IELTS Task 2: The Impact of Car Ownership on Cities — Band 6–9

Introduction

The impact of car ownership on cities appears frequently in IELTS Writing Task 2 because it intersects with urban planning, pollution, congestion, and public policy—issues that exam writers love. Mastering this topic helps you handle opinion, problem-solution, and advantages–disadvantages questions with confidence. In this guide, you will learn how to analyze a real-style question, study three model essays (Band 5–6, 6.5–7, and 8–9), understand their scores, and collect high-value vocabulary and sentence patterns you can reuse on test day.

Realistic, verified-style past questions on this theme include:

• Reported by IELTS Liz (Problem–Solution): “Car ownership has increased so rapidly that many cities are now one big traffic jam. How true do you think this statement is? What measures can governments take to discourage the use of cars?”
• Reported by IELTS Blog (Opinion): “Some people believe governments should limit car ownership to one car per family to reduce congestion and pollution. To what extent do you agree or disagree?”
• Used in British Council and IDP practice contexts (Causes–Solutions variations): “Traffic congestion is a serious problem in many cities. What are the causes of this, and what measures could be taken to tackle this problem?”

If you want to see how this theme connects with transport policy trade-offs, you can explore a focused debate on public transit versus private vehicles in this resource: public transport over car use.

Urban congestion reflects the impact of car ownership on cities worldwide

1. Question & Analysis: The impact of car ownership on cities

Car ownership has increased so rapidly that many cities are now one big traffic jam. How true do you think this statement is? What measures can governments take to discourage people from using their cars?

Question type and requirements:

• Mixed Task: Part 1 asks for an evaluative opinion (How true?), and Part 2 asks for solutions (What measures?).
• You must balance both parts equally; neglecting one part lowers Task Response.

Key terms:

• “So rapidly”: points to pace and scale of growth.
• “One big traffic jam”: implies severe and widespread congestion.
• “Discourage people from using their cars”: asks for policy tools and practical interventions.

Common pitfalls:

• Only describing problems without judging “how true.”
• Listing generic solutions without explaining mechanisms (how they reduce car use).
• Ignoring feasibility or public acceptability.

Strategic approach:

• Paragraph 1: State your judgement (e.g., largely true in major cities), note variations by context (income, transit quality).
• Paragraph 2: Explain why congestion arises from car ownership (space inefficiency, induced demand).
• Paragraph 3: Propose layered measures: pricing (congestion charges), street reallocation (bus/cycle lanes), better public transport, remote work incentives.
• Conclusion: Reaffirm your evaluation and summarize the two or three most effective, realistic policies.

For a focused angle on policy strictness, see how the “one car per household” idea is debated here: Restricting car ownership to one per family: agree or disagree.

2. Band 8–9 Sample Essay: The impact of car ownership on cities

Characteristics: Clear, nuanced position; strong cohesion; precise vocabulary; varied complex grammar; well-developed solutions with feasibility and mechanism.

Essay (approx. 305 words)
In most global cities, the claim that car ownership has turned urban cores into continual traffic jams is largely accurate, though the intensity varies with transit quality and policy discipline. Densely populated Asian megacities such as Manila and Jakarta consistently suffer peak-hour gridlock, while places like Singapore and Tokyo, which pursue demand management and transit-first planning, experience comparatively smoother flows.

The link between rising car ownership and congestion is straightforward. Cars are spatially inefficient; a lane can carry far more bus passengers or cyclists than private vehicles. Moreover, induced demand means new roads quickly fill as driving becomes momentarily more convenient. When parking is subsidised or underpriced, motorists are effectively encouraged to occupy scarce public space, further amplifying queues and delays.

To discourage excessive car use, governments need layered interventions. First, pricing tools—congestion charges, fuel duty, and dynamic parking fees—align private choices with social costs such as pollution and lost time. London’s congestion charge and Singapore’s Electronic Road Pricing show that well-calibrated fees can cut trips and smooth traffic. Second, authorities should reallocate street space to bus lanes, protected cycle tracks, and wider pavements; once reliable alternatives exist, mode shift accelerates. Third, investing in frequent, clean, and safe public transport—particularly rapid bus corridors and metro expansions—offers a dignified substitute for commuting by car. Finally, non-transport levers such as flexible working hours, transit-oriented housing, and digital services reduce the need to travel at all.

In conclusion, the statement is broadly true where car ownership has outpaced infrastructure and policy reform. A smart combination of pricing, street redesign, and high-quality mass transit—supported by land-use and workplace policies—can decisively curb unnecessary car trips and restore urban mobility.

Scoring
| Criterion | Band | Justification |
|—|—|—|
| Task Response | 9 | Fully addresses both evaluation and measures; specific mechanisms (pricing, space reallocation, induced demand) and examples (London, Singapore). |
| Coherence & Cohesion | 9 | Logical progression; clear paragraphing; cohesive devices used flexibly; no mechanical linking. |
| Lexical Resource | 9 | Precise academic lexis: spatially inefficient, induced demand, transit-oriented, calibrate; collocations accurate. |
| Grammar | 8/9 | Wide range (non-finite clauses, complex subordination); virtually error-free; varied sentence lengths. |

Why it excels (5–7 examples)

• Makes a nuanced judgement early and sustains it.
• Explains mechanisms, not just listing solutions.
• Integrates credible real-world examples.
• Uses topic-specific terminology accurately.
• Balances transport measures with land-use/workplace policies.
• Clear topic sentences and logical progression.
• Strong, concise conclusion that mirrors the introduction.

To see how technology shifts can complement policy, compare with this angle: the impact of electric cars on fossil fuel consumption.

3. Band 6.5–7 Sample Essay: The impact of car ownership on cities

Characteristics: Clear position; adequate development; some repetition; generally accurate grammar; minor lapses in precision or cohesion.

Essay (approx. 265 words)
It is reasonable to say that increasing car ownership has made many cities extremely congested, although the situation is not identical everywhere. In cities with strong public transport, such as Seoul, people can still commute efficiently, but in many other places, the roads are overcrowded most of the day.

There are several reasons why more cars lead to slower traffic. A car carries one or two people but takes up a lot of space, so when thousands of cars try to enter the same area, gridlock happens. In addition, some governments expand roads without changing pricing or parking rules, which simply encourages more driving, so the problem returns quickly. Poorly enforced parking also blocks lanes and reduces speed.

To reduce car use, governments should combine better alternatives with smart regulation. First, investment in reliable buses and metro lines can make public transport faster than driving, which will attract commuters. Second, governments can introduce congestion charges in busy zones and higher fees for city-centre parking. If drivers pay the real cost, many will leave their cars at home. Finally, creating safer cycling lanes and pleasant sidewalks gives people more options for short trips.

In conclusion, while car ownership does not always produce the same level of congestion, in many cities it is a major cause. The most effective approach is to improve public transport while also using pricing and street design to manage demand.

Scoring
| Criterion | Band | Justification |
|—|—|—|
| Task Response | 7 | Addresses both parts with clear position; explanations and solutions are relevant but less detailed than Band 9. |
| Coherence & Cohesion | 7 | Logical order and paragraphing; some repetitive linking; adequate referencing. |
| Lexical Resource | 7 | Appropriate topic vocabulary (congestion, gridlock, pricing); occasional general words. |
| Grammar | 6.5/7 | Mostly accurate with some limited complexity; a few minor slips and repetitive structures. |

Direct comparison with Band 8–9

• Depth: Band 8–9 explains mechanisms (induced demand, space reallocation) with examples; Band 7 states ideas more generally.
• Range: Band 8–9 uses broader lexis (transit-oriented, calibrate) and varied grammar; Band 7 is simpler.
• Specificity: Band 8–9 cites London/Singapore; Band 7 uses Seoul but fewer policy details.

Cities are ecosystems; transport choices also interact with urban culture and place-making. For a cultural parallel, consider this resource: impact of street art on city culture.

4. Band 5–6 Sample Essay: The impact of car ownership on cities

Characteristics: Partially developed ideas; noticeable language errors; unclear mechanics/mechanisms; simple cohesion; some irrelevance or generalization.

Essay (approx. 258 words)
Many cities today are full of traffic because the cars are too much. I think this statement is very true in every city, because people like to drive and it is more comfortable. Public transport are not convenience, so citizens have no choice except driving their own cars even in short distance.

The reason is simple. When government build more roads, more cars will come and then traffic become worse. Also, parking is very difficult and it waste a lot of times. People circle the block many times and block the street. Air pollution are another problems, which make the city unhealthy and noisy.

To solve this issue, authorities should make bus and train more cheap and free for students and elders. They can also ban cars in the city everyday or increase gasoline price very high. If they do this, people will stop using cars and the problem will disappear quickly. Finally, building a big parking area outside the centre will help and people can take shuttle bus for free of charge.

In summary, because many people own cars, the cities are jammed every day and it is bad. Government should do more actions to solve it, using ban and price increasing to make people choose other transport.

Scoring
| Criterion | Band | Justification |
|—|—|—|
| Task Response | 5.5/6 | Addresses both parts but with overgeneralisations (“in every city”); limited explanation of how solutions work. |
| Coherence & Cohesion | 5.5 | Basic organisation; repetitive ideas; limited referencing and transitions. |
| Lexical Resource | 5.5 | Some topic words, but frequent awkward collocations (“cars are too much,” “waste a lot of times”). |
| Grammar | 5 | Noticeable errors in SVA, articles, plurals, and word forms. |

Error analysis and corrections
| Mistake | Why it’s a problem | Better version |
|—|—|—|
| “cars are too much” | Incorrect expression; unnatural collocation | “there are too many cars” |
| “Public transport are not convenience” | Agreement and word form errors | “Public transport is not convenient” |
| “even in short distance” | Preposition/article error | “even for short distances” |
| “government build” | Agreement/tense | “governments build” or “when the government builds” |
| “it waste a lot of times” | Verb form and plural | “it wastes a lot of time” |
| “Air pollution are another problems” | Agreement/plural | “Air pollution is another problem” |
| “more cheap” | Comparative form | “cheaper” |
| “ban cars in the city everyday” | Unrealistic absolute ban; imprecise | “introduce car-free days in city centres” |
| “increase gasoline price very high” | Collocation | “significantly increase fuel taxes” |
| “shuttle bus for free of charge” | Redundant phrasing | “a free shuttle bus” |

How to improve from Band 6 to 7

• Replace absolute claims with cautious, supported statements.
• Explain the mechanism for each solution (how pricing reduces trips).
• Use accurate collocations (congestion charge, peak-hour, on-street parking).
• Vary sentence structures and reduce grammar errors through targeted review of subject–verb agreement and articles.

Urban change often affects where people live and invest. If you are curious about a related urban policy theme, this piece offers a useful parallel: how foreign investment affects local real estate.

5. Essential Vocabulary for the impact of car ownership on cities

Word/Phrase	Type	Pronunciation	Definition	Example	Collocations
congestion charge	n.	/kənˈdʒes.tʃən tʃɑːdʒ/	fee to enter busy areas by car	The congestion charge reduced peak-hour traffic.	introduce/expand/apply a congestion charge
induced demand	n.	/ɪnˈdjuːst dɪˈmɑːnd/	extra traffic created by new road capacity	New highways create induced demand.	create/trigger/offset induced demand
transit-oriented development	n.	/ˈtræn.zɪt ˈɔː.ri.ən.tɪd/	dense, mixed-use building near transit	TOD reduces car dependency.	plan/promote/implement TOD
modal shift	n.	/ˈməʊ.dəl ʃɪft/	change from one transport mode to another	Pricing can trigger a modal shift to buses.	encourage/achieve/measure modal shift
spatially inefficient	adj.	/ˈspeɪ.ʃəl.i ɪˈnɪf.ɪ.ʃənt/	using too much space per person	Cars are spatially inefficient downtown.	highly/especially spatially inefficient
curb parking	n.	/kɜːb ˈpɑː.kɪŋ/	on-street parking beside the curb	Priced curb parking reduces cruising.	priced/underpriced curb parking
peak hour	n.	/piːk ˈaʊər/	busiest time of day	Trains are crowded at peak hour.	morning/evening peak hour
road pricing	n.	/rəʊd ˈpraɪ.sɪŋ/	charging vehicles for road use	Road pricing manages congestion.	dynamic/area-based road pricing
reallocate street space	v.	/ˌriːˈæl.ə.keɪt/	shift lanes to other modes	Cities reallocate street space to buses.	gradually/strategically reallocate
park-and-ride	n./adj.	/ˌpɑːk ən ˈraɪd/	parking near transit with onward trip	Park-and-ride helps commuters.	build/expand park-and-ride
consequently	adv.	/ˈkɒn.sɪ.kwənt.li/	as a result	The fee rose; consequently, traffic fell.	consequently, therefore, thus
notwithstanding	prep./adv.	/ˌnɒt.wɪðˈstæn.dɪŋ/	despite	Notwithstanding protests, the city priced parking.	notwithstanding objections/concerns
amplify	v.	/ˈæm.plɪ.faɪ/	make stronger/larger	Cheap parking amplifies congestion.	amplify pressure/impacts
calibrate	v.	/ˈkæl.ɪ.breɪt/	adjust carefully	Calibrate fees to peak demand.	carefully/periodically calibrate
viable alternative	n.	/ˈvaɪ.ə.bəl ɔːlˈtɜː.nə.tɪv/	workable substitute	A fast metro is a viable alternative.	provide/offer a viable alternative

6. High-Scoring Sentence Structures

1. Complex subordination (because/although/when/while/if)

• Formula: Subordinator + clause, main clause.
• Example from Band 8–9: While places like Singapore and Tokyo pursue transit-first planning, flows are smoother.
• Why it scores well: Shows nuanced contrast; tight control of clauses.
• More examples:
  • Although parking is underpriced, reform is politically sensitive.
  • If fees are calibrated to demand, queues decline.
• Common mistakes: Comma splices; missing commas after long subordinate clauses.

2. Non-defining relative clauses

• Formula: Noun, which + verb phrase, main clause.
• Example: Pricing tools, which align private choices with social costs, can cut trips.
• Why: Adds precise, extra information smoothly.
• More: Bus lanes, which prioritise capacity, improve reliability.
• Mistake: Using “which” without commas when the information is non-essential.

3. Participle phrases (reducing clauses)

• Formula: -ing/-ed phrase, main clause.
• Example: Investing in frequent, clean transport, cities offer a dignified substitute.
• Why: Concise and advanced cohesion.
• More: Reallocating lanes, governments accelerate modal shift. Priced correctly, parking reduces cruising.
• Mistake: Misplaced modifiers causing ambiguity.

4. Cleft sentences (focus)

• Formula: It + be + focus + who/that + clause.
• Example: It is the combination of pricing and redesign that curbs car use.
• Why: Emphasises key argument.
• More: It was underpriced parking that encouraged driving. It is reliable service that attracts commuters.
• Mistake: Overuse leads to unnatural rhythm.

5. Advanced conditionals (mixed/realistic)

• Formula: If + present, modal + base; If + past, would + base.
• Example: If authorities reallocate street space, mode shift will accelerate.
• Why: Shows control over hypothetical reasoning.
• More: If parking were market-priced, congestion would ease. If telework expands, peak loads will fall.
• Mistake: Tense mismatch (“If… would” in first clause).

6. Inversion for emphasis

• Formula: Only when/Not until/Seldom + auxiliary + subject + verb.
• Example: Only when alternatives are reliable do commuters leave their cars.
• Why: Sophisticated emphasis; native-like tone.
• More: Seldom has a single policy worked alone. Not until fees rose did traffic fall.
• Mistake: Forgetting auxiliary inversion.

7. Self-Assessment Checklist

Before writing

• Identify question type(s): opinion + solutions? causes + solutions?
• Underline task parts: evaluation and measures.
• Decide your stance and 2–3 key ideas with mechanisms.

While writing

• Topic sentence clearly answers the task.
• Explain how/why each solution reduces car use.
• Use specific examples (policy names, cities) sparingly but effectively.

After writing

• Check both parts are fully addressed.
• Replace vague words with precise collocations.
• Eliminate absolute claims unless defensible.

Time management tips

• 3–4 minutes: Analyse, plan, outline.
• 25–27 minutes: Write two strong body paragraphs.
• 3–5 minutes: Revise topic sentences, examples, and grammar.

Strong opinions about personal vehicles are common, but IELTS values balance. For a related opinion prompt, you might also practise with: Restricting car ownership to one per family: agree or disagree.

Conclusion

Key takeaways: Questions on the impact of car ownership on cities often require you to balance evaluation with realistic, mechanism-based solutions. High scores come from clear positions, coherent structure, precise vocabulary, and advanced but natural grammar. A practical path forward is to write your own essay on today’s question, compare it with the Band 7 and Band 9 samples, and then adjust your structure and vocabulary.

Progress timeline: With focused practice two or three times per week, most learners can move one band in 6–8 weeks. To deepen your understanding of transport trade-offs and urban sustainability, you can also compare perspectives such as public transport over car use and technology-driven angles like the impact of electric cars on fossil fuel consumption. For those exploring urban livability more broadly, culture-focused topics like impact of street art on city culture illuminate how street design and community space interact with mobility.

Call to action: Write your own 260–290 word essay on the selected prompt, time yourself for 40 minutes, and share your draft for peer feedback. Keep your checklist nearby, and prioritise mechanism-based explanations and accurate collocations.