some pointers on the vj and nj with contribution by madeline

VJC
(DRQ)

4b) After identifying the 2 primate cities (eg. Bogota and Lima), other than
saying that those 2 are primate cities because they are significantly bigger
than the 2nd largest cities in the countries, what else can be said? The
question is worth 4 marks so what could be the 1 or 2 more points needed?

I believe the mark allocation is 2 marks for the 2 cities, 1 mark to identify the basis (the size of the pie) and 1 mark to justify (the pie much bigger than other pie in the country)!

8a) Why do some countries urgently need an increase in birth rates?
increased age-dependency ratio-> higher taxes-> less profitable for foreign
investors
less vibrant workforce
less men to defend the country
more money has to be channelled to building senior citizen-friendly
policies/infrastructure; less government funds for other (age-groups in the society?)

What are other points?
social burden on the working population - need to pay higher taxes
in some case, national / ethnic concerns as well for example, Japanese is a highly homogenous society and if BR continues to fall, and more foreigners comes in, social fabric would be affected, japanese culture threaten
for pural societies like singapore, its not much of an issue, even than questions are asked about foreign talents vs locals

> 8b) World pop to surpass 7bn in 2013. twe: strengthen conservationist views
> or pop-resource relationship? (Can't think of 16 marks worth of things to
> say)
Begin with a clear definition of conservationist views: malthus theory
basis of his theory is the limited ability of men to produce enough food
however, as Boserup observed, agiculture communities have consistantly proven him wrong e.g. GR (explain briefly)
More over, pop projection only reflects one side of the pop:resource equation, what about food production projection? Need both to draw conclusion.

Nonetheless, statement cannot be dismiss because
>food production has increased greatly since the GR but has not increased
>significantly after that in the future, population could greatly exceed food >production as populations in ELDCs are still growing rapidly.
>food surplus in EMDC and some rich ELDC (eg. dumping of agri produce by EMDCs, storing of large amounts of grain in Indian granaries), many people in impoverished countries are still starving
>Food is available but the people cannot afford it or cannot access to it

Increase disparity means some parts of the world will face a food crisis

In addition, LTG model reflects more contemporary views of the constraints of a finite earth (explain briefly)
Pop growth alone may not create a crisis but when multiply effect with other variables, the conservationist prediction can still come true

10d) With ref to a NIC, assess the impacts of economic dvt.
> do we have a case study on that? Is it the South Korean one?
Carr has a rather detailed one on Korea Waugh on Malaysia but ans should be based on lecture notes on why ELDC wants to industrialise
>
> NJC
>
> (DRQ)
>
> 1a) What is the model that pop trends in China follow?
> referring to a stage in the DTM? (can't think of anth else) it is DTM
>
> 7b) how can the dry land agri syst be intensified sustainably?
> aeroponics/hydroponics
> market gardening
> multi-cropping- to give nutrients in soil, time to be replenished and not
> overwork the soil. Also, planting of secondary crops would prevent soil
> erosion
> (above mentioned:secondary sch stuff. Applicable?)
forget about this qn

> (Essays)
8b) Pop > 7bn in 2013. Discuss validity of the statement in the context of
> recent pop trends in last 40 years. EMDCs and ELDCs examples req.

interpretation
its a prediction, will the prediction come true? what is the basis of such a prediction

> -what are the pop trends for the past 40 years?
> globally, pop growth exponentially but growth is very uneven
EMDCs generally slow pop growth, with many falling below replacement levels, ageing population
ELDCs > rapidly growing population, young pop has great fertility potential

how to derive the 7 million
So the 2013 projection is base on the assumption current knowledge about population size and age structure, rates of birth, death, and migration, and assumptions about how these rates will change.
The pyramid which reveals the size of the fertile pop ofen use as basis for projection - the momentum of growth
e.g. . A history of high fertility rates would be consistent with a young age structure, while a history of low fertility would be associated with an older age profile.
in addition, countries go through DT, therefore as more eldc become better off, DR fall, while BR may remain high (stage 2)

However as you pointed out
2 major ELDCs have put into place population policies to reduce pop
> size.
> China- one child policy-> ageing pop
> India- promoting of family planning
> Both countries were successful in reducing pop
even tho'
tho pop gw rate has slowed down, the vast pops still
> result in the pop growing, albeit at a much slower rate.

some emdc are actively encourging higher fertility e.g japan, singapore

in addition great difference occurs among em and eldcs
e.g. fertiliy level in pakistan (eldc) is much higher than malaysia (also eldc)
like wise fertility level in US is much higher than UK

thus gloablly projection is still ok, but clearly growth will be very uneven.


hope it helps