Explain how global interactions can foster environmental awareness.

“International interactions always result in the homogenization of culture.” Discuss this statement.

There are many possible approaches. Responses may focus on examples of improved awareness in a single country or may consider the global realm of environmental management. Examples of the latter include response to transboundary pollution, such as oil spills or acid rain, and global climate change governance. They may also possess knowledge of global ecological/conservation initiatives such as Ramsar, WWF, and UNESCO.

The work of NGOs such as Greenpeace may also be explored. Candidates may examine the environmental messages that are sent as well as explaining the medium through which they are transmitted/type of global interaction (for example, internet, Facebook etc.).

Another approach is to argue that global interactions are often environmentally damaging and that we cannot help but be aware of them (for example, Gulf of Mexico oil spill or climate change).

Another response might look at how international movements of waste have improved environmental management for source countries who have simply paid to dispose of their problems elsewhere (for example, waste sent to China for recycling) and it may be noted that awareness of this trend is growing.

To access bands D and E, the response should do more than list green initiatives; it should also tie them to the concept of global interactions. Good answers may also ask whose awareness has been raised – civil society, corporations, governments etc.

Marks should be allocated according to the markbands.

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

The nature of international interactions should be made explicit. Pathways for cultural exchanges include the movement of workers, tourists, commodity flows, and military and imperial ventures, all of which can be accelerated by membership of multi-governmental organizations, such as the EU, NAFTA, ASEAN etc. [Guide 6].

It is not true that homogenization is an inevitable outcome. Possible obstacles include nationalism and anti-globalization movements, as well as a range of local responses that challenge cultural imperialism or at least negotiate “glocalized” outcomes [Guide 7].

There is plenty of scope to discuss arts, music, cuisine and other fields of cultural expression, and to investigate hybridized outcomes – or to look at the obduracy of cultural traits among diaspora groups, meaning that cultural diversity is not lost in global hubs such as New York or Toronto [Guide 5].

In support of the statement, expect TNCs to feature, with some mention of “McDonaldization” or a similar argument using Starbucks, Disney etc. as examples, or broad observations about the spread of English and Spanish perhaps employing the concept of cultural imperialism. The strongest answers may critique the notion of glocalization, and question whether the innovation of a “curry burger” for the Indian McDonald’s franchise is truly symptomatic of heterogeneity [Guide 3 and 5].

The role of technology and the internet in fostering homogeneity through the relation of the shrinking world/global village may also be a feature [Guide 2].

To access bands D and E, both sides of the argument should be addressed, although balance need not be expected.

Marks should be allocated according to the markbands.

One striking general weakness observed here was that many responses were insufficiently focused on how global interactions can foster environmental awareness. Answers could often explain "why" (for instance, it was widely argued that global awareness of climate change is inadvertently fostered by the careless polluting actions of TNCs that have come to the public's attention) but could not address "how" (that is, the processes or pathways that link global interactions to environmental awareness).

Good answers sometimes looked at use of global media (old and new) by NGOs; global diffusion of films such as "An Inconvenient Truth" (and the follow-up globetrotting of Al Gore, celebrities and academics, in order to help raise awareness of important issues); or the idea of representatives of nations "interacting" at key global environmental meetings and conferences such as Stockholm, Kyoto, Copenhagen etc. "Environmental awareness" was equated to "hazard awareness" by a few; there is some legitimate topic overlap, but they are really not equivalents and such responses tended to be self-limiting. Overall, there were some very strong answers to this question, the most popular of the three on the paper.

There were some strong answers to this question that used a commendable range of appropriate examples. In many cases, the net was thrown wide, allowing plenty of credit for assessment objective 3 to be awarded as candidates synthesized a mixture of ideas dealing with TNCs, diaspora groups, nationalism, global media and more.

Weaker answers showed little understanding of what "culture" does, or does not, include (and had little idea of cultural traits, for instance). They also tended to see changes of culture in a very simplistic way. For example, many argued that TNCs or other global interactions "destroy" local culture. Most interpreted any change at all as being towards homogenization, even when the influence of incoming cultural forces was limited and a more logical and appropriate conclusion might have been that local culture had undergone "diversification" (pleasingly, some employed terminology such as hybridity or glocalization here). Very few could tackle the more complex yet very useful idea (in this context) of culture as a "performance", for instance, in the context of querying the nature of the "loss" when a local tribe retains its traditional clothing or dances/rituals for the tourist gaze but may simultaneously (and more or less invisibly) be adopting a modern/secular/consumerist worldview. This is a complex idea requiring thoughtful evaluation that sadly eluded the majority (but is in fact very important if ideas of cultural change and exchange are to be properly explored). A sensible conclusion reached by some of the best candidates was that true global diversity (in terms of different languages) has fallen (though offset to some degree by proliferation of new hybrid glocalisms). Whereas at a local level, some global hubs/core regions/megacities have witnessed an increase in cultural diversity due to the global interaction of migration. Toronto and London are extremely diverse world cities (however, the "melting pot" hypothesis suggests this hyper-diversity may be transient – over time, differences may lessen at this scale also, as different cultures intermingle).