Band 9 model answer
Responsibility for the climate crisis is fiercely contested. Some lay the blame squarely on powerful corporations, whereas others insist that everyday consumers are the true culprits. After weighing both arguments, I believe corporations carry the heavier burden, although consumers are far from blameless.
Those who indict consumers argue that demand ultimately dictates supply. Every flight booked, every disposable product purchased and every wasteful habit collectively generates the emissions that warm the planet. From this standpoint, if billions of individuals adopted greener lifestyles, polluting industries would have no choice but to contract. There is undeniable logic to the view that change begins with personal accountability.
Nevertheless, I find the case against corporations more persuasive. A relatively small number of fossil-fuel and industrial giants are responsible for a disproportionate share of global emissions, and they wield enormous influence over the choices available to consumers. By lobbying against regulation, designing products for obsolescence and concealing the true environmental impact of their operations, these companies actively constrain the public's ability to behave responsibly. Crucially, they also possess the scale and resources to deliver transformative change, which scattered individuals simply lack.
In conclusion, while consumers undoubtedly contribute to climate change and should strive to consume more thoughtfully, the dominant responsibility rests with the corporations that shape markets and dictate the energy supply. Holding these powerful actors accountable, through robust regulation and transparency, offers a far more realistic route to meaningful progress than relying on individual virtue alone.
Examiner’s notes
- Task Response: the discuss-both-views requirement is met by genuinely engaging with each side before delivering a decisive, well-justified opinion favouring corporate responsibility.
- Coherence and Cohesion: the contrast between sides is signalled cleanly with 'Those who indict consumers' and 'Nevertheless, I find the case against corporations more persuasive', anchoring the reader.
- Lexical Resource: advanced collocations such as 'designing products for obsolescence', 'lobbying against regulation' and 'disproportionate share' indicate precise, flexible vocabulary.