Adapted Academic Discussion
Environmental Science · Dr. Rivera
This week, we are examining whether limited environmental funds should prevent future damage or restore ecosystems already harmed. Supporters and critics often begin from different assumptions about fairness, effectiveness, and the proper use of limited resources. In your response, explain which approach you find more convincing and why. You may build on the comments already posted, challenge part of a classmate's reasoning, or introduce a different relevant perspective. Use a specific reason or example so that your contribution moves the discussion forward rather than simply repeating a position.
Maya
I would prioritize prevention because stopping pollution early is often cheaper and protects systems before losses become irreversible. This approach could also make the policy easier to understand and evaluate over time. Even if it has some costs, a carefully designed pilot program could reveal whether the expected benefits actually reach the people who need them.
Leo
I would instead repair existing damage first because communities already living with polluted land and water should not wait for relief. A policy can sound attractive in theory but create unintended consequences in daily life. Before making a broad change, decision-makers should consider who carries the cost and whether a smaller, more flexible solution could achieve the same goal.
根据当前 TOEFL Academic Discussion 题型改编，非 ETS 官方原题。 查看 ETS 当前题型说明