and travel agencies provided the trip p...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 127, Rule ID: MOST_SOME_OF_NNS[1]
Message: After 'most of', you should use 'the' ('most of the inhabitants') or simply say ''most inhabitants''.
Suggestion: most of the inhabitants; most inhabitants
... information in remote areas. Nowadays, most of inhabitants in remote tourist location utilized tec...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, so, as to, in my view, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 13.1623246493 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 7.85571142285 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1520.0 1615.20841683 94% => OK
No of words: 283.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.37102473498 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10153676581 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85421389836 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 176.041082164 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.537102473498 0.561755894193 96% => OK
syllable_count: 494.1 506.74238477 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => 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: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 20.2975951904 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.6079332267 49.4020404114 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.571428571 106.682146367 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.2142857143 20.7667163134 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.28571428571 7.06120827912 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.355531773638 0.244688304435 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.12924528449 0.084324248473 153% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0729392987369 0.0667982634062 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.207223969082 0.151304729494 137% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0414222139578 0.056905535591 73% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.0946893788 107% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 50.2224549098 85% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.87 12.4159519038 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.32 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 78.4519038076 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 9.78957915832 77% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.1190380762 99% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => 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.