The Student Room Group

12 marker human geography help

Hey, please could you read my answer to a globalisation 12 marker (I have included my plan also) and give me a realistic mark out of 12 and reasons why or what I could have done better?

I have mocks in a week and need critical feedback on what I can be doing better, thanks

Assess the view that globalisation inevitably damages the physical environment. (12)


P1 = agreeing with the statement (it does impact the environment)

TNCs polluting the nearby surroundings

Outsourcing causes new pollutants (shell in Nigeria)

Shell dumped hundreds of litres of fossil fuel into the lakes in Nigeria

Spiral of decline = degradation of the local area and abandonment (eg: old mines in the UK after thatcher was in power)

P2 = disagreeing with the statement (it is not inevitable, what TNCs could have done)

TNCs such as shell could have upgraded their pipes to prevent leaks and then taken responsibility

TNCs need to stop outsourcing and offshoring for cheaper labour costs

Offshoring recycling and rubbish eg: china with the UK’s plastic waste

Increasing export tax puts strain on TNCs but aids the environment

P3 = assessment of previous statements

Offshoring and outsourcing do reduce labour costs but damage the environment (carbon footprint)

Increasing corporation and export tax would aid in the proper disposal of waste but is bad for the economy

Its the economy and society as we know it or the environment

Shell giving jobs to over 10,000 = good for the economy

Globalisation is the process in which the world becomes more interconnected than before through the movement of goods and services. In this short essay, the assessment of the effect globalisation has on the environment will be discussed.

Introducing TNCs into a foreign, usually lower-income country has a high likelihood to damage the local environment. An example of this is exploiting natural resources in a low-income country such as Nigeria. The fuel company shell has been tapping into crude oil resources in Nigeria for decades in exchange for local businesses receiving the money to boost the economy. This not only pollutes the natural surroundings as seen in 2017 during the biggest oil spill Nigeria has seen, where over 100,000 litres of oil was spilt into local rivers and lakes due to faulty pipes but also causes interdependence on the said country to the TNC in question due to it financially and socially depending on it.

However, the argument that these TNCs couldn’t have done anything to prevent this is inconsequential. For instance, in Nigeria, the pipes that had caused the oil spill had not been security checked in years meaning they were not legally regulated. Local governments and international financial organisations can also prevent damage to the environment by increasing corporation tax and export tariffs to cause waste and recycling to be disposed of more efficiently regarding the natural environment. For instance, china raised its tariffs for taking in the UK’s plastic waste and demanded that it be pre-cleaned. Increasing said taxes does aid the environment but also puts tremendous strain on the profit acquired from TNCs.

As previously discussed the issue of offshoring and outsourcing will be one that will be fought for decades to come. However, as viewed in paragraph 1, shell does aid the local economy in Nigeria by providing over 10,000 jobs to the local population which, in turn, allows the economy to grow. Inconsequentially, the simple concision to this argument is that it comes down to either society and the economy as we know it based on capitalistic values or the environment which makes such a way of life possible. There is not enough education on climate change and the damage that globalisation can have on the planet which is why government officials and global organisations are not enforcing higher taxes.

In conclusion, I strongly disagree with this statement as the process of globalisation can be prevented or at least mitigated. In a perfect world, this would be possible but due to economical profit reasons, there is no scenario, without drastic action in which the environment can be protected efficiently.

Quick Reply