Marking instructions

Markers must apply the descriptors in line with the general marking guidance and the qualities outlined in the levels-based mark scheme below.

Responses that demonstrate only AO1 without any AO2 should be awarded marks as follows:

Level 1 AO1 performance: 1 mark
Level 2 AO1 performance: 2 marks
Level 3 AO1 performance: 3 marks
Level 4 AO1 performance: 4–5 marks.

Indicative content guidance

The indicative content below is not prescriptive and candidates are not required to include all of it. Other relevant material not suggested below must also be credited.

Please remember that descriptors provide guidance as to the appropriate level. Bullet points covering indicative content do not translate directly into marks.

Relevant points may include:

AO1

Inequalities can be identified in terms of income, health, education and political engagement amongst other factors, both within and between developing countries.
Differential access to basic needs such as food, water supply and sanitation results in inequality of health (e.g. disease, access to health programmes and life expectancy).
Ethnic variations and income levels contribute to health variations within a country.
Development aid includes charitable gifts from NGOs and national governments and IGOs offering loans.
Opinions vary about the success of aid, with most approving of increased equality for women and improvements in treatment for illness, but there is opposition to the dependency and corruption that it can involve.
Aid has helped improve health in some states but there has been failure elsewhere.
Development aid can be used by superpowers to extend their reach and influence.

AO2

Aid that is ineffective in reducing inequalities:

Aid is often short term and controlled by the donor with limited choice or oversight by the recipients. If it is withdrawn the poorest often suffer.
Tied aid and bilateral aid may restrict benefits.
Structural Adjustment Programme rules have forced restrictions on investment in health and education.
Problems with corruption/embezzlement/diversion of funds to ruling elites.
NGOs have exploited people (Oxfam in Haiti).
Health: treatment is provided freely by aid programmes, but a lack of access to clean water/balanced diet, and problems of access to follow-up appointments due to isolation mean that many do not fully benefit.
Access to drug treatment is expensive and the TRIPs agreement does not necessarily mean the best drugs are available, e.g. for cancer.
Fear of western medicine and unwilling to participate in vaccination programmes provided by aid programmes.

However positive progress in reducing inequalities:

Aid has been extremely successful in some ways, e.g. almost complete eradication of polio, small pox and ebola, and significant improvement in effects of malaria and HIV/AIDS. These reduce life expectancy inequalities.
Projects to help improve Maternal Mortality rates have a ‘double dividend’ by saving the child’s life.
Investment in infrastructure/IT/training helps improve trade and earnings.
Success of MDGs (2000 onwards) and SDG (2015 onwards) have targeted help to improve access to primary education, reduced poverty, etc.
Humanitarian aid following disasters does help rescue and recovery but often problems remain (Haiti post-2010 earthquake).
Closing the gender inequality gap has been a focus (globally since the UN decade for women in 1975) in many parts of the world.

Evaluation depends on the examples/evidence presented.

The poorest developing countries have so many other challenges that aid may be little more than a ‘sticking plaster’ alongside other pressures, e.g. migration of Malawi’s nurses to South Africa, and South Africa’s nurses to Australia or Canada means that any improvements from aid are small.

Project aid is widely criticised as piecemeal and poorly monitored, resulting in duplication and short-term targets and limited progress in reducing inequalities.

Inequalities could be assessed within and between countries. For the better off people in capital cities in many African countries, quality of health provision can be as good as elsewhere in the world. But for the poor, and in rural areas options are far fewer.

Note that answers that discuss the positives and negatives of aid generally without referring to inequalities are unlikely to reach L3.

16-20 Marks Level Description:

Demonstrates accurate and relevant geographical knowledge and understanding throughout. (AO1)
Applies knowledge and understanding of geographical information/ideas to find fully logical and relevant connections/relationships. (AO2)
Applies knowledge and understanding of geographical information/ideas to produce a full and coherent interpretation that is supported by evidence. (AO2)
Applies knowledge and understanding of geographical information/ideas to come to a rational, substantiated conclusion, fully supported by a balanced argument that is drawn together coherently. (AO2)

Human Rights & Intervention (Edexcel A Level Geography)

Topic Questions