Band 8 model answer
A model answer written to illustrate a Band 8 response to this question, with the rubric breakdown and what carries it. Written by us as a teaching example, not a verified exam script.
“City centres are unaffordable. The only fair fix is to limit luxury housing. To what extent do you agree?”8
Overall
8
Task response
8
Coherence & cohesion
8
Lexical resource
8
Grammar
The affordability crisis gripping city centres in many countries has fuelled calls for direct intervention in the housing market. The specific proposal that governments should limit luxury housing development as the primary remedy deserves scrutiny, because while it responds to a genuine problem, it addresses the symptom more than the cause. I disagree with the claim that this is the only fair solution, though I accept it has a limited role.
The affordability crisis is, at its structural root, a shortage of supply relative to demand in desirable locations. When demand for urban living rises faster than the stock of homes, prices increase across all segments of the market. Restricting luxury development addresses one corner of supply without meaningfully expanding the housing available to middle- or lower-income residents. In the worst case, it reduces overall construction activity as developers find fewer viable projects, leaving the fundamental imbalance untouched or even worsened.
A more effective set of interventions targets supply directly. Reforming planning restrictions that prevent higher-density development, investing in social and affordable housing through public expenditure, providing incentives for developers who dedicate a proportion of new schemes to below-market units, and improving transport links to expand the effective radius of affordable neighbourhoods, each of these measures engages the underlying problem rather than simply penalising one segment of the market.
Limiting luxury development is not entirely without merit: in contexts where highly speculative schemes are demonstrably displacing existing communities, some restriction may be warranted as part of a broader package. The error in the original proposition is the word 'only', which forecloses a richer toolkit.
In conclusion, capping luxury housing is a blunt, partial measure that should not be mistaken for a comprehensive solution; durable affordability requires a sustained expansion of supply and targeted investment in social housing.
- •The essay identifies and dismantles the flawed premise ('only fair fix') clearly and early, showing genuine critical engagement with the task wording.
- •The supply-side analysis, density reform, social investment, transport links, demonstrates understanding of urban economics beyond slogans.
- •The partial concession ('not entirely without merit') prevents the essay from becoming a one-sided dismissal and shows sophistication.
- •The planning reform point is accurate but would benefit from a brief illustration to match the analytical depth of the demand analysis.
Write your own. Get a real band read.
Reading a model answer only takes you so far. Write your own response to this question and we’ll grade it against the four official rubrics, the same way we scored this one.
Attempt this question