IELTS Reading: Ngành Công Nghiệp Thực Phẩm Toàn Cầu và Biến Đổi Khí Hậu – Đề Thi Mẫu Có Đáp Án Chi Tiết

Mở Bài

Chủ đề về ngành công nghiệp thực phẩm toàn cầu và tác động của nó đến biến đổi khí hậu là một trong những đề tài phổ biến nhất xuất hiện trong IELTS Reading. Chủ đề này không chỉ có tính thời sự cao mà còn liên quan trực tiếp đến môi trường, kinh tế và xã hội – những lĩnh vực được Cambridge IELTS và British Council ưu tiên trong các đề thi gần đây.

Trong bài viết này, bạn sẽ được trải nghiệm một bộ đề thi IELTS Reading hoàn chỉnh với 3 passages được thiết kế tăng dần độ khó từ Easy đến Hard. Đề thi bao gồm đầy đủ 40 câu hỏi với các dạng bài đa dạng như Multiple Choice, True/False/Not Given, Matching Headings, Summary Completion và nhiều dạng khác – hoàn toàn giống với format thi thật.

Bạn cũng sẽ nhận được đáp án chi tiết kèm giải thích cụ thể về cách xác định thông tin, kỹ thuật paraphrase, và vị trí chính xác của đáp án trong bài đọc. Hơn nữa, phần từ vựng quan trọng được tổng hợp theo từng passage sẽ giúp bạn mở rộng vốn từ vựng học thuật về chủ đề môi trường và thực phẩm.

Bộ đề này phù hợp cho học viên có mục tiêu từ band 5.0 trở lên, với độ khó được phân bổ khoa học để giúp bạn làm quen với mọi mức độ câu hỏi trong kỳ thi thật.

Hướng Dẫn Làm Bài IELTS Reading

Tổng Quan Về IELTS Reading Test

IELTS Reading test kéo dài 60 phút và bao gồm 3 passages với tổng cộng 40 câu hỏi. Mỗi câu trả lời đúng được tính 1 điểm, và không bị trừ điểm khi trả lời sai. Độ khó của các passages tăng dần, với Passage 1 thường dễ nhất và Passage 3 khó nhất.

Phân bổ thời gian khuyến nghị:

• Passage 1: 15-17 phút (độ khó Easy, phù hợp band 5.0-6.5)
• Passage 2: 18-20 phút (độ khó Medium, phù hợp band 6.0-7.5)
• Passage 3: 23-25 phút (độ khó Hard, phù hợp band 7.0-9.0)

Lưu ý dành 2-3 phút cuối để chuyển đáp án lên answer sheet một cách cẩn thận.

Các Dạng Câu Hỏi Trong Đề Này

Đề thi mẫu này bao gồm đầy đủ các dạng câu hỏi phổ biến nhất trong IELTS Reading:

1. Multiple Choice – Câu hỏi trắc nghiệm nhiều lựa chọn
2. True/False/Not Given – Xác định thông tin đúng, sai hoặc không được đề cập
3. Matching Headings – Ghép tiêu đề với đoạn văn
4. Summary Completion – Hoàn thành đoạn tóm tắt
5. Sentence Completion – Hoàn thành câu
6. Matching Features – Ghép đặc điểm với danh sách cho sẵn
7. Short-answer Questions – Câu hỏi trả lời ngắn

Mỗi dạng câu hỏi yêu cầu kỹ năng đọc hiểu khác nhau như scanning, skimming, đọc chi tiết và suy luận logic.

IELTS Reading Practice Test

PASSAGE 1 – The Food Industry’s Carbon Footprint

Độ khó: Easy (Band 5.0-6.5)

Thời gian đề xuất: 15-17 phút

The global food industry is one of the largest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions, accounting for approximately 26% of all human-caused emissions worldwide. This staggering figure encompasses the entire food supply chain, from agricultural production to processing, transportation, retail, and consumption. Understanding how different stages of food production contribute to climate change is essential for developing effective strategies to reduce our environmental impact.

Agricultural practices form the foundation of food-related emissions. The cultivation of crops and raising of livestock generate significant amounts of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide. Livestock farming, particularly cattle production, is responsible for about 14.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Cows and other ruminant animals produce methane during digestion through a process called enteric fermentation. Methane is a particularly potent greenhouse gas, with a warming potential 28 times greater than carbon dioxide over a 100-year period. Additionally, animal waste management releases substantial quantities of methane and nitrous oxide into the atmosphere.

The use of synthetic fertilizers in crop production represents another major source of emissions. When farmers apply nitrogen-based fertilizers to their fields, a portion of the nitrogen is converted into nitrous oxide, which has a warming potential nearly 300 times that of carbon dioxide. Industrial agriculture has become increasingly dependent on these chemical inputs to maximize crop yields, but this comes at a considerable environmental cost. Furthermore, the production of these fertilizers itself requires significant energy, mostly derived from fossil fuels.

Deforestation driven by agricultural expansion adds substantially to the food industry’s carbon footprint. Vast areas of tropical rainforests, particularly in the Amazon Basin and Southeast Asia, have been cleared to create farmland for cattle ranching and crop cultivation, especially palm oil and soy plantations. These forests act as carbon sinks, absorbing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. When trees are cut down and burned, not only is this carbon-storing capacity lost, but the carbon previously stored in the trees is released back into the atmosphere. It is estimated that deforestation accounts for approximately 10-15% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

The food processing and manufacturing sector also contributes significantly to climate change. Large-scale food processing facilities require enormous amounts of energy for operations such as cooking, freezing, packaging, and sterilization. Most of this energy currently comes from fossil fuels like coal, natural gas, and petroleum. The production of food packaging materials, particularly plastics derived from petroleum, adds another layer of emissions. Although packaging is necessary for food preservation and safety, the industry’s heavy reliance on non-renewable resources and single-use plastics exacerbates environmental problems.

Transportation and distribution within the food supply chain represent yet another emissions source. The modern globalized food system means that food often travels thousands of miles from farm to table. Refrigerated trucks, cargo ships, and airplanes all burn fossil fuels to transport food products across continents and oceans. “Food miles” – the distance food travels from production to consumption – have become an important metric in assessing environmental impact. Foods transported by air freight have particularly high carbon footprints, as aviation is one of the most emissions-intensive forms of transportation.

Food waste throughout the supply chain and at the consumer level represents a massive inefficiency that contributes to climate change. Globally, approximately one-third of all food produced for human consumption is wasted. When food decomposes in landfills, it produces methane as it breaks down in anaerobic conditions (without oxygen). This means that the emissions generated to produce, process, and transport food that is never eaten are entirely wasted. Moreover, valuable agricultural land, water, and other resources used to produce that food are squandered.

Retail operations, including supermarkets and restaurants, add to emissions through their energy consumption for refrigeration, lighting, and climate control. Large cold storage facilities and refrigerated display cases run continuously, requiring substantial electricity. In regions where electricity is primarily generated from fossil fuels, this represents a significant contribution to greenhouse gas emissions. The trend toward 24-hour retail operations and expansive store formats has further increased the sector’s energy demands.

Finally, consumer behavior and dietary choices play a crucial role in the food industry’s climate impact. Diets heavy in animal-based products, particularly red meat, have much higher carbon footprints than plant-based diets. The resources required to produce one kilogram of beef – including feed, water, and land – generate approximately 60 kilograms of greenhouse gas emissions, compared to just 2 kilograms for the same amount of vegetables. As global incomes rise and more people adopt Western-style diets rich in meat and dairy, food-related emissions are expected to increase substantially unless significant changes are made.

Questions 1-6

Do the following statements agree with the information given in the passage?

Write:

• TRUE if the statement agrees with the information
• FALSE if the statement contradicts the information
• NOT GIVEN if there is no information on this

1. The food industry produces more than a quarter of all greenhouse gas emissions caused by humans.
2. Methane produced by cattle has the same warming effect as carbon dioxide.
3. Nitrogen-based fertilizers are more harmful to the climate than animal waste.
4. Most energy used in food processing facilities comes from renewable sources.
5. Food transported by airplane has a higher carbon footprint than food transported by truck.
6. Wealthy countries waste more food per capita than developing nations.

Questions 7-10

Complete the sentences below.

Choose NO MORE THAN THREE WORDS from the passage for each answer.

7. The process by which cows produce methane during digestion is called ____.
8. Tropical rainforests function as ____, removing carbon dioxide from the air.
9. The distance that food travels from where it is produced to where it is consumed is measured in ____.
10. Food waste in landfills produces methane because it decomposes in ____.

Questions 11-13

Choose the correct letter, A, B, C, or D.

11. According to the passage, livestock farming is responsible for what percentage of global greenhouse gas emissions?

    • A. 10.5%
    • B. 14.5%
    • C. 26%
    • D. 60%

12. Which gas has the highest warming potential mentioned in the passage?

    • A. Carbon dioxide
    • B. Methane
    • C. Nitrous oxide
    • D. Oxygen

13. What proportion of food produced globally is wasted?

    • A. One-quarter
    • B. One-half
    • C. One-third
    • D. Two-thirds

---

PASSAGE 2 – Sustainable Solutions in Food Production

Độ khó: Medium (Band 6.0-7.5)

Thời gian đề xuất: 18-20 phút

As awareness of the food industry’s environmental ramifications grows, researchers, policymakers, and industry leaders are increasingly focused on developing and implementing sustainable solutions to mitigate climate change. These interventions span the entire food system, from innovative farming techniques to consumer education programs, each targeting specific sources of emissions while maintaining food security for a growing global population.

Regenerative agriculture has emerged as a promising approach that goes beyond simply sustaining current production levels to actively improving soil health and ecosystem functionality. Unlike conventional farming, which often depletes soil organic matter and biodiversity, regenerative practices work to rebuild soil carbon stocks. Techniques such as cover cropping, where farmers plant specific crops not for harvest but to protect and enrich the soil, can significantly enhance carbon sequestration. Research indicates that widespread adoption of these practices could potentially offset 15-20% of current global emissions. No-till farming, another regenerative technique, keeps soil undisturbed, preserving its structure and the carbon stored within it. By avoiding the release of carbon that occurs when soil is ploughed, farmers can transform agricultural land from a carbon source into a carbon sink.

The livestock sector, given its disproportionate contribution to food-related emissions, has become a focal point for innovation. Scientists are developing feed additives that can reduce enteric fermentation in ruminant animals, potentially decreasing methane emissions by up to 30%. One such additive, derived from seaweed, has shown particularly promising results in trials. Additionally, selective breeding programs aim to produce animals that are more feed-efficient, converting feed into meat or milk more effectively and thus requiring fewer resources per unit of output. Some researchers are even exploring genetic modifications that could fundamentally alter how cattle digest food, though such approaches remain controversial and face significant regulatory hurdles.

Precision agriculture leverages cutting-edge technology to optimize resource use and minimize waste. Farmers using precision techniques employ GPS-guided equipment, soil sensors, and data analytics to apply water, fertilizers, and pesticides only where and when needed. This targeted approach can reduce fertilizer use by 20-30%, thereby decreasing nitrous oxide emissions while also lowering costs for farmers. Drones and satellite imagery enable detailed monitoring of crop health, allowing for early intervention when problems arise. The integration of artificial intelligence into farm management systems is revolutionizing decision-making, predicting optimal planting times, irrigation schedules, and harvest periods based on complex analysis of weather patterns, soil conditions, and market demands.

Reducing food waste represents one of the most cost-effective interventions for lowering food system emissions. At the production level, improved harvesting techniques and better post-harvest handling can minimize losses. Enhanced storage facilities with appropriate temperature and humidity control preserve food quality for longer periods. In retail, dynamic pricing strategies and discount schemes for food approaching its expiration date can increase sales of items that might otherwise be discarded. Redistribution programs that connect businesses with excess food to charities and food banks address both waste and food insecurity simultaneously. Consumer education campaigns emphasizing proper food storage, meal planning, and creative use of leftovers have proven effective in reducing household waste, which accounts for a significant portion of total food waste in developed countries.

The transition toward plant-based proteins and alternative protein sources offers substantial potential for emissions reductions. Plant-based meat substitutes have improved dramatically in taste and texture, making them increasingly appealing to mainstream consumers. These products typically require a fraction of the land, water, and energy needed for conventional meat production. Cultured meat, grown from animal cells in bioreactors without raising and slaughtering animals, could theoretically reduce livestock-related emissions by up to 96%. However, scalability challenges and high production costs currently limit its commercial viability. Insects, consumed regularly in many cultures, are being reconsidered in Western markets as a sustainable protein source due to their exceptional feed conversion efficiency and minimal environmental footprint.

Renewable energy adoption in food production and processing can dramatically reduce the sector’s carbon footprint. Solar panels installed on farm buildings and food processing facilities can offset a significant portion of electricity needs. Some forward-thinking companies are achieving carbon-neutral or even carbon-negative operations by investing heavily in renewable energy infrastructure. Biogas systems that capture methane from animal waste and convert it into electricity exemplify a circular economy approach, transforming a waste product and emissions source into useful energy. Similarly, food waste can be processed through anaerobic digestion to produce biogas, simultaneously addressing waste disposal and energy generation.

Shorter supply chains and localized food systems reduce transportation-related emissions while often providing additional benefits such as fresher products and support for local economies. Community-supported agriculture (CSA) programs connect consumers directly with nearby farms, eliminating multiple intermediaries in the supply chain. Urban agriculture initiatives, including rooftop gardens and vertical farms, bring food production into cities, drastically reducing transportation distances. Vertical farming, which grows crops in stacked layers within controlled environments, uses up to 95% less water than conventional agriculture and eliminates the need for pesticides, though its high energy requirements for lighting remain a challenge that must be addressed through renewable energy integration.

Policy interventions and economic incentives are essential for accelerating the transition to sustainable food systems. Carbon pricing mechanisms that make emitters pay for their greenhouse gas output can shift economic calculations in favor of cleaner production methods. Subsidies that currently support industrial agriculture and fossil fuel use could be redirected toward sustainable farming practices and renewable energy. Some governments are implementing mandatory environmental labeling schemes that inform consumers about the climate impact of their food choices, empowering them to make more sustainable decisions. International cooperation on agricultural emissions standards and technology transfer to developing nations will be crucial, as food production in many lower-income countries is expected to intensify in coming decades.

Consumer awareness and behavioral change ultimately drive market transformation. As more people understand the climate implications of their dietary choices, demand for sustainable options increases, encouraging producers to adopt cleaner practices. Educational initiatives in schools, social media campaigns, and clear product labeling all contribute to raising consciousness about food-related emissions. The growing popularity of flexitarian diets, which emphasize plant-based foods while allowing occasional meat consumption, demonstrates that significant environmental benefits can be achieved without requiring complete dietary overhauls that many find unrealistic.

Nông nghiệp tái sinh và các giải pháp bền vững giảm phát thải khí nhà kính trong sản xuất thực phẩm toàn cầu

Questions 14-18

Choose the correct heading for each section from the list of headings below.

List of Headings:

• i. The role of government policies in food sustainability
• ii. Technology-driven farming improvements
• iii. Soil restoration as a climate solution
• iv. Reducing waste across the supply chain
• v. Alternative proteins for the future
• vi. Consumer power in transforming food systems
• vii. Renewable energy in agriculture
• viii. Livestock industry innovations
• ix. Urban farming developments

14. Paragraph 2 (starting with “Regenerative agriculture…”)
15. Paragraph 3 (starting with “The livestock sector…”)
16. Paragraph 5 (starting with “Reducing food waste…”)
17. Paragraph 6 (starting with “The transition toward…”)
18. Paragraph 9 (starting with “Policy interventions…”)

Questions 19-23

Complete the summary below.

Choose NO MORE THAN TWO WORDS from the passage for each answer.

Precision agriculture uses advanced technology to optimize farming operations. Farmers utilize GPS equipment and (19) ____ to apply resources more efficiently, which can reduce fertilizer usage by up to 30%. This approach also incorporates (20) ____ for monitoring crop conditions from above. The use of (21) ____ in management systems helps predict the best times for various farming activities. These technologies make farming more sustainable while simultaneously reducing (22) ____ emissions. Such targeted methods represent a significant improvement over traditional farming, which often applies resources uniformly across fields regardless of (23) ____.

Questions 24-26

Do the following statements agree with the information given in the passage?

Write:

• YES if the statement agrees with the views of the writer
• NO if the statement contradicts the views of the writer
• NOT GIVEN if it is impossible to say what the writer thinks about this

24. Cultured meat is currently cheaper to produce than conventional meat.
25. Vertical farming uses significantly less water than traditional agriculture.
26. Most consumers are willing to completely eliminate meat from their diets for environmental reasons.

---

PASSAGE 3 – The Socioeconomic Dimensions of Food System Transformation

Độ khó: Hard (Band 7.0-9.0)

Thời gian đề xuất: 23-25 phút

The imperative to decarbonize the global food system exists within a complex socioeconomic matrix that extends far beyond purely environmental considerations. While the technological and agronomic pathways toward reduced food-related emissions are increasingly well-understood, the implementation trajectory of these solutions must grapple with profound questions of equity, economic viability, cultural identity, and geopolitical dynamics. The transition to sustainable food production is not merely a technical challenge but fundamentally a question of how societies organize economic activity, distribute resources, and balance competing priorities in an era of mounting ecological constraints.

Agricultural communities in both developed and developing nations face disparate vulnerabilities and constraints in adapting to climate-friendly practices. Small-scale farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, who collectively feed billions while contributing minimally to cumulative emissions, often lack access to the capital, technology, and institutional support necessary to implement advanced sustainable techniques. The upfront costs associated with transitioning to regenerative agriculture or precision farming systems can be prohibitive for farmers operating on narrow profit margins. Moreover, the temporal lag between investment in soil health improvements and realized productivity gains creates cash flow challenges that subsistence farmers, living season to season, cannot easily absorb. This raises fundamental questions about climate justice: should those who have contributed least to the problem bear significant adaptation costs?

The political economy of agricultural subsidies further complicates the transition landscape. In many high-income countries, particularly within the European Union and United States, entrenched subsidy regimes have historically favored industrial agriculture, livestock production, and specific commodity crops such as corn and soybeans. These subsidies, totaling hundreds of billions of dollars annually worldwide, create market distortions that make emissions-intensive production artificially profitable while disadvantaging sustainable alternatives. Attempts to reform subsidy structures invariably encounter fierce resistance from well-organized agricultural lobbies and rural constituencies wielding disproportionate political influence. The path dependency created by decades of policy supporting the current system generates institutional inertia that significantly impedes change, despite growing recognition of environmental imperatives.

Labor dynamics within the food industry present another dimension of complexity. The shift toward more sustainable production methods often entails increased labor intensity; organic farming and regenerative agriculture typically require more hands-on management than mechanized industrial operations. In contexts where agricultural labor is scarce or expensive, this creates economic barriers to adoption. Conversely, in regions with abundant agricultural labor forces, transitions toward sustainability might generate employment opportunities, though questions arise regarding working conditions, wages, and workers’ rights in expanded sustainable agriculture sectors. The automation trajectory in agriculture, driven by robotics and artificial intelligence, intersects with sustainability goals in complex ways: while precision agriculture technology can reduce inputs and emissions, it may simultaneously displace rural workers, exacerbating economic inequality in already-vulnerable communities.

Cultural and social dimensions of food profoundly influence both dietary patterns and production systems. Food is inextricably intertwined with cultural identity, religious practices, and social rituals across all societies. Efforts to promote plant-based diets or alternative proteins, while environmentally beneficial, must navigate the symbolic significance of meat consumption in many cultures, where meat-eating historically signified prosperity, hospitality, or social status. In pastoralist societies across East Africa and Central Asia, livestock are not merely protein sources but constitute wealth, serve social functions in marriage and conflict resolution, and form the basis of entire ways of life refined over millennia. Top-down dietary prescriptions that fail to engage with these multifaceted meanings risk being dismissed as neo-colonial impositions by affluent Western nations upon different cultural systems.

The global trade architecture governing food commerce creates both opportunities and constraints for climate action in food systems. Comparative advantage theory suggests that regions should specialize in producing foods they can grow most efficiently, with international trade ensuring diverse diets everywhere. However, this paradigm often fails to account for environmental externalities: emissions from long-distance transportation, ecosystem degradation in regions specializing in export-oriented agriculture, and vulnerability to supply chain disruptions. The tension between food sovereignty movements advocating localized, self-reliant food systems and globalized trade proponents emphasizing efficiency and specialization reflects deeper debates about economic organization in the Anthropocene. Trade agreements increasingly incorporate environmental provisions, yet enforcing meaningful climate standards across diverse national contexts with competing priorities remains profoundly challenging.

Consumer behavior, while theoretically responsive to information and incentives, operates through complex psychological and sociological mechanisms that defy simplistic rational-actor models. Extensive research in behavioral economics reveals that even well-informed consumers often exhibit intention-behavior gaps, expressing environmental concern while making purchasing decisions based primarily on price, convenience, and habit. The invisibility of food-related emissions to consumers – unlike the visible smoke from a factory – makes the climate impact of dietary choices psychologically distant and abstract. Nudge interventions such as menu design, default options, and social norm messaging show some efficacy in shifting choices toward plant-based options, yet their effects are often modest and context-dependent. More coercive policy tools like taxes on emissions-intensive foods raise concerns about regressivity, as they consume a larger proportion of income for lower-income households, potentially exacerbating food insecurity.

The political feasibility of ambitious food system transformation varies dramatically across governance contexts. Democracies face electoral pressures that make policies with concentrated costs and diffuse benefits – such as reducing agricultural subsidies – politically treacherous. Authoritarian systems may implement sweeping changes more rapidly but lack the participatory legitimacy and feedback mechanisms that enhance policy durability and social acceptance. Federalist structures create additional complexity, with climate ambition potentially varying substantially across subnational jurisdictions. The temporal mismatch between electoral cycles (typically 2-6 years) and the long-term horizons over which climate investments yield returns (decades) creates myopic incentives for politicians prioritizing immediate constituent concerns over long-term sustainability.

International cooperation on agricultural emissions faces distinctive challenges compared to other sectors. Unlike fossil fuel combustion, which is technologically substitutable with renewable alternatives, food production is existentially necessary and deeply place-based, varying enormously across agroecological zones and cultural contexts. Establishing universal emissions standards or carbon pricing for agriculture must accommodate the legitimate development aspirations of lower-income countries seeking to enhance agricultural productivity and food security. The concept of common but differentiated responsibilities, a cornerstone of international climate negotiations, becomes particularly salient in agriculture: historical cumulative emissions from food production are disproportionately attributable to high-income nations, while future emissions growth will largely occur in developing regions experiencing dietary transitions.

The financialization of agriculture and increasing corporate concentration in the food industry introduce additional complexity. Large multinational corporations exercise substantial control over seed genetics, agricultural inputs, processing, and retail distribution. While their scale enables rapid dissemination of innovations, it also creates power asymmetries between these corporations and smallholder farmers, raising concerns about who captures the economic benefits of sustainability transitions. The growing influence of institutional investors in farmland ownership, driven partly by carbon credit opportunities and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing trends, could accelerate sustainable practice adoption but also risks land speculation and displacement of existing agricultural communities. Impact investing in sustainable food systems has grown substantially, yet questions persist regarding whether capital flows reach those most in need or primarily benefit already-advantaged actors capable of navigating complex financial mechanisms.

Ultimately, transforming food systems to address climate change requires polycentric governance engaging actors at multiple scales: international agreements setting frameworks and facilitating technology transfer; national policies creating incentives and regulations; corporate commitments driving supply chain changes; civil society organizations advocating and building movements; research institutions generating knowledge; and individuals making daily choices about production and consumption. The irreducible complexity of food systems means that no single intervention suffices; rather, progress depends on synergistic combinations of technical innovation, policy reform, market transformation, and cultural evolution. The profound challenge lies in accomplishing this transformation with sufficient rapidity and scale to meaningfully mitigate climate change while ensuring food security, protecting vulnerable populations, and respecting diverse food cultures – a multifaceted balancing act that represents one of the defining challenges of the twenty-first century.

Hệ thống lương thực toàn cầu và vấn đề công bằng khí hậu trong chuyển đổi nông nghiệp bền vững

Questions 27-31

Choose the correct letter, A, B, C, or D.

27. According to the passage, small-scale farmers in developing nations face challenges in adopting sustainable practices primarily because:

    • A. They are not interested in environmental protection
    • B. They lack the necessary financial resources and support
    • C. Sustainable farming techniques are not suitable for their regions
    • D. They produce the majority of global greenhouse gas emissions

28. The passage suggests that agricultural subsidies in high-income countries:

    • A. Effectively promote sustainable farming practices
    • B. Are easy to reform due to public environmental awareness
    • C. Create economic advantages for emissions-intensive production
    • D. Have minimal impact on global agricultural systems

29. What does the passage say about meat consumption in many cultures?

    • A. It is purely a nutritional choice
    • B. It carries significant cultural and social meaning
    • C. It is declining rapidly due to environmental concerns
    • D. It originated from Western dietary patterns

30. The “intention-behavior gap” in consumer behavior refers to:

    • A. The difference between what consumers say and what they actually do
    • B. The time delay between making a decision and taking action
    • C. The lack of information about food-related emissions
    • D. The inability to afford sustainable food options

31. According to the passage, international cooperation on agricultural emissions is particularly difficult because:

    • A. Countries cannot agree on the existence of climate change
    • B. Food production is essential and varies greatly across regions
    • C. Agricultural emissions are not as significant as fossil fuel emissions
    • D. Renewable alternatives can easily replace current farming methods

Questions 32-36

Complete each sentence with the correct ending, A-I, below.

32. Small-scale farmers in developing countries…
33. Attempts to change subsidy structures…
34. The automation of agriculture…
35. Top-down dietary recommendations…
36. International trade agreements…

A. may reduce emissions but potentially increase unemployment in rural areas.

B. are starting to include environmental standards, though enforcement is challenging.

C. contribute minimally to overall emissions but lack resources to adapt.

D. have successfully transformed global food production within a decade.

E. face opposition from powerful agricultural interest groups.

F. can be perceived as cultural interference by Western nations.

G. have eliminated the need for agricultural subsidies entirely.

H. prove that rational economic models accurately predict consumer choices.

I. guarantee food security for all populations regardless of climate change.

Questions 37-40

Answer the questions below.

Choose NO MORE THAN THREE WORDS from the passage for each answer.

37. What type of societies depend on livestock not just for food but as a basis for their entire way of life?

38. What term describes the phenomenon where climate investments take much longer to show results than the typical length of political terms?

39. What investing trend is driving increased institutional investor interest in farmland ownership?

40. What type of governance approach, involving actors at multiple levels, does the passage suggest is necessary for food system transformation?

---

Answer Keys – Đáp Án

PASSAGE 1: Questions 1-13

1. TRUE
2. FALSE
3. NOT GIVEN
4. FALSE
5. TRUE
6. NOT GIVEN
7. enteric fermentation
8. carbon sinks
9. food miles
10. anaerobic conditions
11. B
12. C
13. C

PASSAGE 2: Questions 14-26

14. iii
15. viii
16. iv
17. v
18. i
19. soil sensors
20. drones / satellite imagery
21. artificial intelligence
22. nitrous oxide
23. local conditions / soil conditions
24. NO
25. YES
26. NOT GIVEN

PASSAGE 3: Questions 27-40

27. B
28. C
29. B
30. A
31. B
32. C
33. E
34. A
35. F
36. B
37. pastoralist societies
38. temporal mismatch
39. carbon credit opportunities / ESG investing
40. polycentric governance

---

Giải Thích Đáp Án Chi Tiết

Passage 1 – Giải Thích

Câu 1: TRUE

• Dạng câu hỏi: True/False/Not Given
• Từ khóa: food industry, more than a quarter, greenhouse gas emissions
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 1, dòng 1-2
• Giải thích: Bài đọc nói rõ “accounting for approximately 26% of all human-caused emissions worldwide” – 26% là hơn một phần tư (25%). Đây là paraphrase giữa “more than a quarter” trong câu hỏi và “approximately 26%” trong bài.

Câu 2: FALSE

• Dạng câu hỏi: True/False/Not Given
• Từ khóa: Methane, cattle, same warming effect, carbon dioxide
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 2, dòng 5-6
• Giải thích: Bài viết chỉ rõ “Methane is a particularly potent greenhouse gas, with a warming potential 28 times greater than carbon dioxide” – methane có tác động mạnh gấp 28 lần CO2, không giống nhau như câu hỏi nói.

Câu 5: TRUE

• Dạng câu hỏi: True/False/Not Given
• Từ khóa: airplane, higher carbon footprint, truck
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 6, dòng cuối
• Giải thích: Bài đọc khẳng định “Foods transported by air freight have particularly high carbon footprints, as aviation is one of the most emissions-intensive forms of transportation” – hàng không là hình thức vận chuyển phát thải cao nhất.

Câu 7: enteric fermentation

• Dạng câu hỏi: Sentence Completion
• Từ khóa: process, cows produce methane, digestion
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 2, dòng 4-5
• Giải thích: Câu gốc: “Cows and other ruminant animals produce methane during digestion through a process called enteric fermentation.”

Câu 11: B

• Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
• Từ khóa: livestock farming, percentage, global greenhouse gas emissions
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 2, dòng 2-3
• Giải thích: “Livestock farming, particularly cattle production, is responsible for about 14.5% of global greenhouse gas emissions.”

Câu 12: C

• Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
• Từ khóa: highest warming potential
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 2 và 3
• Giải thích: Methane có tác động gấp 28 lần CO2, nhưng nitrous oxide có “a warming potential nearly 300 times that of carbon dioxide” – cao nhất trong các khí được đề cập.

Kỹ thuật làm bài IELTS Reading hiệu quả với chiến lược xác định từ khóa và paraphrase

Passage 2 – Giải Thích

Câu 14: iii (Soil restoration as a climate solution)

• Dạng câu hỏi: Matching Headings
• Từ khóa: regenerative agriculture, soil health, carbon sequestration
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 2
• Giải thích: Đoạn văn tập trung vào “regenerative agriculture” và cách nó cải thiện sức khỏe đất, với các kỹ thuật như “cover cropping” và “no-till farming” để tăng cường “carbon sequestration” – đây chính là việc phục hồi đất như một giải pháp khí hậu.

Câu 15: viii (Livestock industry innovations)

• Dạng câu hỏi: Matching Headings
• Từ khóa: livestock sector, feed additives, selective breeding
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 3
• Giải thích: Cả đoạn bàn về các đổi mới trong ngành chăn nuôi: “Scientists are developing feed additives”, “selective breeding programs”, “genetic modifications” – tất cả là những sáng tạo trong chăn nuôi.

Câu 19: soil sensors

• Dạng câu hỏi: Summary Completion
• Từ khóa: precision agriculture, GPS equipment, apply resources efficiently
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 4, dòng 2-3
• Giải thích: “Farmers using precision techniques employ GPS-guided equipment, soil sensors, and data analytics…”

Câu 24: NO

• Dạng câu hỏi: Yes/No/Not Given
• Từ khóa: cultured meat, cheaper, conventional meat
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 6, dòng 5-6
• Giải thích: Bài viết nói “scalability challenges and high production costs currently limit its commercial viability” – thịt nuôi cấy hiện đang có chi phí cao, không rẻ hơn thịt thường.

Câu 25: YES

• Dạng câu hỏi: Yes/No/Not Given
• Từ khóa: vertical farming, less water, traditional agriculture
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 8, cuối đoạn
• Giải thích: “Vertical farming…uses up to 95% less water than conventional agriculture” – giảm tới 95% lượng nước so với nông nghiệp truyền thống.

Passage 3 – Giải Thích

Câu 27: B

• Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
• Từ khóa: small-scale farmers, developing nations, challenges, sustainable practices
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 2, dòng 2-4
• Giải thích: “Small-scale farmers…often lack access to the capital, technology, and institutional support necessary to implement advanced sustainable techniques. The upfront costs…can be prohibitive” – thiếu nguồn lực tài chính và hỗ trợ.

Câu 28: C

• Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
• Từ khóa: agricultural subsidies, high-income countries
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 3, dòng 2-4
• Giải thích: “These subsidies…create market distortions that make emissions-intensive production artificially profitable while disadvantaging sustainable alternatives” – tạo lợi thế kinh tế cho sản xuất phát thải cao.

Câu 30: A

• Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
• Từ khóa: intention-behavior gap, consumer behavior
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 7, dòng 2-3
• Giải thích: “Even well-informed consumers often exhibit intention-behavior gaps, expressing environmental concern while making purchasing decisions based primarily on price, convenience, and habit” – sự khác biệt giữa ý định và hành vi thực tế.

Câu 32: C

• Dạng câu hỏi: Matching Sentence Endings
• Từ khóa: Small-scale farmers, developing countries
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 2, dòng 1-2
• Giải thích: “Small-scale farmers in Sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, who collectively feed billions while contributing minimally to cumulative emissions, often lack access to…” – đóng góp tối thiểu vào phát thải nhưng thiếu nguồn lực để thích nghi.

Câu 37: pastoralist societies

• Dạng câu hỏi: Short-answer
• Từ khóa: societies, livestock, entire way of life
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 5, dòng 4-5
• Giải thích: “In pastoralist societies across East Africa and Central Asia, livestock are not merely protein sources but constitute wealth, serve social functions…and form the basis of entire ways of life”

Câu 40: polycentric governance

• Dạng câu hỏi: Short-answer
• Từ khóa: governance approach, multiple levels, food system transformation
• Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn cuối, dòng 1
• Giải thích: “Transforming food systems to address climate change requires polycentric governance engaging actors at multiple scales”

---

Từ Vựng Quan Trọng Theo Passage

Passage 1 – Essential Vocabulary

Từ vựng	Loại từ	Phiên âm	Nghĩa tiếng Việt	Ví dụ từ bài	Collocation
greenhouse gas	n	/ˈɡriːnhaʊs ɡæs/	khí nhà kính	The food industry is one of the largest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions	greenhouse gas emissions, reduce greenhouse gases
livestock	n	/ˈlaɪvstɒk/	gia súc, vật nuôi	Livestock farming is responsible for 14.5% of global emissions	livestock farming, raise livestock, livestock production
enteric fermentation	n	/enˈterɪk fɜːmenˈteɪʃən/	lên men trong ruột	Cows produce methane through enteric fermentation	undergo enteric fermentation
synthetic fertilizer	n	/sɪnˈθetɪk ˈfɜːtɪlaɪzə/	phân bón tổng hợp	The use of synthetic fertilizers generates nitrous oxide	apply synthetic fertilizers, synthetic fertilizer use
deforestation	n	/diːˌfɒrɪˈsteɪʃən/	nạn phá rừng	Deforestation accounts for 10-15% of greenhouse gas emissions	combat deforestation, deforestation rates
carbon sink	n	/ˈkɑːbən sɪŋk/	bể chứa carbon	Forests act as carbon sinks, absorbing CO2	natural carbon sink, forest carbon sink
food miles	n	/fuːd maɪlz/	quãng đường vận chuyển thực phẩm	Food miles measure distance from production to consumption	reduce food miles, calculate food miles
anaerobic conditions	n	/ˌænəˈrəʊbɪk kənˈdɪʃənz/	điều kiện kỵ khí	Food waste produces methane in anaerobic conditions	under anaerobic conditions
fossil fuels	n	/ˈfɒsəl fjuːəlz/	nhiên liệu hóa thạch	Most processing energy comes from fossil fuels	burn fossil fuels, fossil fuel consumption
single-use plastics	n	/ˈsɪŋɡəl juːs ˈplæstɪks/	đồ nhựa dùng một lần	The industry relies heavily on single-use plastics	ban single-use plastics, reduce single-use plastics
ruminant animals	n	/ˈruːmɪnənt ˈænɪməlz/	động vật nhai lại	Cows and other ruminant animals produce methane	ruminant livestock, ruminant digestion
carbon footprint	n	/ˈkɑːbən ˈfʊtprɪnt/	dấu chân carbon, lượng khí thải carbon	Beef has a much higher carbon footprint than vegetables	reduce carbon footprint, measure carbon footprint

Passage 2 – Essential Vocabulary

Từ vựng	Loại từ	Phiên âm	Nghĩa tiếng Việt	Ví dụ từ bài	Collocation
regenerative agriculture	n	/rɪˈdʒenərətɪv ˈæɡrɪkʌltʃə/	nông nghiệp tái sinh	Regenerative agriculture improves soil health	practice regenerative agriculture, regenerative farming techniques
carbon sequestration	n	/ˈkɑːbən ˌsiːkwesˈtreɪʃən/	cô lập carbon, lưu giữ carbon	Cover cropping enhances carbon sequestration	enhance carbon sequestration, carbon sequestration potential
no-till farming	n	/nəʊ tɪl ˈfɑːmɪŋ/	canh tác không cày xới	No-till farming preserves soil structure	adopt no-till farming, no-till practices
feed additives	n	/fiːd ˈædɪtɪvz/	phụ gia thức ăn chăn nuôi	Feed additives can reduce methane emissions by 30%	develop feed additives, use feed additives
precision agriculture	n	/prɪˈsɪʒən ˈæɡrɪkʌltʃə/	nông nghiệp chính xác	Precision agriculture optimizes resource use	implement precision agriculture, precision farming technology
plant-based proteins	n	/plɑːnt beɪst ˈprəʊtiːnz/	protein thực vật	Plant-based proteins require fewer resources	consume plant-based proteins, plant-based alternatives
cultured meat	n	/ˈkʌltʃəd miːt/	thịt nuôi cấy	Cultured meat could reduce livestock emissions by 96%	produce cultured meat, cultured meat technology
biogas systems	n	/ˈbaɪəʊɡæs ˈsɪstəmz/	hệ thống khí sinh học	Biogas systems capture methane from waste	install biogas systems, biogas production
vertical farms	n	/ˈvɜːtɪkəl fɑːmz/	trang trại thẳng đứng	Vertical farms use 95% less water	develop vertical farms, urban vertical farming
circular economy	n	/ˈsɜːkjələr ɪˈkɒnəmi/	kinh tế tuần hoàn	Biogas exemplifies a circular economy approach	transition to circular economy, circular economy principles
feed-efficient	adj	/fiːd ɪˈfɪʃənt/	hiệu quả trong chuyển hóa thức ăn	Breeding programs produce feed-efficient animals	more feed-efficient, feed-efficient livestock
post-harvest handling	n	/pəʊst ˈhɑːvɪst ˈhændlɪŋ/	xử lý sau thu hoạch	Better post-harvest handling minimizes losses	improve post-harvest handling, post-harvest management
dynamic pricing	n	/daɪˈnæmɪk ˈpraɪsɪŋ/	định giá linh hoạt	Dynamic pricing reduces food waste in retail	implement dynamic pricing, dynamic pricing strategies
meal planning	n	/miːl ˈplænɪŋ/	lập kế hoạch bữa ăn	Meal planning reduces household food waste	effective meal planning, meal planning strategies
flexitarian diets	n	/ˌfleksɪˈteəriən ˈdaɪəts/	chế độ ăn linh hoạt	Flexitarian diets allow occasional meat consumption	adopt flexitarian diets, flexitarian eating pattern

Passage 3 – Essential Vocabulary

Từ vựng	Loại từ	Phiên âm	Nghĩa tiếng Việt	Ví dụ từ bài	Collocation
socioeconomic matrix	n	/ˌsəʊsiəʊˌiːkəˈnɒmɪk ˈmeɪtrɪks/	ma trận kinh tế xã hội	Food system transformation exists within a complex socioeconomic matrix	complex socioeconomic matrix, navigate socioeconomic factors
decarbonize	v	/diːˈkɑːbənaɪz/	giảm phát thải carbon	The imperative to decarbonize the global food system	decarbonize the economy, decarbonization efforts
grapple with	v	/ˈɡræpəl wɪð/	vật lộn với, đối phó với	Implementation must grapple with questions of equity	grapple with challenges, grapple with issues
disparate vulnerabilities	n	/ˈdɪspərət vʌlnərəˈbɪlətiz/	các điểm yếu khác nhau	Agricultural communities face disparate vulnerabilities	address disparate vulnerabilities, recognize disparate impacts
upfront costs	n	/ˈʌpfrʌnt kɒsts/	chi phí ban đầu	Upfront costs can be prohibitive for farmers	high upfront costs, cover upfront costs
temporal lag	n	/ˈtempərəl læɡ/	độ trễ thời gian	Temporal lag between investment and gains creates challenges	temporal lag effect, experience temporal lag
political economy	n	/pəˈlɪtɪkəl ɪˈkɒnəmi/	kinh tế chính trị	The political economy of subsidies complicates transition	understand political economy, political economy analysis
entrenched subsidy regimes	n	/ɪnˈtrentʃt ˈsʌbsɪdi reɪˈʒiːmz/	chế độ trợ cấp đã ăn sâu	Entrenched subsidy regimes favor industrial agriculture	reform entrenched subsidies, challenge entrenched regimes
market distortions	n	/ˈmɑːkɪt dɪˈstɔːʃənz/	méo mó thị trường	Subsidies create market distortions	eliminate market distortions, cause market distortions
disproportionate political influence	n	/ˌdɪsprəˈpɔːʃənət pəˈlɪtɪkəl ˈɪnfluəns/	ảnh hưởng chính trị không cân xứng	Rural constituencies wield disproportionate political influence	exercise disproportionate influence, have disproportionate power
path dependency	n	/pɑːθ dɪˈpendənsi/	phụ thuộc đường đi	Decades of policy create path dependency	overcome path dependency, path dependency effect
institutional inertia	n	/ˌɪnstɪˈtjuːʃənəl ɪˈnɜːʃə/	quán tính thể chế	Path dependency generates institutional inertia	combat institutional inertia, institutional inertia impedes change
inextricably intertwined	adj	/ˌɪnɪkˈstrɪkəbli ˌɪntəˈtwaɪnd/	đan xen không thể tách rời	Food is inextricably intertwined with cultural identity	inextricably linked, inextricably connected
pastoralist societies	n	/ˈpɑːstərəlɪst səˈsaɪətiz/	xã hội chăn nuôi du mục	In pastoralist societies, livestock form the basis of life	traditional pastoralist societies, pastoralist communities
neo-colonial impositions	n	/ˌniːəʊkəˈləʊniəl ˌɪmpəˈzɪʃənz/	áp đặt tân thực dân	Top-down prescriptions risk being seen as neo-colonial impositions	resist neo-colonial impositions, neo-colonial attitudes
environmental externalities	n	/ɪnˌvaɪrənˈmentəl ˌekstɜːˈnælətiz/	tác động môi trường bên ngoài	Trade paradigms fail to account for environmental externalities	internalize environmental externalities, address externalities
intention-behavior gaps	n	/ɪnˈtenʃən bɪˈheɪvjə ɡæps/	khoảng cách giữa ý định và hành vi	Consumers exhibit intention-behavior gaps	close intention-behavior gaps, recognize behavioral gaps
psychologically distant	adj	/ˌsaɪkəˈlɒdʒɪkəli ˈdɪstənt/	xa vời về mặt tâm lý	Emissions are psychologically distant to consumers	seem psychologically distant, psychologically remote
nudge interventions	n	/nʌdʒ ˌɪntəˈvenʃənz/	can thiệp nhẹ nhàng	Nudge interventions show modest efficacy	design nudge interventions, behavioral nudge strategies
regressivity	n	/rɪˈɡresɪvəti/	tính lũy thoái	Taxes raise concerns about regressivity	address regressivity, regressive impact
participatory legitimacy	n	/pɑːˌtɪsɪˈpeɪtəri lɪˈdʒɪtɪməsi/	tính hợp pháp có sự tham gia	Authoritarian systems lack participatory legitimacy	ensure participatory legitimacy, democratic legitimacy
myopic incentives	n	/maɪˈɒpɪk ɪnˈsentɪvz/	động lực cận thị	Electoral cycles create myopic incentives	overcome myopic incentives, short-term myopic focus
technologically substitutable	adj	/ˌteknəˈlɒdʒɪkəli ˈsʌbstɪtjuːtəbəl/	có thể thay thế về mặt công nghệ	Fossil fuels are technologically substitutable	not easily substitutable, readily substitutable
common but differentiated responsibilities	n	/ˈkɒmən bʌt ˌdɪfəˈrenʃieɪtɪd rɪˌspɒnsəˈbɪlətiz/	trách nhiệm chung nhưng khác biệt	The concept applies to international climate negotiations	principle of common but differentiated responsibilities
financialization of agriculture	n	/faɪˌnænʃəlaɪˈzeɪʃən əv ˈæɡrɪkʌltʃə/	tài chính hóa nông nghiệp	Financialization introduces additional complexity	impacts of financialization, agricultural financialization trends
impact investing	n	/ˈɪmpækt ɪnˈvestɪŋ/	đầu tư tác động	Impact investing in sustainable food systems has grown	engage in impact investing, impact investment funds
polycentric governance	n	/ˌpɒliˈsentrɪk ˈɡʌvənəns/	quản trị đa tâm	Transformation requires polycentric governance	establish polycentric governance, multi-level governance
synergistic combinations	n	/ˌsɪnəˈdʒɪstɪk ˌkɒmbɪˈneɪʃənz/	sự kết hợp hiệp đồng	Progress depends on synergistic combinations	create synergistic effects, synergistic approaches

Từ vựng IELTS Reading chủ đề môi trường và biến đổi khí hậu trong ngành thực phẩm

---

Kết Bài

Chủ đề về ngành công nghiệp thực phẩm toàn cầu và tác động của nó lên biến đổi khí hậu không chỉ là một đề tài thời sự quan trọng mà còn là nội dung xuất hiện thường xuyên trong IELTS Reading. Qua bộ đề thi mẫu này, bạn đã được trải nghiệm đầy đủ cả ba mức độ khó từ Easy đến Hard, với 40 câu hỏi đa dạng về dạng bài và kỹ thuật làm bài.

Passage 1 giúp bạn làm quen với các thông tin cơ bản về phát thải khí nhà kính từ ngành thực phẩm, với câu hỏi tương đối dễ xác định và từ vựng không quá phức tạp. Passage 2 đưa bạn đến mức độ trung bình với các giải pháp bền vững, yêu cầu khả năng paraphrase và suy luận tốt hơn. Passage 3 thách thức bạn với nội dung học thuật sâu về các khía cạnh kinh tế-xã hội, đòi hỏi kỹ năng phân tích và hiểu ngữ cảnh ở mức cao.

Phần đáp án chi tiết với giải thích cụ thể về vị trí thông tin, kỹ thuật paraphrase và lý do đúng sai sẽ giúp bạn tự đánh giá năng lực và học hỏi từ những sai lầm. Đây là kỹ năng quan trọng để cải thiện band điểm Reading của bạn một cách bài bản.

Phần từ vựng được tổng hợp theo từng passage không chỉ giúp bạn mở rộng vốn từ về chủ đề môi trường và thực phẩm mà còn cung cấp phát âm, nghĩa, ví dụ và collocation – những yếu tố cần thiết để sử dụng từ vựng một cách tự nhiên và chính xác trong kỳ thi.

Hãy dành thời gian làm bài nghiêm túc theo đúng thời gian quy định, sau đó đối chiếu đáp án và phân tích kỹ lưỡng những câu bạn làm sai. Đừng chỉ xem đáp án đúng là gì mà hãy hiểu tại sao đó là đáp án đúng và bạn đã nhầm lẫn ở đâu. Việc rút kinh nghiệm từ mỗi bài tập là chìa khóa để tiến bộ vững chắc trong IELTS Reading.

Chúc bạn ôn tập hiệu quả và đạt được band điểm mục tiêu trong kỳ thi IELTS sắp tới!