Ielts — Nguyen Huyen Writing Task 2

In my view, it is not a question of choosing one over the other, but rather how to allocate funds appropriately based on each country’s specific needs. Governments should invest more in railways in densely populated urban corridors and inter-city routes where high demand exists. Simultaneously, they must maintain and upgrade existing roads to ensure safety and accessibility, particularly in rural zones. A mixed strategy, like the one adopted in Germany or China, would maximise the strengths of both systems while minimising their weaknesses.

On the other hand, those who favour road investment point out that roads offer greater flexibility and accessibility. Unlike trains, which operate on fixed routes and schedules, roads allow people to travel directly from point A to point B, especially in rural or remote areas where railways are absent. Additionally, road transport is vital for last-mile delivery services, emergency vehicles, and public buses. In many developing countries, improving road conditions can immediately boost local economies by connecting farmers to markets and children to schools. Thus, neglecting roads could isolate communities and hinder economic growth. ielts nguyen huyen writing task 2

On the one hand, proponents of railway investment argue that trains are more environmentally friendly and efficient for mass transit. Railways can carry a large number of passengers or a significant volume of freight at once, which helps reduce traffic congestion and lower carbon emissions. For example, high-speed rail networks in countries like Japan and France have proven successful in replacing short-haul flights and reducing road traffic. Moreover, railways are generally safer than roads, as train accidents are far less frequent than car crashes. Therefore, prioritising railway funding can lead to a more sustainable and secure transport system. In my view, it is not a question