IB Global Politics HL Extension: Global Political Challenges Questionbank

(d) Evaluate the extent to which states can meaningfully control the movement of data across their borders.

Stimulus

Text extract (adapted): "The physical barrier along the United States to Mexico frontier has grown in stages. The Secure Fence Act of 2006 authorised hundreds of miles of fencing, and construction accelerated after 2017. By early 2021 about 458 miles of barrier had been completed, but the great majority replaced older, weaker fencing rather than sealing previously open ground. Border officials acknowledge that migration did not stop; instead crossing routes shifted into remoter desert and mountain terrain, where recorded migrant deaths rose to record levels. The emergency public-health order known as Title 42, in force from 2020 to 2023, allowed rapid expulsions but produced repeated attempts by the same individuals rather than fewer arrivals overall."

(a) Using the stimulus, identify three claims the stimulus makes about the United States to Mexico border wall.

(b) Analyse one political issue raised by the construction of physical barriers along the United States to Mexico border.

(c) Recommend a course of action that the United States federal government and Mexico could take to reduce migrant deaths along their shared border, and consider its limitations.

(d) Evaluate the extent to which physical border barriers do more to project political symbolism than to control migration.

Stimulus

When the international community meets to bargain over the climate crisis, two very different demands sit on the table. The first is mitigation finance, money channelled to help developing states cut their own future emissions through renewable energy and cleaner industry. The second is loss and damage compensation, money that acknowledges harms already suffered from storms, flooding and drought that can no longer be prevented or adapted to. At COP27 in Egypt in 2022, states agreed in principle to create a dedicated Loss and Damage Fund, and at COP28 in the United Arab Emirates in 2023 they operationalised it with initial pledges.

The distinction matters politically because it reframes who owes what to whom. Mitigation finance treats climate action as a shared investment in a common future, while loss and damage frames the issue as historical responsibility for harm already inflicted. The Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), a coalition of low-lying nations facing existential threat, has argued for decades that pledges to cut future emissions do nothing for communities already losing their coastlines. Wealthier states have often resisted the language of compensation, fearing it implies unbounded legal liability.

Adapted from "The Price of Harm Already Done: Climate Finance After COP28" by Dr Amara Okonjo, Global Environmental Governance Review (2024).

(a) Using at least two examples from the stimulus, contrast mitigation finance with loss and damage compensation

(b) With explicit reference to a global political challenge from one of your researched case studies, explain how an alliance of vulnerable states has been used to advance a climate finance demand within a multilateral negotiating process

(c) Based on your answer to part (b), recommend one strategic change that would help an alliance of vulnerable states convert Loss and Damage Fund pledges into reliable, disbursed finance

Stimulus

Text extract (adapted): "The killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis in May 2020 turned a network founded in 2013 into the largest protest wave in recent memory. Within weeks, marches under the Black Lives Matter banner appeared in the United Kingdom, France, Australia and dozens of other countries, each attaching the slogan to its own history of policing and race. Supporters argue the movement changed what societies are willing to discuss. Critics counter that attention faded quickly and that durable change still depends on statutes, budgets and courts, which move at the pace of domestic politics rather than street mobilisation."

Source: Adapted from international press commentary on the 2020 protest wave.

(a) Using the stimulus, identify three things it suggests about the Black Lives Matter protest wave of 2020.

(b) Analyse one political issue raised by the transnational spread of the Black Lives Matter movement.

(c) Recommend a course of action that a transnational movement such as Black Lives Matter and allied domestic legislators could take to convert protest attention into durable reductions in racial inequality, and consider its limitations.

(d) Evaluate the extent to which transnational protest movements are more effective than domestic policy reform at reducing racial inequality.

Stimulus

Text extract (adapted): "The shale revolution transformed the United States from a large energy importer into the world's biggest producer of both oil and natural gas. Hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling unlocked tight oil and shale gas across states such as Texas, North Dakota and Pennsylvania, and politicians of both major parties embraced 'energy independence' as a strategic prize. The same government that rejoined the Paris Agreement and passed the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, the largest climate investment in US history, also presided over record crude output. Supporters argue cheap domestic gas and clean-energy subsidies can advance security and decarbonisation together; critics counter that expanding fossil production locks in emissions and contradicts the country's climate pledges."

(a) Using the stimulus, identify three things it suggests about the tension between US energy security and climate commitments.

(b) Analyse one political issue raised by the tension between energy security and climate commitments in the United States.

(c) Recommend a course of action that the US federal government could take to reconcile energy security with its climate commitments, and consider its limitations.

(d) Evaluate the extent to which energy-security imperatives will always override climate commitments for major states.

(d) Evaluate the extent to which framing climate finance as compensation for harm, rather than as investment in mitigation, strengthens the position of vulnerable states in global environmental politics. Base your response on one researched case study and integrate links to at least two HL extension topic areas.