In spite of advances made in agriculture, many people Around the world still go hungry.
Why is this the case?
What can be done about this problem?
The terms of poverty, starvation and hunger seem to be ever-lasting terms from the beginning of life. Meanwhile, there are some short-term and also long-term solutions considered by authorities to ameliorate the issue of hunger.
First of all, having an efficient agriculture needs suitable weather condition and high soil quality beside the technologies used for growing and harvesting. For example, there are bare and barren lands that suffer from lack of rich nutrients and water as a result of long-lasting droughts, following famine for residents of the area. Therefore, if livelihood of people living in these areas depends on farming, they may suffer from hunger after finding their lands unfarmable because there is nothing to find for eating. The second point is that there are countries with rich soil and good weather conditions, and also use high technological farming methods for producing their agricultural products. However, governments monopolize the mentioned products and buy them for lower prices from farmers and export them for developed countries with considerable prices to increase their own profits. Therefore, trades of these commodities inject money to the pocket of authorities and people become deprived of benefits, causing poor living conditions and leading to poverty and then suffering from hunger to some extent.
Turn to possible solutions, the short-term method could be diverting the revenues coming from exporting products to the society as a whole, and also considering distribution of agricultural yields with an appropriate price among people at first, and if the supply meets the demand, think about exporting products. The second remedy would be that wealthy countries consider a quota system for helping agriculturally deprived areas in the long term to save the residents’ life. However, it is compulsory to help them by distributing food instead of sending them money because it has been seen that the corruption of local authorities has been the most significant obstacle of having money in the hands of people.
To sum up, agriculture play a paramount role in people’s life. However, technological growth can not solve the problem of hunger, and other supplementary roles should be considered ranging from rich soil and good weather condition to the governments.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 363, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...of the area. Therefore, if livelihood of people living in these areas depends on ...
^^
Line 3, column 1064, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ng poor living conditions and leading to poverty and then suffering from hunger t...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, may, second, so, then, therefore, while, for example, as a result, first of all, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 10.4138276553 163% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 41.998997996 129% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1967.0 1615.20841683 122% => OK
No of words: 360.0 315.596192385 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.46388888889 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.35587717469 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92212584336 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 176.041082164 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.566666666667 0.561755894193 101% => OK
syllable_count: 596.7 506.74238477 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 5.43587174349 37% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.76152304609 21% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 27.0 20.2975951904 133% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 59.4674591539 49.4020404114 120% => OK
Chars per sentence: 151.307692308 106.682146367 142% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.6923076923 20.7667163134 133% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.30769230769 7.06120827912 132% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0734226649629 0.244688304435 30% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0308917386113 0.084324248473 37% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0287124267298 0.0667982634062 43% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0546038295479 0.151304729494 36% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0345508489182 0.056905535591 61% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.1 13.0946893788 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.61 50.2224549098 71% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.3001002004 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.68 12.4159519038 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.49 8.58950901804 110% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 78.4519038076 131% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.1190380762 126% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 11.2359550562 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.