Distinguish between the concept of a “charismatic” (flagship) species and a keystone species using named examples.

Explain the role of two historical influences in shaping the development of the environmental movement.

Discuss the implications of environmental value systems in the protection of tropical biomes.

Award 1 mark for two valid examples (one of each kind)
charismatic/flagship eg Panda/Tiger and keystone eg Northern Spotted Owl/Sea Stars/Fig Trees/Sea Otters/Jaguar;

Award 3 max for valid points of distinction:
charismatic/flagship species are used to publicise/advertise conservation campaigns/stimulate public action/raise economic support;
...they are selected because they appeal to humans/have ideological/cultural/religious significance;
their value is primarily subjective/relative to a society rather than ecological;
keystone species have a disproportionately large effect on their environment/may determine structure of an ecosystem/have many other species dependent on them;
keystone species may be publicly unpopular/threat to locals/considered pests/killed for fur/trophy;
they are identified through ecological/scientific/objective study of their relationships with the entire ecosystem;

While it is acceptable to award a mark for stating a discriminatory feature of just one kind of species (without referring to contrasting feature of the other), do not credit directly converse statements twice e.g. “flagship are X ...keystone are not X” would gain only 1 mark if X was valid.

eg Rachel Carson – Author of Silent Spring (1962);
Silent Spring documented/highlighted the problems caused by the widespread use of synthetic pesticides;
focus was placed on the activities of chemical companies;
explained impact of use of insecticides/pesticides on birds of prey;
led to widespread awareness amongst (American) public of environmental issues/bioaccumulation/biomagnification;
was a focal point for the social/environmental movements of the 1960s;
inspired many other environmentalists;
led to ban on DDT for agricultural uses;
inspired the formation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency;

eg Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster of 2011;
a natural disaster/earthquake/tsunami led to the biggest nuclear disaster since Chernobyl at Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant;
estimates vary about the number of people affected by the disaster/no direct deaths initially/over 600 deaths by workers/thousands with increased risk of cancers;
as the disaster was able to happen in a “developed” country like Japan, many societies came to the conclusion that nuclear power could not be “safe”;
this has led to increased public pressure to phase out nuclear power generation;
eg Germany sped up plans to close nuclear reactors/over 90 % of Italy voted against government plans to expand nuclear power/Switzerland also decided to phase out nuclear power;

Award [1 max] for correctly identifying/naming two historical influences.
Award credit for valid statements that describe the personality/event; explain how it has influenced the movement; and explain exactly what gave rise to the influence.
If more than two events/personalities are addressed credit only the highest-scoring two.
Award [4 max] for each explanation of how historical influences shaped the development of environmentalism up to max of 7 marks.

The following guide for using the markbands suggests certain features that may be offered in responses. The five headings coincide with the criteria given in each of the markbands (although “ESS terminology” has been conflated with “Understanding concepts”). This guide simply provides some possible inclusions and should not be seen as requisite or comprehensive. It outlines the kind of elements to look for when deciding on the appropriate markband and the specific mark within that band.

Answers may include:

• understanding concepts and terminology of environmental value systems, tropical biomes, biodiversity, conservation, habitat v species approach, reserves, ecotourism, flagship species, sustainable development/exploitation, goods/services.
• breadth in addressing and linking environmental value systems with each other and ecocentric values with biorights, wilderness reserves, restrained resource use, etc and anthropocentric values with laws/regulations/quotas, public consultation/agreements, sustainable exploitation, ecotourism etc and technocentric values with economic development, habitat restoration, economic value of natural goods and services, gene banks etc
• examples of tropical biomes e.g. tropical forests, grasslands, savannas, lakes & rivers, coral reefs etc and environmental value systems eg ecocentrism, anthropocentrism, technocentrism, etc and habitat/species protection strategies eg reserves, managed sustainable harvesting, ecotourism, fishing quotas, etc and value systems in specific tropical societies eg rights of nature enshrined in constitutions of Ecuador/Bolivia, human rights to a healthy environment in laws of Costa Rica/Brazil, etc
• balanced analysis of the ways in which different value systems are likely to impact/influence the protection of tropical biomes, acknowledging relevant counter-arguments/alternative viewpoints.
• a conclusion that is consistent with, and supported by, analysis andexamples given eg “Because ecocentric values embrace the biorights of all living species and habitats their implications are bound to be the most fundamentally protective, however, to be practical in current society, more is likely to be achieved in protecting tropical biomes through some compromise with other value systems.” NB This is only an example of a possible conclusion. Candidates’ conclusions do not have to agree.

Please refer to paper 2 markbands, available under the "your tests" tab > supplemental materials

Q5 was the least favourite of the options in Section B and yet the highest scoring. Part (a) was generally very well-answered with clear distinctions given between charismatic and keystone species and valid examples of each.

Again, the majority of candidates provided two valid examples of historical influences along with sufficient detail of their significance in the environmental movement.

Most candidates were able to sketch the character of two or three value systems, though these were often rather woolly and were not always applied effectively to the protection of tropical biomes specifically. This resulted in many responses not emerging from the 1-3 markband because there was no real analysis or detailed, relevant examples.