Environmental practices of big businesses: reading answers and analysis
Businesses can profit by damaging the environment when regulation is weak and the public doesn't care, and they're legally bound to maximise profit. So, the writer argues, the public holds ultimate responsibility: suing, shopping, shaming and voting. Pressure at the right link in the supply chain works, as when a fast-food chain forced meat packers to follow BSE rules within weeks.
Questions 27-40 · 14 marks · 4 question blocks
Where the answers sit
The summary (27-31) is all in the first paragraph. The multiple choice (32-34) covers the third to fifth paragraphs. YES / NO / NOT GIVEN (35-39) covers the last two. Question 40 asks about the whole passage.
Questions 27-31
The first paragraph gives it all: businesses seem to have no moral standards, and weak government control and low public involvement allow damage. The two examples are unmanaged fisheries (overfishing) and rainforest logging (trees). 'Rare species' and 'flooding' sound plausible but aren't mentioned.
| Question | Answer | Also accepted |
|---|---|---|
| 27 | D | — |
| 28 | E | — |
| 29 | F | — |
| 30 | H | — |
| 31 | B | — |
Questions 32-34
The third paragraph says the public, directly or through politicians, has the power to change things. The fourth lists ways the public can influence businesses and governments. In the BSE case, the fast-food company's demand made meat packers comply in weeks.
| Question | Answer | Also accepted |
|---|---|---|
| 32 | C | — |
| 33 | D | — |
| 34 | B | — |
Questions 35-39
The public should accept higher prices for sound practices (YES), and past changes came from public pressure (YES). The writer says his conclusion is not moralistic about who is good or bad, so the third statement is NO. The passage doesn't compare businesses' morals, and it predicts changes in public attitudes, not business behaviour.
| Question | Answer | Also accepted |
|---|---|---|
| 35 | YES | — |
| 36 | NOT GIVEN | — |
| 37 | NO | — |
| 38 | YES | — |
| 39 | NOT GIVEN | — |
Question 40
Choose the option that covers the whole argument: businesses do damage, but is blaming them right when the public holds the power? The other options focus on survival, profit or specific dangers, which are only parts of it.
| Question | Answer | Also accepted |
|---|---|---|
| 40 | D | — |
The questions most people get wrong
NO. The writer says his conclusion isn't a moralistic one about who is right or wrong, good or bad, which is the opposite of the statement.
NOT GIVEN. The writer predicts that public attitudes will need to change, not that businesses will care more.
B. The meat packers ignored the government's rules for five years but gave in within weeks when a fast-food buyer demanded the same.
Sit this test on Langujet, then come back
The full Cambridge 15 Test 4 reading paper: all three passages, 60 minutes, marked the second you finish with a review of every answer. Already done it? Take it again and see if the same traps still get you.
Cambridge IELTS 15, Test 4, Reading Passage 3. The passage name belongs to Cambridge University Press. No passage text or question wording is reproduced on this page. The answers are published for self-marking, and the analysis is our own.