Unemployment
is one of the most serious problems facing developed nations today.
What are the advantages and/or
disadvantages of reducing the working week to thirty
five hours?
It is
unquestionable that rising unemployment is one of the most pressing issues in
the industrial
world. One solution that has been put
forward is to cut the working week to a maximum of 35 hours. However, in my
view this solution is rather controversial and other solutions need to be found.
It is fairly easy to understand the
reasons why this proposal has been made. The reasoning is
that if workers are not allowed to
work for more than 35 hours weekly, then employers will be forced to engage
more staff. There would be at least two advantages to this. Not only would
unemployment be reduced, but the working conditions of employees on very long
shifts would also be significantly
improved. For example, a factory employing 300 manual workers doing 10 hours a day might employ 450 workers.
There is also, however, a strong
argument not to implement this proposal. This argument is
based on economic
competitiveness. If a company was forced to employ more workers to produce the same
amount of goods, then its wage bill would rise and its products might become
more expensive and less competitive compared to companies with longer working
weeks. In this case, it
is possible that the company either might become insolvent or it would have to
make some employees redundant. As a result,
the intended benefit to the personnel would not happen.
In summary, we
can see that this is clearly a complex issue as there are significant
advantages
and disadvantages
to the proposal. My own personal view is that it would be better not to
introduce the
shortened working week because it works only in theory and not in practice.
(280 words)
2
Facebook.com/IELTSVN
Should
museums and art galleries be free of charge for the general public, or should a
charge, even a voluntary charge, be
levied for admittance? Discuss this issue, and give your opinion.
One very complex issue in today's
world is the funding of museums and art galleries. While there is an argument that they should be free to
the general public and funded by governments,
I also believe that there is also a
case for saying that they should charge an entrance fee like
other
attractions.
Those who argue that museums should be
free typically make one of two arguments. The first argument is that
institutions like museums are a public service and therefore there should be
free access to
the man in the street. If, for example, there was a charge, only the wealthy
could afford to enjoy
works of art. The second, and related, argument is that if they did levy a
charge
fewer people would go to museums. This
would be serious as they are educational institutions
and standards
would fall.
In contrast, there is only one major
argument on the other side of the debate. This is that both museums and art
galleries need to charge an entrance fee if they are to survive in the modern world. Governments do not have sufficient funds
to subsidise all such institutions, and there are other priorities for
public money. Therefore these galleries and museums need to charge their
customers not only to survive but to
update their exhibitions and make new purchases. By way
of illustration, the Tate Modern in
London could not have been founded without revenue from admissions.
My personal position is that there is
no clear answer to this question as there are such strong arguments on both sides. Perhaps it is possible
for some museums and galleries to charge fees
and for others
not to. It will depend on the situation of the individual museum or gallery.
(291 words)
3
Facebook.com/IELTSVN
Space exploration requires vast sums of money. Is the
amount of money spent on space
research
justifiable? Could the money be better spent?
There has always been considerable
discussion about whether governments should spend tax payers' money on space
research. In my view it is impossible to justify the amount of money spent on
such projects. Generally speaking, the main reason for this position is that
there are
several areas in
which the money could be invested better.
The first point
to make is that politicians have a responsibility to spend public money on
projects that bring a
benefit to the general public. This has not been the case with space research
as
most developments
have been limited to helping astronauts in space or have been very specialised. For example, it is not of
great value to the general public that we now have pens
and biros that
can write upside down. This does not merit the huge amount of money spent.
The second point
to make is that there are many much more urgent projects on Earth that require investment. If governments
spent less money on space research, then they would be
able to help solve some of these
problems such as population control, elimination of diseases
like cholera, global warming and food
shortages. It seems to me that all of these issues are more important because they affect the lives of millions of ordinary
people. An illustration of this
is that the US government could
provide food for all the starving people in the world if they did
not spend so much
on NASA.
My conclusion is
that politicians should not fund space research. The grounds for saying this
are that it is very
costly and provides few real benefits. Furthermore, there are several more
urgent issues that need to be funded.
(281 words)
4
Facebook.com/IELTSVN
Television has had a significant influence on the culture
of many societies. To what
extent would you say that television
has positively or negatively affected the cultural
development of
your society?
It is unarguable that television has
had a considerable impact and changed the world in which
we live. However, there is debate
whether that change has been for the better or the worse, when we consider cultural development. While
there are certainly strong feelings on both sides of the argument in
western Europe, my own view is that television has had a largely positive
influence on our
society.
There are, however, several reasons
why it can be argued that television has a negative effect
on cultural
development. Perhaps the principle argument is the lowbrow nature of many programmes, particularly sitcoms and
soap operas. People who watch these programmes do not learn anything, they are simply entertained. The other major
argument is that because people watch so much television, they no longer
take part in more traditional forms of cultural entertainment. An example here
is how traditional dancing and music is becoming much less
popular because
people are staying at home to watch the television.
On the other
hand, there are a variety of ways in which cultural development has been
assisted
by television.
Here the major argument is that television has allowed the whole of society access to
cultural entertainment. For example, in the nineteenth century only a small
proportion of people could go to the ballet or the theatre. However, it is now possible
for everyone to enjoy these on television. A second positive effect is that on
television we can learn more about other cultures and societies because there are so many
interesting documentaries about other
countries.
My personal
conclusion is that television is a largely positive influence. However, it is
important
that we do not
watch it too much and that we watch the right sort of programme. If we watch
the
wrong sort of
programme and watch too much television, we may become couch potatoes.
(309 words)
5
Facebook.com/IELTSVN
Sample IELTS essay - school curriculum
Subjects such as
Art, Sport and Music are being dropped from the school curriculum for subjects such as Information
Technology. Many people children suffer as a result of
these changes. To what extent would
you support or reject the idea of moving these
subjects from
school curriculum?
In recent times there has much debate
about which subjects should be included on the school curriculum. One particular issue is whether the introduction of more
modern subjects such as IT
for more traditional subjects such as
art and music disadvantages the pupils. I believe that this is a difficult question and different solutions
need to be found for primary and secondary
schools.
There is one major argument in favour
of replacing art, music and sport on the curriculum with subjects like IT. This
is that the purpose of school is to prepare children for their working life
after school, so the subjects on the
curriculum should be relevant to their potential careers. From this point of
view, IT is much relevant to schoolchildren as they need to be computer literate if they want to survive in the workplace.
For example, it is easy to see that word
processing and programming skills will
impress employers more than the ability to run fast or
draw well.
There are also,
however, strong arguments for retaining the more traditional subjects as part
of the curriculum. One
significant counter-argument is that the purpose of education is not just to prepare children for later careers, but also to
develop their all round "culture". It is important that
children leave school with some
knowledge of art, music and sport as all these are all help
develop aspects
of young people's personalities.
My own personal
point of view is that there is merit in both sides of the debate and that all children should study some IT, art
music and sport at least at primary school. At secondary
school, however, children should be
offered a choice between these subjects so that they can
continue to study
them if they wish
(293 words)
6
Facebook.com/IELTSVN
Some people prefer to live in a house, while others
think that there are more advantages
living in an
apartment.
Are there more advantages than
disadvantages to living in a house rather than in an
apartment?
Many people
nowadays face a difficult decision when they buy their own home. The question
is whether they should
buy a house or an apartment. There would seem to be clear benefits and
drawbacks to both
options.
Perhaps the major
advantage of living in a house is the issue of privacy. Typically, there is
more opportunity
for peace and quiet, if you live in a house. This is particularly the case if
it is a detached house. Other significant advantages are that houses are
generally more spacious and
on the whole have gardens. This is
especially important if there is a family so that the children
can have a safe environment to play
in. If, however, you live in a tower block, then the children may have to play outside on the pavement.
There are, of course, negative aspects
to living in houses. The greatest of these is that they tend to be more
expensive to purchase and to maintain. Indeed, a large majority of people choose to live in apartments because they cannot
afford the mortgage to buy a house. Another
possible problem is that there are
fewer houses in cities than the countryside. So if you like
urban life, it may be preferable to
live in an apartment. A second reason to avoid living in a house is that there is a greater sense of
community to life in an apartment.
My conclusion
would be that this is a well-balanced issue. There are probably an equal number
of pros and cons to
making either choice. Ultimately, whether you decide to live in a cottage in
the countryside or a duplex in the city depends on your own personality, family
and financial
circumstances.
(285 words)
7
Facebook.com/IELTSVN
Advances in science and technology have made great
changes to lives of ordinary
people, but artists such as musicians,
painters and writers are still highly valued. What
can the arts
tell us about life that science and technology cannot?
There is no doubt that the quality of
our lives in the 21st century has been greatly improved by various scientific and technological advances.
Despite this, the arts and humanities too still have
much to teach us
about ourselves and life in general.
One area in which we can learn from
the arts is that concepts such as beauty matter in and of themselves. In the world of science and technology,
the only true measure is whether something
works or not. This is a limited view of the world and the arts differ in that
they offer us
an alternative
and more spiritual outlook. For example, if we listen to Mozart we can learn
about
harmony and joy
through the medium of music or if even we read an author like PG Wodehouse we learn about
the value of humour. These essential aspects of life are absent from the
clinical
world of science
and technology.
The other way in
which artists can teach us about more about life is that enjoying art encourages the habit of
self-reflection. If you walk into an art gallery, attend a concert or even
just stay in to read a book, you will
almost certainly begin to think about your inner values. For me, this is a invaluable lesson in life as if we
begin to reflect about ourselves, we begin not just to become more human, but also consider the lives
of others too.
So while science and technology may
have made our physical lives more comfortable in the 21st century. It remains true that the arts and humanities are still
absolutely necessary for
ordinary people as they promote a more
spiritual and reflective view of life that is essential to
our humanity.
8
Facebook.com/IELTSVN
Newspapers and books are outdated. Why do some people
believe this? What is
your opinion?
As we move into
the twenty- first century an increasing number of people are relying on new
forms of
technology. A possible consequence of this is that traditional media such
asbooks and newspapers are not just less popular are considered by some to be
outdated.
The principal
reason why some people take this view is fairly clear in the case of newspapers.
It is generally much easier and quicker to discover what is happening in
theworld from the internet
or the television
than from a newspaper. If you use Google or another search engine or simply
switch on the
television, you can instantly get the latest news bulletin. A newspaper, by
contrast, is out of date the moment it is published because it contains
yesterday's news.
It is perhaps
less obvious why books are said to be out of fashion. One possibility is that
fewer people choose to read for pleasure nowadays because they prefer the
instant gratification and
thrills of modern
technology. There is less effort involved in enjoying a 3D movie or playing a
computer game
than in turning the pages of a book.
My own view and
conclusion is that books and newspapers will never go completely out of fashion or become
redundant. The reason for this is that they serve basic human needs. I
believe that
people will always want to read about the news and escape into the imaginary
worlds of great
novels. However, books and newspapers may need to change to meet the new
demands of
twenty-first century consumers. We can already see this happening with the
arrival
of the
audio-book and the various free newspaper internet sites.
(292 words)
9
Facebook.com/IELTSVN
We are becoming increasingly dependent on computer
technology. It is used in
business, crime
detection and even to fly planes. What will it be used for in future? Is this
dependence on
technology a good thing or should we be suspicious of its benefits?
As we move into
the twenty-first century, it is clear to see that we have become more and more
dependent on computers and information technology. This technology now reaches
into almost
every area of our lives and it is easy
to predict that this phenomenon is only going to grow. My personal belief is that this presents a variety of
dangers.
It is highly
likely that in the future there will be comparatively few aspects of our lives
that will not be influenced by computer technology. The probability is that it
will control more and more forms of communication, transforming fields such as
education and business when video-conferencing
platforms become
more stable. It might even affect romance with more people forming
relationships
online.
While there may
be benefits to this technological revolution, there are also a number of
potential dangers. Perhaps the most serious of these would be that if people
rely on computers too much
for communication, they could in fact
begin to communicate less well. For example, if every member of a family had their own computer screen and smart phone, they
might speak less and
less often to one
another and simply look at a screen. This would be serious because our ability
to communicate
is an essential part of our humanity.
My conclusion is that the growth of
computer technology is inevitable, but that this may not be entirely positive. Just one area in which it is
possible to foresee dangers is communication, and if we are going to ensure
that computers do not become a negative influence, we need to think carefully how we use them.
10
Facebook.com/IELTSVN
Some people believe that
exams are an inappropriate way of measuring students'
performance
and should be replaced by continuous assessment. Do you agree or
disagree
with this view?
There
is some dispute whether the best method of assessing students is to use
examinations
or some form of continuous assessment. This is a complex issue and my
belief
is that there is no one method that applies to all educational systems.
There
are three major arguments in favour of retaining exams. One is that they
provide
a
clear and objective measure of what students have learned, whereas any form of
continuous
assessment is probably going to be far more subjective. An additional point
is
that testing is an excellent way of motivating learners to study harder and to
reward
the
students who do best. Likewise, examinations test the ability of students to
work
under
pressure, and this is a vital life skill for their later careers.
On
the other hand, there are still occasions when it can be better to relieve the
students of exam pressure and to measure their abilities through
continuous assessment. This is
particularly
the case in lower age groups where young children can be affected
negatively by stress
and underperform in exams. It can also be argued that continuous
assessment
is a more effective way of testing some subjects such as design and
technology, which are
more creative and less academic. A further point is that often
continuous
assessment can allow teachers to reward students who work hard, but who
may
be less able and not do well in more formal testing.
In conclusion, while
continuous assessment may be fairer in some contexts, there are still times
when traditional exams may be more appropriate. A sensible compromise
would be to use both
forms of testing together, allowing teachers to reward both ability
and
hard work.
11
Facebook.com/IELTSVN
Differences between countries become less evident each
year. Nowadays, all over the
world people
share the same fashions, advertising, brands, eating habits and TV
channels. Do the
advantages outweigh the disadvantages of this?
It is undoubtedly
the case that the world today has become a global village. One of the
effects of this
is that increasingly people in all corners of the world are exposed to similar
services and
products and adopt similar habits. My view is that this is largely a beneficial
process and in
this essay I will explain why.
The first point
to make is that there are some downsides to this process of cultural
globalisation,
but these are relatively minor. The most significant of these disadvantages is
that it can weaken
national culture and traditions. For example, if people watch films and
television
programmes
produced in the United States, sometimes they adopt aspects of the lifestyle of
the
American characters they see on
television. Typically, however, this only affects minor details such as clothing and does not seriously threaten
national identity.
When we turn to
the other side of the argument, there are two major points to make in favour of
this process. The first of these is that the more we share habits, products and
services, the better we understand each other and this reduces prejudice
against other
nations. The
other point relates to modernity. It is a sign of progress in a society that
people no longer
are restricted to brands and advertisements from their own society but are able
to access more international goods. If, for example, there were unable to drink
Coca Cola or
wear Nike, then that would mean their society was not part of the
international
community.
In conclusion, I
understand the point of view of people who worry about cultural
globalisation because it is a threat
to national traditions. However, this is outweighed by its
positive impact on international
understanding and the fact that it represents progress within a society.
12
Facebook.com/IELTSVN
In the past lectures were the traditional method of
teaching large numbers of
students.
Nowadays new technology is increasingly being used to teach students. What
are the
advantages and disadvantages of this new approach?
As we move into
the twenty-first century, technology is affecting many different areas of life
and education is no exception. Indeed, in some institutions traditional forms
of education have been
revolutionised by
new technology to the extent that the lecture is no longer the main method of
delivery. While
there are a variety of benefits to this new approach, there are also
significant
drawbacks.
Perhaps the
greatest bonus of the introduction of technology is the flexibility it offers.
This is
evident in two
different ways. Firstly, it is now no longer essential for students to be
present in
the lecture
theatre for their courses. This means that part-time courses for
adults who are in
employment and distance learning courses for people in other countries are now
much more practical. Another area of flexibility is of course that the lecturer
and tutor are
able to use
Moodles, interactive whiteboards and other tools to deliver their courses in a
more
stimulating way
to large numbers of students.
Not everything,
however, about the introduction of this new technology into education is
positive. One
major problem is that not all students are comfortable with using technology,
even
if they are part
of the digital native generation. This is a serious issue as they may suffer
from
their lack of
technological skills. Another related issue is that education is a human
activity and it
works best with
as much human interaction as possible. Impersonal technology cannot replace
the human contact
found in traditional face-to-face tutorials and seminars.
As we have seen,
there are major benefits to the introduction of technology into education, not
least because it enables modern forms of education such as distance learning
courses. This is
balanced,
however, by the fact that it can be too impersonal for some and disadvantages
others for their lack of technological skills.
13
Facebook.com/IELTSVN
Some people think that only staff who worked in a
company for a long
time should be
promoted to a higher position. What's your opinion?
One of the
reasons why companies choose to promote some staff is seniority. While length
of
service is
undoubtedly an important factor, my belief is it should certainly not be the
only
criterion for
deciding who should be promoted. Rather it would be better for companies to
have
a more varied
policy in this area.
There are without
question sound arguments for promoting employees who have been working
for a company for
a number of years. The first of these is that these more experienced
employees would
be able to adapt themselves to being in a higher position, as they they would
understand the
culture and policies of the company better. Again, on a practical level, if
they
were not
promoted, they might well leave the company to find a higher position and earn
a
larger salary.
This could have serious consequences for the company, which might lose a signifiicant
amount of business to its competitors.
Despite these
reasons, there is a strong argument in favour of also promoting staff because
of their performance. This can be seen by how some muti-nationals use annual
performance and
development
reviews when deciding on promotion. Under this system a supervisor can set
targets for an
employee and if those targets are met, then the employee can be promoted, even
if they are
relatively junior. The benefit of this approach is that it encourages staff to
work harder and rewards merit and not just long service.
In conclusion,
there is no doubt a case for implementing a policy of promoting longserving
members of staff,
but I believe that it is also wise to take account of the performance of more junior members of
staff.
14
Facebook.com/IELTSVN
In recent years, farming practice has changed to include
methods such as factory
farming and the
use of technology to improve crops. Some people believe these
developments are
necessary, while others regard them as dangerous and advocate a
return to more
traditional farming methods. Discuss both points of view and give your own opinion.
There is some
controversy about how farming has been revolutionised in the past decades.
While it is
possible to claim that the net effect of these changes has been for the benefit
of mankind, my view is that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages. In this
essay, I shall
explain my point
of view by analysing both sides of the argument.
There are several
reasons why these innovations in agriculture can be said to positive. One is that the world's
population has exploded within the past century and that traditional methods of
agriculture could
not provide sufficient food for everyone. It can also be argued that we need
more efficient
methods of farming because many countries in Asia and Africa suffer regular
famine and
droughts and the people would starve if it was not for genetically modified
crops that
are drought
resistant. It should also not be forgotten that the quality of life of farmers
has been
improved by
these advances which are less labour intensive.
Those who argue for a return to smaller scale and more organic farming
base their arguments on the impact of agriculture on health and the
environment. Firstly, it is claimed that a variety of
diseases such as
BSE, swine flu and bird flu were caused by conditions in factory farms and
that organic food
is much healthier. Then, there are concerns about the lack of research into
how genetically
modified crops might affect the ecosystem for the worse.
While there are
strong arguments on both sides of the case, my personal belief is that the
long- term dangers of these developments mean that we should be extremely
cautious. I suggest that
there should be
more investment in traditional farming methods to make them more efficient and
that there should
be stronger legislation to ensure that both factory farms and GM crops are
safe
15
Facebook.com/IELTSVN
Some people believe that the government should ban
dangerous sporting activities while
others think
that people have the freedom do whatever sports they choose. Discuss both
views and give
your own opinion
We live in a
world where health and safety is an ever greater priority. One of the signs of
this is
the demand that
dangerous sports should be banned. While I understand that argument, my
view is that,
within certain limits, people should retain the freedom to participate in
whatever
sports they
choose.
The principal
reason for objecting to extreme sports is of course that they can be highly
dangerous and
sometimes life-threatening. More than that, it is not just the participants who
are at risk, but spectators too can be seriously injured. If, for example, a
Formula 1 car crashes, the
driver may not
escape unharmed and there is also a chance that a bouncing tyre or debris will
fly into the
crowd. Given this level of danger, it is understandable why people call for the
authorities
to take action.
The counter
argument is that people should be allowed to assume whatever risk they choose.
So, if someone wishes to freefall from a plane at 30,000 feet, then they should
be free to do so
and it should be
accepted that it is not the place of the government to dictate how they lead
their
lives. A further
point is that in statistical terms there is a low probability of injury in many
so-
called dangerous
sports and people are at greater risk carrying out everyday activities such as crossing the
road or cooking a meal as bungee jumping.
My personal view
is that while the government and other authorities do need to regulate
dangerous sports,
it would be preferable not to ban them entirely. I would suggest that
safeguards need
to be established so that any risk is minimised. What these safeguards are will
vary from sport
to sport, but safety has to be paramount, especially where minors are involved.
(302 words)
16
Facebook.com/IELTSVN
One of the major problems facing the world today is the
growing number of refugees.
The developed
nations in the world should tackle this problem by taking in more
refugees. To
what extent do you agree with this opinion?
There is little
doubt that the issue of refugees is a global problem. While it most immediately
affects
developing nations, there is a strong argument that industrialised countries
should help
by allowing
higher levels of immigration. This is certainly not an easy issue though,
because
historically
immigration has caused as many problems as it solves.
The principal
reason why developed nations should help is that we now live in a global village
and it is no
longer possible to ignore what happens on the other side of the world. This is
partly
a moral issue and
partly because it is in the economic self-interest of industrialised nations to
ensure that
developing nations continue to progress. A practical way of achieving this
would be
to accept more
immigration, particularly when it is caused by natural disasters or civil war.
I would argue,
however, that this is not an open and shut case, as there is a negative side to
mass immigration. The multi-cultural experiments in Europe have not always
succeeded and immigrants have often suffered badly from racism and other
prejudices. On a practical level,
refugees are
sometimes better off receiving aid in their native land than begging on the
streets
in a country
where they cannot speak the language. Many so-called economic migrants end up returning to the
country of their birth.
My personal
conclusion is that developed nations should agree to take in more refugees, but
only in
restricted numbers and in extreme cases. I also believe that there needs to be
a global
effort to provide
aid to solve theproblems that cause emigration. Prevention is, as they say,
better than
cure.
17
Facebook.com/IELTSVN
The best way to solve the world's environmental problems
is to increase the cost of fuel.
To what extent
do you agree or disagree?
Most people would
accept that one of the highest priorities today is to find a solution to the
various
environmental problems facing mankind. It has been suggested that best way to achieve this is
for governments to raise the price of fuel. I am, however, not sure that this
is necessarily
the case.
One reason why
this approach may not work is that there is not just one environmental
problem the world
faces today. If governments did make fuel more expensive, it might well
help reduce the
amount of carbon dioxide we produce and so slow down the rate of global
warming and air
pollution. However, it would not help with other major problems such as
intensive
farming, overpopulation, the hole in the ozone layer or water pollution. For
these
problems we need
to find other solutions.
A second reason
why this policy may not be the most appropriate is that it places the
emphasis on
governmental policy and not individual responsibility. Ultimately, most
environmental
problems are the result of the way we as individuals live our lives. If we
wish to find a
long-term and lasting solution to them, we need to learn to live in a way that
it is greener or
kinder to the environment. What governments need to do to make this
happen is to
ensure there is a global programme to educate people of all ages about the
environmental
consequences to their actions.
In summary, I
believe that increasing the level of taxation on fuel is at best a short-term
solution to only
one environmental problem. If we wish to provide a home for our children's children,
education is likely to be the key to making this happen.
(283 words)
18
Facebook.com/IELTSVN
One of the most pressing problems facing the world today
is overpopulation. What
policies do you
believe governments should adopt to address the causes and effects of
this problem?
There is no doubt
that the massive increase in the worldʼs population in the last 100 years has created a crisis.
In order to find a solution to this crisis, politicians need to deal with not
only the
immediate
problems, but also the long-term causes if they want to rescue humanity.
Finding the
right policies
is not an easy task as it is a complex problem.
The first step is
to recognise what the consequences of overpopulation are. Only by doing this
can we find an appropriate solution. Perhaps its most important effect is the
increased rate at
which we are
consuming the Earthʼs resources such as oil. To combat this, governments need
to do more
research on alternative and renewable energy supplies so that we do not use up
all
the oil reserves.
Another negative effect of overpopulation is how some countries suffer from a
lack of basic
necessities such as food. Here, an answer could be greater international co-
operation so that
countries with a food surplus donate what they do not need to the less
fortunate
countries.
It is not quite
so easy to decide how governments should deal with the causes of
overpopulation.
The Chinese have adopted legislation that requires parents to pay a
special tax if
they have more than one child. I doubt, however, whether this solution is
realistic in
other countries. Another option would be to improve levels of sex education by
explaining the
difficulties caused by having too many children. Promoting contraception though
may be
problematic in many regions on cultural and religious grounds.
In conclusion,
while it may be possible to find ways to address some of the consequences of
overpopulation by
international co-operation, it is harder to find policies to deal with its
causes. It
might be that the
only way forward is for different countries to adopt policies that work within their particular
culture.
(319 words)
