A Level H1 Geography Practice Paper 3

TuitionGoWhere Practice Paper - Geography H1 A-Level (Answer Key)

Version 3 - Resources & Sustainability

Section A: Source-Based Questions

Question 1
Describe the trends in access to improved water sources in District A and District B as shown in Resource 1. [4 marks]

Marking Scheme:

• District A Trend (2 marks):
  • Access increased significantly/rapidly from 40% in 2010 to 75% in 2020. (1 mark)
  • The rate of increase was steady/consistent over the decade. (1 mark)
• District B Trend (2 marks):
  • Access increased only slightly/marginally from 35% in 2010 to 45% in 2020. (1 mark)
  • The gap between District A and District B widened over time (from 5% difference to 30% difference). (1 mark)
• Note: Answers must quote data from the resource to gain full marks.

Question 2
With reference to Resource 2, explain two characteristics of community-led resource management in informal settlements. [4 marks]

Marking Scheme:

• Characteristic 1: Informal/Grassroots Organisation (2 marks):
  • The initiative is run by residents themselves rather than formal municipal authorities. (1 mark)
  • Evidence: The photo shows residents actively sorting waste, suggesting local participation and ownership. (1 mark)
• Characteristic 2: Resource Recovery/Recycling Focus (2 marks):
  • The focus is on extracting value from waste (e.g., recyclables) rather than just disposal. (1 mark)
  • Evidence: Sorting of plastics and organics indicates an attempt to reuse materials, likely for economic benefit or environmental cleanliness. (1 mark)

Question 3
Using Resource 3, explain why state-led interventions are considered necessary alongside community initiatives. [4 marks]

Marking Scheme:

• Limitation of Scale (2 marks):
  • Community initiatives are often small-scale and localized. (1 mark)
  • They cannot address city-wide or systemic issues like major flooding or widespread pollution which require large infrastructure. (1 mark)
• Limitation of Expertise/Technology (2 marks):
  • Grassroots groups may lack technical expertise or financial resources. (1 mark)
  • State interventions can provide the necessary engineering solutions, funding, and regulatory framework to ensure long-term sustainability. (1 mark)

Question 4
"Evaluate the usefulness of Resource 1 and Resource 2 in helping you understand the challenges of achieving sustainable resource management in informal settlements." [8 marks]

Marking Scheme:

• Usefulness of Resource 1 (3 marks):
  • Strength: Provides quantitative data on a key resource (water). Shows inequality between districts (challenge of equity). (1 mark)
  • Strength: Shows temporal change, indicating progress or lack thereof. (1 mark)
  • Limitation: Only shows access, not quality or reliability. Does not explain why District B lagged (e.g., policy neglect, geography). (1 mark)
• Usefulness of Resource 2 (3 marks):
  • Strength: Provides qualitative/visual insight into how residents cope (adaptive strategies). Highlights the role of social capital. (1 mark)
  • Strength: Shows a specific aspect of sustainability (waste management). (1 mark)
  • Limitation: Single snapshot; may not represent the whole settlement. Does not show the scale of the problem or the effectiveness of the recycling. (1 mark)
• Overall Evaluation/Synthesis (2 marks):
  • Together, they show both the outcome (water stats) and the process (community action). (1 mark)
  • However, both lack information on the barriers to sustainability (e.g., cost, political will, land tenure), which are crucial for a full understanding. (1 mark)

Question 5
"Country Y contributes more to global climate change than Country X." With reference to Resource 4, discuss the validity of this statement. [5 marks]

Marking Scheme:

• Argument for Validity (Total Emissions) (2 marks):
  • Country Y has much higher total emissions (11,000 million tonnes) compared to Country X (450 million tonnes). (1 mark)
  • Climate change is driven by the total accumulation of GHGs in the atmosphere, so Country Y’s current output is physically larger. (1 mark)
• Argument against Validity (Per Capita/Historical) (2 marks):
  • Country X has a much higher per capita emission (14.5 tonnes) than Country Y (7.2 tonnes), indicating a higher carbon footprint per person/lifestyle. (1 mark)
  • Country X is "Developed," implying historical responsibility for accumulated emissions, whereas Country Y is "Emerging" and may need emissions for development. (1 mark)
• Conclusion/Judgment (1 mark):
  • The statement is valid in terms of current annual volume but misleading if considering responsibility per person or historical contribution. A nuanced view is required.

Section B: Structured Response & Essay Questions

Question 6
Explain how urban planning strategies can help to mitigate the issue of urban heat islands in high-density cities. [6 marks]

Marking Scheme:

• Strategy 1: Increasing Green Spaces/Vegetation (2 marks):
  • Planting trees and creating parks increases shade and evapotranspiration, which cools the air. (1 mark)
  • Example: Singapore’s "City in a Garden" initiative or vertical greenery on buildings. (1 mark)
• Strategy 2: Use of Reflective/Cool Materials (2 marks):
  • Using light-colored or reflective materials for roofs and pavements reduces the absorption of solar radiation. (1 mark)
  • This lowers the surface temperature of buildings and streets, reducing heat re-radiation at night. (1 mark)
• Strategy 3: Urban Design for Ventilation (2 marks):
  • Planning building heights and orientations to create wind corridors allows hot air to escape and cool breezes to enter. (1 mark)
  • Prevents the trapping of heat in dense urban canyons. (1 mark)

Question 7
"Slums are merely a symptom of failed urban planning, not a barrier to sustainable development." To what extent do you agree with this statement? [19 marks]

Marking Scheme:

Level 4 (15–19 marks): Comprehensive Evaluation

• Clear Position: Takes a balanced view, acknowledging slums as both a symptom of planning failure and a complex factor in sustainability.
• Argument 1: Slums as a Symptom of Failed Planning (AO2/AO3):
  • Slums arise due to rapid urbanization outpacing housing supply, lack of affordable land, and exclusionary zoning laws.
  • Evidence: Growth of favelas in Rio or Dharavi in Mumbai correlates with periods of weak regulatory enforcement or high inequality.
  • This supports the view that they are a result (symptom) of systemic planning failures.
• Argument 2: Slums as a Barrier to Sustainable Development (AO2/AO3):
  • Environmental: Poor sanitation, waste disposal, and overcrowding lead to pollution and health risks, undermining environmental sustainability.
  • Social: Lack of secure tenure and basic services perpetuates poverty cycles, hindering social sustainability.
  • Economic: Informal economies may lack regulation and tax revenue, limiting city resources for broader development.
• Argument 3: Slums as Contributors/Solutions (Counter-Argument) (AO4):
  • Slums provide affordable housing and labor close to city centers, supporting the urban economy.
  • High density in slums can be more resource-efficient per capita than suburban sprawl.
  • Community resilience and informal networks often fill gaps left by the state.
• Evaluation/Synthesis:
  • Slums are indeed a symptom of planning failure (lack of inclusive policy).
  • However, they become a barrier to sustainability when left unaddressed, as the accumulation of environmental and social deficits grows.
  • Therefore, they are not inherently a barrier, but their conditions are. Upgrading (in-situ) rather than eradication is the sustainable path.
  • Conclusion: The statement is partially true; they are a symptom, but ignoring them turns them into a significant barrier.

Level 3 (10–14 marks): Good Understanding

• Discusses both sides (symptom vs. barrier).
• Uses relevant case studies (e.g., Lagos, Mumbai).
• Explains the link between planning failure and slum growth.
• Identifies environmental/social challenges in slums.
• Evaluation may be less nuanced or slightly one-sided.

Level 2 (5–9 marks): Basic Understanding

• Describes slums and their problems.
• May list planning failures but lacks depth.
• Limited use of case studies.
• Little evaluation of the "barrier" aspect.

Level 1 (1–4 marks): Limited Understanding

• Vague statements about slums being bad.
• Little geographical terminology.
• No clear argument or structure.