Date | November 2014 | Marks available | 15 | Reference code | 14N.1.bp.6 |
Level | SL and HL | Paper | 1 | Time zone | |
Command term | Discuss | Question number | 6 | Adapted from | N/A |
Question
“We still have the resources to live as wastefully as we want.” Discuss this statement.
Markscheme
Whether or not the statement is accepted as holding any validity, it suggests many implications worth discussing. These implications include not only considerations of demographic, social, cultural, economic and (geo-)political development/progress but also of environmental, social and economic sustainability.
Many approaches are possible.
Some candidates may base their discussion around the distinction between renewable and non-renewable resources, arguing that by using the former, we can reduce or remove our concern about using the latter. Nuanced positions are also tenable since some non-renewable resources are present in such large amounts that they could easily supply our needs for many generations (no adverse implications), whereas other non-renewables are in such short supply that they do require immediate protection, conservation or substitution.
An alternative approach might be to look at the adverse effects of living wastefully and then consider how society or individuals can avoid these problems. For example, it might be argued that wastefulness could lead to positive impacts such as the stimulation of new technologies, new ideas, the substitution of resources, recycling and policies to reduce resource use.
Stronger candidates are likely to point out that there are some ways of assessing or measuring our impact(s), employing such approaches as environmental footprints and food miles. Stronger responses may also link the discussion to neo-Malthusian and opposing viewpoints about the relationship between population size and resource consumption.
Answers that are simplistic and/or generalized with few or no relevant examples are unlikely to advance beyond band C.
Responses that discuss a range of ideas, supported by evidence, within a structured framework (eg compares renewable and non-renewables, or different societies, eg rich/poor countries) and show some recognition that there is room for alternative viewpoints about this question are likely to be credited at band E/F.
Marks should be allocated according to the markbands.
Examiners report
This was also a popular question and many candidates approached this with a good knowledge and understanding of issues related to consumption and resource use. The best responses tended to look at a range of resources and ideas supported with evidence or actual case studies. Some responses neglected to use examples of places when discussing specific resources and this resulted in a very generic response, which was penalized by the markbands. Many responses also tended to limit themselves just to oil or energy resources, this was fine but the question was open to many other types of resources. Many candidates focused their discussions around the neo-Malthusian versus Boserup debate and examined the relationship between population size and resource consumption. The best answers had appropriate application and were developed to cover most aspects of the question. Good scripts demonstrated some evaluation of wasteful living and sustainability options.