Advantages of public transport: reading answers and analysis
A World Bank study of 37 cities finds public transport more efficient than car-based systems. Professor Newman uses Perth, Melbourne, Portland and others to argue that climate, hills and wealth are weak excuses, that politics decides transport, and that people working close together keep cities dense.
The headings (1-5) are only for the five lettered paragraphs at the end. The TRUE / FALSE / NOT GIVEN statements (6-10) come from the unlettered paragraphs 1-5, in order. The city matching (11-13) uses paragraph 2, paragraph 7 and A.
Answer key and self-check
Type what you wrote and hit mark. Hide the key first if you haven't done the passage yet. Every question number jumps to its explanation.
How to attack this block: Read each lettered paragraph to its end: B and E both start with one idea and turn to another with 'However'. The telecommunications heading matches E's first sentence, but that was only a belief the research overturned. A is a story about local voters, not a reply to objections.
Question 1
Answer: iiParagraph A
Which heading fits paragraph A?
local pressure groups forced a referendum over whether to spend the money on light rail instead. The rail proposal won and the railway worked spectacularly well.
Question says → Passage says
people powerThe more democratic the process / local pressure groups forced a referendum
A successful exerciseThe rail proposal won and the railway worked spectacularly well
Why: A says politics decides transport, and Portland proves it: local groups forced a vote, won it, and the railway was a big success. Ordinary people making the decision is 'people power', and it worked, so heading ii.
The trap: Heading viii (responding to arguments against public transport) fits the two unlettered paragraphs just before A, where Newman answers objections about climate and hills. A starts 'In fact' and moves on to politics, so don't let the run-on pull you back.
Question 2
Answer: viiParagraph B, last sentence
Which heading fits paragraph B?
public infrastructure did not keep pace with urban sprawl, causing massive congestion problems which now make commuting times far higher
Question says → Passage says
Increasesfar higher
travelling timecommuting times / travel times to work
Why: B tells a story with a twist: commuting times were stable for centuries, trains and cars kept them stable at first, then congestion pushed them 'far higher'. The paragraph lands on the increase, so heading vii.
The trap: The first sentence is about times staying the same for six centuries, so a heading about stability would look right if there were one. Read to the 'However': the main point is what changed.
Question 3
Answer: ivParagraph C, first three sentences
Which heading fits paragraph C?
They are often wealthier than their American counterparts but have not generated the same level of car use.
Question says → Passage says
Higher incomesincreasing wealth / wealthier
need not mean more carshave not generated the same level of car use / car use has actually fallen
Why: C attacks the belief that getting richer pushes people into cars. European cities, Stockholm and wealthy Tokyo and Singapore all show wealth without more car use. That's heading iv.
The trap: Heading v (economic arguments fail to persuade) has an economic ring, and C mentions the World Bank. But C isn't about anyone failing to persuade. It's about wealth and car use.
Question 4
Answer: iParagraph D, second and third sentences
Which heading fits paragraph D?
It found that pushing everyone into the city centre was not the best approach.
Question says → Passage says
Avoidingwas not the best approach
an overcrowded centrepushing everyone into the city centre
insteadurban villages at hundreds of sites
Why: The Urban Village report rejects packing everyone into the centre and spreads people across hundreds of villages around stations. Not overcrowding the centre is heading i.
The trap: Heading iii (working together in cities) can sound like 'urban villages', but D is about where people live, not about people in related jobs being close. That's E.
Question 5
Answer: iiiParagraph E, last two sentences
Which heading fits paragraph E?
The explanation for this seems to be that it is valuable to place people working in related fields together.
Question says → Passage says
working togetherpeople working in related fields together / people come together face-to-face
The benefitsvaluable / creativity flourishes
Why: E explains why cities didn't empty out: people in related fields gain from being close, and creativity grows face to face. The benefits of that closeness is heading iii.
The trap: Heading vi (the impact of telecommunications on population distribution) matches the first sentence word for word. But that was only what people 'once assumed', and E shows it was wrong.
TRUE / FALSE / NOT GIVEN
Questions 6-10
How to attack this block: These all sit in the unlettered opening paragraphs. Check single words: 'every', 'outer', 'dangerous'. The bicycle statement is TRUE even though the study left bicycles out, because Newman gives the view himself.
Question 6
Answer: FALSEParagraph 1, second sentence
Did the study look at every city in the world?
The study compared the proportion of wealth poured into transport by thirty-seven cities around the world.
Question says → Passage says
every city of the worldthirty-seven cities around the world
Why: The study covered 37 cities, not every city. 'Around the world' means from different parts of the world, not all of it. That contradicts 'every', so FALSE.
The trap: The statement's 'public and private systems' matches the next sentence ('public and private costs'), which makes the whole thing feel TRUE. One wrong word, 'every', is enough to make it FALSE.
Question 7
Answer: TRUEParagraph 2, last sentence
Can efficient cities make life better for the people who live there?
these more efficient cities were able to put the difference into attracting industry and jobs or creating a better place to live
Question says → Passage says
Efficient citiesthese more efficient cities
improve the quality of lifecreating a better place to live
Why: Cities spending less on transport put the savings into jobs or 'a better place to live'. A better place to live is a better quality of life, so TRUE.
Question 8
Answer: NOT GIVENParagraph 3, third sentence
Is an inner-city tram network dangerous for drivers?
Melbourne's large tram network has made car use in the inner city much lower
Question says → Passage says
inner-city tram networklarge tram network… in the inner city
car driverscar use
Why: The passage links trams to less car use, and that's all. It says nothing about safety or danger, so NOT GIVEN.
The trap: You might reason that trams reduce car use because driving among them is risky. That's your own logic, not the writer's, and the passage gives no reason at all.
Question 9
Answer: FALSEParagraph 3, last sentence
Do people in Melbourne prefer living in the outer suburbs?
The explosion in demand for accommodation in the inner suburbs of Melbourne suggests a recent change in many people's preferences as to where they live.
Question says → Passage says
preferpreferences
the outer suburbsthe inner suburbs
Why: Demand has exploded for the inner suburbs, which shows people's preference has moved inwards. The statement says the opposite, so FALSE.
The trap: The sentence before mentions the outer suburbs' car-based structure, so people match 'outer suburbs' and stop. That sentence is about how the suburbs are built, not where people want to live.
Question 10
Answer: TRUEParagraph 5
Can bike-friendly cities be efficient even with ordinary public transport?
the two most 'bicycle friendly' cities considered - Amsterdam and Copenhagen - were very efficient, even though their public transport systems were 'reasonable but not special'
Question says → Passage says
high levels of bicycle usagethe two most 'bicycle friendly' cities
can be efficientwere very efficient
only averagely goodreasonable but not special
Why: Each part has a match: bike-friendly cities, very efficient, and public transport that is 'reasonable but not special', which means average. TRUE.
The trap: The paragraph opens by saying bicycle use wasn't included in the study, which makes some people choose NOT GIVEN. Newman still states the point himself, so the information is given.
Matching features (cities to descriptions A-F)
Questions 11-13
How to attack this block: Each city appears in one clear place. Perth spends most on transport, Auckland is the hilly city Newman concedes, and Portland swapped a road plan for light rail. Hong Kong and Zurich are the hilly successes, so don't give their description to Auckland.
Question 11
Answer: FParagraph 2, first two sentences
Which description fits Perth?
Perth is a good example of a city with minimal public transport. As a result, 17% of its wealth went into transport costs.
Question says → Passage says
limited public transport systemminimal public transport
inefficient due toAs a result, 17% of its wealth went into transport costs
Why: 'Minimal' is 'limited', and 'as a result' gives the cause and effect: Perth spends 17% of its wealth on transport against 5% elsewhere. That's inefficient, so F.
The trap: Perth comes back in A, compared with Portland. That comparison is about population, not about a new description, so don't let it pull you towards C.
Question 12
Answer: DParagraph 7, second sentence
Which description fits Auckland?
Newman accepts it would be hard for a city as hilly as Auckland to develop a really good rail network.
Question says → Passage says
hillya city as hilly as Auckland
inappropriate for rail transport systemwould be hard… to develop a really good rail network
Why: Even Newman, who backs public transport, accepts that Auckland's hills make good rail difficult. That's D.
The trap: A (light rail in a hilly place) is the same paragraph but describes Zurich, and Hong Kong has heavy rail. Auckland is the city where rail would be hard.
Question 13
Answer: CParagraph A
Which description fits Portland?
Some years ago, federal money was granted to build a new road. However, local pressure groups forced a referendum over whether to spend the money on light rail instead.
Question says → Passage says
moved from road to light railbuild a new road… spend the money on light rail instead
profitablythe railway worked spectacularly well
Why: The money was meant for a road but went on light rail, and the railway 'worked spectacularly well'. Moving from a road plan to light rail with great success is C.
The trap: A also says light rail, but it adds 'hilly environment', which is Zurich. Nothing in A says Portland is hilly.
iii. The telecommunications heading copies E's opening, but that was the old assumption. The research shows the benefit of working close together.
Words from this passage worth keeping
grossly inadequate(Paragraph 4)
extremely poor, far from good enough
zero correlation(Paragraph 6)
no connection at all between two things
lobbies(Paragraph 7)
groups that try to influence decisions in their own interest
urban sprawl(B)
cities spreading out over more and more land
viable(C)
able to work in practice
refutes(C)
proves something is wrong
advocated(D)
publicly recommended
dispersal(E)
spreading out over a wide area
Sit this test on Langujet, then come back
The full Cambridge 6 Test 2 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 6, Test 2, Reading Passage 1. The passage and questions belong to Cambridge University Press and are not reproduced here. We quote short extracts only as evidence for our own commentary, and the answers are published for self-marking. Get the book for the full text, or sit the test on Langujet.
The rest of Cambridge 6 Test 2
Passage 1 · Questions 1-13 · You're hereAdvantages of public transport
