IB ESS HL 1.1 Perspectives Questions

Credit different interpretations of what is meant by "bigger" in this context e.g. bigger can refer to the scale/number of effects, or to how immediate/frightening/concrete the threat may seem, or in terms of whether the threat is to humans or to living systems in general.

Marking guidance:

Award [1] for a explicit statement of their view on which is the bigger threat. global warming is a bigger threat than biodiversity;
biodiversity is a bigger threat than global warming;
Do not credit if the viewpoint is only implied in the response.
Award [8 max] for relevant arguments for why one issue is a bigger threat than the other.
Award [4 max] if response is simply a description of the threat/effects not a comparison with the other threat. e.g. global warming is the bigger threat because:
it will have big effects e.g. melting ice caps/shifting biomes/changing the world's weather/flooding land;
its effects will be more widespread than biodiversity/every country will be affected;
whereas the loss of diversity in, e.g. a tropical rainforest, may have little direct impact on people elsewhere;
larger numbers of people will be affected e.g. Bangladeshi delta region low-lying and densely populated affected by sea level rises;
it will affect a bigger range of human activity, such as food supply/living space, health/disease;
it will lead to biodiversity loss as well (whereas loss of diversity will not cause global warming);
many biodiversity hotspots are particularly vulnerable e.g. coral reefs;
it has a higher public/global profile;
it can lead to significant social consequences e.g. wars / mass migrations;
is harder to solve than biodiversity loss which can be helped by e.g. seedbanks;
current rate of warming is unprecedented, whereas there have been mass extinctions in the past and the biodiversity has recovered;
it may lead to positive feedback loops/potentially devastating tipping points/exponential change;
> e.g. biodiversity is the bigger threat because:
> biodiversity provides/ensures key essential ecological services;
e.g. a balance of atmospheric $\mathrm{O}_{2}$ and $\mathrm{CO}_{2}$ /soil preservation/mineral cycles;
without these there would be no life-supporting conditions on the planet;
once biodiversity is lost it is gone forever;
and whereas global warming may be mitigated by negative feedback mechanisms there are no feedback mechanisms to maintain diversity;
to restore biodiversity it can take very long periods of time;
whereas climatic variations are reversible/happen in cycles (and have occurred in the past);
> from a human point of view, loss of biodiversity may mean loss of critical resources;
> biodiversity provides many forms of natural income, e.g. aesthetic, economic, ecological services;
> at a point in human population growth where resources are possibly limiting;
it is biodiversity that gives living systems the ability to adapt to change;
and the more it is reduced, the lower the chances of adapting to change;
biodiversity is being lost now/threats seem more immediate to people;
there are some positive benefits of global warming but no benefits to biodiversity loss;

Factors may include:
cultural ie some cultures place a high value on nature and thus have a more ecocentric EVS;
religious ie some religions deify certain organisms/landscapes and thus have a more ecocentric EVS;
economic ie some would argue that more economically wealthy societies tend towards a more technocentric/anthropocentric EVS;
socio-political ie some would argue that a society with a strong social political movement would tend towards a more anthropocentric EVS;
experience/history ie societies that have experienced anthropogenic disasters may become more prone to adopt ecocentric value systems;

Marking guidance:

Award [3 max] if only one category of EVS is addressed (question asks for "contrasting cultures").

Note: Full credit can be given where candidate gives a specific example to outline link between factor and EVS. However, if factors are simply named/listed without any explanatory outline broadly linking them to EVS, then award just 1 mark for every TWO valid factors identified up to 2max.

12. Evidence [4 max]: the population is stabilizing which will benefit the environment;
they are employing mitigation strategies that will address issue of global warming / climatic change;
they are improving efficiency of food production limiting area of environment impacted / small increase in amount of arable/agricultural land;
a high proportion of renewable energy/biofuel/hydropower is used that could reduce emissions of GHGs/global warming;
a high proportion of renewable energy/biofuel/hydropower is used that could reduce use of fossil fuels/non-renewable resources/non-renewable natural capital / rapid increase in number of cars using flex fuel / reducing number of petrol/gasoline cars;
Brazil has adopted energy efficiency methods/policies;
compared to other countries, Brazil still has a relatively low proportion of developed/arable land;
NGOs and other organizations are supporting conservation projects (restoring habitats / encouraging sustainable use of forest resources) in the Atlantic Rainforest;
Brazil has maintained a relatively low/stable ecological footprint (despite increase in GDP);

Limitations [4 max]: population is not yet stabilized so demands on environment still increasing/urban growth continues;
there are still a significant number of threatened species / high biodiversity loss;
there is still land clearance/deforestation for sugar cane/coffee/soy bean/biofuels/commercial logging/urban growth/urban development/infrastructure development/mining;
the conversion of agricultural land to growing crops for biofuels is causing problems with sufficient production/availability of food;
pollution from mining/manufacture of goods/oil production/commercial agriculture;
high proportion of renewable energy still comes from hydropower that impacts environment;
energy consumption continues to increase;
decrease in biocapacity suggests unsustainable practices / degradation of natural resources / depletion rates are greater than rates of growth / increase in ecological footprint suggest greater use of resources/unsustainability;
Brazil has large number of cattle that leads to high production of methane;
there are still gasoline only cars in use / there has been a reduction in/there are no ethanol only vehicles;

Opinion/conclusion [1 max]: there are clear indications in a number of areas that Brazilians are currently taking global warming very seriously / valuing environment over development;
despite the results of this survey, there are clear indications that Brazilians are not taking global warming seriously / there is clear evidence that Brazilians are not valuing the environment over development;

Marking guidance:

[6 max]
Award [5 max] if there is no opinion/conclusion.
Accept other reasonable responses supported by information in the resource booklet.
An isolated statement/opinion eg "Brazil is concerned about the environment" should not be considered a valid opinion/conclusion without supporting evidence.