International travels would bring conflict among locals and visitors in term of prejudice. Although this phenomenon is attributed to an array of causative factors, effective policies can be adopted to tackle the situation.
As regards the root causes, there seem to be two contributing factors which should be taken into consideration. Firstly, visitors travel across the world in tandem with their culture, while tending to share their value and culture. Such a different culture is bound to appear appealing to few, especially the youth in the host country, thereby gradually instilling to them. A good illustration of this is clearly delineated by Islamic countries where Hijab is compulsory; any showing disrespect to it is highly likely to be considered to flout the current law. This in itself leads to disturbing social mandatory conventions as a result of a shared culture of western holidaymakers. Furthermore, the more the tourists flock to a historic site, the more the economic problem increase. This means that, when tourists over-flock to a historic site, local inhabitants will suffer from the bad economic climate, for business owners potentially incline to sell and rent their products and facilities at higher prices such as ordinary requirements and accommodations. This policy afflicts damage on indigenous people's level of subsistence. A report speaks of Spanish natives protest the tourism industry in 2018 owing to the rise in the price of accommodation’s rent which firmly endorses the viewpoint business owners were reluctant to sell or rent their houses in fair costs.
Having said that, however, workable solutions could be adopted to make sure that conflicts arising due to international travels are kept at bay. One possible measure is that all-round and catch-all information is provided to visitors by travel agencies with references to the destination country before issuing the ticket. Another viable solution could be enacting specified prices on products and offers in the market in order to make boundaries to preventing abuse from the tourists and residents. If implementing properly, these will have profound and constructive effects on revamping this situation.
To conclude, international travels might be judged as a source of prejudice among people in the level of the world thanks to influencing economic conditions as well as local custom. Whereas, these problems are not by no means insurmountable barriers by making applicable decisions by responsible entities including travelling agencies and the state authorities.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 287, Rule ID: TO_TOO[2]
Message: Did you mean 'too'?
Suggestion: too
...nt culture is bound to appear appealing to few, especially the youth in the host c...
^^
Line 3, column 472, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...mic countries where Hijab is compulsory; any showing disrespect to it is highly l...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, so, still, well, whereas, while, as regards, such as, as a result, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 10.4138276553 106% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 24.0651302605 79% => OK
Preposition: 65.0 41.998997996 155% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 8.3376753507 96% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2182.0 1615.20841683 135% => OK
No of words: 395.0 315.596192385 125% => OK
Chars per words: 5.52405063291 5.12529762239 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45809453852 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.06499168197 2.80592935109 109% => OK
Unique words: 244.0 176.041082164 139% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.617721518987 0.561755894193 110% => OK
syllable_count: 677.7 506.74238477 134% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.10420841683 238% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.76152304609 21% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.3733601952 49.4020404114 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.352941176 106.682146367 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2352941176 20.7667163134 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.29411764706 7.06120827912 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.189271562897 0.244688304435 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0550138713358 0.084324248473 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0322016684979 0.0667982634062 48% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.116974789634 0.151304729494 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0145047944898 0.056905535591 25% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.03 12.4159519038 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.33 8.58950901804 120% => OK
difficult_words: 139.0 78.4519038076 177% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.