Model Essay 20: Climate Change: Individuals or Governments
Two-part question. The question, a plan, the essay itself, and why it would score well.
Unofficial original RCF practice material
Original question and essay written by RCF English. Not endorsed by the British Council, IDP: IELTS Australia or Cambridge University Press & Assessment.
The question
Many people believe that individuals can do little about climate change and that only governments and large companies can make a difference.
To what extent do you agree, and what could ordinary people do?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your own knowledge or experience.
Write at least 250 words.
The plan
| Paragraph | Content |
|---|---|
| Introduction | Rephrase the claim. Position: largely agree on scale, but individuals matter in two particular ways. |
| Body 1 | Why the claim is largely right: where the emissions actually come from. |
| Body 2 | Where individuals still count: voting and demand, which change what governments and companies do. |
| Body 3 | What ordinary people can do, concretely: travel, heating, food, and pressure. |
| Conclusion | Both, with the causal link between them stated. |
The model essay
Question: Many people believe that individuals can do little about climate change and that only governments and large companies can make a difference. To what extent do you agree, and what could ordinary people do?
It is often said that climate change is too large for individuals to affect, and that governments and corporations must act instead. I largely agree with the first part, but I think it underestimates two things individuals do that matter a great deal.
The scale argument is sound. Most emissions come from electricity generation, heavy industry, agriculture and transport systems, and no household decision reaches them. A family that recycles carefully has changed almost nothing about how its country produces power. Told that personal effort is the answer, many people reasonably conclude that the problem is hopeless, and this is why the claim is usually right.
It is incomplete, however, because governments and companies respond to people. Governments that act on climate are elected by voters who wanted it, and policies survive only while that support lasts. Companies, similarly, follow demand: when enough customers change what they buy, the product changes, and the change reaches the factory. Individuals therefore act less as consumers than as citizens.
In practical terms, this suggests what is worth doing. The decisions with real weight are the large and infrequent ones: how a home is heated and insulated, whether a car is needed at all, how often one flies, and how much meat is eaten. Alongside these, people can vote on the issue, ask their employer about its energy use, and support organisations that hold companies to their promises.
In conclusion, the claim is right about scale and wrong about influence. Governments and industry must make the large changes, but they make them because enough ordinary people, acting as voters and customers, made it costly not to.
Language worth borrowing
- I largely agree with the first part, but I think it underestimates ...
- Answers to what extent and announces what the rest of the essay will add.
- The scale argument is sound.
- Concedes in four words so the paragraph can spend its length on evidence.
- It is incomplete, however, because ...
- The pivot. Incomplete is more precise than wrong and more honest.
- Individuals therefore act less as consumers than as citizens.
- A less as X than as Y comparison, which is a neat structure to have ready.
- ...made it costly not to.
- A short, concrete ending after an abstract argument.
Why this would score well
The four things an examiner marks, and what this essay does about each. The wording of the criteria is IELTS's own and is published for candidates; the comments are ours.
| Criterion | What this essay does |
|---|---|
| Task Response | The extent is stated and both parts are answered; the practical suggestions follow from the argument rather than being a list. |
| Coherence and Cohesion | Concede, qualify, then apply. The final paragraph ties the two halves together. |
| Lexical Resource | Accurate topic language: emissions, insulated, demand, generation, without slipping into jargon. |
| Grammatical Range and Accuracy | Participle openings and comparative structures used correctly, with clean punctuation in long sentences. |
Check your own attempt
- Did you state how far you agree, and answer the second question too?
- Are your suggestions the ones that actually matter, rather than the easiest to list?
- Did you connect individual action to government and company action?
- Did you avoid inventing percentages for emissions?
- Does the conclusion answer both parts in one movement?
- Are you between 250 and 300 words?
Use it, do not memorise it
An essay learnt by heart is easy to spot and cannot fit the question you are actually given. Take the shapes from Language worth borrowing, write your own answer to this question in forty minutes, then compare.
Share this
Next
All 20 essays
The full list, with the question type of each.