Educerie · IB Diploma · Environmental Systems and Societies
Topic 1 — Topic test · mark scheme
One mark per distinct point. Terms shown in bold are required. Named, specific examples are credited; generic examples ("in some countries") are not.
1Environmental value systems — 6 marks
(a) [1]
| A worldview or set of values that shapes how an individual or group perceives and evaluates environmental issues | 1 |
|---|
Accept a systems formulation: inputs of education, culture and experience producing outputs of decisions and behaviour. "What someone thinks about nature" is too vague — 0.
(b) [2]
| Ecocentric: nature has intrinsic value; favours minimal intervention and reduced consumption | 1 |
|---|---|
| Technocentric: favours technological solutions and human ingenuity; sees resources as manageable or effectively unlimited | 1 |
Award both marks only if the two are set against each other. A single perspective described in detail scores 1.
(c) [3]
| Their environmental value systems differ, acting as a lens on the same information | 1 |
|---|---|
| Gives contrasting positions applied to a situation, e.g. a technocentric view emphasising a technological benefit and an ecocentric view emphasising intrinsic ecological loss | 1 |
| Recognises that the two weigh the same evidence differently, so the disagreement is about values rather than facts | 1 |
The third mark is the discriminating one and is frequently missed. An answer implying one of the two has misread the evidence does not earn it.
2Systems — 4 marks
(a) [2]
| An open system exchanges both matter and energy across its boundary | 1 |
|---|---|
| A closed system exchanges energy but not matter | 1 |
Both must be present. "Open lets things in and closed does not" scores 0 — matter and energy must be distinguished.
(b) [2]
| Closed | 1 |
|---|---|
| Justification: energy enters as solar radiation and leaves as heat, but matter (apart from negligible meteorite input and atmospheric escape) does not cross the boundary | 1 |
"Closed" stated alone scores 1. An answer of "open" scores 0 for both marks, since the justification cannot then be correct.
3Feedback — 5 marks
(a) [2]
| Negative feedback counteracts change and returns the system toward equilibrium — it is stabilising | 1 |
|---|---|
| Positive feedback amplifies change and drives the system away from equilibrium — it is destabilising | 1 |
Reversing the two scores 0 for both. This is the most common error in the subject and should not be condoned.
(b) [3]
| Names a valid specific example, e.g. Arctic sea-ice albedo, permafrost methane release, Amazon dieback | 1 |
|---|---|
| Describes the loop such that it returns to its starting condition, e.g. ice melts → darker ocean absorbs more radiation → more warming → more ice melts | 1 |
| Explains that the self-reinforcing cycle can carry the system past a tipping point, beyond which the change is self-sustaining and effectively irreversible | 1 |
The second mark requires the loop to close. A linear description of melting ice, however detailed, is not feedback and scores 0 for that mark.
4Sustainability — 5 marks
(a) [2]
| Natural capital is the stock of natural resources that produces a yield, e.g. a forest or fish stock | 1 |
|---|---|
| Natural income is the sustainable yield that capital produces, e.g. annual timber growth; harvesting only the income leaves the capital intact | 1 |
(b) [3] — award 1 for a strength, 1 for a limitation, 1 for a judgement:
| A valid strength, e.g. aggregates complex impacts into a single comparable figure; reveals ecological deficit; trackable over time | 1 |
|---|---|
| A valid limitation, e.g. aggregation hides very different impacts; heavily weighted to carbon; omits biodiversity, pollution and water quality; depends on contested assumptions; variable data quality | 1 |
| A supported judgement, e.g. "useful for comparison and communication, but should be used alongside biodiversity and pollution indicators rather than as a standalone measure of sustainability" | 1 |
A one-sided answer cannot score more than 2, however well informed — evaluate requires both sides. A judgement that merely restates "there are advantages and disadvantages" does not earn the third mark; it must say what the indicator is and is not good for.
Mark distribution
| Split | Allocation |
|---|---|
| By sub-topic | Environmental value systems 6 · Systems and models 4 · Energy and equilibria 5 · Sustainability 5 |
| By objective | AO1 knowledge 5 · AO2 application 8 · AO3 analysis and evaluation 7 |
| By command term | Distinguish 6 · Explain 6 · Evaluate 3 · Outline 2 · Justify 2 · Define 1 |
Total: 20 marks
Educerie · original mark scheme for original questions, written against the published IB syllabus structure for Environmental Systems and Societies Topic 1, first assessment 2026. Last reviewed 5 September 2026.