Band 8.5 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 8.5 · Cambridge IELTS 20 · 2026-09-26

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

Access to clean water is a basic human right. Therefore every home should have a water supply that is provided free of charge.

Do you agree or disagree?

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

Student answer (Band 8.5)

The proposition that clean running water is an inherent human right, and consequently should be supplied to every residential household entirely free of charge, is a highly compelling but logistically flawed argument. While I wholeheartedly agree that access to potable water is fundamental to human dignity and health, I disagree with the notion that residential utility supplies should be completely unpriced. A completely free supply inevitably triggers unsustainable economic strain and rampant resource depletion.

The primary argument against a completely free residential water supply is the immense financial cost associated with water purification and infrastructural maintenance. Clean tap water does not merely exist; it requires complex, high-tech engineering networks to collect, treat, filter, and pump safely into urban homes. If governments completely eliminate utility billing, they must absorb these astronomical operational costs entirely through public taxation. In many developing or highly populated nations, this fiscal burden would rapidly drain state budgets, leading to underfunded treatment plants, broken water mains, and a subsequent deterioration in water quality. Ultimately, making the service free could paradoxically leave citizens with highly unreliable or contaminated supplies.

Furthermore, assigning zero financial value to residential water invariably leads to severe resource mismanagement and environmental degradation. When a commodity is provided free of charge, consumers lack any economic incentive to practice conservation. Households would be far more likely to leave taps running, irrigate lawns excessively, and ignore leaky pipes, causing massive systemic waste. In an era marked by climate change and intensifying global droughts, unmetered usage would quickly deplete fragile freshwater aquifers. By contrast, a tiered, low-cost pricing model ensures accountability, encouraging citizens to treat clean water as a precious, finite resource that must be conserved.

This is not to say that impoverished demographics should be left behind. To honor the premise that water is a basic human right, governments should implement social safety nets, such as providing a basic, essential volume of water free or heavily subsidized to low-income households. Any consumption exceeding that vital threshold can then be charged at standard or progressive rates. This balanced framework guarantees basic survival for marginalized populations while simultaneously funding the infrastructure and discouraging wasteful habits.

In conclusion, while the moral premise behind free water access is entirely commendable, providing an unpriced domestic supply to every home is an impractical strategy. To safeguard both infrastructure quality and environmental sustainability, water must carry a regulated economic cost, backed by targeted subsidies to protect the vulnerable.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 8.0

The response fully addresses all parts of the task by clearly stating a position in the introduction and maintaining it throughout. The writer addresses both sides of the premise—acknowledging that water is a basic human right while arguing against a completely free unpriced supply. Ideas are well-developed and supported with relevant reasoning, such as the financial burden of infrastructure maintenance and the risk of resource depletion. Examples of well-supported arguments include the discussion on consumer behavior when commodities are unpriced and the suggestion of a tiered pricing model. The position is consistently clear and supported by well-extended arguments, satisfying all criteria for a high band score.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 8.5

Cohesion and coherence are exceptionally well managed. Ideas are logically sequenced, moving smoothly from the introduction to the economic arguments, environmental concerns, proposed solutions, and a concise conclusion. Paragraphing is used skillfully, with each paragraph focusing on a distinct central theme, such as infrastructure costs in paragraph two and resource mismanagement in paragraph three. Cohesive devices are employed flexibly and naturally without being mechanical (e.g., 'The primary argument against', 'Furthermore', 'By contrast', 'This is not to say that'). Referencing is precise, ensuring the text flows logically from start to finish.

Lexical Resource: Band 8.5

The writer demonstrates a wide, fluent, and flexible vocabulary range with skilled use of less common and sophisticated lexical items. Examples include 'inherent human right', 'potable water', 'astronomical operational costs', 'environmental degradation', 'unmetered usage', and 'marginalized populations'. Word choice and collocations are used with a high degree of precision and natural control. There are virtually no lexical errors, and the vocabulary choices contribute significantly to the academic tone of the essay.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 8.5

The response features a wide variety of complex structures deployed with a high degree of control and flexibility. Sentences are structurally sophisticated, featuring effective subordinate clauses, conditional elements, and participial phrases (e.g., 'If governments completely eliminate utility billing, they must absorb these astronomical operational costs entirely through public taxation' and 'In an era marked by climate change and intensifying global droughts...'). The vast majority of sentences are completely error-free, with only rare, non-systematic slips. Punctuation is used accurately throughout, and grammatical structures effortlessly support the clear communication of complex arguments.

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.