Cambridge IELTS 11 Test 2 Writing Task 2: Recycling Laws
Cambridge IELTS 11 · Test 2 · Academic Writing Task 2Opinion (agree or disagree)Environment
Some people claim that too little household waste is recycled and that making recycling a legal requirement is the only way to increase it. Candidates must say to what extent they think laws are needed to make people recycle more of their waste.
The question
You should spend about 40 minutes on this task. Some people claim that not enough of the waste from homes is recycled. They say that the only way to increase recycling is for governments to make it a legal requirement. To what extent do you think laws are needed to make people recycle more of their waste? Write at least 250 words.
Free and timed, with a live word count, just like the computer-delivered test. Then get an instant AI band score.
The exam simulator runs on a computer. Open this page on a laptop or desktop to practise.
How to read the question
- This is an opinion essay: To what extent do you think means you must give a clear position on how necessary laws are and keep it consistent throughout.
- Notice the strong word only in the background statement: the claim is that legislation is the only way to raise recycling, so you can agree that laws help while rejecting the idea that nothing else works.
- The scope is waste from homes, so focus on households and the systems around them rather than industrial or commercial waste in general.
- A balanced but clear position works well, for example arguing that laws are necessary but not sufficient without good facilities, incentives and education.
- You do not need to discuss whether recycling is good for the environment; that is assumed in the question, and spending a paragraph on it would be off-topic.
- Make sure alternatives such as deposit schemes, convenient collections and public campaigns are presented as answers to the question, not as a separate topic.
Suggested position
I agree that laws have an important role to play in increasing household recycling, but I do not believe they are the only way, or even an effective one when used on their own.
Paragraph plan
- 1
Introduction
Paraphrase the claim that households recycle too little and that legislation is the only solution, then give your position: laws are needed but must be combined with other measures.
- 2
Body paragraph 1: why laws can help
Explain that voluntary schemes depend on goodwill, while compulsory sorting backed by fines changes behaviour quickly. Give an example such as strict sorting rules in South Korea or Germany, and mention laws that make producers reduce packaging.
- 3
Body paragraph 2: why laws alone are not enough
Argue that people cannot comply without separate bins and regular collections, that incentives such as deposit return schemes work well, and that education is needed because many people are unsure what can be recycled.
- 4
Conclusion
Restate that laws are necessary but should be part of a wider strategy of facilities, incentives and education, since compulsion alone would be less effective and less popular.
Ideas and arguments
- Voluntary recycling relies on goodwill, and many people do not bother to sort waste when it is inconvenient.
- Compulsory sorting with fines, as in South Korea and Germany, has helped produce some of the highest recycling rates in the world.
- Laws can target manufacturers, requiring less packaging or recyclable materials, which reduces waste before it reaches homes.
- Without separate bins, regular collections and nearby recycling centres, people cannot obey recycling laws however strict they are.
- Deposit return schemes give a small refund for returned bottles and cans and achieve very high return rates without punishing anyone.
- Many people are confused about which materials are recyclable, and contaminated waste can spoil a whole collection, so education is essential.
- Laws that are difficult to enforce, such as checking every household bin, may be ignored or cause resentment.
Band 8+ model answer
294 words · An original model answer written for ieltswrites, not an official answer. It stays in English, as in the exam.
It is often argued that households recycle too little of their rubbish and that legislation is the only means of changing this. I agree that laws have an important role to play, but I do not believe they are the only solution, or even an effective one when used on their own.
There are clear reasons why legal requirements can help. Voluntary schemes rely on goodwill, and many people simply do not bother to separate their waste when it is inconvenient. When sorting rubbish becomes compulsory and is backed by fines, behaviour can change quickly, as countries such as South Korea and Germany have shown with strict rules that have contributed to some of the highest recycling rates in the world. Laws can also target producers rather than households, for example by obliging manufacturers to use less packaging, which reduces waste before it even reaches the home.
However, legislation alone is unlikely to succeed. A law is only as good as the system that supports it: if local councils fail to provide separate bins, regular collections and accessible recycling centres, residents cannot comply however heavily they are fined. Financial incentives often work as well as punishment, and deposit return schemes, in which customers receive a small refund for each bottle or can they bring back, have achieved remarkably high return rates in several European countries. Education is equally vital, since many people are unsure which materials can be recycled, and contaminated waste can ruin an entire collection.
In conclusion, I believe that laws are needed to push household recycling rates higher, but they should form part of a wider strategy that includes convenient facilities, incentives and public education. Relying on compulsion alone would be both less effective and far less popular with the public.
Why this answer scores highly
- Task Response
- The answer gives a clear position that laws are necessary but not sufficient, addresses the claim that legislation is the only way, and supports each point with specific examples such as deposit return schemes.
- Coherence and Cohesion
- The essay moves logically from the case for laws to their limitations, each paragraph has a clear central idea, and referencing such as the system that supports it and these rules links sentences naturally.
- Lexical Resource
- Precise topic vocabulary such as legislation, compulsory sorting, contaminated waste and financial incentives is used accurately, and the key words of the question are consistently paraphrased.
- Grammatical Range and Accuracy
- The essay uses complex structures such as conditional clauses, non-defining relative clauses and passive forms accurately, with a good mix of sentence types and no noticeable errors.
Useful vocabulary
- household waste
- rubbish produced by people in their homes
- legal requirement
- something that the law says people must do
- legislation
- a law or set of laws made by a government
- compulsory
- required by law or rules
- enforce
- make sure that people obey a law
- impose fines
- make people pay money as a punishment
- comply with
- act according to a rule or law
- deposit return scheme
- a system in which buyers pay a small extra amount for a drink container and get it back when they return it
- financial incentive
- a payment or saving that encourages people to do something
- awareness campaign
- a public effort to inform people about an issue
- contamination
- the mixing of non-recyclable material with recyclable waste
- recycling rate
- the percentage of waste that is recycled
- landfill
- a place where rubbish is buried in the ground
Common mistakes
- Writing about why recycling is important for the environment instead of answering whether laws are needed to increase it.
- Ignoring the word only in the claim and failing to consider other ways to raise recycling rates.
- Not stating a clear position, for example describing laws and alternatives without saying how necessary laws are.
- Discussing industrial waste, plastic in the ocean or climate change in general rather than waste from homes.
- Giving vague solutions such as people should be more responsible without explaining how this would happen.
- Repeating the words recycle and law constantly instead of using alternatives such as legislation, compulsory and household waste.
Frequently asked questions
- Which Cambridge book is this question from?
- This question about whether laws are needed to make people recycle more household waste is Writing Task 2 of Test 2 in Cambridge IELTS 11 Academic, published in 2016.
- Is this an opinion essay or a discussion essay?
- It is an opinion essay. You only need to say to what extent laws are needed and support that view, although discussing alternatives to laws is a good way to answer the claim that legislation is the only way.
- Can I argue that laws are needed but not enough on their own?
- Yes. This is a clear and well-supported position, as long as you state it in the introduction and develop both parts with reasons and examples.
- How many words should I write for this Task 2?
- Write at least 250 words; about 270-310 words is usually enough to develop two body paragraphs fully in 40 minutes.
Free and timed, with a live word count, just like the computer-delivered test. Then get an instant AI band score.
The exam simulator runs on a computer. Open this page on a laptop or desktop to practise.