User interface language: English | Español

Date November 2013 Marks available 15 Reference code 13N.3.hl.3
Level HL only Paper 3 Time zone
Command term Discuss Question number 3 Adapted from N/A

Question

Analyse the strengths and weaknesses of one named globalization index.

[10]
a.

“Individuals, national governments and international organizations are increasingly resistant to global interactions.” Discuss this statement.

[15]
b.

Markscheme

Expect either the KOF or Kearney index to be selected. There are other possibilities, for example, Maastricht globalization index; CSGR (Warwick); Ernst & Young.

Strengths include the multi-strand approach taken, recognizing that globalization comprises a range of processes that need to be measured, for example, KOF distinguishes between political, social and economic measures of globalization while Kearney uses four categories (economic, personal, technological or political integration).

Weaknesses can be conceptual (what is not included) or empirical (difficulties in collecting data and accuracy issues), for example, KOF’s measures of social globalization are easily critiqued, such as the “proximity” of data.

For band C, one recognizable index of globalization should be described in a way that implies it has merit (has different strands) and may state one or two basic weaknesses.

To access band D, expect:

At band E, expect both of these elements.

Other approaches may be equally valid. Marks should be allocated according to the markbands.

a.

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

Global interactions should be defined as a broad set of economic and sociocultural exchanges.

At the individual scale, a range of civil society initiatives can be discussed, such as Occupy/anti-globalization and, at the other end of the political spectrum, anti-immigration/nationalists [Guide 7]. However, some individuals continue to embrace the shrinking world [Guide 2] for a range of economic/cultural reasons [Guide 5].

Evidence of resistance at the national level might include individual government attitudes towards the arrival of global media corporations [Guide 5] or towards immigration and diaspora growth [Guide 5] or towards MGO membership [Guide 6]. However, governments also recognize the advantages of globalization, free trade and financial flows [Guide 5].

The concept of “international organizations” embraces MGOs [Guide 6] and international aid and development agencies responsible for financial flows, such as the politically-guided work of the IMF [Guide 2]. It is likely that candidates will choose to argue against the statement at this final scale.

Because the question specifies three scales of resistance, there are several routes to discussing the statement. One might be to offer some counterarguments (eg shows that some national governments embrace global interactions). Another might be to discuss the extent to which resistance is exhibited by individuals compared with governments and international organizations. Another might be to consider whether different kinds of interaction meet with varying strength or resistance (eg China embracing trade but resists information exchange). Each approach must be assessed on its own merits. However, a response that merely agrees with the statement cannot progress beyond the band C/D border.

For band C, resistance to global interactions must be identified at all three scales, with description provided of at least two.

To access band D, expect:

At band E, expect both of these elements.

b.

Examiners report

[N/A]
a.
[N/A]
b.

Syllabus sections

HL extension: Global interactions » Changing space—the shrinking world » Time–space convergence and the reduction in the friction of distance

View options