Over the last few decades, there has been an increase in international tourism. Some people think that tourism is beneficial for local communities and should be encouraged. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Recently, the issue of tourism has become the subject of heated debate. Some people assert that global tourism benefits local communities a great deal and should not be discouraged, while others argue otherwise. Personally, I believe that both arguments should be given equal weight. In the following essay, the evidence supporting this contention will be discussed alongside relevant examples.
On the one hand, it seems difficult to refute the idea that there are a number of advantages that can be derived from a boom in tourism. Perhaps the principal benefit is that the advancement of the tourism industry invigorates economic growth considering that it attracts investment from multinational firms and governments across the globe. In addition, developments in the tourism sector create a multitude of employment opportunities in the building of facilities as well as the updating of infrastructure, leading local residents to have an improved standard of living. To provide a hypothetical example, if it were not for tourism, there would be much higher unemployment rates in a myriad of renowned cities amongst overseas visitors. For these reasons, there does seem to be a solid basis for several of the arguments in favour of global tourism.
On the other hand, it seems short-sighted to contend that the development of tourism merely brings with it positives. The most oft-cited argument against such a view is that a growth in tourism poses a threat to the local environment since foreign travellers produce garbage. As an illustration, one notable natural heritage site designated by UNESCO in South Korea had more than 500 species of birds in 2010. However, the majority of these species became extinct due to a huge amount of waste generated by overseas tourists, which exerted a detrimental influence on birds' habitats. Furthermore, some foreign visitors often commit vandalism, placing a heavy burden on local governments because they have to spend an astronomical sum of public funding in restoring damaged amenities. In light of the above, I also find these persuasive.
In conclusion, it is undeniable that there are a variety of opinions about this topic. However, after considering this matter in a careful manner, it can be concluded that each side of the debate has its strengths, as discussed above.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-08-09 | idid382021 | 89 | view |
| 2022-08-07 | idid382021 | 89 | view |
| 2022-03-30 | idid382021 | 89 | view |
| 2022-03-30 | idid382021 | 89 | view |
| 2021-09-11 | idid382002 | 89 | view |
- QQ4 Some people think that social networking sites have a huge negative impact on both individuals and society To what extent do you agree or disagree 84
- Some people think living in big cities is bad for people s health To what extent do you agree or disagree 87
- Q19 Developing countries require help offered by international organizations to ensure healthy and sustainable development Some people think that financial aid is important Others believe that practical aid and advice is more important Discuss both these 89
- Q In a number of countries some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities Others believe that the money should be spent on improving existing public transport Discuss bo 84
- QQ9 With the increasing demand for energy sources of oil and gas people should look for sources of oil and gas in remote and untouched natural places Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages of damaging such areas 89
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 127, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a careful manner" with adverb for "careful"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... However, after considering this matter in a careful manner, it can be concluded that each side of ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, furthermore, however, if, so, well, while, as to, in addition, in conclusion, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 10.4138276553 19% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 24.0651302605 112% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 41.998997996 143% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 8.3376753507 144% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1961.0 1615.20841683 121% => OK
No of words: 371.0 315.596192385 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.28571428571 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38877662729 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99153490717 2.80592935109 107% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 176.041082164 128% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.606469002695 0.561755894193 108% => OK
syllable_count: 628.2 506.74238477 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.76152304609 168% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.5121181308 49.4020404114 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.352941176 106.682146367 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8235294118 20.7667163134 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.64705882353 7.06120827912 94% => 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 : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => 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: 0.229948205361 0.244688304435 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0650959323672 0.084324248473 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0557800087292 0.0667982634062 84% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125282420623 0.151304729494 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0753346065842 0.056905535591 132% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.0946893788 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.4 12.4159519038 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.87 8.58950901804 115% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 78.4519038076 156% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.