With reference to the information in the resource booklet, to what extent has Costa Rica’s aim to become carbon neutral led to a more environmentally-sustainable nation?

This question requires Resource booklet-May 2022 SL Paper 1, available under the “your tests” tab > supplemental materials.

Evidence for [4 max]:

1. carbon off-setting has increased afforestation/reforestation/tree planting / forestation has increased carbon sinks / forestation has contributed to mitigating climate change/reducing atmospheric carbon dioxide levels;
2. afforestation/reforestation/increase in protected area has increased biodiversity/natural habitat for wildlife;
3. afforestation/reforestation has increased natural capital/goods and services;
4. most electricity comes from renewable sources of energy rather than non-renewable sources (can be used up / exhaustible) / most electricity comes from renewable sources rather than fossil fuels hence produces less carbon dioxide emissions/has a lower EF;
5. use of electric/hybrid/biofuel/hydrogen vehicles limits carbon dioxide emissions / increase use of renewables/electric transport could improve air quality in urban areas;
6. use of public transport limits individual car use and reduces overall carbon dioxide emissions/could improve urban air quality/has a lower EF;
7. certified carbon neutral coffee farming may mitigate impacts of intensive (cash crops) agriculture / certified carbon neutral coffee farming may support businesses which have a smaller carbon footprint; 
   
   Note: Do not credit only ‘PES results in more tree planting’.
   
   Evidence against [4 max]:
   
   
8. there are emissions of other greenhouse gases from farming (e.g. methane from cattle/beef production / nitrous oxide from using fertilizers or manure);
9. increase in land area used for intensive agriculture (pineapples) reduces biodiversity;
10. there is high use of fossil fuel / transport sector depends on fossil fuels / the transportation of importing fossil fuels produces carbon dioxide;
11. ecological footprint (EF) is beyond the carrying capacity / EF is greater than biocapacity;
12. despite increased forestation the biocapacity has continued to decline which is not sustainable / biocapacity still appears to be declining which is not sustainable;
13. large tourism numbers may cause damage to the environment e.g. roads may fragment habitats / building development for tourism may lead to habitat destruction;
14. tourists that travel to Costa Rica can produce high levels of greenhouse gases/carbon dioxide emissions through plane travel;
15. growth in agriculture leads to deforestation / there is still some loss of mature forest to agriculture / difficult to enforce ban on deforestation;
16. in future, the country will eventually run out of space for carbon off-setting by planting trees and therefore this is not a sustainable practice;
17. hydropower has a detrimental effect on the environment e.g. blocks migratory routes for fish, causes siltation behind the dam wall and reduces flow of nutrients/sediments downstream contributing to coastal erosion/lower diversity;
18. (despite carbon zero policy/efforts to reduce CO₂ levels) the levels of CO₂ emissions for Costa Rica are above the regional average;

Award [5 max] for evidence for and evidence against.

Conclusion/opinion [1 max]
For example: Although Costa Rica produces most of its electricity from renewable sources, non-renewable resources are still used eg oil which is a finite resource and is not sustainable for the future;
Despite reducing loss of forest/increasing sinks for carbon, the biocapacity continues to decline and hence overall Costa Rica is not sustainable;
While Costa Rica still has some issues relating to emissions of GHGs through agriculture/transport, it is moving in the right direction towards environmental sustainability with its tree planting campaigns/increase in protected areas and cleaner air due to renewable energy sources;

A valid conclusion should be credited if it is explicit, balanced (addresses both sides of the argument) and supported by evidence. Do not credit the conclusion if only one side of the argument has been considered within the overall response.

Accept other reasonable responses supported by the information in the resource booklet.

Most candidates achieved 2 or 3 marks for this question. There were some excellent responses that achieved the full 6 marks but also a number of poor responses achieving no marks. Some responses inappropriately repeated material from the resource booklet without connecting the facts provided to the question being asked. Few candidates were able to provide a well-balanced conclusion. Many conclusions were either one sided or vague.