Environmental topics have consistently appeared in IELTS Writing Task 2, with corporate responsibility for environmental protection being a particularly common theme. Based on analysis of past exam questions, this topic has appeared in approximately 15% of environment-related questions since 2019, making it highly relevant for IELTS candidates.
As we explore how to tackle the issue of plastic pollution in oceans, let’s examine a frequently tested question format:
Some people believe that companies should be required to pay for cleaning up environmental damage, while others think the government should use tax money for this purpose. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
Question Analysis
- Topic: Environmental cleanup funding
- Task: Discuss both views + opinion
- Key elements: Corporate responsibility vs. government funding
- Focus: Financial responsibility for environmental restoration
Corporate vs Government Environmental Funding Debate
Band 8.5 Sample Essay
In the ongoing debate about who should bear the cost of environmental restoration, I firmly believe that while both corporate and government funding have roles to play, companies should shoulder the primary financial responsibility for cleaning up environmental damage.
Those advocating for government-funded cleanup through taxation argue that environmental protection is a public good that benefits all citizens. They contend that governments have better resources and coordination capabilities to implement large-scale environmental projects. Moreover, they suggest that taxing citizens ensures everyone contributes to maintaining environmental quality.
However, I strongly support the view that companies should be the main financial contributors to environmental cleanup efforts. The principle of “polluter pays” is fundamentally fair and logical – businesses that profit from activities causing environmental degradation should be responsible for mitigating their impact. This approach serves multiple purposes: it creates a direct financial incentive for companies to adopt environmentally friendly practices, ensures accountability for environmental damage, and prevents the socialization of environmental costs while profits remain private.
Furthermore, requiring corporate funding for environmental cleanup can drive innovation in sustainable business practices. When companies must internalize environmental costs, they are more likely to invest in cleaner technologies and operational procedures. This has been demonstrated in countries where strict environmental liability laws have led to significant improvements in corporate environmental performance.
Nevertheless, a balanced approach combining both corporate and government funding would be most effective. While companies should bear primary responsibility, government support through tax revenue can supplement cleanup efforts, particularly in cases where responsible parties cannot be identified or have ceased operations.
Band 6.5 Sample Essay
The question of who should pay for cleaning up environmental damage is very important today. Some people think companies should pay, while others believe the government should use tax money. I will discuss both sides and give my opinion.
People who support government funding say that the environment belongs to everyone, so public money should be used to clean it. They think the government has more power to organize big cleanup projects. Also, when everyone pays taxes for this, it’s fair because we all use the environment.
On the other hand, many people think companies should pay for cleanup. This is because many companies make the environment dirty while making money. If they have to pay for cleanup, they might be more careful about pollution. For example, if a factory pollutes a river, they should pay to clean it instead of using public money.
I agree more with the second view. I think it’s fair that companies should pay to fix the damage they cause. However, I also think the government should help sometimes, especially when we don’t know which company caused the problem.
Additionally, when companies have to pay for environmental damage, they might try harder to prevent pollution. This could make them use better technology and be more careful about the environment.
Key Vocabulary
- Environmental degradation (n) /ɪnˌvaɪrənˈmentl ˌdeɡrəˈdeɪʃn/ – The deterioration of the environment
- Polluter pays principle (n) /pəˈluːtə peɪz ˈprɪnsəpl/ – Policy that requires polluting parties to bear costs of pollution
- Internalize (v) /ɪnˈtɜːnəlaɪz/ – To incorporate something as an integral part
- Mitigate (v) /ˈmɪtɪɡeɪt/ – To make less severe or reduce impact
- Accountability (n) /əˌkaʊntəˈbɪləti/ – The obligation to accept responsibility
Similar to should companies be held accountable for environmental pollution, this topic requires careful consideration of various perspectives while maintaining a clear position.
Practice Suggestions
Try writing your own essay addressing these variations:
- Should companies face mandatory environmental cleanup regulations?
- How can governments ensure companies take responsibility for environmental damage?
- What role should citizens play in environmental cleanup funding?
Share your practice essays in the comments for feedback and discussion.
