Band 8.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 8.0 · 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 8.0)

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 safe 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 presenting a clear position that balances the moral right of clean water access with the practical economic and environmental necessity of pricing utility supplies. The author takes a well-developed, nuanced stance in the introduction and sustains it throughout the essay. Main ideas are thoroughly extended and supported, particularly in paragraphs exploring financial maintenance costs and resource degradation. For instance, the discussion on municipal engineering networks and water purification provides strong, relevant examples from general knowledge. Furthermore, the counter-argument addressing impoverished demographics is skillfully integrated with a practical social safety net proposal. This meets the criteria for a Band 8.0, as all parts of the prompt are covered exceptionally well with fully developed ideas.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 8.0

Cohesion and logical progression are managed with a high degree of skill. Ideas are logically sequenced, beginning with the thesis and counter-arguments before moving into infrastructure costs, environmental mismanagement, and finally proposed solutions. Cohesive devices such as 'While I wholeheartedly agree', 'The primary argument', 'Furthermore', and 'By contrast' are used flexibly and naturally to guide the reader through complex arguments. Paragraphing is used sufficiently and appropriately, with each paragraph centering on a distinct, clear theme (infrastructure, conservation, and social equity). Referencing and substitution are handled smoothly without mechanical repetition. This performance aligns comfortably with the Band 8 descriptor for Coherence and Cohesion.

Lexical Resource: Band 8.0

The writer demonstrates a wide, fluent, and flexible lexical resource throughout the essay. Uncommon lexical items such as 'inherent human right', 'logistically flawed', 'infrastructure maintenance', 'resource mismanagement', and 'progressive rates' are deployed with a high degree of precision and natural control. Collocations are generally accurate and appropriate for an academic register (e.g., 'astronomical operational costs', 'systemic waste', 'fragile freshwater aquifers'). There are only occasional minor awkwardnesses in word choice, but meaning is conveyed with absolute clarity. The vocabulary range is sufficiently broad to allow the writer to discuss sophisticated economic and social concepts effortlessly, fully justifying a Band 8.0 score.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 8.0

The response exhibits a wide range of complex structures used with a high degree of flexibility. The writer successfully employs conditional and concessional clauses, such as 'While I wholeheartedly agree that access to safe water is fundamental... I disagree with the notion...' and 'If governments completely eliminate utility billing, they must absorb...'. The majority of sentences are error-free, and punctuation is handled impeccably across all paragraphs. Minor slips do occasionally occur, but these do not impede communication or detract from the sophisticated flow of the essay. Grammar and sentence construction are well-controlled, matching the criteria for a Band 8.0.

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.