Today much of the food people eat gets transported from farms that are thousands of miles away. Some people believe it would be better for the environment and the economy if people only consumed food produced by the local farmers. Would the advantages of

Nowadays, it is common practice for people to obtain their food from agricultural
lands located in very distant places. However, some believe it might be more
beneficial for local destinations, both environmentally and economically, if nations
promote the consumption of domestic food cultivated by the locals. In my idea, the
merits of this approach outstrip its drawbacks.

The first advantage of food being domestically grown is that a nation’s economy
would probably witness an unprecedented boom. That is, some agrarian countries
pivot solely on agricultural production, striving to cultivate as much as possible.
Helping the nation’s overall revenue, farmers are highly motivated to produce more
food if their fellow countryman consumes their agricultural produce more.
Additionally, a surge in domestically produced food is likely to obviate the need for
a vast number of vehicles carrying the food to one’s locality, thus a significant drop
in the amount of pollution arising from those vehicles’ emissions and noises.

On the negative side, some nations lack sufficient resources, both geographically
and technically in order to grow quality raw material. Prepared from these poor
quality ingredients, food would probably possess minimum nutritional properties,
thus wreaking havoc on one’ health over a long-term consumption. Moreover, this
practice might disturb wildlife. To this end, persisting in producing food from
materials of a local origin, farmers are likely to seek more cultivable lands. This dire
need, in turn, would culminate in an invasion into other uncultivated lands, which
have previously been a haven sheltering varied species of wild animals, hence posing
a real menace to the life of those creatures. However, with a proper policy adopted
by the governments, these adverse ramifications are to be mitigated.

In conclusion, I think the merits of producing more locally cultivated food is likely
to eclipse the downsides, as this pattern helps a nations’ economy and the
sustainability of its environment.

Votes
Average: 8.4 (1 vote)
Essays by the user:

Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, hence, however, if, moreover, so, thus, i think, 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: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 10.4138276553 38% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 7.30460921844 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 41.998997996 100% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1811.0 1615.20841683 112% => OK
No of words: 310.0 315.596192385 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.84193548387 5.12529762239 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19604776685 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.24257737186 2.80592935109 116% => OK
Unique words: 193.0 176.041082164 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.622580645161 0.561755894193 111% => OK
syllable_count: 563.4 506.74238477 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 5.0 2.52805611222 198% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.76152304609 189% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.5356588631 49.4020404114 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 129.357142857 106.682146367 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.1428571429 20.7667163134 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.92857142857 7.06120827912 70% => OK
Paragraphs: 26.0 4.38176352705 593% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.251859121501 0.244688304435 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0793539774246 0.084324248473 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0572231816243 0.0667982634062 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0604068319233 0.151304729494 40% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0548996058683 0.056905535591 96% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.1 13.0946893788 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 32.22 50.2224549098 64% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.59 12.4159519038 134% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.53 8.58950901804 123% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 78.4519038076 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------
Maximum five paragraphs wanted.

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.