Many people believe that scientific research should be carried out and controlled by governments rather than private companies. To what extent do you agree or disagree ?

Question

Research is a major component of science and they have been playing a significant role in shaping understandings of the world and creating innovation serving for the advancement of human civilisation. Administering research projects related to science has been a controversial issue, with many people arguing for the case that control over science-based research and experiments should be handed to governmental agencies over private sectors. In opposition to such argument, my viewpoint is that such manipulation rights should be shared between govermental and non-governmental agencies and no degree of absolute control should be given to either parties.

            One of the reasons why the right to administrate researching should be handed to both parties is directly attributed to the context of which the research is related to. In some cases, governmental coordination is more suitable, such as when the research have national scale, address a large-scale and complex socio-economic issues scientifically or examine features related to national aspects such as GDP, Human Development Index and so on. Such research endeavours will benefit from governments’ huge financial and human resources, thus the quality and reliability of these research could be perpetuated. In other circumstances, when the research have smaller scale and scope, such as examining pollution level of a neighborhood, private administration will be more appropriate, as involvement of governments may result in public funding wasted for insignificant outcome. In Vietnam, the government only control research activities that address problems affecting the welfare of the entire Vietnamese population like climate change, sea level rise and many more.

            Another possible reason supporting such points of view is that involvement of both sectors in research control will allow a degree of co-operation, which is crucial in maintaining researching qualities and scientific transparency. Such co-operation can allow more holistic approaches to scientific problems by making way for discussions between scientists both from goverments and private corporations. This idea also provides opportunities for both parties to take control over parts of the research that each party have advantages over. While governments can provide better evidences in many cases due to redundant database, private agencies can, in various scenarios, create more expertise scientific reasoning and conclusion-drawing. This could be partly attributed to their capability to recruit not only local scientists like governmental agencies but also regional and international experts whose expertise can be more reliable and more advanced.

            In conclusion, rather than giving goverments total rights to deploy science-based research, it is more beneficial to give both governments and non-governmental agencies rights to conduct and control scientific experiments, as this gives opportunities to flexibly and co-operatively analyse scientific information and draw conclusions from them. In the future, as reliability will be more prioritized in a world where information is becoming increasingly redundant and complex, it is highly likely goverments will share the responsibility to conduct experiments with independent corporations.

Answer 1

vIt is true that riding a biclycle is not prevalent among many people around the world although cycling is a better way to mitigate environmental contamination than other types of transport.Reasons for this vary, and steps need to be taken to promote the useage of bicycles.

I think that the first sentence which you used "better... than" structure is not correct. Because when you used "a better way" that is a noun, so it cannot connect with "than" . That means you should change a bit, for example "....rather than other types of transport".

"Reasons for this vary" does not make sense and impolite, maybe that should be changed in this way "reasons for this phenomenon will be discussed in this essay and resolutions need to be pointed out to promote the usage of bicycles".

To begin with, there are several reasons why few people use bicycles on a regular basis. 

few people regularly use bicyckes

 Firstly, these days people is often busier than before   ever. Many people have to take responsibility for a mountain of work at their working places; therefore, they want to spend less time on transport as much as possible.

This obviously causes  this is a dominant reason lead them to choose motor vehicles such as motorbikes or cars. 

 Another justification for this problem Another supportive explanation for the phemomenon is that today a number of people lead possess a sedentery lifestyle. 

Using bicycles consumes more energy than   needs more physical demand than  other types of transport, which deters people from choosing this means of transport. 

Firstly, the government should conduct  organize or held  suitable campaigns to raise public awareness of the detrimental  beneficial effects of motor vehicles bicycles on the environment.

thus people cycling can move faster than using the lanes of other types of transport.

thus, cyclists might move easier and faster on such lanes.

Finally, the government can impose heavy taxes on cars and motorbikes, so people will think carefully (excogitate) before buying ones.

In conclusion, the increase in using this environmental friendly vehicle is intractable, andsolutions are available to mitigate the problem. this part of the sentence does not make sense, you should re-wirte this conclusion.

hoping this is useful for you.

Comments

I think you have posted in the wrong essay.