1 · Power, legitimacy and source analysis
legitimacy · agenda
U1-Q1 · 2 marks
What best demonstrates agenda-setting power?
Answer and reasoning
An actor's ability to decide which issues receive consideration.
U1-Q2 · 4 marks
Explain the mechanism or reasoning in this original case: Two organizations have equal formal votes but different budgets and access to information. Formal equality does not make every actor equally influential.
Answer and reasoning
Compare the organizations' formal rights with their ability to commission research and set meeting agendas. This separates rule-based authority from practical influence and shows where another actor might challenge a decision.
- Accurate relevant concept (1)
- Specific evidence from the case (1)
- Connected reasoning (2)
Do not treat legitimacy as popularity alone, or assume a source is false because it has an interest. / Explain how origin, purpose and content affect the claim's usefulness for your question.
2 · Rights, development, sustainability and peace
justice · sustainability
U2-Q1 · 2 marks
What makes a peace agreement more durable in the resource case?
Answer and reasoning
Credible enforcement and arrangements that address the parties' underlying needs.
U2-Q2 · 4 marks
Explain the mechanism or reasoning in this original case: A community resource dispute involves access, livelihood and environmental limits. Treating it as only an economic problem can miss questions of rights and authority.
Answer and reasoning
Map the actors' needs and responsibilities. Compare a negotiated access agreement with a restriction imposed without consultation. Explain which conditions could make each option durable, fair and enforceable.
- Accurate relevant concept (1)
- Specific evidence from the case (1)
- Connected reasoning (2)
A single case is not proof that every conflict has the same cause. / State the relevant concept, evidence and counter-perspective before reaching a judgement.
3 · Engagement and reflective research
engagement · perspective
U3-Q1 · 2 marks
Which reflection is strongest?
Answer and reasoning
Explain how access to only staff perspectives limits conclusions about users' experiences.
U3-Q2 · 4 marks
Explain the mechanism or reasoning in this original case: A school wants to improve accessibility to a shared facility. You can study how decisions are made without staging activism or collecting sensitive information.
Answer and reasoning
With school approval, attend a permitted consultation or interview responsible staff about access arrangements. Compare the experience with policy documents and users' voluntary accounts. Analyse power and competing needs, then reflect on what the evidence cannot establish.
- Accurate relevant concept (1)
- Specific evidence from the case (1)
- Connected reasoning (2)
Participation itself is not analysis; avoid a diary that only recounts events. / The teacher approves the real activity and authorship; a fictional engagement report cannot satisfy IA requirements.
4 · Global challenges and case synthesis
cooperation · sovereignty
U4-Q1 · 2 marks
Why can an institution's formal mandate be insufficient?
Answer and reasoning
It may lack resources, enforcement or agreement among actors needed to achieve the outcome.
U4-Q2 · 4 marks
Explain the mechanism or reasoning in this original case: A water shortage affects health, migration and development at the same time. A single-sector response may move the problem rather than resolve it.
Answer and reasoning
Compare a local water-management case with a transboundary allocation case. Identify where cooperation depends on authority, trust and resource asymmetry. Evaluate institutions by outcomes and constraints, rather than assuming cooperation is either always effective or always impossible.
- Accurate relevant concept (1)
- Specific evidence from the case (1)
- Connected reasoning (2)
The current HL requirement is a stimulus-based Paper 3, not the old oral case presentation. / Case synthesis needs specific evidence from both cases and the provided sources.