IELTS Computer Delivered Tests + Band Score

IELTS Debate on Rural to Urban Migration

Welcome to our IELTS Debate on Rural to Urban Migration - a comprehensive resource designed to strengthen your IELTS Speaking, Writing, Reading, and Listening skills through real-world academic topics.

This page explores one of the most important global issues today: the movement of people from rural regions to major cities.  This topic has for instance been a recent essay question in the test:

In many countries, young people are leaving their homes in rural areas to study or work in cities.

What do you think are the reasons for this?

Do the advantages of this development outweigh the disadvantages?

These could be possible IELTS speaking part 3 questions on rural to urban migration:

  1. Why do you think so many young people choose to leave rural areas for big cities today?
  2. What problems can occur when too many people move away from rural communities?
  3. Do you think governments should encourage people to stay in or return to rural regions? Why or why not?

You’ll find a full debate script, concise summaries of the arguments for and against migration, topic-specific vocabulary lists, general academic vocabulary, and useful phrases for building strong, persuasive arguments.

To help you improve your listening comprehension and pronunciation, the debate is also available as an audio podcast, allowing you to hear natural discussion, intonation, and structured argumentation exactly as it might appear in IELTS Speaking Part 3.

Debate Transcript

Speaker 1 (for migration to urban areas)

Welcome to the debate. Today, we're looking at a huge socio-economic trend, something we see all over the world: the rural exodus. Basically, young people leaving their rural homes for big cities, mostly for work or for school. And the central question really is whether this is a good thing or a bad thing overall. Is it a net benefit that gives people opportunities and modernises the country, or is it a net detriment that speeds up the decline of entire regions? Exactly. And I'll be arguing that this migration is fundamentally a positive thing.

Speaker 2 (against migration to urban areas)

And I'll be arguing that the negative consequences are just too significant to ignore.

Speaker 1 (for migration to urban areas)

So my position is that you have to see this movement as something that is, at its core, positive. It's driven by economic necessity and individual aspiration. When you get talent moving to these dense urban areas, you're maximising the use of human capital. Young people get access to education and to job markets that are completely unavailable back home. This movement is really the engine of national modernisation. It's propelled by agglomeration effects that create incredible productivity growth in cities. We're optimising our resources as a nation.

Speaker 2 (against migration to urban areas)

I see that point about individual choice, and that's important, but my concern is with the cumulative cost that I think you're minimising. We are seeing nothing short of a demographic collapse in the regions that send people away. This so-called brain drain depletes the pool of young, skilled people, and what you're left with is an ageing population that's ill-equipped to maintain local infrastructure or innovate. The result is a rapid decline of local economic and social structures, creating profound instability that eventually comes back to haunt the national level. You frame this as some kind of efficient optimisation, but efficiency at what cost? We are externalising structural decline onto rural communities. The tax base vanishes, schools close, essential services become impossible to maintain. These are severe, systemic costs the regions are forced to bear—after which the state ends up intervening with massive, inefficient stabilisation measures. That isn’t efficiency; it's a geographical transfer of debt.

Speaker 1 (for migration to urban areas)

Okay, I understand why you see it that way, but let me offer a different perspective. This isn’t externalisation; it's a necessary economic transition. The agglomeration effect I mentioned creates what are called knowledge spillovers: specialised information spreads quickly in cities, and that's what drives complex exponential growth. You simply cannot achieve that scale of innovation with talent spread out geographically. And besides, these rural regions aren't totally abandoned. Remittances from the cities act as crucial financial support, and we also see what’s called circular migration, where people return later in life with more capital and more skills, providing a delayed subsidy back to their hometowns.

Speaker 2 (against migration to urban areas)

I'm just not convinced by that line of reasoning. The data shows that circular migration is simply not enough to counteract the massive, permanent loss of people. And remittances—helpful for day-to-day consumption—rarely translate into sustainable, productive investment in the local economy. They treat the symptoms, not the disease. If a region lacks a critical mass of young entrepreneurs and innovators, no amount of money sent from the city will rebuild its capacity for economic self-renewal.

Speaker 1 (for migration to urban areas)

But we have to look at the collective benefit. Through the lens of aggregate growth, the overall modernisation and national GDP increase driven by dynamic urban centres elevates the entire nation. We're centralising opportunity, yes, but that centralisation accelerates progress for everyone. Policy should focus on mitigating the localised pain, I agree, but not at the expense of slowing down the primary engine of our economic progress. We shouldn’t artificially stop the optimal movement of human capital.

Speaker 2 (against migration to urban areas)

That's a compelling argument if you only care about maximising aggregate GDP, but have you considered the structural fragility this creates? Urban centres rely entirely on stable, functioning rural areas for resources, food security, and environmental stability. If we allow the rural foundation to wither—if we asset-strip these communities to fuel immediate urban growth—the instability created by deserted, unproductive regions becomes a significant negative side effect. Is concentrated yet precarious growth truly better than balanced, sustainable growth?

Speaker 1 (for migration to urban areas)

In the end, I think the positive forces of individual aspiration and national efficiency shouldn't be constrained. The policy challenge is to manage the systemic costs through targeted investment in rural areas, ensuring they can benefit indirectly from this trend.

Speaker 2 (against migration to urban areas)

And I would argue that the erosion of rural social and economic capital demands a more fundamental rethink of our economic model. We need policies that actively promote regional parity, recognising that a nation’s stability rests on the health of all its parts, not just a hyper-productive urban core.

Speaker 1 (for migration to urban areas)

So we're left with the central tension: balancing individual flourishing and national efficiency against the collective need for regional health. The evidence forces us to weigh the undeniable upsides of centralisation against the very real systemic costs to local communities.

Key Arguments For and Against Remote Working

For

  • Maximises human capital – Skilled young people can use their abilities more effectively in cities.
  • Creates access to opportunities – Cities offer better education, jobs, and professional networks.
  • Drives national modernisation – Urban areas generate innovation and productivity that boost overall economic growth.
  • Agglomeration effects – Concentrated populations increase efficiency, knowledge sharing, and rapid development.
  • Knowledge spillovers – Ideas and expertise spread more quickly in cities, supporting advanced industries.
  • Remittances support rural areas – Migrants send money home, helping families and communities financially.
  • Circular migration – Some people return later with capital and skills, potentially benefiting their hometowns.

Against 

  • Causes demographic decline in rural areas – Young people leave, ageing populations remain.
  • Leads to loss of skilled workers (brain drain) – Weakens local economies and reduces innovation outside cities.
  • Creates local economic collapse – Tax bases shrink, businesses close, services become unsustainable.
  • Produces long-term instability – Declining rural areas undermine national stability (infrastructure, food security).
  • Remittances are not enough – They support consumption but do not rebuild long-term economic capacity.
  • Circular migration is limited – Too few return to reverse population and skill loss.
  • Requires expensive government interventions – The state later has to stabilise failing regions at high cost.

Useful Vocabulary from the Debate

Rural to Urban Migration Topic Related Vocabulary 

Rural exodus

  • The large-scale movement of people from countryside areas to cities.

Rural regions

  • Countryside areas characterised by low population density and limited services or job opportunities.

Brain drain

  • The loss of skilled or educated individuals from a region, weakening its workforce.

Demographic collapse

  • A significant drop in population, often caused by outward migration and ageing communities.

Agglomeration effects

  • Economic benefits that occur when people and businesses cluster together in cities, increasing productivity and innovation.

Knowledge spillovers

  • When ideas and expertise spread quickly within dense urban environments, boosting innovation.

Centralisation of opportunity

  • The concentration of jobs, education, and resources in one place, usually cities.

Circular migration

  • When people move to cities temporarily and later return to their hometowns with new skills or money.

Remittances

  • Money sent by migrants back to their families or communities in their place of origin.

Regional parity

  • A policy goal of reducing inequality between regions, ensuring all areas develop sustainably.

Human capital

  • The skills, education and abilities individuals bring to an economy.

Localised decline

  • Economic and social deterioration within a specific region, often caused by depopulation.

Economic transition

  • A structural shift in how an economy is organised or where its workforce is located.

General Vocabulary

Aspirations

  • Hopes or ambitions for achieving something.

Optimise

  • To make something function as effectively or efficiently as possible.

Cumulative

  • Increasing or growing by adding up over time.

Externalise

  • To shift a problem, cost, or responsibility onto someone else.

Infrastructure

  • The basic physical and organisational systems needed for a society to function (roads, schools, hospitals, etc.).

Instability

  • A state of uncertainty or lack of balance that can lead to problems or collapse.

Sustainable

  • Able to continue over time without causing damage or running out of resources.

Productive investment

  • Spending aimed at creating future economic growth, not just meeting short-term needs.

Intervention

  • Action taken by a government or authority to address a problem.

Fragility

  • The quality of being easily broken or weakened.

Inefficient

  • Not achieving maximum productivity; wasting time, money, or effort.

Subsidy

  • Financial support provided to help reduce costs or support an activity.

Structural model

  • A framework or system that explains how an economy or society is organised.

Aggregate growth

  • Overall national economic growth, considering the whole economy rather than individual regions.

Critical mass

  • The minimum size or amount of something needed for it to function or succeed effectively.

Key IELTS Speaking Part 3 Debate Phrases

  1. So my position is that… – Introduces your main argument clearly and directly.
  2. At its core, … – Signals that you are focusing on the essential or most important aspect.
  3. It's driven by… – Explains the underlying causes behind a phenomenon.
  4. What you're left with is… – Highlights the final or inevitable result of a situation.
  5. We are, in effect,… – Clarifies what the true nature or implication of an action is.
  6. These are severe, systemic costs… – Emphasises that the problems are large and structural.
  7. Let me offer a different perspective. – Polite way to introduce a counterargument.
  8. You simply cannot achieve that… – States that something is impossible.
  9. And besides,… – Adds an extra supporting point to strengthen your argument.
  10. I’m just not convinced by that line of reasoning. – Politely expresses disagreement with the other side.
  11. They treat the symptoms, not the disease. – Argues that a solution addresses superficial issues, not the root cause.
  12. We have to look at the collective benefit. – Shifts the discussion to the bigger or national picture.
  13. Policy should focus on… – Moves the argument towards recommended solutions.
  14. Have you considered…? – Introduces a challenge by pointing out an overlooked issue.
  15. In the end, I think… – Summarises your overall belief or concluding viewpoint.
  16. We’re left with the central tension… – Highlights the core conflict that must be evaluated.

Join IELTS buddy for Free IELTS Tips!

Comments

Any comments or questions about this page or about IELTS? Post them here. Your email will not be published or shared.

Show / Hide

Band 7+ eBooks

"I think these eBooks are FANTASTIC!!! I know that's not academic language, but it's the truth!"

Linda, from Italy, Scored Band 7.5

All eBooks Small
ielts buddy ebooks