IB DP Environmental Systems and Societies Topic 1: Foundations -- Practice Questions

These are original questions written for Marlbridge, in the style and at the standard of the examination. They are not reproduced past-paper questions – the IB holds copyright in its own papers. Use these alongside the official past papers available through your school or the IB store.

Related: Topic 1 Foundations study guide and revision notes.

Section A

1. Define “environmental value system (EVS).” [2]

2. State the key difference between natural capital and natural income. [2]

3. Distinguish between an open system and a closed system. [2]

Section B

4. A national government announces a policy that permits logging in a forest region “wherever it can be shown to create net economic value for the country,” with no separate ecological criteria attached to the decision.

(a) Identify the environmental value system (EVS) most clearly reflected in this policy. [1] (b) Justify your answer using specific wording from the policy description. [3]

5. A fishery is harvested at a rate that matches its measured annual population growth, so the total fish stock remains roughly constant year on year.

(a) Using the concepts of natural capital and natural income, explain whether this fishery is being used sustainably. [3] (b) Explain what would need to change for this fishery to become an example of natural capital being depleted. [2]

Section C

6. A coastal wetland absorbs floodwater during storms and releases it slowly afterwards. Recent development has removed part of the wetland to build housing, and residents further inland have since reported worse flooding after storms than before the development.

Using systems thinking, evaluate this scenario, explaining: the wetland’s original role in the system, the type of feedback loop implied by the worsening flooding, and one recommendation grounded in the sustainability concept for managing the remaining wetland. [8]

7. Two countries have similar populations and similar total resource consumption, but Country X has a much smaller land area than Country Y.

Explain what the ecological footprint indicator would be expected to show for each country, and evaluate one limitation of using ecological footprint alone to compare the environmental impact of the two countries. [8]

Worked answers

1. A particular world view or paradigm that shapes the way an individual or group perceives and evaluates environmental issues, influenced by cultural, religious, economic and socio-political factors. [2]

2. Natural capital is the stock of a natural resource itself; natural income is the sustainable yield – the amount that can be harvested or used from that stock without depleting it. [2]

3. An open system exchanges both energy and matter with its surroundings across its boundary; a closed system exchanges only energy, not matter. [2]

4. (a) Anthropocentrism. [1] (b) The policy explicitly frames permission to log on whether it “creates net economic value for the country,” making human economic benefit the sole decision criterion, with “no separate ecological criteria attached” – this centres the policy on human benefit rather than the intrinsic value of the forest (which would indicate ecocentrism) or a belief that technology can resolve any resulting environmental harm (which would indicate technocentrism). [3]

5. (a) Because the harvest rate matches the fishery’s natural income (its sustainable annual yield, reflected in the population growth rate), the fish stock – the natural capital – remains constant rather than shrinking; this is the definition of sustainable use, since the resource is not being depleted over time. [3] (b) If the harvest rate exceeded the population’s growth rate (the natural income), the total fish stock would fall year on year, meaning the natural capital itself was being drawn down rather than only its sustainable yield being taken. [2]

6. A strong answer treats the wetland as part of a system with an input (storm rainfall/floodwater) and an output (the wetland’s slow release of that water after absorbing it), where the wetland acts as a storage that regulates the speed at which water reaches the surrounding area. Removing part of the wetland reduces this storage and buffering capacity, so floodwater that would previously have been absorbed and released gradually instead reaches inland areas faster and in greater volume, which explains residents’ reports of worse flooding. This worsening flooding is best described as a consequence of losing a stabilising (negative feedback) mechanism rather than as a positive feedback loop in itself – the wetland previously provided negative feedback against flood severity, and removing it has removed that stabilising effect rather than introduced an amplifying one. A recommendation grounded in sustainability should focus on managing the remaining wetland as natural capital: for example, protecting the remaining wetland area from further development so its flood-buffering natural income (the flood protection service it provides annually) is preserved rather than eroded further, since further loss would keep reducing the system’s capacity to buffer future storms. [8] (Marks for correctly modelling the wetland as a system component with clear inputs/outputs; correctly identifying the loss of a stabilising function rather than mislabelling it as positive feedback; and a specific, sustainability-grounded recommendation.)

7. Ecological footprint measures the area of land and water required to sustainably provide the resources a population consumes and assimilate its waste; because both countries have similar total resource consumption, both would be expected to have a similar total ecological footprint area, largely independent of the size of their own land area. However, Country X’s smaller land area does affect how that footprint compares to what its own territory can sustainably supply: Country X could show an ecological deficit (a footprint larger than its own biocapacity), needing to rely on land, water or resources beyond its own borders, while Country Y’s larger land area may allow it to remain closer to, or within, its own biocapacity for the same footprint. A worthwhile evaluation notes that ecological footprint alone captures aggregate resource demand but does not, by itself, indicate which specific resources are under the most pressure, how sustainably those resources are being extracted (whether within natural income or depleting natural capital), or the social and economic distribution of that consumption within each country – so footprint comparisons are most useful alongside these other measures, not as a stand-alone verdict on environmental impact. [8] (Marks for correctly explaining that footprint reflects consumption rather than land area directly; connecting footprint to biocapacity/ecological deficit; and a genuine, specific limitation of the indicator.)

Why this set keeps applying Topic 1’s vocabulary to unfamiliar scenarios

Every question in this set deliberately places Topic 1’s three concepts – environmental value systems, systems thinking and sustainability – into an unfamiliar scenario rather than asking for a bare definition alone, because the study guide identifies this kind of transfer, not definition recall, as what the specification tests throughout the course. Question 6 in particular is written to penalise an answer that mislabels a stabilising effect as “positive feedback” simply because the outcome (worse flooding) sounds negative in the everyday sense – exactly the common exam error the study guide flags.

Official syllabus

International Baccalaureate Organization, Diploma Programme Subject Brief – Environmental Systems and Societies, first assessment 2026, https://ibo.org/globalassets/new-structure/university-admission/pdfs/environmental-systems-and-societies-subject-brief-en.pdf – the same source cited by the Topic 1 Foundations study guide and the full syllabus guide. Verified 2026-09-06.