OxfordAQA A Level Geography: Globalisation and Global Systems — 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 — examination boards hold copyright in their own papers. Use these alongside the official past papers available free from your board.

Related: Globalisation and Global Systems study guide · Globalisation and Global Systems revision notes

---

Section A

1. Define globalisation and identify the five named dimensions along which it takes place. [3]

2. Explain what is meant by “interdependence” as a feature of global systems. [3]

Section B

3. Explain three flows that contribute to economic globalisation. [8]

4. Explain how developments in technology and systems have acted as factors driving globalisation. [8]

5. Using an example, explain why unequal power relations between states can shape the outcome of a global system. [5]

6. Evaluate the view that globalisation benefits all countries and peoples equally. [12]

---

Answers

1. Globalisation is the increasing economic, political, social and environmental interconnectedness of countries and regions across the world [1]. The specification identifies five dimensions: flows of capital, labour, products, services and information [1] [1].

2. Interdependence is a state in which countries, economies or peoples rely on one another, such that a change or decision made in one place has effects elsewhere [1]. It can be economic, political, social or environmental in form [1], and the specification treats it as a double-edged phenomenon — capable of producing stability and growth, but also inequality and conflict [1].

3. Capital flows — foreign direct investment moves finance from investing economies into others, funding infrastructure and production but also creating dependence on external investors [1] [1]. Labour flows — international migration, including skilled-labour migration, redistributes workers between economies, raising remittance income in origin countries while filling skills gaps in destination countries [1] [1]. Information flows — instant digital communication and financial data transfer allow production, marketing and investment decisions to be coordinated across continents in real time [1] [1]. In each case, naming a concrete instance of the flow — a specific investment project, a specific migration corridor, a specific data link — is what separates a listed category from credited detail [1].

4. Transport technology — containerisation and cheaper, faster shipping and air freight have cut the cost and time of moving products between countries, enabling globally distributed supply chains [1] [1]. Communications systems — the internet and mobile telecommunications allow financial, management and information systems to operate across borders instantaneously, coordinating global production and marketing [1] [1]. Financial and security systems — international banking networks and trade-facilitating security systems reduce the risk and cost of cross-border transactions, encouraging further capital flows [1] [1]. Trade agreements — negotiated reductions in tariffs and other barriers between states directly increase the volume of products and services able to flow between them [1] [1].

5. States with greater economic and political power can drive global systems, such as trade rules or the terms set within international financial institutions, to their own advantage [1]. For example, a highly developed economy negotiating trade agreements that favour its own industries, or setting conditions within a financial institution that smaller economies must accept, leaves those less powerful states more constrained, able only to respond to or resist decisions made elsewhere rather than shape them directly [1] [1]. This does not mean less powerful states gain nothing — global systems can still offer genuine access to investment or markets — but the terms of that access remain shaped by more powerful actors [1].

6. Evidence that globalisation benefits are unequal: unequal flows of people, money, ideas and technology can promote stability, growth and development in some places while causing inequalities, conflicts and injustices in others [1] [1]. Unequal power relations mean that more powerful states can drive global systems, such as trade rules and financial institutions, to their own advantage, while less powerful states are limited to a more constrained, responsive role [1] [1]. A skilled-labour migration flow, for instance, benefits a destination economy’s skills base while representing a loss of human capital for the country of origin [1]. Evidence of genuine shared benefit: capital and information flows can fund infrastructure, transfer technology and open market access in less developed economies that would not otherwise be available, and trade agreements can expand opportunities for exporters in smaller economies as well as larger ones [1] [1]. Interdependence, by definition, means that growth or stability in one place can also generate benefit elsewhere through the same flows that transmit risk [1]. Judgement: globalisation produces genuine opportunities alongside genuine costs, but the two are not evenly distributed — because power relations between states are unequal, more powerful states are better placed to capture benefit and shift cost onto others, so the claim that benefit is equal across all countries and peoples is not supported [1] [1]. The clearest test of a strong answer is whether it can hold both halves of this balance together for the same flow or system, rather than treating globalisation as uniformly positive or uniformly negative [1].

---

Where marks are usually lost

• Naming the dimensions of globalisation without a concrete example for any of them.
• Treating globalisation and global systems as interchangeable rather than distinguishing process from outcome.
• Describing unequal power relations abstractly without naming a specific mechanism, such as a trade agreement or financial institution, through which that power is exercised.
• Giving a one-sided evaluation that treats globalisation as either wholly beneficial or wholly harmful, rather than balancing both for the same example.