Global Perspectives · Oct / Nov 2021 · Paper 11 · Question 4

0457

As printed in the paper

The question as text

Your government wants to reduce pollution from transporting food over long distances. The following suggestions have been made: • offer more funding to local food producers • launch an advertising campaign about pollution caused by food transportation • increase taxes on food transported from other countries. Which one of these would you recommend to the government, and why? In your answer, you should: • state your recommendation • give reasons and evidence to support your choice • use the material in the sources and/or any of your own ideas • consider different arguments and perspectives.

Read automatically from the paper; the printed page above is exact.

Show the answer and mark scheme

Main Annotations J

Indicative content

Candidates are expected to make a choice about the best course of action, i.e. how best to reduce pollution from transporting food over long distances. Candidates may use and develop the material found in Sources 1 to 4 but should go beyond simply repeating or recycling without adaptation. Other material may be introduced but is not necessary to gain full marks. Candidates may consider some of the following:

Reference to scale of impact on transportation

Reference to different consequences and implications for

individuals/groups/government.

How long it might take to make a difference.

Barriers to change.

The power of collective action, e.g. cooperation between countries over knowledge of pollution issues.

The influence of individuals and groups on decision making.

The role of vested interests and power differences.

Potential conflicts of interest.

Difficulties in planning and coordinating improvements.

Cost and access to resources to implement change.

Other reasonable response.

The following levels of response should be used to award marks:

Level 5 (20–24 marks) Very good response

Clear, well supported reasoning about the proposed course of action. Different arguments and perspectives are clearly considered.

The response contains a wide range of clearly reasoned points and/or evidence to support the views expressed, usually with four (or more) developed points, and some undeveloped points.

The response is very well-structured and a clear judgement is reached.

Level 4 (15–19 marks) Good response

Clear, supported reasoning about the proposed course of action. Different arguments and perspectives are considered.

The response contains a range of reasoned points and/or evidence to support the views expressed, usually with three (or more) developed points, and some undeveloped points.

The response is generally well-structured and a judgement is reached. Level 3 (10–14 marks) Reasonable response

Some supported reasoning about the proposed course of action. Different arguments and perspectives are included.

The response contains some points and/or evidence to support the views expressed, usually with two (or more) developed points, and some undeveloped points.

The response is structured but at times difficult to follow and an attempt is made to give an overall judgement.

Level 2 (5–9 marks) Basic response

Basic reasoning about the proposed course of action. Different arguments are included; perspectives, if present, are unclear.

The response relies on assertion rather than evidence and explanation and usually contains one (or more) developed point(s) or a range of undeveloped points.

The response lacks structure and is difficult to follow though a basic judgement may be attempted.

Level 1 (1–4 marks) Limited response

Limited and unsupported reasoning about the topic in general. Tangential. Generalised. Different arguments may be included.

Level 0 (0 marks)

No relevant response or creditworthy material.

Practise this paper →

Make a free account to save your answers and see your weak topics and ask the AI why a wrong answer is wrong.