Luyện theo cấu trúc Cambridge IELTS 13 · Writing Task 1 + 2: Tourism on Islands

The table compares international tourist arrivals on four islands in 2005, 2015 and 2025, together with the average length of stay in 2025.

Overall, three of the four islands attracted more visitors over the twenty-year period, with Corvel and Tolu recording by far the most dramatic growth. Mariset was the only exception, as its visitor numbers fell in the second decade. Visitors to the fastest-growing islands also stayed the shortest time.

Corvel was the most popular destination by 2025. Its visitor numbers rose from 120,000 in 2005 to 310,000 a decade later, before reaching 540,000, roughly four and a half times the original figure. Tolu grew even faster in relative terms: starting from only 15,000 visitors, it received 220,000 by 2025, an almost fifteen-fold increase. However, tourists on these two islands stayed only 4.2 and 3.1 nights respectively.

By contrast, Halden saw only modest growth, from 85,000 to 105,000, yet its visitors stayed far longer than anywhere else, at 9.5 nights. Mariset, the busiest island in 2005 with 240,000 arrivals, rose slightly to 260,000 before dropping to 180,000, with an average stay of six nights.

As cheap flights and social media have made remote destinations easier to reach, many small islands now receive far more visitors than they did a generation ago. While some people argue that numbers should be firmly capped, others feel that tourism should be free to expand. In my view, a limit is justified, provided it is designed to protect islanders' livelihoods rather than simply to exclude visitors.

Those who favour unrestricted growth point to the economic realities of island life. Small islands often have few alternative industries, since farmland is scarce and manufacturing is impractical. Tourism therefore provides jobs in hotels, restaurants and transport, and the taxes it generates can fund schools and hospitals. Restricting visitor numbers, they argue, would push young people to leave for the mainland in search of work.

On the other hand, the case for limits is equally compelling. Islands have fragile ecosystems and finite resources, especially fresh water, and a sudden influx of tourists can overwhelm both. Coral reefs damaged by careless swimmers or boats may take decades to recover. Moreover, when housing is converted into holiday rentals, local families can be priced out of their own communities, so the very culture that attracts visitors begins to disappear.

On balance, I believe that a carefully managed cap is the wiser policy. Rather than an arbitrary ban, islands could combine a daily visitor limit with an entry fee that is reinvested in conservation and affordable housing. This would encourage visitors to stay longer and spend more, rather than arriving in crowds for a single day.

In conclusion, although tourism is vital to many island economies, unlimited growth threatens the environment and communities on which that economy depends. Sensible limits are therefore in the long-term interest of both islanders and visitors.