Band 6.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 6.5 · Cambridge IELTS 19 · 2026-10-17

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

In many countries nowadays, consumers can go to a supermarket and buy food produced all over the world.

Do you think this is a positive or negative development?

Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.

Student answer (Band 6.5)

It is widely acknowledged that in the modern era, buyers in numerous countries can visit major superstores and purchase food produced in nations across the globe. I partially agree with this trend because accessing global food products is essential for improving consumers' standard living. However, this phenomenon exerts serval negative effects on local environment and agriculture.

Firstly, a large proportion of shoppers choose to purchase international food products to maintain a healthy lifestyle and improve their overall well-being. For instance if customers visit retail outlets and purchase global food products, it will boosts the local economy while expanding international trade. Consequently, consumers gain wider access to fresh and nutrient-rich items year around. Additionally, if governing bodies facilitates food imports industrially advanced nations, it is highly likely to fulfill the daily nutritional needs of the local populace.

On the other hand, if economically backward countries imported food items from wealthy nations, it would have adverse effect on both local trade and domestic agriculture. For example, when consumers prefer to purchase imported items over local produce, domestic farmers unable to sell their crops. Consequently, unsold yields goes to waste, leading to cause financial hardship for farmers and driving them into poverty. Furthermore, shipping food across thousands of miles requires cargo ships, long-haul trucks and air flight. These modes of transportation burn immense amount of fossil fuels, releasing massive quantities of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other green house gases into the atmosphere, directly contributing to global warming.

In conclusion, although importing global food expands consumer choice and supports international trade, it harms local farmer and damages the environment. Therefore, state bodies ought to prioritize local agriculture while importing food only when necessary.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.0

Your position is clear: you see international food access as beneficial for consumers, while recognising environmental and agricultural costs. Both sides are relevantly addressed, and the examples about farmers losing sales and transport emissions support your argument. This fits a response that covers the task and extends its main ideas. To strengthen the development further, explain the consumer benefit more precisely: the claim that imported food improves health is broad, and the link between buying international products and boosting the local economy needs clarification. You could also distinguish when imports are useful from when they displace local produce, making your partly balanced position more fully reasoned.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 7.0

The essay has a clear overall progression: an introduction states your position, two body paragraphs present contrasting effects, and the conclusion restates your judgement. Signposting such as “Firstly,” “On the other hand,” and “In conclusion” helps readers follow the argument, while cause-and-effect links like “Consequently” make the reasoning easy to track. To make cohesion more flexible and less dependent on explicit transitions, connect related points within paragraphs more smoothly and use clearer references. For example, “this phenomenon” in the introduction is broad, and the shift from consumer health to local economic benefits in the first body paragraph could be made more explicit. The paragraphing is appropriate and supports the logical organisation.

Lexical Resource: Band 6.5

You use an adequate range of topic vocabulary, including “nutrient-rich,” “domestic agriculture,” “fossil fuels,” and “carbon dioxide,” and these choices help communicate the main ideas. There are also attempts at more formal phrasing, such as “adverse effect” and “financial hardship.” Some less common expressions are not yet used accurately or naturally: “standard living” would be “standard of living,” “green house gases” should be “greenhouse gases,” and “air flight” is an awkward choice for air freight or air transport. “Economically backward” is also an unsuitable description of countries; “lower-income countries” is more neutral. These occasional word-choice, collocation, and spelling issues do not prevent understanding, but greater precision would show more flexible control.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 6.0

You attempt a mix of simple and complex structures, including conditional clauses (“if economically backward countries imported…”) and a relative clause (“items…which…” is not used, but the sentence patterns still vary). Most ideas remain understandable, and the longer sentence about transport emissions is generally controlled. Some grammatical errors persist, however: “it will boosts” should be “it will boost,” “governing bodies facilitates” should be “governing bodies facilitate,” and “domestic farmers unable to sell” needs “are unable.” There are also agreement and article problems in “unsold yields goes” and “an adverse effect,” as well as “local farmer” in the conclusion. Check subject–verb agreement and ensure each clause has a complete verb; this would improve accuracy while preserving your range.

See this exact question answered at other band scores. The same prompt compared across bands.

Browse more IELTS Writing model answers or get your own writing scored by the same AI examiner.