Using examples, analyse the links between globalization and the rise of nationalism in some countries.

Examine the spatial pattern of environmental impacts associated with different global flows.

Marks should be allocated according to the paper 3 part A markbands. These can be found under the “Your tests” tab > supplemental materials.

Nationalism can assume different forms, eg, protectionism, anti-immigration policies and demonstrations, military action, etc. In the past nationalism was associated with expansion and empire building; today it may be linked with a retreat from globalization (and associated sovereignty issues).

Some credit must be given for material which analyses the rise of anti-globalization/isolationist movements at more localized scales, such as Occupy, local food sourcing movements, long-established Amish communities, etc.
Case studies such as these may include relevant explanations of why globalization has prompted the rise of reactive movements within some countries. However, valid instances of nationalism must also be included for Bands 7-9 and 10-12.

Possible reasons and examples include:

• concerns that globalization has not led to “a good deal” for native citizens (USA since 2016)
• “resource nationalism” and the expatriation of profits by TNCs (Bolivia)
• concerns with migration and cultural change (UK/Brexit)
• the impact of global information flows on national language and culture (France)
• the “dilution” of sovereignty on account of MGO membership (EU populist movements)
• large-scale anti-Western political movements in particular nations eg Boko Haram in northeast Nigeria (though not always strictly “nationalist”, credit should be given for material linking globalization with so-called “tribalization” politics).

Good answers may apply (AO2) a wider range of knowledge and understanding (AO1) in a well-structured way (AO4). One approach might be to provide a structured systematic analysis of opposition different facets of globalization (trade, migration, media, etc). Another approach might be to analyse different manifestations of nationalism (civil society action as opposed to government policies).

For 4–6 marks, expect some outlining of one or two instances of contemporary nationalism. Response is either partial, narrow or lacks supporting evidence.

For 7–9 marks, expect a structured, evidenced analysis of:

• either why nationalism is linked with globalization in two countries
• or different forms/aspects/types of nationalism.

For 10–12 marks, expect both of these traits.

Credit all content in line with the markbands. Marks should be allocated according to the paper 3 part B markbands. These can be found under the “Your tests” tab > supplemental materials. Credit unexpected approaches wherever relevant.

Global flows include movements of goods, people, data and capital (and investment). Environmental impacts – at local, regional or global scales – can be wide ranging, encompassing: pollution of water, air and land; biodiversity issues and agribusiness impacts; climate change projections. Consideration of impact patterns may include uneven regional impacts (eg, for waste exporters/importers in the global core/periphery), spatial diffusion patterns for transboundary pollution, localized/linear pollution along shipping lanes, etc.

Responses which describe detailed environmental problems caused by global flows/growth/development, yet fail to address any pattern of these impacts (other than asserting that ‘everywhere’ or 'more places' are being affected) are unlikely to progress far into Level 9-12 and should not be awarded a Level 13-16 mark.

Possible applied themes (AO2) include knowledge and understanding (AO1) of:

• global core and periphery patterns (1.1)
• major global networks and flows (4.2)
• illegal waste movements (4.2)
• growth of TNC supply chain networks (4.2)
• natural resource patterns and interactions (4.2.1)
• cultural landscape and built environment changes (5.2)
• transboundary pollution patterns (6.2)
• shipping lane pollution (6.2)
• global shift of polluting industries (6.3)
• global agribusiness systems (6.3).

Good answers may synthesize (AO3a) three or more of these themes in a well-structured (AO4) way.
Good answers may additionally offer a critical evaluation (AO3b) of the statement which examines patterns at varying scales (global, regional or more local patterns). Another approach might be to critically examine how the different global processes give rise to more evident impact patterns than others.

For 5–8 marks, expect some outlining of two relevant themes. Response is either partial, narrow or lacks supporting evidence (or neglects ‘pattern’ entirely).

For 9–12 marks, expect:

• either a structured synthesis which links together several well-evidenced themes from the Guide
• or a critical conclusion (or on-going evaluation) informed by geographical concepts and/or perspectives.

For 13–16 marks, expect both of these traits.

Although only a minority of candidates attempted this question, many of those who did wrote excellent answers which demonstrated an impressive awareness and understanding of current affairs. Candidates frequently analysed the rise of populist movements in Europe and the USA. Their answers were often highly detailed and well-focused on the ways in which new manifestations of nationalism may reflect a partial or full rejection of globalization. Important themes included: the loss of sovereignty; unchecked migration flows; and the costs and benefits of the global shift of manufacturing for communities in developed countries. Another popular topic was the rise of resource nationalism in Latin American countries including Bolivia and Venezuela. Benefit of the doubt was given to candidates who wrote about opposition to globalization but showed insecure knowledge of exactly what is meant by nationalism (usually demonstrated by the absence of a definition of nationalism at the beginning of their answer). In such cases, candidates often wrote at length about local civil society opposition to McDonald's restaurants, rainforest removal, shale gas extraction and other issues. All of these place-based movements can be viewed as being "against" globalization in some or other way; however, it is incorrect to always view them as being instances of nationalism. As a result, full credit could not always be awarded for the use of such illustrations. In other cases, candidates wrote about the growth of Isis (Daesh) and Boko Haram -  identifying efforts to establish a religious caliphate as a form of nationalism  in opposition to Western culture. This was treated as a legitimate approach, provided candidates were clear about which countries had been affected. 

Candidate performance on this question was relatively disappointing for the simple reason that the phrase "spatial pattern" was ignored or largely overlooked in almost every case. Given that this was a geography examination, widespread neglect of the question's spatial dimension was most surprising. In other ways, performance was sometimes commendable insofar as candidates were able to document in considerable detail the impacts which have been suffered in particular places on account of industrialization or waste recycling. However, there was little mention of any wider spatial patterns. Similarly, good recall of the Pacific garbage patch and climate change impacts were included in many essays. Unfortunately, the only acknowledgment of there being any spatial dimension to these impacts all too often amounted to the assertion that "everywhere" has been affected. Case studies from the geography guide which did lend themselves well to writing about a spatial pattern of impacts included: transboundary pollution patterns (for example, centred on palm oil production in Indonesia); linear patterns of pollution and biodiversity loss along shipping lanes; and the global core-periphery pattern of polluting industries. Candidates who linked together several detailed case studies of pollution (but only implied there was a pattern or ignored the spatial element altogether) sometimes scored between 9 and 12 marks. However, a requirement of the top mark band was explicit and sustained attention to the spatial pattern of environment impacts, Very few candidates proved able to do this.