Band 7.0 IELTS Writing Task 2 Model Answer

Overall Band Score: 7.0 · Cambridge IELTS 11 · 2026-10-13

IELTS Writing Task 2 question

Some people claim that not enough of the waste from homes is recycled. They say that the only way to increase recycling is for governments to make it a legal requirement.

To what extent do you think laws are needed to make people recycle more of their waste?

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

Student answer (Band 7.0)

It is argued that domestic waste recycling rates are too low and mandatory legislation is the only solution. In my opinion, while laws are necessary to increase recycling, they are the most effective effective when combined education and incentives.

There are strong arguments for making recycling legal requirement. Firstly, laws create a sense of responsibility and urgency. When people know they can be fined for separating their waste, they are more likely to comply. For instance, in countries like Germany and Singapore, strict rules and regulations regarding to the segregation of waste with penalties have resulted in recycling rates of over 60. Secondly, legislation can force local authorities to provide the necessary infrastructure such as separate bins for plastic, glass and organic waste. Without a legal framework, many households may want to recycle but they have lack of facilities.

However, relying solely on laws may not be sufficient and could even create resentment. A more sustainable approach is is to educate and motivate people. Public awareness campaigns in schools and through media can help people to understand the environmental consequences of landfill waste, such as pollution and climate change. furthermore, incentive based schemes can be highly effective. For instance, small municipalities give small discounts on utility bills or offer cash for returning plastic bottles, which encourages voluntary participation more positively than punishment.

In conclusion, I believe that laws are needed to establish a baseline and provide infrastructure for recycling. Nevertheless, to achieve a loon-term change, governments should not rely on legal compulsion but should also invest in education and reward system to make people willing participants in recycling.

AI examiner evaluation

Task Achievement / Task Response: Band 7.5

Your position is clear throughout: you support laws as a foundation but argue they work best alongside education and incentives. You address both the need for legal requirements and the limits of relying on compulsion, and your examples—penalties, separate bins, awareness campaigns and bottle-return rewards—extend the main points. This gives the response a relevant, well-supported answer to the question. To develop the discussion further, explain the examples more precisely: the claim that Germany and Singapore achieve recycling rates “over 60” needs a unit or context, and the municipality incentive example is general rather than tied to a specific case. A little more qualification of how laws affect different households would also make the reasoning more fully developed.

Coherence and Cohesion: Band 7.0

The essay has a clear progression from the case for legislation, to the drawbacks of relying on it alone, and then to a balanced conclusion. Paragraphing is appropriate, and signposts such as “Firstly,” “Secondly,” “However,” and “In conclusion” make the argument easy to follow. The examples are generally placed beside the points they support. Cohesion is not always fully controlled, however: “Furthermore” begins a sentence with a lowercase letter, and the repeated “For instance” openings make the examples feel somewhat formulaic. The conclusion also restates the position without adding much synthesis. Varying transitions and using clearer links between the legal framework and the proposed incentives would make the progression more flexible and polished.

Lexical Resource: Band 7.0

You use a suitable range of topic vocabulary, including “mandatory legislation,” “legal framework,” “infrastructure,” “public awareness campaigns,” and “voluntary participation.” These choices help express the argument with reasonable precision, and the tone is generally appropriate for an academic essay. Some collocations and word forms are less natural, such as “recycling legal requirement,” “regulations regarding to,” and “incentive based schemes.” There are also spelling or form slips, including “loon-term” and “reward system.” The repeated use of “small” in the incentive example and “laws” in the conclusion limits variety slightly. Aim to check collocations and use more precise terms for the examples, while retaining the strong topic-specific vocabulary already present.

Grammatical Range and Accuracy: Band 7.0

You attempt a useful range of sentence forms, including conditional structures (“When people know they can be fined…”) and complex clauses explaining causes and effects. Many sentences are clear and grammatically controlled, so the argument remains easy to understand. A few errors persist, including the missing article in “making recycling legal requirement,” the incorrect construction “they have lack of facilities,” and the duplicated wording in “effective effective” and “is is.” The phrase “regarding to the segregation” also shows difficulty with the grammatical pattern after “regarding.” Check articles, verb patterns and proofreading carefully. More consistently accurate complex sentences, rather than simply adding complexity, would strengthen control.

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.