In spite of the advances made in agriculture, many people around the world still go hungry. Why is this the case? What can be done about this problem?
Despite the fact that farming methods and yield improved dramatically over the last century, millions of people still do not have enough food to eat. There are social, economical and climatic reasons behind this disturbing phenomenon.
Famine or food scarcity only affects the poor. Whether they grow their food or not, the rich will ensure that they have enough on their platter. The poor, unfortunately, lack this purchasing power. If food is not made available at concessional rates, they cannot have to access to it. Most of the time poor people do not own any land. Consequently, they cannot grow their own food. They have to buy their food and when food prices increase, they cannot have their fill.
The change in climate also causes famine. Extreme drought like conditions persist in some countries. For example, in some parts of Africa it has not rained in years. Consequently, people living in those regions cannot grow their crops. They are dependent on food grown in other areas and if that is not available, then these people will have to go hungry. Political reasons also contribute to this problem. Many countries refuse to share their water resources with other countries. Often times this is caused by the enmity between these nations. Unfortunately, this practice affects the food security in those countries that do not have adequate water resources of their own.
In order to solve this problem, the governments need to ensure that food is available for the poor for free or at concessional rates. Rich countries which grow surplus food should show the magnanimity to share their excess with poor countries that do not have enough food to feed their people. International organizations can play an important role in ensuring that nations share their wealth and resources with those that need it.
To conclude, hunger continues to haunt millions of people even in the 21st century. Often times this is caused by the inequitable distribution of wealth and resources. Rich countries and rich people can do a lot to ensure that the poor also have access to a basic necessity like food.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-27 | BIBHU KALITA | 67 | view |
| 2020-01-24 | yasamin27 | 67 | view |
| 2020-01-15 | Iruki | 78 | view |
| 2020-01-03 | aria etemadi | 56 | view |
| 2019-11-29 | JiaYanLi | 73 | view |
- the graph below shows changes in the distribution of average household income between 1965 and 2015 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 85
- In spite of the advances made in agriculture, many people around the world still go hungry.Why is this case? What can be done about this problem? 56
- 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 the money should be spent on improving existing public transport.Discuss both th 56
- Some people say that the only reason for learning a foreign language is in order to travel or to work in a foreign country. Others say that these are not the only reasons why someone should learn a foreign language.Discuss both these views and give your o 56
- In spite of the advances made in agriculture, many people around the world still go hungry. Why is this the case? What can be done about this problem? 56
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, if, so, still, then, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 13.1623246493 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 7.85571142285 140% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 42.0 24.0651302605 175% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 46.0 41.998997996 110% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 8.3376753507 12% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1763.0 1615.20841683 109% => OK
No of words: 351.0 315.596192385 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02279202279 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.32839392791 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.56639340527 2.80592935109 91% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 176.041082164 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.490028490028 0.561755894193 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 533.7 506.74238477 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.60771543086 93% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 16.0721442886 149% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 20.2975951904 69% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.9772743681 49.4020404114 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 73.4583333333 106.682146367 69% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.625 20.7667163134 70% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.375 7.06120827912 34% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 3.9879759519 201% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 3.4128256513 234% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.118917860448 0.244688304435 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0428304108087 0.084324248473 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0397364923936 0.0667982634062 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0815093602131 0.151304729494 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0353905366719 0.056905535591 62% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.5 13.0946893788 73% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 65.73 50.2224549098 131% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.6 11.3001002004 67% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.24 12.4159519038 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.84 8.58950901804 91% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 78.4519038076 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 9.78957915832 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.6 10.1190380762 75% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 10.7795591182 74% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.