AQA A-Level Geography Paper 1, June 2025: Question 5

Section C

Question 5 Hazards

Total

Qu Part Marking guidance

marks

05 1 Outline processes involved in the formation of island arcs. 4

AO1=4

Point marked

Allow 1 mark per valid point with extra mark(s) for developed points (d).

For example:

Notes for answers

AO1

• Island arcs tend to form at destructive (convergent) plate boundaries

(1).

• Convection currents are the process involved in the creation of island

arcs (1). Some may reference ridge push / slab pull (or gravitational

sliding) as an associated theory (1) (d).

• When oceanic crust descends into the mantle along the lithosphere it

folds, crumples and is forced up (1). This is most likely to occur at

oceanic / oceanic plate boundaries (1) (d).

• Intense heating occurs along the subduction zone (1). Some may

reference the role of friction or the presence of water in causing the

mantle to reach melting point and forming magma (1) (d).

• The less dense magma rises to the surface forming volcanoes, often in

the shape of an arc (1).

• Examples include the Ryuku Islands, south of Japan (1).

The notes for answers are not exhaustive. Credit any valid points.

05 2 Interpret the data shown in Figure 9. 6

AO3=6

AO3 – There should be interpretation of the information provided. This

should include an awareness of the patterns and relationships as well as

an awareness of any anomalies.

Mark scheme

Level 2 (4–6 marks)

AO3 – Clear analysis of a geographical issue or question. Clear

interpretation of the quantitative evidence provided, which makes

appropriate use of data and evidence in support. Clear connection(s)

between different aspects of the data and evidence.

Level 1 (1–3 marks)

– A-LEVEL GEOGRAPHY – –

AO3 – Basic analysis of a geographical issue or question. Basic

interpretation of the quantitative evidence provided, which makes limited

use of data and evidence in support. Basic connection(s) between

different aspects of the data and evidence. 31

Notes for answers

AO3

• Northern California appears to be less at risk of extreme seismic

events compared to Southern California looking at the map data.

However, the probability of >6.7 in a 30-year period is similar and

almost certain to occur, according to the table (93% v 97% and just a

4% difference). Also, the table indicates that Southern California is at

much greater risk of >7.0 and >7.5. For instance, at >7.5 the risk is

22% higher.

• Broadly speaking there are two swathes of land at greater risk of a

>6.7 event across the whole of California. The first area is in a series

of relatively thin strips running almost parallel to the coast and

extending inland around 80 km–100 km. These thin strips are where

the highest risks are found in California.

• The second area of increased risk of seismic activity is more of a zone

extending from the north down to the southeast in a wider band, again

around 80–100 km wide. The risk is much lower here though at only

0.1 to 10%.

• Much of the interior of California has no significant risk of such a

seismic event.

• The logarithmic colour spectrum scale could be argued to be a little

unclear. For example, the thin strip extending northwest to southeast

just above Los Angeles and San Diego is the most active area on the

map. The percentage appears to be around 50%, but it is not possible

to be definitive or to compare areas easily.

• It is also hard to see how the percentages in the table correlate with

the map evidence for >6.7 events in a 30-year period. Considering

that risk in the table is so high, the map should include more colours

towards the top end of the spectrum.

• Allow critical evaluation of the resource’s usefulness.

– A-LEVEL GEOGRAPHY – –

Credit any other valid interpretation.

05 3 Using Figure 10 and your own knowledge, assess the challenges in 9

responding to an event such as this. AO1=4

AO2=5

AO1 – Knowledge and understanding of the management of tropical

storms.

AO2 – Application of knowledge and understanding to the novel

situation, to assess the impacts of the data for the management of

tropical storms in this region.

Mark scheme

Level 3 (7–9 marks)

AO1 – Demonstrates detailed knowledge and understanding of

concepts, processes, interactions and change. These underpin the

response throughout.

32 AO2 – Applies knowledge and understanding appropriately with detail.

Connections and relationships between different aspects of study are

fully developed with complete relevance. Assessment is detailed and

well supported with appropriate evidence.

Level 2 (4–6 marks)

AO1 – Demonstrates clear knowledge and understanding of concepts,

processes, interactions and change. These are mostly relevant though

there may be some minor inaccuracy.

AO2 – Applies clear knowledge and understanding appropriately.

Connections and relationships between different aspects of study are

evident with some relevance. Assessment is evident and supported with

clear and appropriate evidence.

Level 1 (1–3 marks)

AO1 – Demonstrates basic knowledge and understanding of concepts,

processes, interactions and change. This offers limited relevance with

inaccuracy.

AO2 – Applies limited knowledge and understanding. Connections and

relationships between different aspects of study are basic with limited

relevance. Assessment is basic and supported with limited appropriate–A-LEVEL GEOGRAPHY– –

evidence.

Notes for answers

AO1

• The nature of tropical storms and their underlying causes. Forms of

storm hazard: high winds, storm surges, coastal flooding, river flooding

and landslides. Spatial distribution, magnitude, frequency, regularity,

predictability of hazard events.

• Impacts: primary/secondary, environmental, social, economic, political.

Short and long-term responses: risk management designed to reduce

the impacts of the hazard through preparedness, mitigation, prevention

and adaptation.

• Impacts and human responses as evidenced by two recent tropical

storms in contrasting areas of the world.

AO2

• The storm appears to have hit the northern part of the south and

central Philippines over 3-day period (10–12 April, 2022). At its worst,

over 500 mm of rainfall fell in an 4-day period. This will almost

certainly have caused widespread flooding. Trying to provide

evacuation routes as well as accessing the area to provide emergency

relief will have proven extremely difficult. No doubt the delays will

have caused unnecessary hardship and contributed to the loss of life.

• Considering the size of the Eastern Visayas Islands, 107 rescue

centres does not seem adequate given that it bore the brunt of the

storm in terms of loss of life and missing persons. Western Visayas for

example had 226 rescue centres but only 17 dead and 6 missing. The

focus of the rescue operation needed to be on Eastern Visayas.

• Another issue is scale of area affected. Given the sheer size of the

archipelago, emergency services would have found accessing the

number of sites requiring support to be extremely difficult. Even as far

south as Davao, there were still deaths and missing people.

• Added to this was the multi-hazard nature of the event. For example,

the storm surge appears to have affected the whole country. Some

parts may have been relatively well protected but others not.

• Prioritising which areas to help would have been hampered by the

scale but also inevitable communication issues. No doubt telephone

lines, Internet services and TV communications were affected to at

least some degree. This would have made it harder to both receive

and send vital messages.

• In the longer term, reconstruction would have been a major challenge.

Nearly 500 000 had to leave their homes and over 11 000 houses

were damaged in some way. Depending on levels of insurance,

government may also have needed to step in and provide emergency

assistance.

• Some may go further and consider challenges such as ruined

farmland /crops and the implications of other aspects of infrastructure

damage. This is creditable.

• Others may compare this event with their learned case study material.

Lengthy consideration of this is only creditable under AO1.

– A-LEVEL GEOGRAPHY – –

Credit any other valid assessment.

05 4 Evaluate the role of economic development in the management of 9

wildfires. AO1=4

34 AO2=5

AO1 – Knowledge and understanding of how levels of development

relate to the human response to wildfires.

AO2 – Application of knowledge and understanding to evaluate the role

of economic development in the management of wildfires.

Mark scheme

Level 3 (7–9 marks)

AO1 – Demonstrates detailed knowledge and understanding of

concepts, processes, interactions and change. These underpin the

response throughout.

AO2 – Applies knowledge and understanding appropriately with detail.

Connections and relationships between different aspects of study are

fully developed with complete relevance. Evaluation is detailed and well

supported with appropriate evidence.

Level 2 (4–6 marks)

AO1 – Demonstrates clear knowledge and understanding of concepts,

processes, interactions and change. These are mostly relevant though

there may be some minor inaccuracy.

AO2 – Applies clear knowledge and understanding appropriately.

Connections and relationships between different aspects of study are

evident with some relevance. Evaluation is evident and supported with

clear and appropriate evidence.

Level 1 (1–3 marks)

AO1 – Demonstrates basic knowledge and understanding of concepts,

processes, interactions and change. This offers limited relevance with

inaccuracy.

AO2 – Applies limited knowledge and understanding. Connections and

relationships between different aspects of study are basic with limited

relevance. Evaluation is basic and supported with limited appropriate–A-LEVEL GEOGRAPHY– –

evidence.

Notes for answers

AO1

• Characteristic human responses – fatalism, prediction,

adjustment/adaptation, mitigation, management, risk sharing – and

their relationship to level of development.

• Nature of wildfires. Conditions favouring intense wildfires: vegetation

type, fuel characteristics, climate and recent weather and fire

behaviour. Causes of fires: natural and human agency. Impacts:

primary/secondary, environmental, social, economic, political. Short

and long-term responses; risk management designed to reduce the

impacts of the hazard through preparedness, mitigation, prevention

and adaptation.

• Impact and human responses as evidenced by a recent wildfire event. 35

AO2

• Irrespective of the level of development there are measures that

communities can take to protect themselves from the most severe

impacts of wildfires. For those with only intermediate technology the

key is education and communication. Once individual families and

communities know they are at risk, they can undertake controlled

burning in advance of an event to create a protective ring around

whatever they deem valuable. Families can use flame resistant

building materials. Early warning systems can be put in place, in even

the most remote and undeveloped locations. Using high points on the

land and establishing spotters will certainly help.

• However more developed countries generally have greater resilience

to wildfires due to the access to better technology. Weather mapping

can identify which areas are more likely to be affected. This combined

with early warning and a combination of protecting property and

evacuation will save lives. Emergency services are more likely to be

equipped with the necessary skills, training and equipment tackle the

fire. This includes creating fire breaks and using flame retardants as

well as aircraft to deliver high volumes of water. Insurance is likely to

be much more prevalent as level of development improves. Whilst this

does not help with the management of the fire, it certainly helps with

recovery.

• Case studies may feature as a comparison, and if clearly used to

support the answer can be credited for AO2.

– A-LEVEL GEOGRAPHY – –

Credit any valid assessment.

05 5 Assess the future prospects for sustainable human occupation of a 20

multi-hazardous environment that you have studied. AO1=10

AO2=10

AO1 – Knowledge and understanding of a multi-hazard environment

location and the responses to this hazard.

AO2 – Application of knowledge and understanding to assess the extent

to which the chosen location has a sustainable future.

Notes for answers

AO1

• Case study of a multi-hazardous environment to illustrate and analyse

36 the nature of the hazards and the social, economic and environmental

risks presented, and how human qualities and responses such as

resilience, adaptation, mitigation and management contribute to its

continuing human occupation.

AO2

• The direction of the response will depend on the choice of supporting

material.

• By any definition Haiti fits the definition of a multi-hazard environment.

It lies on a fault line between the Caribbean and North American plate.

In 2010 it was hit by a shallow focus 7.0 Richter Scale earthquake near

the capital Port Au Prince. Most of the estimated 260 000 deaths were

caused by the impact of the earthquake, but there was also a tsunami

triggered by underwater landslides. Added to this, a secondary impact

caused by the insanitary conditions was cholera. An additional 9000

died between 2010 and 2017 with hundreds of thousands still at risk of

the disease. Haiti is also vulnerable to tropical storms, as evidenced

by the 2016 Hurricane Matthew event. Prior to this and not long after

the earthquake of 2010, it was hit by Hurricane Tomas. It lies in the

location of regular tropical storms fuelled by high water temperatures in

the Caribbean Sea. These tropical storms have created a number of

additional hazards such as landslides, coastal floods and river floods.

• Haiti has been severely damaged by these repeated events over a

relatively short space of time. Added to this Haiti was already one of

the poorest countries in the western hemisphere. The underlying

challenges of a low literacy (representing a poor inaccessible

education system), poor healthcare (evidenced by low life expectancy)

as well as alleged government corruption and mismanagement have

produced a dire outlook for Haiti in terms of a sustainable future.

• The country could be described as being in a repeating cycle of

disaster and only partial recovery before the next disaster strikes.

Some estimates suggest that the earthquake alone has pushed Haiti’s

development back by 100 years.

• International support has not been strong in recent years. Some argue

that this is due to ‘disaster fatigue’ ie charitable donations have dried

up due to the repeated issues facing the country. This is quite the

opposite of what the country needs but there may be evidence of this

occurring. However, debt cancellation–A-has taken place and the UNLEVEL GEOGRAPHY– –

donated $21 million to help with the refugee and cholera crisis. Other

attempts have been made to train local doctors and rebuild

communications infrastructure in Haiti. Nevertheless, Haiti’s 37

international debt once again exceeds $400 million.

• Internally, there are serious issues around political instability, inflation,

crime and gang warfare.

• It is very hard to see how this multi-hazard environment has anything

resembling a sustainable future without substantial, immediate and

long-term international support. Even this small hope is predicated on

the country remaining disaster free, which does not seem likely.

• Others may consider multi-hazardous locations which are more

sustainable in terms of human occupation. Expect to see reference to

Japan for example, in this regard.

– A-LEVEL GEOGRAPHY – –

Credit any other valid assessment.

Marking grid for Question 05.5

Level/ Criteria/Descriptor

Mark

Range

Level 4 • Detailed evaluative conclusion that is rational and firmly based on knowledge and

(16–20 understanding which is applied to the context of the question. Interpretations are

marks) comprehensive, sound and coherent (AO2).

• Detailed, coherent and relevant analysis and evaluation in the application of knowledge

and understanding throughout (AO2).

• Full evidence of links between knowledge and understanding to the application of

knowledge and understanding in different contexts (AO2).

• Detailed, highly relevant and appropriate knowledge and understanding of place(s) and

environments used throughout (AO1).

• Full and accurate knowledge and understanding of key concepts, processes and

interactions and change throughout (AO1).

• Detailed awareness of scale and temporal change which is well integrated where

appropriate (AO1).

Level 3 • Clear evaluative conclusion that is based on knowledge and understanding which is

(11–15 applied to the context of the question (AO2).

marks) • Generally clear, coherent and relevant analysis and evaluation in the application of

knowledge and understanding (AO2).

• Generally clear evidence of links between knowledge and understanding to the

application of knowledge and understanding in different contexts (AO2).

• Generally clear and relevant knowledge and understanding of place(s) and environments

(AO1).

• Generally clear and accurate knowledge and understanding of key concepts and

processes (AO1).

• Generally clear awareness of scale and temporal change which is integrated where

appropriate (AO1).

Level 2 • Some sense of an evaluative conclusion partially based upon knowledge and

(6–10 understanding which is applied to the context of the question (AO2).

marks) • Some partially relevant analysis and evaluation in the application of knowledge and

understanding (AO2).

• Some evidence of links between knowledge and understanding to the application of

knowledge and understanding in different contexts (AO2).

• Some relevant knowledge and understanding of place(s) and environments which is

partially relevant (AO1).

• Some knowledge and understanding of key concepts, processes and interactions and

change (AO1).

38 • Some awareness of scale and temporal change which is sometimes integrated where

appropriate. There may be a few inaccuracies (AO1).

Level 1 • Very limited and/or unsupported evaluative conclusion that is loosely based upon

(1–5 knowledge and understanding which is applied to the context of the question (AO2).

marks) • Very limited analysis and evaluation in the application of knowledge and understanding.

This lacks clarity and coherence (AO2).

• Very limited and rarely logical evidence of links between knowledge and understanding to

the application of knowledge and understanding in different contexts (AO2).

• Very limited relevant knowledge and understanding of place(s) and environments (AO1).

• Isolated knowledge and understanding of key concepts and processes (AO1).

• Very limited awareness of scale and temporal change which is rarely integrated where

appropriate. There may be a number of inaccuracies (AO1).

Level 0 • Nothing worthy of credit.

(0 marks)