IB DP · Thinka-original Practice Paper

2024 IB DP Geography Practice Paper with Answers

Thinka May 2024 SL (TZ2) IB Diploma Programme-Style Mock — Geography

50 marks75 mins2024

An original Thinka practice paper modelled on the structure and difficulty of the May 2024 SL (TZ2) IB Diploma Programme Geography paper. Not affiliated with or reproduced from IB.

Section A

Answer all compulsory structured short-answer questions based on the core themes.

3 Question · 30 marks

Question 1 · Data Interpretation & Explanation

10 marks

Table 1: Demographic indicators for Country X (2000 and 2020)

Year 2000: Birth rate = 18 per 1000; Death rate = 7 per 1000; Population under 15 = 28%; Population aged 65 and over = 7%.
Year 2020: Birth rate = 10 per 1000; Death rate = 8 per 1000; Population under 15 = 16%; Population aged 65 and over = 18%.

(a) (i) Define the term "elderly dependency ratio". (2 marks)

(a) (ii) Using the data provided, calculate the change in the total dependency ratio for Country X between 2000 and 2020. Show your calculations. (2 marks)

(b) Explain two socio-economic challenges that Country X may face as a result of the demographic trends shown in Table 1. (4 marks)

Show answer & marking scheme

Worked solution

(a) (i) Definition: The elderly dependency ratio is the ratio of dependents aged 65 and over to the working-age population (typically defined as those aged 15-64), expressed as a percentage or ratio.

(a) (ii) Calculation:
Total Dependency Ratio (TDR) = $\frac{\% \text{ under 15} + \% \text{ over 65}}{\% \text{ working age 15-64}} \times 100$
In 2000: Under 15 = 28%, Over 65 = 7%, Working age = $100 - (28+7) = 65$%. TDR = $\frac{35}{65} \times 100 = 53.85$%.
In 2020: Under 15 = 16%, Over 65 = 18%, Working age = $100 - (16+18) = 66$%. TDR = $\frac{34}{66} \times 100 = 51.52$%.
Change: $51.52\% - 53.85\% = -2.33$% (or a decrease of 2.33 percentage points).

(b) Challenges (any two explained):
1. Increased healthcare costs and pressure on elderly care facilities due to a higher proportion of elderly population (18% in 2020 vs 7% in 2000).
2. Potential labor shortages in the future due to a shrinking younger demographic cohort (under 15 dropped from 28% to 16%), leading to lower economic productivity or tax revenue.
3. Increased fiscal pressure on public pension systems as a relatively smaller working-age population supports a growing base of retirees.

(c) Pro-natalist Policy: Any valid policy such as cash incentives/child bonuses, heavily subsidized childcare facilities, extended parental leave policies, or tax breaks for larger families, which reduces the financial burden of raising children and encourages parents to have more children.

Marking scheme

(a) (i)
• Award 1 mark for mentioning the ratio of elderly/dependents aged 65+ to the working population.
• Award 1 mark for specifying the correct age range of the working-age population (15-64).

(a) (ii)
• Award 1 mark for showing correct working/formula for both years: Year 2000 TDR (~53.85%) and Year 2020 TDR (~51.52%).
• Award 1 mark for the correct final difference (accept -2.3 to -2.4 percentage point change).

(b)
• Award 1 mark for identifying a socio-economic challenge and 1 mark for explaining how it relates to the changing demographic data, up to a maximum of 4 marks.
• Acceptable challenges include: labor force shortages, increased tax burdens, increased healthcare demand, pension fund unsustainability.

(c)
• Award 1 mark for outlining a specific pro-natalist policy (e.g., parental leave, cash bonuses).
• Award 1 mark for explaining how this policy works to increase the birth rate.

Question 2 · Data Interpretation & Explanation

10 marks

Table 2: Greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and Climate Vulnerability Index (CVI) scores for selected countries

Country A (HIC): GHG per capita = 15.4 tonnes; CVI score = 18 out of 100 (low vulnerability).
Country B (NIC): GHG per capita = 7.2 tonnes; CVI score = 42 out of 100 (medium vulnerability).
Country C (LIC): GHG per capita = 0.8 tonnes; CVI score = 78 out of 100 (high vulnerability).
Country D (Small Island Developing State - SIDS): GHG per capita = 1.5 tonnes; CVI score = 85 out of 100 (extremely high vulnerability).

(a) Describe the relationship between greenhouse gas emissions per capita and Climate Vulnerability Index scores shown in Table 2. (2 marks)

(b) Explain how one physical factor and one economic factor contribute to the high climate vulnerability of Small Island Developing States (SIDS). (4 marks)

Show answer & marking scheme

Worked solution

(a) Relationship: There is an inverse/negative relationship between emissions and vulnerability. The high-income country (Country A) produces the highest per capita emissions (15.4 tonnes) but has the lowest vulnerability (18/100). Conversely, the low-income country (Country C) and SIDS (Country D) produce very low emissions (0.8 and 1.5 tonnes) but have high vulnerability scores (78 and 85/100 respectively).

(b) Factors contributing to SIDS vulnerability:
• Physical factor: Low-lying coastal topography and small landmass make SIDS highly exposed to sea-level rise, coastal erosion, and intense tropical storms, leaving no safe inland areas to retreat to (2 marks).
• Economic factor: Small economies with limited financial capacity and high reliance on vulnerable sectors (e.g., tourism) lack the capital to invest in expensive coastal defenses, early warning systems, or resilient infrastructure (2 marks).

(c) Contrast of mitigation vs adaptation:
• Mitigation: Focuses on addressing the root causes of climate change by reducing GHG emissions or enhancing carbon sinks. Example: Transitioning from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources like wind or solar power (2 marks).
• Adaptation: Focuses on managing the impacts and consequences of climate change to reduce harm. Example: Building sea walls or restoring coastal mangrove forests to prevent storm surge flooding (2 marks).

Marking scheme

(a)
• Award 1 mark for identifying the inverse relationship (high emissions correlate with low vulnerability, and vice versa).
• Award 1 mark for supporting this with specific data points from the table (contrasting Country A with Country C or D).

(b)
• Award 1 mark for identifying a valid physical factor (e.g., low-lying terrain, island isolation) and 1 mark for explaining how it drives high vulnerability to climate impacts.
• Award 1 mark for identifying a valid economic factor (e.g., lack of capital, tourism dependence) and 1 mark for explaining how it limits adaptive capacity.

(c)
• Award 1 mark for defining mitigation (reducing causes/GHGs) and 1 mark for a relevant example.
• Award 1 mark for defining adaptation (coping with/minimizing impacts) and 1 mark for a relevant example.

Question 3 · Data Interpretation & Explanation

10 marks

Table 3: Ecological Footprint and Biocapacity data for selected regions (2022)

Region X: Ecological Footprint = 6.8 gha/person; Biocapacity = 2.1 gha/person.
Region Y: Ecological Footprint = 1.8 gha/person; Biocapacity = 3.2 gha/person.
Region Z: Ecological Footprint = 0.9 gha/person; Biocapacity = 0.6 gha/person.

(a) Define the term "ecological footprint" and identify from Table 3 which regions are in an "ecological deficit". (2 marks)

(b) Explain how importing agricultural goods with high "embedded water" (virtual water) allows a water-stressed country to manage its local water security. (4 marks)

(c) Explain two reasons why the growth of the global middle-class increases pressure on global energy resources. (4 marks)

Show answer & marking scheme

Worked solution

(a) Definition and Identification:
• Ecological Footprint: The theoretical area of land and water (measured in global hectares, gha) required to support a given population at its current level of consumption and to absorb its waste (1 mark).
• Ecological Deficit: Regions where Ecological Footprint exceeds Biocapacity. Based on the data, Region X (deficit of 4.7 gha) and Region Z (deficit of 0.3 gha) are in deficit (1 mark).

(b) Embedded water and water security:
Virtual water (or embedded water) is the volume of water used in the production of agricultural or industrial goods. When a water-scarce nation imports crops like wheat or meat, it effectively imports the large volume of water used to grow them. This "outsources" the heavy water footprint of agriculture to the producing nation, allowing the importing nation to conserve its scarce local freshwater resources for critical domestic and industrial uses, thereby improving domestic water security (4 marks).

(c) Middle-class growth and energy pressure:
• Reason 1: Increased ownership of domestic electrical appliances (e.g., air conditioning, refrigerators, personal computers) as disposable incomes rise, driving higher per capita electricity consumption (2 marks).
• Reason 2: Shift toward private transport and personal vehicle ownership (and increased air travel/tourism) which significantly escalates demand for liquid fossil fuels (petroleum) or grid electricity (2 marks).

Marking scheme

(a)
• Award 1 mark for a complete definition of ecological footprint (must mention both resource consumption and waste absorption).
• Award 1 mark for correctly identifying Region X and Region Z as having an ecological deficit.

(b)
• Award 1 mark for explaining what virtual/embedded water is (water used in production).
• Award 1 mark for linking imports of high-water goods (like crops/beef) to the reduction of domestic water extraction.
• Award 2 marks for a detailed explanation of how this conservation of domestic reserves improves overall water security/resilience for the importing nation.

(c)
• Award 1 mark for identifying a valid reason related to middle-class consumption (e.g., appliance ownership, increased transport/private cars, higher consumption of energy-intensive manufactured goods).
• Award 1 mark for explaining how this specific consumption behavior directly increases the demand or pressure on global energy infrastructure. Repeat for the second reason (2 marks + 2 marks).

Section B

Answer the compulsory question based on the provided infographic resource booklet.

1 Question · 10 marks

Question 1 · Infographic Analysis & Evaluation

10 marks

### Infographic Resource: Global E-Waste and Resource Recovery (2024)

* **Total E-waste generated:** 62 million metric tonnes (Mt)
* **Formally collected and recycled:** 22.3% (13.8 Mt)
* **Unregulated/informal flows:** 48.2 Mt (mostly dumped, landfilled, or traded informally)
* **Transboundary trade:** 5.1 Mt exported from High-Income Countries (HICs) to Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LICs/MICs) as 'used electronics'.
* **Value of raw materials embedded in total e-waste:** $62 billion USD
* **Value of raw materials actually recovered:** $28 billion USD
* **Key pollutants released annually from informal processing:** 58,000 kg of mercury and 18.9 million tonnes of CO2 equivalents.

---

**Task:**

**(a)** (i) Calculate the percentage value of raw materials embedded in global e-waste that is currently lost (unrecovered), showing your working. (ii) State the primary pattern of transboundary trade depicted in the infographic. [2 marks]

**(b)** Explain two environmental or human health hazards that arise from the unregulated informal processing of electronic waste in destination countries. [4 marks]

**(c)** Evaluate the effectiveness of adopting a circular economy model as a strategy to manage global e-waste flows sustainably. [4 marks]

Show answer & marking scheme

Worked solution

### Part (a) Proposed Solution:
* **(i) Calculation:**
* Total value = $62 billion USD
* Recovered value = $28 billion USD
* Unrecovered value = $62 billion - $28 billion = $34 billion USD
* Percentage unrecovered = $\left(\frac{34}{62}\right) \times 100\% \approx 54.84\%$ (Accept 54.8% or 55%)
* **(ii) Primary pattern:**
* The flow is unidirectional, moving from High-Income Countries (HICs) to Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LICs/MICs).

### Part (b) Proposed Solution:
* **Hazard 1: Toxic chemical exposure and bioaccumulation (Health)**
* Informal processing techniques like open-air burning of plastic casings to extract copper wires release dioxins and heavy metals (like mercury, lead). These toxic chemicals are inhaled by informal workers (often children) or settle into nearby agricultural soils, entering the food chain and causing severe chronic neurological, respiratory, and developmental diseases.
* **Hazard 2: Hydrological contamination (Environmental)**
* Acid leaching baths used to extract gold from circuit boards are often dumped directly onto the ground or into nearby waterways. This leads to the acidification of freshwater sources and heavy metal contamination of aquifers, killing aquatic life and poisoning drinking water resources for downstream communities.

### Part (c) Proposed Solution:
* **Circular Economy Evaluation:**
* **Strengths / Opportunities:** A circular economy addresses e-waste at the source through extended producer responsibility (EPR) and eco-design (designing electronics for easy disassembly, repair, and recycling). This keeps precious metals in closed loops, reduces the need for destructive primary mining, and mitigates toxic transboundary dumping.
* **Limitations / Challenges:** Implementing closed-loop supply chains requires significant capital investment and global harmonization of standards, which is lacking in LICs/MICs. Planned obsolescence remains highly profitable for transnational corporations (TNCs). Furthermore, illegal transboundary shipping of waste labeled as "used goods" bypasses international regulatory frameworks like the Basel Convention.
* **Conclusion:** While a circular economy is the most sustainable long-term systemic solution, its success depends on strict international enforcement, binding legislative frameworks on manufacturers, and global technology transfers to help developing countries formalize their recycling sectors.

Marking scheme

### Part (a) [2 marks]
* **Award 1 mark** for the correct percentage calculation: $54.8\%$ or $55\%$ (must show correct working of $\frac{34}{62}$).
* **Award 1 mark** for identifying the transboundary flow direction (HICs to LICs/MICs).

### Part (b) [4 marks]
* **Award up to 2 marks** for each explained hazard (maximum of 2 hazards).
* **1 mark** for identifying a valid hazard (e.g., acid dumping, burning plastic wires, mercury exposure).
* **1 mark** for explaining how it harms the environment or human health (e.g., bioaccumulation, aquifer pollution, neurological damage).
* *Do not award marks for vague answers like 'pollution' without explaining the specific mechanism or impact.*

### Part (c) [4 marks]
* **3–4 marks:** A balanced evaluation that discusses both the potential of a circular economy (e.g., product design, EPR) and its limitations (e.g., economic costs, black market trade, lack of regulatory enforcement). To reach 4 marks, there must be a clear concluding judgment or synthesis.
* **1–2 marks:** A descriptive response outlining what a circular economy is or listing benefits with little to no critical evaluation or structured synthesis.

Section C

Answer one extended response essay question from a choice of two.

1 Question · 10 marks

Question 1 · Evaluative Essay

10 marks

To what extent does the transition to a circular economy offer a sustainable solution to the global challenge of resource insecurity?

Show answer & marking scheme

Worked solution

An effective essay should be structured as follows:

1. Introduction: Define 'circular economy' (an economic system aimed at eliminating waste and the continual use of resources, contrasting with the 'take-make-dispose' linear model) and 'resource insecurity'. Outline the thesis: while circularity is a vital tool for decoupling economic growth from resource consumption, it cannot be a complete solution on its own due to physical, economic, and systemic limitations.

2. Supporting Arguments (Opportunities of Circularity):
- Resource Conservation: By designing out waste and keeping materials in use, countries can significantly reduce their dependence on virgin raw materials. For example, recycling critical metals from e-waste reduces the need for environmentally damaging mining.
- Supply Chain Resilience: Implementing circular loops helps nations secure resource pathways and buffer against geopolitical tensions or supply shocks (e.g., the European Union's push for circularity in critical raw materials).
- Waste-to-Energy and Industrial Symbiosis: Case studies like Kalundborg Symbiosis in Denmark demonstrate how one industry's waste becomes another's input, maximizing resource efficiency.

3. Counter-arguments / Limitations (Challenges of Circularity):
- Thermodynamic Limits: Materials cannot be recycled indefinitely; entropy dictates that quality degrades (e.g., paper fibres shorten, plastics degrade), meaning virgin inputs are still required.
- High Upfront Costs & Infrastructure Barriers: Shifting to circular supply chains requires massive capital investment and technological capacity, which are often lacking in low-income countries (LICs).
- The Rebound Effect (Jevons Paradox): Increased resource efficiency can lower production costs, leading to lower prices, which may paradoxically increase overall consumption and offset the resource savings.
- Global Inequality: High-income countries may successfully implement circular systems while exporting their waste to lower-income nations, perpetuating global inequalities rather than resolving systemic resource pressure.

4. Conclusion: Synthesize the arguments to show that the circular economy is an essential structural shift but must be coupled with demand-side reduction (degrowth or conservation policies) to truly achieve global resource security.

Marking scheme

This essay is marked out of 10 using the following level descriptors:

- Level 1 (1–3 marks): Simple, descriptive response with limited understanding of the circular economy or resource insecurity. Lacks structure and relies on generalized assertions without case studies or relevant examples.

- Level 2 (4–6 marks): Demonstrates some understanding of the circular economy and resource insecurity. Explains some benefits or limitations but lacks balanced evaluation. Mentions basic examples or case studies but without deep integration.

- Level 3 (7–8 marks): A well-structured, balanced evaluation of both the opportunities and constraints of the circular economy in solving resource insecurity. Good integration of appropriate geographic terminology and specific examples/case studies (e.g., national strategies or industrial symbiosis). Evaluative conclusion is present.

- Level 4 (9–10 marks): Outstanding, nuanced evaluation showing deep critical understanding of the limits of circularity (e.g., thermodynamic limits, systemic challenges, geopolitical issues). Excellent synthesis of concepts, highly structured, and supported by precise, well-integrated case studies leading to a clear, justified conclusion.

Wondering how well you actually know this?

Thinka is an AI practice app for DSE students — unlimited questions, instant auto-marking, and detailed step-by-step solutions. 100,000+ students use it to confirm they actually know it, not just think they do.

Start Practising Free See pricing

Want more questions like this? Practice unlimited on Thinka — instant answers included.

Start Practising Free