| Date | May 2017 | Marks available | 2 | Reference code | 17M.1.SL.TZ0.11 |
| Level | Standard Level | Paper | Paper 1 | Time zone | Time zone 0 |
| Command term | Suggest | Question number | 11 | Adapted from | N/A |
Question
Figure 11(a): Ecological footprint and biocapacity of Brazil
(Biocapacity can be defined as the amount of biologically productive land, measured in total hectares per capita.)
[Source: © 2017 Global Footprint Network National Footprint Accounts from http://data.footprintnetwork.org]
With reference to Figure 11(a), suggest what conclusions can be drawn regarding the sustainability of the Brazilian population over the period shown.
Markscheme
ecological footprint increasing over period suggests they are moving toward unsustainability;
biocapacity decreasing over period suggests they are moving toward unsustainability / Brazil is living unsustainably (using resources at a rate that is not replenishable) resulting in a decline in the biocapacity / if the line for biocapacity and ecological footprint meet/crossover it suggests unsustainability;
rate of decrease in biocapacity is falling/stabilizing toward end of period suggests they may remain/be moving towards being sustainable;
the Brazilian population/government will need to reduce their ecological footprint to sustain biocapacity;
ecological footprint being lower than biocapacity suggests population is sustainable.
Do not accept only “current ecological footprint is unsustainable”.
Do not accept “steady ecological footprint is sustainable”, as a stable ecological footprint is not necessarily a sign of sustainability.
To be credited the mark the response must link to sustainability.
[2 max]
Examiners report
There were very mixed responses to this question. Many candidates outlined the change in the biocapacity and ecological footprint over time but did not relate this correctly to a reduction in sustainability. Some candidates misinterpreted the graphs and suggested that a decrease in biocapacity showed that land was being better cared for or that the rise in the ecological footprint showed that the population was living more sustainably.
