Explain the causes and consequences of the international relocation of polluting industries and/or waste disposal.

“All societies, wherever they are, enjoy the benefits of a shrinking world.” Discuss this statement.

Polluting industries include manufacturing or mining operations with a large footprint and a polluting or dangerous character in the absence of regulation (examples might include Apple’s contractors in China). There are also international movements of waste (for recycling or disposal), for example, UK wastes to China (recycling) and European waste taken by contractors to Ivory Coast (dumping). The oil industry has brought polluting operations to many territories. While this is not strictly a “relocation”, the benefit of the doubt should be given to accounts of the expansion/diffusion of polluting industries (ie consequences of oil pollution in new deep water sites, for example, Gulf of Mexico, new sites in Niger delta, should be credited). Also credit eutrophication linked to agro-industry/agribusiness, etc.

The causes might include a quest for cheap sites (thus higher profits) and expect explanations to include details of labour costs, lack of red tape, etc. Weaker answers are likely to neglect causes, or provide simple assertions only (eg “there’s too much waste nowadays”).

Consequences for both physical environments (landscape, ecosystems) and people should be addressed. Some may be positive (eg recycling waste as a resource; FDI and its multiplier effects). Long-term litigation and quest for justice could even be a theme that is explored.

For band C, at least one cause and one consequence must be described (or a wider range of ideas listed) with some exemplification (of either one relocation or waste disposal example).

To access band D, expect:

• either more detailed knowledge of the causes and consequences (do not expect balance; case study consequences are likely to be more detailed and may use more than one example/industry, though this is not required)
• or some explanation of how a single incidence of relocation/disposal can have more varied consequences for different places/people (eg origin and destination), though less supporting detail is given.

At band E, expect both of these elements.

Marks should be allocated according to the markbands.

Credit all content in line with the markbands. Credit unexpected approaches wherever relevant.

“Shrinking world” (time-space compression) should be explained and related to different ICT and transport technologies [Guide 2]. Increased migration can be credited as a symptom of a shrinking world (because migrants make use of transport). Trade blocs/MGOs, eg EU, can play a supporting role (because the removal of border controls removes intervening obstacles to migration/transport).

Possible economic benefits derived from connectivity include: more profitable TNCs, with work opportunities for outsourcing locations and locations in receipt of FDI [Guide 3] especially when long view is taken (eg signs of factory reform in Bangladesh). A range of sociocultural benefits can be explored that relate to the sharing of global media, the growth of social networks, etc [Guide 5]. The ease with which migrant remittances can be wired home (or money transferred via mobiles) might be explored [Guide 5]. There are many other benefits that can be mentioned, for example, access to branded commodities [Guide 5].

There are, of course, cases where the statement may not be true and societies remain non-globalized/disconnected. Expect examples of indigenous people, isolated tribes, or variation within societies, for example, subsistence farmers [Guide 7].

Another counterargument would be the “one-sided” benefits of connectivity, wherein poorer connected places are exploited as low-wage production sites, possibly suffering environmental problems [Guide 4]; the sociocultural reaction against globalization, and movements aiming to limit shrinking world effects in some way, for example, increased food localism or the resurgence of nationalism [Guide 6, 7]. Indigenous people may be victims, not beneficiaries, of global interactions [Guide 5]. A current affairs focus might be on internet privacy/rights.

For band C, the shrinking world/globalization (may not distinguish) must be described and its benefits commented on.

To access band D, expect:

• either both sides of the argument are addressed (some societies/places benefit, some do not not), displaying some synthesis of a range of ideas, mostly (but not always) linked to the idea of a shrinking world/technology and transport
• or some more explicit discussion of how “benefits” are not enjoyed by all people within the same society/not everyone agrees what is beneficial (eg some perspectives see globalization as a sovereignty threat).

At band E, expect both of these elements.