The photograph shows part of the Himalaya in the Everest region of Nepal in summer.

Answers may include but are not limited to:

Hot, arid areas are characterized by high temperatures and low/variable annual rainfall. Annual rainfall varies between 250 mm and 500 mm, so there is some possibility for farming, especially where water conservation methods are used.

Opportunities are created by:

• nomadism (the traditional way of dealing with insufficient amounts of rainfall and pasture)
• maximizing water availability (eg irrigation in areas close to rivers or oases/aquifers; creation of bunds, stone lines, etc to trap water; use of desalinization plants for water in high income countries
• improving agricultural practices (eg increased use of drought-tolerant species; land enclosure to reduce wind erosion; limiting the numbers of grazing animals; careful choice of crops, cultivation techniques and continuous monitoring; use of fertilizers; irrigating with silt-laden river water to restore soil in badly eroded areas.

Good answers will present a structured response which will explain a wide range of opportunities for hot, arid areas, or some critical discussion of whether one or more opportunities have actually been realized by different groups/stakeholders/perspectives in different places (with varying wealth, technology, etc). There may be some discussion on whether opportunities have increased or lessened over time.

Marks	Overall Description
0	The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.
1-2	• Response is too brief, lists unconnected information, not focused on question and lacks structure • Very brief or descriptive, listing unconnected comments or irrelevant information • Very general knowledge with large gaps or errors • Examples/case studies absent or only listed • No evidence of analysis • Terminology missing, undefined, irrelevant or incorrect • No evaluation or conclusion expected • Information not grouped logically • Maps/graphs/diagrams absent, irrelevant or unclear
3-4	• Response is too general, lacks detail, not focused on question and largely unstructured • Very general response • Outlines relevant and irrelevant examples, statistics, facts • Links to question merely listed • Analysis not relevant • Basic terminology used with errors or inconsistently • Irrelevant conclusion • No critical evaluation of evidence • Information not logically grouped • Maps/graphs lack detail or incorrectly interpreted
5-6	• Response partially addresses question, with narrow argument, unsubstantiated conclusion, and limited evaluation • Describes relevant supporting evidence • Outlines appropriate links to question • Partially addresses question or repeats one point • Relevant terminology used with minor errors • General conclusions, misaligned with evidence • Other perspectives/strengths/weaknesses listed • Some logical grouping but inconsistent • Maps/graphs don't follow conventions
7-8	• Response addresses whole question, evaluated analysis and relevant but unbalanced conclusion • Describes correct relevant evidence covering all main points • Describes appropriate links • Clear but one-sided analysis • Complex terminology correct but inconsistent • Relevant but unbalanced conclusion • Other perspectives described • Consistent logical grouping • Maps/graphs support analysis
9-10	• Response is in-depth and question-specific; justified analysis and conclusion through well-developed evaluation • Explains integrated examples, statistics, details • Explains appropriate links • Balanced analysis discussing complexity • Complex terminology used correctly throughout • Balanced conclusion aligned with evidence • Systematic evaluation of perspectives • Discusses strengths/weaknesses • Logically structured • Maps/graphs properly annotated and support argument