Many developing countries are currently expanding their tourist industries. Why is this the case? Is it a positive development?
In recent years, tourism has been expanding in those developing nations to attract a great deal of visitors. There are various reasons behind this trend and it may cause to harmful environment in the long term.
To begin with, it cannot be denied that tourism industry may contribute to the nations’ economy and those nations normally prioritise expenditure on tourism. First of all, visitors from developed nations often prefer travelling to third countries which are suitable with their budget. Moreover, stunning landscapes are normally promoted on advertisements in these nations which attract people around the world and they are likely to spend more compared with local tourists. Instead of visiting metropolitan cities, individuals tend to visit natural attractions to get their mind at ease after a long-haul working period of time. For example, American travellers tend to visit ASEAN nations to save money or experience different cultures.
There are also, however, some negative effects on the environment that people should take into account. The first drawback of this trend would be result in environmental degradation in local areas, such as pollution and destruction of natural landscapes. The root cause of these issues is the tourists from their ignorance of everything related to green space. This might lead to gradually destroy the environmental resources on which tourism itself depends. An example for this case is most tourists generally drink bottled water which creates mountains of plastic every year. If those developing countries do not have appropriate recycling facilities or do not know how to deal with these waste, and therefore, they commonly end up littered plastic throughout the rivers, seas, beaches, and oceans.
To conclude, tourism can be the financial hubs in developing countries, however, it may put the nature in local areas at risk.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 619, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
... mind at ease after a long-haul working period of time. For example, American travellers tend ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 286, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ndscapes. The root cause of these issues is the tourists from their ignorance of ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, moreover, so, therefore, third, for example, such as, first of all, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 49.0 41.998997996 117% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1609.0 1615.20841683 100% => OK
No of words: 294.0 315.596192385 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.47278911565 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14082457966 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78885016158 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 186.0 176.041082164 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.632653061224 0.561755894193 113% => OK
syllable_count: 489.6 506.74238477 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.8921997097 49.4020404114 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.928571429 106.682146367 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 20.7667163134 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.35714285714 7.06120827912 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.17018186695 0.244688304435 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0546823185756 0.084324248473 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0484934454704 0.0667982634062 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.103468394637 0.151304729494 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0373428951201 0.056905535591 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 13.0946893788 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 12.4159519038 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.57 8.58950901804 111% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 78.4519038076 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => 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.