Mở bài
Chủ đề Impact Of Green Technologies On Traditional Farming (Tác động của công nghệ xanh đối với nông nghiệp truyền thống) đang ngày càng trở nên phổ biến trong các đề thi IELTS Reading gần đây. Điều này phản ánh xu hướng toàn cầu về bền vững môi trường và chuyển đổi số trong nông nghiệp – hai vấn đề then chốt của thế kỷ 21.
Trong bài viết này, bạn sẽ được thực hành với một bộ đề thi IELTS Reading hoàn chỉnh bao gồm 3 passages với độ khó tăng dần từ Easy đến Hard. Đề thi được thiết kế dựa trên format chuẩn của Cambridge IELTS, bao gồm đầy đủ 40 câu hỏi với 7 dạng câu hỏi khác nhau thường gặp trong kỳ thi thật.
Bạn sẽ nhận được đáp án chi tiết kèm giải thích cụ thể, giúp bạn hiểu rõ cách xác định thông tin trong bài, kỹ thuật paraphrase, và chiến lược làm bài hiệu quả. Ngoài ra, bài viết còn cung cấp bộ từ vựng học thuật quan trọng được phân loại theo từng passage, kèm phiên âm, ví dụ và collocation thực tế.
Đề thi này phù hợp cho học viên có trình độ từ band 5.0 trở lên, đặc biệt hữu ích cho những ai đang nhắm đến band 6.5-7.5 trong phần Reading.
Hướng dẫn làm bài IELTS Reading
Tổng Quan Về IELTS Reading Test
IELTS Reading Test là bài kiểm tra kéo dài 60 phút với 3 passages và tổng cộng 40 câu hỏi. Mỗi câu trả lời đúng được tính 1 điểm, và tổng điểm sẽ được quy đổi thành band score từ 0-9.
Phân bổ thời gian khuyến nghị:
- Passage 1: 15-17 phút (độ khó Easy – Band 5.0-6.5)
- Passage 2: 18-20 phút (độ khó Medium – Band 6.0-7.5)
- Passage 3: 23-25 phút (độ khó Hard – Band 7.0-9.0)
Lưu ý rằng bạn cần tự quản lý thời gian vì giám thị không cảnh báo thời gian cho từng passage riêng lẻ. Hãy dành 2-3 phút cuối để chuyển đáp án lên answer sheet.
Các Dạng Câu Hỏi Trong Đề Này
Đề thi mẫu này bao gồm 7 dạng câu hỏi phổ biến nhất:
- Multiple Choice – Chọn đáp án đúng từ các phương án cho sẵn
- True/False/Not Given – Xác định thông tin đúng, sai hay không được đề cập
- Matching Information – Nối thông tin với đoạn văn tương ứng
- Matching Headings – Chọn tiêu đề phù hợp cho các đoạn văn
- Summary/Note Completion – Hoàn thiện tóm tắt hoặc ghi chú
- Matching Features – Nối đặc điểm với danh mục cho sẵn
- Short-answer Questions – Trả lời câu hỏi ngắn trong giới hạn từ cho phép
IELTS Reading Practice Test
PASSAGE 1 – The Green Revolution in Modern Agriculture
Độ khó: Easy (Band 5.0-6.5)
Thời gian đề xuất: 15-17 phút
Agriculture has been the backbone of human civilization for thousands of years, but the methods farmers use today are undergoing a dramatic transformation. Green technologies are rapidly changing the face of traditional farming, introducing innovative solutions that promise both increased productivity and environmental sustainability. This revolution is not just about adopting new tools; it represents a fundamental shift in how we think about food production and our relationship with the natural world.
Precision agriculture is one of the most significant developments in modern farming. Using GPS technology, sensors, and data analytics, farmers can now monitor their fields with unprecedented accuracy. Instead of treating an entire field uniformly, they can identify specific areas that need more water, fertilizer, or pest control. This targeted approach reduces waste and minimizes the environmental impact of farming operations. For example, a farmer in Iowa can use drone technology to scan hundreds of acres in minutes, identifying problem areas that would have taken days to find using traditional methods.
Solar-powered irrigation systems represent another breakthrough in sustainable farming. Traditional irrigation methods often rely on diesel pumps, which are expensive to operate and contribute to carbon emissions. Modern solar pumps, however, harness the power of the sun to deliver water efficiently to crops. In regions like sub-Saharan Africa and rural India, where electricity is unreliable or unavailable, these systems have transformed agricultural productivity. Farmers who once struggled during dry seasons can now maintain consistent crop yields throughout the year.
The introduction of biodegradable materials in farming has also gained considerable attention. Conventional plastic mulch, widely used to control weeds and retain soil moisture, takes hundreds of years to decompose and often ends up polluting the environment. Bio-based mulch films, made from materials like cornstarch or cellulose, perform the same function but break down naturally within months. This innovation addresses one of agriculture’s most persistent pollution problems while maintaining the practical benefits farmers need.
Vertical farming is perhaps the most revolutionary green technology, completely reimagining where and how food can be grown. These indoor farming facilities use LED lighting, hydroponics, and climate control systems to grow crops in stacked layers, often in urban environments. A vertical farm can produce the same amount of food as a traditional farm using 95% less water and 99% less land. Companies in Singapore, Japan, and the United States are already operating profitable vertical farms that supply fresh produce to local markets year-round, regardless of weather conditions.
However, the adoption of green technologies in traditional farming faces several challenges. The initial investment costs can be prohibitive for small-scale farmers, particularly in developing countries. A complete precision agriculture system might cost tens of thousands of dollars, which is beyond the reach of many family farms. Additionally, these technologies require technical knowledge and training that traditional farmers may not possess. A farmer who has worked the land for decades using conventional methods might find it difficult to learn how to operate sophisticated computer systems and interpret data analytics.
Despite these obstacles, the benefits of green technologies are becoming increasingly clear. Studies have shown that farms using precision agriculture techniques can reduce fertilizer use by up to 30% while maintaining or even increasing crop yields. This not only saves money but also prevents harmful nutrient runoff that pollutes rivers and lakes. Similarly, solar-powered systems eliminate ongoing fuel costs, and while the initial investment may be high, most farmers recover their expenses within three to five years.
Government support and agricultural cooperatives are playing a crucial role in making green technologies more accessible. In countries like the Netherlands and Israel, governments provide subsidies and low-interest loans to help farmers transition to sustainable practices. Cooperative models, where multiple small farmers pool resources to purchase and share expensive equipment, are also proving effective. In Kenya, for instance, groups of farmers jointly invest in solar irrigation systems and drone services, making these technologies affordable for communities that could never afford them individually.
The transformation of traditional farming through green technologies is not just an environmental necessity but an economic opportunity. As the global population continues to grow and climate change threatens traditional agricultural regions, these innovations offer a path toward food security and sustainability. The farmers who embrace these changes today are not only protecting the environment but also positioning themselves for success in the agriculture of tomorrow.
Questions 1-6: Multiple Choice
Choose the correct letter, A, B, C, or D.
1. According to the passage, precision agriculture allows farmers to:
A) treat all areas of their fields equally
B) reduce the time spent monitoring crops
C) target specific areas needing different treatments
D) eliminate the need for fertilizers completely
2. Solar-powered irrigation systems are particularly beneficial in:
A) areas with consistent electricity supply
B) regions with unreliable power access
C) countries with low sunlight levels
D) farms that grow only specific crops
3. Bio-based mulch films differ from conventional plastic mulch because they:
A) are more expensive to produce
B) last for hundreds of years
C) decompose naturally within months
D) are less effective at controlling weeds
4. Vertical farming can produce the same amount of food as traditional farming while using:
A) 95% less water and 99% less land
B) 99% less water and 95% less land
C) 50% less water and 75% less land
D) 75% less water and 50% less land
5. The main challenge for small-scale farmers adopting green technologies is:
A) lack of available technology
B) government regulations
C) high initial investment costs
D) resistance from local communities
6. According to the passage, farms using precision agriculture can reduce fertilizer use by up to:
A) 20%
B) 25%
C) 30%
D) 35%
Questions 7-10: True/False/Not Given
Write TRUE if the statement agrees with the information, FALSE if the statement contradicts the information, or NOT GIVEN if there is no information on this.
7. Traditional irrigation methods using diesel pumps are environmentally friendly.
8. Vertical farms in Singapore, Japan, and the United States are currently operating at a profit.
9. Most farmers recover their investment in solar-powered systems within three to five years.
10. Green technologies in agriculture have been rejected by farmers in developed countries.
Questions 11-13: Sentence Completion
Complete the sentences below. Choose NO MORE THAN TWO WORDS from the passage for each answer.
11. Agricultural cooperatives help small farmers by allowing them to __ resources to purchase expensive equipment.
12. In Kenya, groups of farmers jointly invest in solar irrigation systems and __ services.
13. The adoption of green technologies offers a path toward food security and __.
PASSAGE 2 – The Socioeconomic Dimensions of Agricultural Technology Transition
Độ khó: Medium (Band 6.0-7.5)
Thời gian đề xuất: 18-20 phút
The integration of green technologies into traditional farming systems represents far more than a simple technological upgrade; it constitutes a profound socioeconomic transformation that is reshaping rural communities worldwide. While the environmental and productivity benefits of these innovations are well-documented, their broader implications for social structures, economic relationships, and cultural practices deserve equally careful consideration. Understanding these multifaceted impacts is essential for policymakers, agricultural scientists, and farming communities as they navigate this complex transition.
A. The economic dynamics of adopting green technologies reveal a paradox that challenges conventional development theories. Initial research suggested that high-tech farming solutions would naturally favor large commercial operations with substantial capital reserves, potentially marginalizing smallholder farmers and exacerbating rural inequality. However, empirical evidence from diverse geographical contexts paints a more nuanced picture. In regions where institutional support mechanisms—such as microfinance initiatives, equipment-sharing cooperatives, and government subsidy programs—are robust, small-scale farmers have demonstrated remarkable adaptability. The rise of smart agriculture in food production has shown that technology adoption patterns depend less on farm size than on access to credit, training, and supportive policy frameworks.
B. The knowledge economy emerging around agricultural technology presents both opportunities and challenges for traditional farming communities. Green technologies require new competencies that extend beyond conventional agricultural expertise: data literacy, basic programming skills, equipment maintenance, and the ability to interpret complex analytical outputs. This shift has created a generational divide in many rural areas, with younger, more educated family members becoming indispensable to farm operations. In Vietnam’s Mekong Delta, for instance, families that once valued physical strength and experiential knowledge now increasingly depend on children who can operate smartphone applications for crop monitoring and market analysis. This transformation is fundamentally altering intergenerational power dynamics and raising questions about the preservation of traditional agricultural wisdom.
C. Gender relations within farming communities are also experiencing significant reconfiguration. Traditional agriculture in many societies has been characterized by gendered divisions of labor, with men typically controlling mechanized equipment and women focusing on manual tasks. Green technologies, particularly those involving digital interfaces and precision instruments, are disrupting these patterns. Research from East Africa indicates that women are often more enthusiastic adopters of certain green technologies, particularly mobile-based information systems and solar-powered processing equipment, which reduce physical labor and provide greater flexibility. However, this technological shift does not automatically translate into economic empowerment; persistent barriers in property rights, credit access, and decision-making authority continue to limit women’s ability to fully benefit from these innovations.
D. The environmental justice dimensions of agricultural technology adoption remain underexplored in mainstream discourse. While green technologies promise overall sustainability benefits, their implementation can create new forms of inequality. Water-efficient irrigation systems and climate-controlled greenhouses, for example, may enable some farmers to maintain productivity during droughts while their less-equipped neighbors face crop failures. This technological divide can intensify resource competition and social tensions, particularly in water-scarce regions where the advantages gained by technology-adopting farmers come at the perceived expense of others. The situation resembles patterns observed in how global warming is changing agricultural practices, where adaptation capacities vary dramatically across different farming communities.
E. Cultural and psychological factors play a surprisingly significant role in technology adoption patterns. Farming communities worldwide possess deep-rooted cultural identities tied to traditional practices, seasonal rhythms, and relationships with the land that extend beyond purely economic calculations. The introduction of technologies that fundamentally alter these relationships can provoke resistance not from ignorance or conservatism, as outsiders sometimes assume, but from legitimate concerns about cultural continuity and community cohesion. In parts of rural France and Italy, for instance, some farmers have deliberately chosen to limit their adoption of certain green technologies, not because they doubt their effectiveness, but because they fear losing the artisanal character and heritage value that distinguish their products and sustain their regional identities.
F. The market implications of widespread green technology adoption are reshaping agricultural value chains in unexpected ways. Consumers in developed markets increasingly demand transparency about production methods, creating premium price opportunities for farmers who can document their use of sustainable practices. Blockchain technology and digital certification systems now allow farmers to provide verifiable evidence of their environmental practices directly to consumers or retailers. However, this trend creates new barriers for farmers in developing regions who may employ sustainable practices but lack the technical infrastructure to document and market them effectively. The result is a potential certification gap that paradoxically disadvantages farmers who can least afford to be excluded from premium markets.
G. Looking forward, the success of green technology integration in traditional farming will likely depend on developing hybrid models that combine technological innovation with respect for local knowledge systems and social structures. Several promising examples are emerging: participatory design processes that involve farmers in technology development, community-managed technology centers that provide shared access to expensive equipment, and peer-to-peer learning networks that facilitate knowledge exchange between experienced and novice users. These approaches recognize that sustainable agricultural transformation requires not just better tools, but new forms of social organization that can support their equitable and culturally appropriate implementation.
The transition to green technologies in agriculture is thus revealed as a deeply human process, one that cannot be reduced to technical specifications or efficiency metrics. Its ultimate success will be measured not only in yield improvements and emission reductions, but in its capacity to strengthen rural livelihoods, preserve valuable cultural practices, and create more equitable and resilient food systems for future generations.
Questions 14-20: Matching Headings
Choose the correct heading for paragraphs A-G from the list of headings below.
List of Headings:
i. The paradox of technology accessibility and farm size
ii. Digital skills transforming family hierarchies in farming
iii. Environmental benefits creating new inequalities
iv. Gender dynamics and technological change in agriculture
v. Future models combining innovation with tradition
vi. Cultural resistance as rational choice rather than ignorance
vii. Market opportunities and documentation challenges
viii. Government policies restricting technology adoption
ix. The complete rejection of traditional farming methods
14. Paragraph A
15. Paragraph B
16. Paragraph C
17. Paragraph D
18. Paragraph E
19. Paragraph F
20. Paragraph G
Questions 21-23: Summary Completion
Complete the summary below. Choose NO MORE THAN TWO WORDS from the passage for each answer.
Green technologies require farmers to develop new skills including data literacy and the ability to interpret 21. __. This has created a 22. __ in rural areas, as younger family members become essential to farm operations. The shift is changing traditional 23. __ within farming families.
Questions 24-26: Yes/No/Not Given
Write YES if the statement agrees with the claims of the writer, NO if the statement contradicts the claims of the writer, or NOT GIVEN if it is impossible to say what the writer thinks about this.
24. Small-scale farmers cannot compete with large commercial operations when adopting green technologies.
25. Women in East Africa have shown greater interest in certain types of green technologies than men.
26. All farmers in France and Italy have completely rejected green technologies.
PASSAGE 3 – Theoretical Frameworks for Understanding Agricultural Technology Diffusion and Systemic Change
Độ khó: Hard (Band 7.0-9.0)
Thời gian đề xuất: 23-25 phút
The diffusion of green technologies within traditional agricultural systems presents a compelling case study for examining broader theoretical questions about innovation adoption, systemic change, and the co-evolution of technology and society. While conventional diffusion of innovation theory, as originally articulated by Everett Rogers in 1962, provides a foundational framework for understanding how new practices spread through communities, the specific characteristics of agricultural green technologies—their capital intensity, knowledge requirements, interdependencies with ecological systems, and embeddedness within complex social structures—necessitate more sophisticated analytical approaches that transcend simple linear models of adoption.
Socio-technical transitions theory offers a particularly illuminating lens through which to examine the transformation of agricultural systems. This framework, developed within Science and Technology Studies, conceptualizes change as occurring across three nested levels: niches (protected spaces where radical innovations develop), regimes (the dominant configuration of rules, practices, and technologies), and landscapes (the broader context of slowly changing external factors). The introduction of green technologies into traditional farming can be understood as a niche-level innovation attempting to destabilize the existing socio-technical regime of conventional agriculture. However, the success of this destabilization depends not merely on the technical superiority of innovations, but on their ability to align with or reconfigure the institutional arrangements, economic incentives, cultural meanings, and power relationships that constitute the regime.
The concept of path dependency proves crucial in understanding why agricultural technology transitions occur unevenly across different contexts. Historical institutionalism suggests that past decisions create lock-in effects that privilege certain trajectories while foreclosing others. In agriculture, decades of investment in input-intensive production systems—supported by fertilizer subsidies, irrigation infrastructure, research priorities, and marketing channels—have created powerful structural inertias that resist change. Farmers embedded in these systems face switching costs that extend beyond mere financial calculations to encompass reputational risks, potential loss of social capital within established networks, and the cognitive burden of abandoning familiar practices. This phenomenon mirrors challenges seen in how renewable energy is influencing global oil markets, where established infrastructure and practices create resistance to systemic change.
Recent scholarship has increasingly emphasized the importance of social network analysis in understanding technology diffusion patterns. Unlike traditional diffusion models that assume relatively homogeneous populations and random contact patterns, network approaches recognize that farmers are embedded in structured relationships that fundamentally shape information flows and influence processes. Centrality measures can identify key individuals whose adoption decisions disproportionately affect others, while structural holes analysis reveals opportunities for knowledge brokers to connect otherwise disconnected groups. Empirical research in Southeast Asian rice farming communities has demonstrated that green technology adoption often follows network patterns rather than economic logic, with farmers more influenced by the observable experiences of trusted peers than by extension agents or economic incentives.
The political economy perspective directs attention to how power relations and conflicting interests shape agricultural technology trajectories. Green technologies are not politically neutral tools but rather material embodiments of particular visions of agricultural development that advantage some actors while disadvantaging others. The promotion of precision agriculture technologies, for instance, strengthens the position of companies providing proprietary software platforms and data analytics services, potentially creating new forms of farmer dependency that parallel earlier concerns about hybrid seeds and chemical inputs. Critical agrarian studies scholars have warned of emerging “data extractivism,” whereby farmers’ production information becomes a valuable commodity controlled by technology providers rather than farmers themselves, raising fundamental questions about data sovereignty and algorithmic governance in food systems.
Commons theory offers valuable insights into the governance challenges associated with agricultural technology transitions. Many green technologies involve shared resources or generate collective benefits that cannot be easily appropriated by individual adopters. Integrated pest management systems, for example, produce positive externalities for neighboring farms, while biodiversity conservation practices contribute to ecosystem services that benefit entire regions. However, these public good characteristics create collective action problems: individual farmers may lack sufficient incentive to adopt practices whose benefits are widely distributed. Elinor Ostrom’s work on common-pool resource management suggests that solutions lie not in purely market-based mechanisms or state regulation, but in carefully designed polycentric governance systems that combine multiple institutional levels and create appropriate incentive structures for collective environmental stewardship.
The integration of complexity science perspectives has revealed that agricultural systems exhibit emergent properties and non-linear dynamics that confound simple cause-effect predictions. Small changes in technology adoption can trigger cascading effects through interconnected ecological, economic, and social subsystems, sometimes leading to threshold effects or regime shifts that fundamentally alter system behavior. Conversely, apparently significant technological inputs may be absorbed without substantial system-level change due to buffering mechanisms and adaptive capacity within existing structures. Agent-based modeling approaches have proven particularly valuable for exploring these dynamics, allowing researchers to simulate how individual farmer decisions, shaped by diverse motivations and constraints, aggregate into system-level outcomes that may be counterintuitive or unexpected.
Feminist political ecology contributes essential insights into how gender relations shape and are shaped by agricultural technology transitions. This perspective reveals that technologies are not adopted into socially neutral contexts but rather into gendered landscapes where women and men have differential access to resources, knowledge, decision-making authority, and benefits from agricultural production. The framework challenges gender-blind approaches to technology promotion that assume innovations affect all farmers equally, demonstrating instead how technologies can reinforce existing inequalities or, when carefully designed and implemented, contribute to more equitable outcomes. Research from South Asia has shown that women’s adoption of certain green technologies correlates with factors entirely different from those affecting men, including mobility restrictions, time poverty from domestic responsibilities, and informal knowledge networks operating separately from male-dominated extension systems.
The concept of technological frames from social construction of technology theory illuminates how different stakeholder groups attribute varying meanings to agricultural innovations. What agricultural scientists understand as “precision agriculture” may be interpreted by farmers as “excessive complexity,” by input suppliers as “market opportunity,” by environmental advocates as “partial solution,” and by food sovereignty movements as “corporate control.” These divergent frames shape not only whether actors support particular technologies but also how they are implemented and what effects they ultimately produce. Interpretive flexibility means that the “same” technology may function quite differently across contexts as it is adapted to local conditions, integrated into existing practices, and imbued with locally specific meanings, as evidenced by variations in how does climate change affect global crop yields across different farming systems.
Resilience theory offers a final crucial perspective, focusing attention on how agricultural systems maintain functionality amid disturbances and whether technology transitions enhance or compromise this capacity. Ecological resilience emphasizes the ability of systems to absorb shocks while retaining fundamental structure and function, while engineering resilience focuses on speed of recovery to equilibrium states. Green technologies may simultaneously enhance certain dimensions of resilience—such as drought tolerance through efficient irrigation—while potentially reducing others, such as diversity-based adaptive capacity. The framework highlights trade-offs between efficiency and resilience, suggesting that optimal agricultural systems may prioritize functional redundancy and response diversity over maximum productivity—a conclusion sometimes in tension with dominant technology promotion narratives.
These diverse theoretical perspectives collectively suggest that understanding and facilitating beneficial agricultural technology transitions requires moving beyond technocentric approaches to embrace frameworks that recognize the fundamentally socio-ecological character of farming systems. Effective interventions must attend simultaneously to technical performance, economic viability, social equity, cultural appropriateness, ecological sustainability, and political feasibility—a multidimensional challenge that defies simple solutions but offers rich opportunities for innovative governance approaches and transformative change.
Questions 27-32: Multiple Choice
Choose the correct letter, A, B, C, or D.
27. According to the passage, conventional diffusion of innovation theory:
A) fully explains green technology adoption in agriculture
B) is entirely irrelevant to modern agricultural systems
C) provides a basic framework but requires more sophisticated approaches
D) was developed specifically for agricultural contexts
28. Socio-technical transitions theory conceptualizes change as occurring across:
A) two interrelated levels
B) three nested levels
C) four distinct phases
D) five interconnected stages
29. Path dependency in agriculture creates:
A) simplified decision-making for farmers
B) structural inertias that resist change
C) automatic adoption of new technologies
D) reduced investment requirements
30. According to social network analysis, farmers are most influenced by:
A) government extension agents
B) economic incentives alone
C) trusted peers and observable experiences
D) advertising from technology companies
31. Critical agrarian studies scholars have warned about:
A) declining crop yields
B) excessive government regulation
C) data extractivism and farmer dependency
D) the complete abandonment of technology
32. Complexity science perspectives reveal that agricultural systems:
A) follow simple cause-effect predictions
B) exhibit emergent properties and non-linear dynamics
C) cannot be studied scientifically
D) remain unchanged despite technological inputs
Công nghệ xanh trong nông nghiệp hiện đại với hệ thống tưới tiêu năng lượng mặt trời và máy bay không người lái giám sát cánh đồng
Questions 33-37: Matching Features
Match the following theoretical perspectives (A-H) with the insights they provide (Questions 33-37).
Theoretical Perspectives:
A) Socio-technical transitions theory
B) Commons theory
C) Complexity science
D) Feminist political ecology
E) Political economy perspective
F) Resilience theory
G) Social construction of technology
H) Historical institutionalism
33. Reveals how different stakeholder groups attribute varying meanings to innovations
34. Addresses governance challenges when technologies generate collective benefits
35. Examines how gender relations shape technology adoption differently for women and men
36. Explains how power relations and conflicting interests shape technology trajectories
37. Focuses on maintaining system functionality amid disturbances
Questions 38-40: Short-answer Questions
Answer the questions below. Choose NO MORE THAN THREE WORDS from the passage for each answer.
38. What type of effects can small changes in technology adoption trigger through interconnected subsystems?
39. What does Elinor Ostrom’s work suggest is needed instead of purely market-based mechanisms for managing common resources?
40. What do optimal agricultural systems prioritize over maximum productivity according to resilience theory?
Answer Keys – Đáp Án
PASSAGE 1: Questions 1-13
- C
- B
- C
- A
- C
- C
- FALSE
- TRUE
- TRUE
- NOT GIVEN
- pool
- drone
- sustainability
PASSAGE 2: Questions 14-26
- i
- ii
- iv
- iii
- vi
- vii
- v
- complex analytical outputs / analytical outputs
- generational divide
- intergenerational power dynamics / power dynamics
- NO
- YES
- NO
PASSAGE 3: Questions 27-40
- C
- B
- B
- C
- C
- B
- G
- B
- D
- E
- F
- cascading effects
- polycentric governance systems
- functional redundancy / response diversity
Giải Thích Đáp Án Chi Tiết
Passage 1 – Giải Thích
Câu 1: C
- Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
- Từ khóa: precision agriculture, allows farmers
- Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 2, dòng 2-4
- Giải thích: Bài văn nói rõ “farmers can now monitor their fields with unprecedented accuracy” và “they can identify specific areas that need more water, fertilizer, or pest control.” Đây là paraphrase của “target specific areas needing different treatments” trong đáp án C.
Câu 2: B
- Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
- Từ khóa: Solar-powered irrigation systems, beneficial
- Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 3, dòng 3-5
- Giải thích: Passage đề cập “In regions like sub-Saharan Africa and rural India, where electricity is unreliable or unavailable, these systems have transformed agricultural productivity” – khớp với “regions with unreliable power access.”
Câu 7: FALSE
- Dạng câu hỏi: True/False/Not Given
- Từ khóa: Traditional irrigation methods, diesel pumps, environmentally friendly
- Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 3, dòng 1-3
- Giải thích: Bài văn nói “Traditional irrigation methods often rely on diesel pumps, which are expensive to operate and contribute to carbon emissions” – điều này mâu thuẫn trực tiếp với việc “environmentally friendly.”
Câu 8: TRUE
- Dạng câu hỏi: True/False/Not Given
- Từ khóa: Vertical farms, Singapore, Japan, United States, operating at a profit
- Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 5, dòng cuối
- Giải thích: Passage khẳng định “Companies in Singapore, Japan, and the United States are already operating profitable vertical farms” – từ “profitable” đồng nghĩa với “operating at a profit.”
Câu 11: pool
- Dạng câu hỏi: Sentence Completion
- Từ khóa: Agricultural cooperatives, small farmers, resources
- Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 8, dòng 3-5
- Giải thích: Câu gốc là “where multiple small farmers pool resources to purchase and share expensive equipment” – “pool” là từ cần điền.
Nông dân ứng dụng công nghệ chính xác với máy bay không người lái và thiết bị cảm biến đất trong canh tác hiện đại
Passage 2 – Giải Thích
Câu 14: i
- Dạng câu hỏi: Matching Headings
- Từ khóa: Paragraph A – economic dynamics, farm size, institutional support
- Giải thích: Đoạn A thảo luận về “paradox” rằng công nghệ xanh không nhất thiết ưu tiên các nông trại lớn như dự đoán, mà phụ thuộc vào institutional support mechanisms. Heading i “The paradox of technology accessibility and farm size” phù hợp nhất.
Câu 15: ii
- Dạng câu hỏi: Matching Headings
- Từ khóa: Paragraph B – knowledge economy, generational divide, intergenerational power dynamics
- Giải thích: Đoạn B tập trung vào việc công nghệ tạo ra generational divide và thay đổi intergenerational power dynamics trong gia đình nông dân. Heading ii “Digital skills transforming family hierarchies in farming” khớp chính xác.
Câu 21: complex analytical outputs / analytical outputs
- Dạng câu hỏi: Summary Completion
- Từ khóa: interpret
- Vị trí trong bài: Paragraph B, câu thứ 2
- Giải thích: Bài văn nêu “the ability to interpret complex analytical outputs” – đây chính xác là cụm từ cần điền (có thể viết đầy đủ hoặc rút gọn thành “analytical outputs”).
Câu 24: NO
- Dạng câu hỏi: Yes/No/Not Given
- Từ khóa: Small-scale farmers, cannot compete
- Vị trí trong bài: Paragraph A
- Giải thích: Paragraph A nói rõ rằng “where institutional support mechanisms are robust, small-scale farmers have demonstrated remarkable adaptability” và “technology adoption patterns depend less on farm size than on access to credit, training, and supportive policy frameworks” – điều này trái ngược với câu phát biểu rằng họ “cannot compete.”
Câu 25: YES
- Dạng câu hỏi: Yes/No/Not Given
- Từ khóa: Women, East Africa, greater interest
- Vị trí trong bài: Paragraph C
- Giải thích: Passage đề cập “Research from East Africa indicates that women are often more enthusiastic adopters of certain green technologies” – “more enthusiastic” đồng nghĩa với “greater interest.”
Passage 3 – Giải Thích
Câu 27: C
- Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
- Từ khóa: conventional diffusion of innovation theory
- Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 1, câu cuối
- Giải thích: Bài văn nói conventional theory “provides a foundational framework” nhưng characteristics của green technologies “necessitate more sophisticated analytical approaches that transcend simple linear models” – khớp với đáp án C.
Câu 28: B
- Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
- Từ khóa: Socio-technical transitions theory, levels
- Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 2, câu thứ 2
- Giải thích: Passage nêu rõ “change as occurring across three nested levels: niches, regimes, and landscapes” – đáp án là B (three nested levels).
Câu 33: G
- Dạng câu hỏi: Matching Features
- Từ khóa: different stakeholder groups, varying meanings
- Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 9, câu đầu
- Giải thích: Đoạn 9 nói về “technological frames” từ “social construction of technology theory” và giải thích “how different stakeholder groups attribute varying meanings to agricultural innovations” – khớp chính xác với mô tả câu 33.
Câu 34: B
- Dạng câu hỏi: Matching Features
- Từ khóa: governance challenges, collective benefits
- Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 6, câu đầu
- Giải thích: Commons theory được đề cập trong đoạn 6 với nội dung “governance challenges associated with agricultural technology transitions” và “shared resources or generate collective benefits.”
Câu 38: cascading effects
- Dạng câu hỏi: Short-answer Questions
- Từ khóa: small changes, trigger, interconnected subsystems
- Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 7, câu thứ 2
- Giải thích: Passage nói “Small changes in technology adoption can trigger cascading effects through interconnected ecological, economic, and social subsystems” – “cascading effects” là đáp án chính xác.
Câu 39: polycentric governance systems
- Dạng câu hỏi: Short-answer Questions
- Từ khóa: Elinor Ostrom’s work, instead of market-based mechanisms
- Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 6, gần cuối
- Giải thích: Bài văn đề cập “Elinor Ostrom’s work suggests that solutions lie not in purely market-based mechanisms or state regulation, but in carefully designed polycentric governance systems.”
Câu 40: functional redundancy / response diversity
- Dạng câu hỏi: Short-answer Questions
- Từ khóa: optimal agricultural systems, prioritize, maximum productivity
- Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 10, câu cuối
- Giải thích: Passage kết luận “optimal agricultural systems may prioritize functional redundancy and response diversity over maximum productivity” – cả hai cụm từ đều được chấp nhận.
Mối quan hệ phức tạp giữa công nghệ xanh và cộng đồng nông dân truyền thống trong bối cảnh chuyển đổi bền vững
Từ Vựng Quan Trọng Theo Passage
Passage 1 – Essential Vocabulary
| Từ vựng | Loại từ | Phiên âm | Nghĩa tiếng Việt | Ví dụ từ bài | Collocation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| precision agriculture | n | /prɪˈsɪʒən ˈæɡrɪkʌltʃə/ | nông nghiệp chính xác | Precision agriculture is one of the most significant developments | precision farming, precision technology |
| GPS technology | n | /ˌdʒiː piː ˈes tekˈnɒlədʒi/ | công nghệ định vị toàn cầu | Using GPS technology, sensors, and data analytics | GPS system, GPS tracking |
| drone technology | n | /drəʊn tekˈnɒlədʒi/ | công nghệ máy bay không người lái | A farmer can use drone technology to scan hundreds of acres | agricultural drones, drone surveillance |
| carbon emissions | n | /ˈkɑːbən ɪˈmɪʃənz/ | khí thải carbon | Contribute to carbon emissions | reduce carbon emissions, carbon footprint |
| biodegradable materials | n | /ˌbaɪəʊdɪˈɡreɪdəbəl məˈtɪəriəlz/ | vật liệu phân hủy sinh học | The introduction of biodegradable materials in farming | biodegradable plastic, biodegradable packaging |
| vertical farming | n | /ˈvɜːtɪkəl ˈfɑːmɪŋ/ | nông nghiệp thẳng đứng | Vertical farming is perhaps the most revolutionary | indoor vertical farming, vertical farm systems |
| hydroponics | n | /ˌhaɪdrəˈpɒnɪks/ | thủy canh | These facilities use LED lighting, hydroponics, and climate control | hydroponic system, hydroponic farming |
| investment costs | n | /ɪnˈvestmənt kɒsts/ | chi phí đầu tư | The initial investment costs can be prohibitive | upfront investment, capital investment |
| nutrient runoff | n | /ˈnjuːtriənt ˈrʌnɒf/ | dòng chảy dinh dưỡng | Prevents harmful nutrient runoff that pollutes rivers | agricultural runoff, chemical runoff |
| agricultural cooperatives | n | /ˌæɡrɪˈkʌltʃərəl kəʊˈɒpərətɪvz/ | hợp tác xã nông nghiệp | Agricultural cooperatives are playing a crucial role | farming cooperatives, farmer cooperatives |
| food security | n | /fuːd sɪˈkjʊərəti/ | an ninh lương thực | These innovations offer a path toward food security | global food security, food safety |
Passage 2 – Essential Vocabulary
| Từ vựng | Loại từ | Phiên âm | Nghĩa tiếng Việt | Ví dụ từ bài | Collocation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| socioeconomic transformation | n | /ˌsəʊsiəʊˌiːkəˈnɒmɪk ˌtrænsfəˈmeɪʃən/ | chuyển đổi kinh tế xã hội | It constitutes a profound socioeconomic transformation | social transformation, economic transformation |
| institutional support | n | /ˌɪnstɪˈtjuːʃənəl səˈpɔːt/ | hỗ trợ thể chế | Where institutional support mechanisms are robust | institutional framework, institutional capacity |
| knowledge economy | n | /ˈnɒlɪdʒ ɪˈkɒnəmi/ | nền kinh tế tri thức | The knowledge economy emerging around agricultural technology | knowledge-based economy, knowledge society |
| generational divide | n | /ˌdʒenəˈreɪʃənəl dɪˈvaɪd/ | khoảng cách thế hệ | This shift has created a generational divide | generation gap, intergenerational conflict |
| crop monitoring | n | /krɒp ˈmɒnɪtərɪŋ/ | giám sát cây trồng | Operate smartphone applications for crop monitoring | crop surveillance, crop management |
| intergenerational power dynamics | n | /ˌɪntədʒenəˈreɪʃənəl ˈpaʊə daɪˈnæmɪks/ | động lực quyền lực liên thế hệ | Fundamentally altering intergenerational power dynamics | family power dynamics, power relations |
| environmental justice | n | /ɪnˌvaɪrənˈmentəl ˈdʒʌstɪs/ | công bằng môi trường | The environmental justice dimensions of agricultural technology | social justice, climate justice |
| water-efficient irrigation | n | /ˈwɔːtər ɪˈfɪʃənt ˌɪrɪˈɡeɪʃən/ | tưới tiêu tiết kiệm nước | Water-efficient irrigation systems and climate-controlled greenhouses | efficient irrigation, water conservation |
| resource competition | n | /rɪˈsɔːs ˌkɒmpəˈtɪʃən/ | cạnh tranh tài nguyên | Can intensify resource competition and social tensions | competition for resources, resource scarcity |
| cultural identities | n | /ˈkʌltʃərəl aɪˈdentətiz/ | bản sắc văn hóa | Possess deep-rooted cultural identities tied to traditional practices | cultural heritage, cultural values |
| artisanal character | n | /ˌɑːtɪˈzænəl ˈkærəktə/ | đặc tính thủ công | Fear losing the artisanal character and heritage value | artisanal production, artisanal quality |
| premium price opportunities | n | /ˈpriːmiəm praɪs ˌɒpəˈtjuːnətiz/ | cơ hội giá cao | Creating premium price opportunities for farmers | premium market, price premium |
| blockchain technology | n | /ˈblɒktʃeɪn tekˈnɒlədʒi/ | công nghệ chuỗi khối | Blockchain technology and digital certification systems | blockchain system, distributed ledger |
| participatory design | n | /pɑːˌtɪsɪpətəri dɪˈzaɪn/ | thiết kế có sự tham gia | Participatory design processes that involve farmers | participatory approach, participatory methods |
| peer-to-peer learning | n | /pɪə tə pɪə ˈlɜːnɪŋ/ | học tập ngang hàng | Peer-to-peer learning networks that facilitate knowledge exchange | collaborative learning, peer learning |
Passage 3 – Essential Vocabulary
| Từ vựng | Loại từ | Phiên âm | Nghĩa tiếng Việt | Ví dụ từ bài | Collocation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| diffusion of innovation | n | /dɪˈfjuːʒən əv ˌɪnəˈveɪʃən/ | sự lan tỏa đổi mới | Conventional diffusion of innovation theory | innovation diffusion, technology diffusion |
| co-evolution | n | /kəʊ ˌiːvəˈluːʃən/ | đồng tiến hóa | The co-evolution of technology and society | co-evolutionary process, mutual evolution |
| socio-technical transitions | n | /ˌsəʊsiəʊ ˈteknɪkəl trænˈzɪʃənz/ | chuyển đổi kỹ thuật xã hội | Socio-technical transitions theory offers a particularly illuminating lens | socio-technical system, system transitions |
| path dependency | n | /pɑːθ dɪˈpendənsi/ | phụ thuộc đường đi | The concept of path dependency proves crucial | historical path dependency, dependency effects |
| lock-in effects | n | /lɒk ɪn ɪˈfekts/ | hiệu ứng khóa chặt | Past decisions create lock-in effects | technological lock-in, institutional lock-in |
| structural inertias | n | /ˈstrʌktʃərəl ɪˈnɜːʃəz/ | quán tính cấu trúc | Have created powerful structural inertias that resist change | organizational inertia, institutional inertia |
| switching costs | n | /ˈswɪtʃɪŋ kɒsts/ | chi phí chuyển đổi | Farmers embedded in these systems face switching costs | transition costs, conversion costs |
| social network analysis | n | /ˈsəʊʃəl ˈnetwɜːk əˈnæləsɪs/ | phân tích mạng xã hội | The importance of social network analysis | network analysis, network theory |
| knowledge brokers | n | /ˈnɒlɪdʒ ˈbrəʊkəz/ | người môi giới tri thức | Opportunities for knowledge brokers to connect disconnected groups | information brokers, intermediaries |
| political economy | n | /pəˈlɪtɪkəl ɪˈkɒnəmi/ | kinh tế chính trị | The political economy perspective directs attention | political economy analysis, economic politics |
| proprietary software | n | /prəˈpraɪətəri ˈsɒftweə/ | phần mềm độc quyền | Companies providing proprietary software platforms | proprietary technology, proprietary systems |
| data extractivism | n | /ˈdeɪtə ɪkˈstræktɪvɪzəm/ | chủ nghĩa khai thác dữ liệu | Warned of emerging data extractivism | data exploitation, digital extractivism |
| commons theory | n | /ˈkɒmənz ˈθɪəri/ | lý thuyết tài sản chung | Commons theory offers valuable insights | tragedy of the commons, common resources |
| collective action problems | n | /kəˈlektɪv ˈækʃən ˈprɒbləmz/ | vấn đề hành động tập thể | These public good characteristics create collective action problems | collective action theory, coordination problems |
| polycentric governance | n | /ˌpɒliˈsentrɪk ˈɡʌvənəns/ | quản trị đa trung tâm | Solutions lie in polycentric governance systems | multi-level governance, decentralized governance |
| complexity science | n | /kəmˈpleksəti ˈsaɪəns/ | khoa học phức tạp | The integration of complexity science perspectives | complex systems, complexity theory |
| emergent properties | n | /ɪˈmɜːdʒənt ˈprɒpətiz/ | thuộc tính nổi lên | Agricultural systems exhibit emergent properties | emergent behavior, emergent phenomena |
| agent-based modeling | n | /ˈeɪdʒənt beɪst ˈmɒdəlɪŋ/ | mô hình hóa dựa trên tác nhân | Agent-based modeling approaches have proven particularly valuable | simulation modeling, computational modeling |
| feminist political ecology | n | /ˈfemɪnɪst pəˈlɪtɪkəl iˈkɒlədʒi/ | sinh thái chính trị nữ quyền | Feminist political ecology contributes essential insights | feminist geography, political ecology |
| gendered landscapes | n | /ˈdʒendəd ˈlændskeɪps/ | cảnh quan giới tính | Technologies are adopted into gendered landscapes | gendered spaces, gender relations |
| technological frames | n | /ˌteknəˈlɒdʒɪkəl freɪmz/ | khung công nghệ | The concept of technological frames from social construction | interpretive frames, conceptual frames |
| resilience theory | n | /rɪˈzɪliəns ˈθɪəri/ | lý thuyết phục hồi | Resilience theory offers a final crucial perspective | ecological resilience, system resilience |
| adaptive capacity | n | /əˈdæptɪv kəˈpæsəti/ | năng lực thích ứng | Diversity-based adaptive capacity | adaptation capacity, resilience capacity |
Kết bài
Bộ đề thi IELTS Reading về chủ đề Impact of green technologies on traditional farming mà bạn vừa hoàn thành đã cung cấp một cái nhìn toàn diện về một trong những chủ đề nóng nhất của nông nghiệp hiện đại. Ba passages với độ khó tăng dần từ Easy đến Hard đã giúp bạn làm quen với nhiều khía cạnh khác nhau: từ những ứng dụng công nghệ cơ bản như tưới tiêu năng lượng mặt trời và nông nghiệp thẳng đứng (Passage 1), đến các vấn đề kinh tế xã hội phức tạp về chuyển đổi công nghệ (Passage 2), và cuối cùng là các khung lý thuyết học thuật sâu sắc về lan tỏa đổi mới (Passage 3).
Với 40 câu hỏi đa dạng bao gồm Multiple Choice, True/False/Not Given, Matching Headings, Summary Completion và nhiều dạng khác, bạn đã được rèn luyện những kỹ năng then chốt cần thiết cho kỳ thi IELTS thực tế. Việc nghiên cứu kỹ phần giải thích đáp án chi tiết sẽ giúp bạn hiểu rõ cách xác định thông tin trong bài, nhận diện paraphrase, và áp dụng chiến lược làm bài phù hợp cho từng dạng câu hỏi.
Đặc biệt, bộ từ vựng học thuật được tổng hợp theo từng passage không chỉ giúp bạn hiểu sâu hơn về chủ đề này mà còn cung cấp vocabulary foundation vững chắc cho các chủ đề liên quan như the effects of climate change on global food security. Hãy dành thời gian học và ôn tập những từ vựng này thường xuyên, đặc biệt chú ý đến cách sử dụng chúng trong ngữ cảnh và các collocations đi kèm.
Để đạt kết quả tốt nhất trong IELTS Reading, hãy luyện tập đều đặn với các đề thi mẫu chất lượng như này, phân tích kỹ các lỗi sai của mình, và không ngừng mở rộng vốn từ vựng học thuật. Chúc bạn ôn tập hiệu quả và đạt được band điểm mục tiêu trong kỳ thi IELTS sắp tới!
