IELTS Forcast Reading Test 2025 - Q2 Test 4 with Practice Test, Answers And Explanation
Luyện tập đề IELTS Forcast Reading Test 2025 - Q2 Test 4 được lấy từ cuốn sách Forcast Test 2025 - Q2 với trải nghiệm thi IELTS trên máy và giải thích đáp án chi tiết bằng Linearthinking, kèm answer key và list từ vựng IELTS cần học trong bài đọc.
IELTS Forcast Reading Test 2025 - Q2 Test 4 with Practice Test, Answers And Explanation
Passage
❓ Câu hỏi passage 1
Question 1 - 7
From the list of headings below choose the most suitable heading for each paragraph.
List of Headings
I
Financial hardship of community
II
A good tendency of strengthening the supervision
III
Details of plans for the community’s makeover and upgrade
IV
Architecture suits families of various ethnic origins
V
Problems arise then the mentality of alienation developed later
VI
Introduction of a social housing community with unexpected high standard
VII
A practical design and the need to assist and cooperate in the future
VIII
Closer relationship among neighbors in the original site
IX
Different needs from a makeup of a low financial background should be considered
X
How to make the community feel safe
XI
A plan with details for house structure
1
Paragraph A
2
Paragraph B
3
Paragraph C
4
Paragraph D
5
Paragraph E
6
Paragraph F
7
Paragraph G
Question 8 - 10
Use the information in the passage to match the people (listed A-E) with opinions or deeds below.
Write the appropriate letters, A-E.
List of Findings
A
Michael Thompson
B
Graham Bodman
C
Stuart Bracey
D
James Lunday
8
Design should meet the need of mix-raced cultural background.
9
For a better living environment, regulations and social control should be imperative.
10
Organising more community’s activities helps to strengthen the relationship in the community.
Question 11 - 14
Complete the following summary of the paragraphs.
Choose NO MORE THAN TWO WORDS from the passage for each answer.
In the year 2002, the Talbot decided to raise housing standards. Although the upgrade plan did not utilise the maximum accommodation allowed, it did increase the number of housing units.
And as the various plans were complemented under the designs of many together, many house styles were designed to match tenants from different cultures. As for the finance, the reconstruction program’s major concern is to build a house within low . Finally, just as experts predicted, residents will agree on building a relatively conventional house in its own , which provides considerable space to move around.
Passage
❓ Câu hỏi passage 2
Question 15 - 18
Match each opinion with the correct person.
Write the correct letter, A, B, C, or D
List of Findings
A
Kenneth Cassman
B
Bill Liebhardt
C
Vaclav Smil
D
Ron Olson
15
Without the use of synthetic fertilizers, large numbers of people would die of hunger.
16
We need agricultural methods that work for the environment.
17
In future, the quantity of fertilizer used will be linked to predicted harvests.
18
The output from organic soils is very nearly equal to that from fields treated with chemical fertilizers.
Question 19 - 23
Choose
YES if the statement agrees with the information
NO if the statement contradicts the information
NOT GIVEN if it is impossible to say what the writer thinks about this
19
There are only two real farming options worth considering.
20
Farmers need to act on locally relevant information.
Farmers are unable to meet demand for grain in temperate zones.
Question 24 - 27
Complete the summary below.
Choose NO MORE THAN TWO WORDS from the passage for each answer.
A leading American agronomist is concerned that unless we improve our approach to food production, the world will face serious shortages by the year 2050. A government team which looked ahead at British came up with a similar prediction. The pro-technology lobby believes in using crops which are as well as relying heavily on agro-chemicals. On the other hand, farmers believe passionately in natural techniques. The real problem is, however, that both natural and farming damage the ecosystem. The move towards a more sensible approach to farming is being hampered by a lack of political will. We need to steer a middle course if we are to solve the world's food problems.
Passage
❓ Câu hỏi passage 3
Question 28 - 33
Complete the sentences below.
Choose NO MORE THAN THREE WORDS from the passage for each answer.
Not only one individual or one country, but the whole world took part in the invention of the bicycle over a period of years. This invention was firstly found in Scotland in the first decades of 1800, and was known as velocipedes. They were not resembled to today's bicycles and had two wheels, but they had no . The rider sat on a pillow and walked his feet along the ground in order to move his velocipede forward. Soon, a French inventor added pedals to the front wheel. However, because of their difficulty in riding, nobody used them in a daily life, and they were accepted as . Around 1870, manufacturers in America found that this invention was popular but with one difference: frameworks were made from , which makes them much lighter. Soon, the British inventors found the method which can make pedaling more efficient-to turn pedals one by one. They designed a bicycle with a giant front wheel. However, as the rider had to sit high above the giant front wheel it was too difficult to keep the balance. The safer bicycle was invented by Americans. They designed the rear , which minimized the danger of falling and injuring. At last, the British changed the design one last time and added two wheels equal in size and the mechanism that induce a chain to turn the rear wheel. By this there was invented the example of the modern bicycle.
Question 34 - 37
Choose
YES if the statement agrees with the information
NO if the statement contradicts the information
NOT GIVEN if it is impossible to say what the writer thinks about this
34
The bicycle was invented by Americans only
35
It was too hard to ride the velocipedes because of their heavy weight
36
The alteration of velocipedes made operating them much easier.
37
The changes by British inventors altered the wheels to make pedaling more efficient
Question 38 - 40
Complete the question below.
38
The British inventors concluded that if the front wheel were
in size, the bicycle would travel comparatively long distance.
39
American engineers designed a system of
that was driven by pressing first the right and then the left pedals.
40
The final alteration in creating of the modern bicycle was making the two wheels equal in size and using the
to spin the rear wheel.
DOL IELTS Đình Lực
05/05/2026
📖 Bài đọc passage 1
Urban Revitalization: Transforming Talbot Park in Auckland
A
A. An architecture of disguise is almost complete at Talbot Park in the heart of Auckland’s Glen Innes. The place was once described as a state housing ghetto, rife with crime, vandalism and other social problems. But today after a $48 million urban renewal makeover, the site is home to 700 residents — 200 more than before — and has people regularly inquiring whether they can buy or rent there. “It doesn’t look like social housing,” Housing New Zealand housing services manager Dene Busby says of the tidy brick-and-weatherboard apartments and townhouses, which would look just as much at home in more affluent suburbs. “There is no reason why public housing should look cheap, in my view,” says Design Group architect Neil, referring to the eight three-bedroom terrace houses his firm designed.
B
Talbot Park is a triangle of government-owned land bounded by Apirana Ave, Pilkington Rd and Point England Rd. in the early 1960s, it was developed for state housing built around a linear park that ran through the middle. Initially, there was a strong sense of a family-friendly community. Former residents recall how the Talbot Park reserve played a big part in their childhoods – a place where the kids in the block came together to play softball, cricket, tiggy, leapfrog and bullrush. Sometimes they’d play “Maoris against Pakehas” but without any animosity. “It was all just good fun”, says Georgie Thompson in Ben Schrader’s We Call it Home: A History of State Housing in New Zealand. “We had respect for our neighbours and addressed them by title Mr. and Mrs. so-and-so,” she recalls.
C
Quite what went wrong with Talbot Park is not clear. We call it Home Records that the community began to change in the late 1970s as more Pacific Islanders and Europeans moved in. The new arrivals didn’t readily integrate with the community, a “them and us” mentality developed, and residents interact with their neighbours less. What was clear was the buildings were deteriorating and becoming dilapidated, petty crime was on the rise and the reserve – the focus of fond childhood memories – had become a wasteland and was considered unsafe.
D
But it wasn’t until 2002 that Housing New Zealand decided the properties needed upgrading. The master renewal plan didn’t take advantage of the maximum accommodation density allowable (one unit per 100 sq metres) but did increase density to one unit per 180 sq m by refurbishing all 108 star flat units, removing the multis and building 111 new home. The Talbot strategy can be summed up as mix, match and manage. Mix up the housing with various plans from a mix of architects, match house styles to what’s built by the private sector, match tenants to the mix, and manage their occupancy. Inevitably cost comes into the equation. “If you’re going to build low-cost homes, you’ve got to keep them simple and you can’t afford a fancy bit on them.” Says Michael Thompson of Architectus which designed the innovative three-level Atrium apartments lining two sides of a covered courtyard. At $300,000 per two-bedroom unit, the building is more expensive but provides for independent disabled accommodation as well as offering solar hot water heating and rainwater collection for toilet cisterns and outside taps.
E
The renewal project budget at $1.5 million will provide park pathways, planting, playgrounds, drinking fountains, seating, skateboard rails, a half-size basketball hard court, and a pavilion. But if there was any doubt this is a low socio-economic area, the demographics for the surrounding Tamaki area are sobering. Of the 5000 households there, 55 per cent are statehouses, 28 per cent privately owned (compared to about 65 per cent nationally) and 17 per cent are private rental. The area has a high concentration of households with incomes in the $5000 to $15,000 range and very few with an income of over $70,000. That’s in sharp contrast to the more affluent suburbs like Kohimarama and St John’s that surround the area.
F
“The design is for people with different culture background,” says architect James Lunday of Common Ground which designed the 21 large family homes. “Architecturally we decided to be relatively conservative – a nice house in its own garden with a bit of space and good indoor-outdoor flow.” There’s a slight reflection of the whare and a Pacific fale, but not overplayed. “The private sector is way behind in urban design and sustainable futures,” says Bracey. “Redesigning streets and parks is a big deal and very difficult to do. The private sector won’t do it, because it’s so hard."
G
There’s no doubt good urban design and good architecture play a significant part in the scheme. But probably more important is a new standard of social control. Housing New Zealand calls it “intensive tenancy management”. Others view it as social engineering. “It’s a model that we are looking at going forward,” according to Housing New Zealand’s central Auckland regional manager Graham Bodman. “The focus is on frequent inspections, helping tenants to get to know each other and trying to create an environment of respect for neighbours,” says Bodman. That includes some strict rules – no loud parties after 10 pm, no dogs, no cats in the apartments, no washing hung over balcony rails and a requirement to mow lawns and keep the property tidy. Housing New Zealand has also been active in organising morning teas and street barbecues for residents to meet their neighbours. “It’s all based on the intensification,” says Community Renewal project manager Stuart Bracey. “We acknowledge if you are going to put more people living closer together, you have to actually help them to live closer together because it creates tension – especially for people that aren’t used to it.”
🔥 Đáp án & giải thích 1
1
VI
Giải thích chi tiết
☺️ Ứng dụng Linearthinking để giải quyết dạng bài Matching Headings
🔥 Step 01: Read to understand main idea
Đoạn A giới thiệu dự án đổi mới tại Talbot Park, một khu nhà ở xã hội từng bị coi là khu ổ chuột.
Trọng tâm là kết quả sau khi cải tạo: khu nhà mới trông không giống nhà ở xã hội và có tiêu chuẩn cao đến mức có thể đặt ở các khu vực giàu có hơn.
--------------
✨ Step 02: Compare meaning with meaning
Đại ý của đoạn:Giới thiệu khu nhà ở xã hội Talbot Park đã được nâng cấp với kiến trúc và chất lượng tốt, không như những gì người ta mong đợi ở nhà ở công cộng.
Heading F:Introduction of a social housing community with unexpected high standard (Giới thiệu một cộng đồng nhà ở xã hội với tiêu chuẩn cao bất ngờ).
Đáp án đúng: F. Introduction of a social housing community with unexpected high standard
Feeding the world while nurturing the planet doesn't necessarily mean going back to nature.
The world's population continues to climb and, despite the rise of high-tech agriculture, 800 million people don't get enough to eat. Admittedly, this is often due to a lack of money, since the world actually produces enough for everyone. However, by 2050, we will have 9 billion mouths to feed, 3 billion more than today.
Agriculture must become the solution to environmental problems in 50 years. If we don't have systems that make the environment better-not just hold the fort-then we're in trouble," says Kenneth Cassman, an agronomist at the University of Nebraska in America. That view was echoed by the Curry Report, a government panel that surveyed the future of farming in Britain.
Concerned consumers are facing what appears to be an ever-widening ideological divide. In one corner are the techno-optimists, who put their faith in genetically modified crops and improved agrochemicals. In the other are advocates of organic farming, who reject artificial chemicals and embrace back-to-nature techniques. Both sides cite plausible science to back their claims, leaving many people to believe we're faced with a stark choice between two mutually incompatible options.
Not so. If you set ideology aside and simply ask how the world can produce the food it needs with the least environmental cost, a new middle way opens. Like today's organic farming, the intelligent farming of the future should pay much more attention to the health of its soil and the ecosystem it is part of, as well as making shrewd and locally appropriate use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. The most crucial ingredient in this new style of agriculture is not chemicals but information about what is happening in each field and how to respond.
Organic farming sounds attractive since an approach that rejects synthetic chemicals surely runs no risk of poisoning land and water, and its emphasis on natural ecosystems seems to be good for everyone. Perhaps these easy assumptions explain why sales of organic food across Europe are increasing by at least 50% a year. Going organic sounds idyllic, but it is also naïve and has its own suite of environmental costs, which can be worse than those of conventional which can be worse farming, especially if it were to become the world norm.
Advocates of organic farming like to point out that fields organically managed can produce yields just as high as fields enhanced with synthetic fertilizers. For example, Bill Liebhardt at the Rodale Institute in Pennsylvania recently compiled the results of such comparisons for corn, wheat, soybeans, and tomatoes in the US and found that the organic fields averaged between 94 and 100 percent of the yields of nearby conventional crops.
But this optimistic picture tells only half the story. Organic farmers can't reach this yield every year if they want to build soil nutrients without synthetic fertilizers. They need to alternate with soil-building crops, and this is the biggest cost of organic farming. Vaclav Smil of the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg estimates that if farmers worldwide gave up the 80 million tonnes of synthetic fertilizer they now use each year, total grain production would fall by at least half. Either farms would have to double the amount of land they cultivate-at catastrophic cost to natural habitats-or billions of people would starve.
In short, the world needs chemical fertilizers, even though farmers in much of the temperate zone produce so much grain that they are hard-pressed to sell it at a profit. But if they were to cut back drastically on their fertilizer use and harvests were to shrink, grain prices would go up, making poor people hungrier. Besides the obvious moral cost of this approach, nothing destroys ecosystems more surely than hungry people who cannot afford to think about tomorrow because they are desperate to feed their children today.
Technologically advanced farmers can now monitor their yields and target their fertilizer to the parts of the field where it will do the most good, which, in turn, increases the yield. Eventually, farmers may incorporate long-term weather forecasts into their planning so they can cut back on fertilizer use when the weather is likely to make harvests poor anyway, says Ron Olson, an agronomist from Florida.
The challenge in moving towards a new, more intelligent farming of the future is as much political as it is technological. We already know how to build better soils, how to keep pests in check, and how to recognize when synthetic chemicals can provide the decisive edge to maximize yields. What's missing is political will. The time has come to step past the tired battle lines drawn up between organics advocates and agribusiness and enter the zone in between, where the real solutions lie.
🔥 Đáp án & giải thích 2
15
C
Giải thích chi tiết
☺️ Ứng dụng Linearthinking để giải quyết dạng bài Matching Names
Step 01: Read the question to understand main idea
Simplified:
Without the use of synthetic fertilizers , large numbers of people would die of hunger
Main idea: Nếu không sử dụng phân bón hoá học → nhiều người sẽ chết đói.
-------
Step 02: Locate relevant information
🔍 Từ khoá: synthetic fertilizers; die of hunger; without, large numbers of people
→ Dựa vào các từ khoá trên → Tìm được trích dẫn ở đoạn 7 - đoạn có nói về hậu quả nghiêm trọng khi ngừng sử dụng phân bón hoá học.
-------
Step 03: Read relevant information to understand (main + detail)
📌Trích dẫn đoạn văn liên quan:Vaclav Smil of the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg estimates that if farmers worldwide gave up the 80 million tonnes of synthetic fertilizer they now use each year, total grain production would fall by at least half. Either farms would have to double the amount of land they cultivate—at catastrophic cost to natural habitats—or billions of people would starve. (đoạn 7)
Simplified:
Vaclav Smil estimates that if farmers gave up synthetic fertilizer -> grain production would fall by at least half
→ farms would have to double the amount of land they cultivate or billions of people would starve
Main idea: Nếu nông dân ngừng dùng phân bón hoá học → sản lượng ngũ cốc giảm mạnh → các trang trại sẽ phải tăng gấp đôi diện tích đất canh tác hoặc hàng tỷ người sẽ chết đói.
-------
Step 04: Compare meaning with meaning
Nội dung tìm được trong bài: Nếu không dùng phân bón hoá học, sản lượng ngũ cốc giảm → hàng tỷ người sẽ chết đói.
Nội dung câu hỏi: Nếu không dùng phân bón hoá học, nhiều người sẽ chết đói.
The modern bicycle did not emerge from the ingenuity of a single individual or the confine of one nation. Its development spanned nearly 100 years and involved numerous innovators. Over this period, the bicycle underwent significant transformations, ultimately reshaping transportation methods and societal norms. Bicycles first appeared in Scotland in the early 1800s, and were called velocipedes. These early bicycles had two wheels, but they had no pedals. The rider sat on a pillow and walked his feet along the ground to move his velocipede forward.
Soon a French inventor added pedals to the front wheel. Instead of walking their vehicles, riders used their feet to run the pedals. However, pedaling was hard because velocipedes were very heavy. The framework was made of solid steel tubes and the wooden wheels were covered with steel. Even so, velocipedes were popular among rich young men, who raced them in Paris parks. Because the velocipedes were so hard to ride, no one thought about using them for transportation. People didn't ride velocipedes to the market or to their jobs. Instead, people thought velocipedes were just toys.
Around 1870, American manufacturers saw that velocipedes were very popular overseas. They began building velocipedes, too, but with one difference. They made the frameworks from hollow steel tubes. This alteration made velocipedes much lighter, but riders still had to work hard to pedal just a short distance. In addition, roads were bumpy so steering was difficult. In fact, most riders preferred indoor tracks where they could rent a velocipede for a small fee and take riding lessons.
Subsequent changes by British engineers altered the wheels to make pedaling more efficient. They saw that when a rider turned the pedals once, the front wheel turned once. If the front wheel was small, the bicycle traveled just a small distance with each turn. They reasoned that if the front wheel were larger, the bicycle would travel a greater distance. So they designed a bicycle with a giant front wheel. They made the rear wheel small. Its primary purpose was to help the rider balance. Balancing was hard because the rider had to sit high above the giant front wheel in order to reach the pedals.
This meant he was in danger of falling off the bicycle and injuring himself if he lost his balance. Despite this inherent danger, "high wheelers" became very popular in England. American manufacturers once again tried to design a better bicycle. Their goal was to make a safer bicycle. They substituted a small wheel for the giant front wheel and put the driving mechanism in the larger rear wheel. It would be impossible for a rider to pedal the rear wheel, so engineers designed a system of foot levers. By pressing first the right one and then the left, the rider moved a long metal bar up and down. This bar turned the rear axle. In turn, this axle propelled the rear wheel. This design minimized the dangers inherent in bicycle riding, so more and more people began using bicycles in their daily activities. The British altered the design one last time. They made the two wheels equal in size and created a mechanism that uses a chain to turn the rear wheel. With this final change, the modern bicycle was born.
Subsequent improvements, such as brakes, rubber tires, and lights were added to make bicycles more comfortable to ride. By 1900, bicycle riding had become very popular with men and women of all ages. Bicycles revolutionized the way people worldwide ride bicycles for transportation, enjoyment, sport, and exercise.
🔥 Đáp án & giải thích 3
28
one hundred / a hundred
Giải thích chi tiết
☺️ Ứng dụng Linearthinking để giải quyết dạng bài Gap Fill
Step 01: Read the question to understand (main idea + detail) + Predict Word Form + Meaning
Simplified:
Not onlyone individual or one country, The whole world took part in the invention of the bicycle over a period of ________ years
Main idea: Cả thế giới cùng tham gia vào quá trình phát minh xe đạp – diễn ra trong một khoảng thời gian ______
Prediction: Danh từ - chỉ số lượng / thời gian (dạng number + years)
-------
Step 02: Locate relevant information
🔍 Từ khoá: “not only one individual or one country”, “the whole world”, “invention of the bicycle”, “years”
→ Dựa vào các từ khoá trên → Tìm được trích dẫn ở đoạn A - đoạn nói về sự phát triển của xe đạp.
-------
Step 03: Read relevant information to understand (main + detail)
📌 Trích dẫn: "The modern bicycle did not emerge from the ingenuity of a single individual or the confines of one nation. Its development spanned nearly 100 years and involved numerous innovators." (đoạn A)
Simplified:
The modern bicycle did not emerge from a single individual or one nation.
Its development spanned nearly 100 years
Main idea: Quá trình phát triển của xe đạp kéo dài gần 100 năm – có sự đóng góp của nhiều nhà phát minh từ nhiều quốc gia khác nhau.
-------
Step 04: Compare meaning with meaning
Trong bài đọc: Quá trình phát triển của xe đạp kéo dài gần 100 năm – có sự đóng góp của nhiều nhà phát minh từ nhiều quốc gia khác nhau.
Trong câu hỏi: Cả thế giới tham gia vào phát minh xe đạp trong khoảng thời gian ________ năm.
B. Talbot Park is a triangle of government-owned land bounded by Apirana Ave, Pilkington Rd and Point England Rd. in the early 1960s, it was developed for state housing built around a linear park that ran through the middle. Initially, there was a strong sense of a family-friendly community. Former residents recall how the Talbot Park reserve played a big part in their childhoods – a place where the kids in the block came together to play softball, cricket, tiggy, leapfrog and bullrush. Sometimes they’d play “Maoris against Pakehas” but without any animosity. “It was all just good fun”, says Georgie Thompson in Ben Schrader’s We Call it Home: A History of State Housing in New Zealand. “We had respect for our neighbours and addressed them by title Mr. and Mrs. so-and-so,” she recalls.
C. Quite what went wrong with Talbot Park is not clear. We call it Home Records that the community began to change in the late 1970s as more Pacific Islanders and Europeans moved in. The new arrivals didn’t readily integrate with the community, a “them and us” mentality developed, and residents interact with their neighbours less. What was clear was the buildings were deteriorating and becoming dilapidated, petty crime was on the rise and the reserve – the focus of fond childhood memories – had become a wasteland and was considered unsafe.
D. But it wasn’t until 2002 that Housing New Zealand decided the properties needed upgrading. The master renewal plan didn’t take advantage of the maximum accommodation density allowable (one unit per 100 sq metres) but did increase density to one unit per 180 sq m by refurbishing all 108 star flat units, removing the multis and building 111 new home. The Talbot strategy can be summed up as mix, match and manage. Mix up the housing with various plans from a mix of architects, match house styles to what’s built by the private sector, match tenants to the mix, and manage their occupancy. Inevitably cost comes into the equation. “If you’re going to build low-cost homes, you’ve got to keep them simple and you can’t afford a fancy bit on them.” Says Michael Thompson of Architectus which designed the innovative three-level Atrium apartments lining two sides of a covered courtyard. At $300,000 per two-bedroom unit, the building is more expensive but provides for independent disabled accommodation as well as offering solar hot water heating and rainwater collection for toilet cisterns and outside taps.
E. The renewal project budget at $1.5 million will provide park pathways, planting, playgrounds, drinking fountains, seating, skateboard rails, a half-size basketball hard court, and a pavilion. But if there was any doubt this is a low socio-economic area, the demographics for the surrounding Tamaki area are sobering. Of the 5000 households there, 55 per cent are statehouses, 28 per cent privately owned (compared to about 65 per cent nationally) and 17 per cent are private rental. The area has a high concentration of households with incomes in the $5000 to $15,000 range and very few with an income of over $70,000. That’s in sharp contrast to the more affluent suburbs like Kohimarama and St John’s that surround the area.
F. “The design is for people with different culture background,” says architect James Lunday of Common Ground which designed the 21 large family homes. “Architecturally we decided to be relatively conservative – a nice house in its own garden with a bit of space and good indoor-outdoor flow.” There’s a slight reflection of the whare and a Pacific fale, but not overplayed. “The private sector is way behind in urban design and sustainable futures,” says Bracey. “Redesigning streets and parks is a big deal and very difficult to do. The private sector won’t do it, because it’s so hard."
G. There’s no doubt good urban design and good architecture play a significant part in the scheme. But probably more important is a new standard of social control. Housing New Zealand calls it “intensive tenancy management”. Others view it as social engineering. “It’s a model that we are looking at going forward,” according to Housing New Zealand’s central Auckland regional manager Graham Bodman. “The focus is on frequent inspections, helping tenants to get to know each other and trying to create an environment of respect for neighbours,” says Bodman. That includes some strict rules – no loud parties after 10 pm, no dogs, no cats in the apartments, no washing hung over balcony rails and a requirement to mow lawns and keep the property tidy. Housing New Zealand has also been active in organising morning teas and street barbecues for residents to meet their neighbours. “It’s all based on the intensification,” says Community Renewal project manager Stuart Bracey. “We acknowledge if you are going to put more people living closer together, you have to actually help them to live closer together because it creates tension – especially for people that aren’t used to it.”
The world's population continues to climb and, despite the rise of high-tech agriculture, 800 million people don't get enough to eat. Admittedly, this is often due to a lack of money, since the world actually produces enough for everyone. However, by 2050, we will have 9 billion mouths to feed, 3 billion more than today.
Agriculture must become the solution to environmental problems in 50 years. If we don't have systems that make the environment better-not just hold the fort-then we're in trouble," says Kenneth Cassman, an agronomist at the University of Nebraska in America. That view was echoed by the Curry Report, a government panel that surveyed the future of farming in Britain.
Concerned consumers are facing what appears to be an ever-widening ideological divide. In one corner are the techno-optimists, who put their faith in genetically modified crops and improved agrochemicals. In the other are advocates of organic farming, who reject artificial chemicals and embrace back-to-nature techniques. Both sides cite plausible science to back their claims, leaving many people to believe we're faced with a stark choice between two mutually incompatible options.
Not so. If you set ideology aside and simply ask how the world can produce the food it needs with the least environmental cost, a new middle way opens. Like today's organic farming, the intelligent farming of the future should pay much more attention to the health of its soil and the ecosystem it is part of, as well as making shrewd and locally appropriate use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides. The most crucial ingredient in this new style of agriculture is not chemicals but information about what is happening in each field and how to respond.
Organic farming sounds attractive since an approach that rejects synthetic chemicals surely runs no risk of poisoning land and water, and its emphasis on natural ecosystems seems to be good for everyone. Perhaps these easy assumptions explain why sales of organic food across Europe are increasing by at least 50% a year. Going organic sounds idyllic, but it is also naïve and has its own suite of environmental costs, which can be worse than those of conventional which can be worse farming, especially if it were to become the world norm.
Advocates of organic farming like to point out that fields organically managed can produce yields just as high as fields enhanced with synthetic fertilizers. For example, Bill Liebhardt at the Rodale Institute in Pennsylvania recently compiled the results of such comparisons for corn, wheat, soybeans, and tomatoes in the US and found that the organic fields averaged between 94 and 100 percent of the yields of nearby conventional crops.
But this optimistic picture tells only half the story. Organic farmers can't reach this yield every year if they want to build soil nutrients without synthetic fertilizers. They need to alternate with soil-building crops, and this is the biggest cost of organic farming. Vaclav Smil of the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg estimates that if farmers worldwide gave up the 80 million tonnes of synthetic fertilizer they now use each year, total grain production would fall by at least half. Either farms would have to double the amount of land they cultivate-at catastrophic cost to natural habitats-or billions of people would starve.
In short, the world needs chemical fertilizers, even though farmers in much of the temperate zone produce so much grain that they are hard-pressed to sell it at a profit. But if they were to cut back drastically on their fertilizer use and harvests were to shrink, grain prices would go up, making poor people hungrier. Besides the obvious moral cost of this approach, nothing destroys ecosystems more surely than hungry people who cannot afford to think about tomorrow because they are desperate to feed their children today.
Technologically advanced farmers can now monitor their yields and target their fertilizer to the parts of the field where it will do the most good, which, in turn, increases the yield. Eventually, farmers may incorporate long-term weather forecasts into their planning so they can cut back on fertilizer use when the weather is likely to make harvests poor anyway, says Ron Olson, an agronomist from Florida.
The challenge in moving towards a new, more intelligent farming of the future is as much political as it is technological. We already know how to build better soils, how to keep pests in check, and how to recognize when synthetic chemicals can provide the decisive edge to maximize yields. What's missing is political will. The time has come to step past the tired battle lines drawn up between organics advocates and agribusiness and enter the zone in between, where the real solutions lie.
if farmers gave up synthetic fertilizer
grain production
would fall
by at least half
farms
would have to double
the amount of land they cultivate
or
billions of people
would starve
The modern bicycle did not emerge from the ingenuity of a single individual or the confine of one nation. Its development spanned nearly 100 years and involved numerous innovators. Over this period, the bicycle underwent significant transformations, ultimately reshaping transportation methods and societal norms. Bicycles first appeared in Scotland in the early 1800s, and were called velocipedes. These early bicycles had two wheels, but they had no pedals. The rider sat on a pillow and walked his feet along the ground to move his velocipede forward.
Soon a French inventor added pedals to the front wheel. Instead of walking their vehicles, riders used their feet to run the pedals. However, pedaling was hard because velocipedes were very heavy. The framework was made of solid steel tubes and the wooden wheels were covered with steel. Even so, velocipedes were popular among rich young men, who raced them in Paris parks. Because the velocipedes were so hard to ride, no one thought about using them for transportation. People didn't ride velocipedes to the market or to their jobs. Instead, people thought velocipedes were just toys.
Around 1870, American manufacturers saw that velocipedes were very popular overseas. They began building velocipedes, too, but with one difference. They made the frameworks from hollow steel tubes. This alteration made velocipedes much lighter, but riders still had to work hard to pedal just a short distance. In addition, roads were bumpy so steering was difficult. In fact, most riders preferred indoor tracks where they could rent a velocipede for a small fee and take riding lessons.
Subsequent changes by British engineers altered the wheels to make pedaling more efficient. They saw that when a rider turned the pedals once, the front wheel turned once. If the front wheel was small, the bicycle traveled just a small distance with each turn. They reasoned that if the front wheel were larger, the bicycle would travel a greater distance. So they designed a bicycle with a giant front wheel. They made the rear wheel small. Its primary purpose was to help the rider balance. Balancing was hard because the rider had to sit high above the giant front wheel in order to reach the pedals.
This meant he was in danger of falling off the bicycle and injuring himself if he lost his balance. Despite this inherent danger, "high wheelers" became very popular in England. American manufacturers once again tried to design a better bicycle. Their goal was to make a safer bicycle. They substituted a small wheel for the giant front wheel and put the driving mechanism in the larger rear wheel. It would be impossible for a rider to pedal the rear wheel, so engineers designed a system of foot levers. By pressing first the right one and then the left, the rider moved a long metal bar up and down. This bar turned the rear axle. In turn, this axle propelled the rear wheel. This design minimized the dangers inherent in bicycle riding, so more and more people began using bicycles in their daily activities. The British altered the design one last time. They made the two wheels equal in size and created a mechanism that uses a chain to turn the rear wheel. With this final change, the modern bicycle was born.
Subsequent improvements, such as brakes, rubber tires, and lights were added to make bicycles more comfortable to ride. By 1900, bicycle riding had become very popular with men and women of all ages. Bicycles revolutionized the way people worldwide ride bicycles for transportation, enjoyment, sport, and exercise.
