In spite of the advances made in agriculture, many people around the world still go hungry.
Why is this the case?
What can be done about this problem?
In the modern world, despite the proliferation of technology applied in agriculture, the food shortage has still happened. From my perspective, there exists three contributing factors to this issue, which could be addressed by a number of appropriate remedies.
Regarding answers to the questions of the insufficient food supply in spite of the advances made in agriculture, there have been three mains factors. First and foremost, environmental impact is what I would like to my priority. It is explained that modern technological devices fail to support farming because of soil erosion. A good illustration fact is that in Vietnam, there are several impoverished locations such as Thai Binh or Nghe An have the main geographic features of rocks, hence stunning in growth and limiting the transpiration of trees. Secondly, natural catastrophe is one of the most inevitable causes resulting in people going to hungry around the world. To be more specific, the frequency of droughts and floods occurring over the year are likely to limit the development of the irrigation system as well as innovating special seeds. Last but not least, in terms of social view, it is irrefutable that in several countries, the people in remote areas have no chances to approach the advances in technology. As a result, these citizens have no choices but remaining the traditional farming methods and failing to enhance productivity despite the growing numbers of the population.
There are many actions that people should perform to take advantage of cutting – edge technology and tackle the foregoing causes. First of all, in terms of the environment, the solution would be to improve the cultivation condition by preventing waste from manufacturing as well as daily activities to protect soil quality. Additionally, increasing the numbers of crop rotation and forecasting exact natural disasters to have timely solutions also improves agricultural output. Besides, from a social perspective, it is necessary to reduce the gap between the poor and the rich, thus opening more job opportunities for remote citizens to have access to contemporary farming techniques. In consequence, people in the countryside may broaden their horizons and improve their living standards.
In conclusion, for the aforementioned statement, the food shortage in many countries is mainly caused by environmental issues, natural catastrophe, and the limitation in approaching technology. However, with the right actions by government, these impressing problems could be solved.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 440, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...hed locations such as Thai Binh or Nghe An have the main geographic features of rocks, ...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 285, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...se impressing problems could be solved.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, hence, however, if, may, regarding, second, secondly, so, still, thus, well, in conclusion, such as, as a result, as well as, first of all, in spite of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 63.0 41.998997996 150% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 8.3376753507 192% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2159.0 1615.20841683 134% => OK
No of words: 392.0 315.596192385 124% => OK
Chars per words: 5.50765306122 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.44960558625 4.20363070211 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.14921893723 2.80592935109 112% => OK
Unique words: 230.0 176.041082164 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.586734693878 0.561755894193 104% => OK
syllable_count: 675.0 506.74238477 133% => 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: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.76152304609 231% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.1991488787 49.4020404114 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.0 106.682146367 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0588235294 20.7667163134 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.4705882353 7.06120827912 148% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => 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: 0.163079439257 0.244688304435 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0455929855677 0.084324248473 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0431680508002 0.0667982634062 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0917217783225 0.151304729494 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0390583643653 0.056905535591 69% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 13.0946893788 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 50.2224549098 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.3001002004 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.97 12.4159519038 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.89 8.58950901804 115% => OK
difficult_words: 127.0 78.4519038076 162% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.