Take this Quiz: A-Level Geography: Global Systems and Governance | Zestly

Question 1

In the country of Orizon, farmers sell unroasted coffee beans for two pounds a kilogram. A foreign firm roasts and packs these beans, selling them in retail markets for eight pounds a kilogram. What share of the final price does Orizon receive, and what change would allow the country to capture more value?

Accepted Answer

One quarter of the final price; Orizon would need to process the beans domestically to retain the value added.

Answer

One eighth of the final price; Orizon would need to abandon coffee production to focus on higher-value manufactured goods.

Answer

One half of the final price; Orizon would need to increase the volume of raw bean exports to maximise total revenue.

Answer

One quarter of the final price; Orizon would need to lower the price of raw beans to attract more processing firms.

Question 2

The nation of Veridia earns eighty percent of its export revenue from a single crop, cocoa. When global market prices for cocoa fall by thirty percent, the national economy enters a recession. What does this case demonstrate about export dependence, and what would diversification achieve?

Accepted Answer

It shows that Veridia is highly exposed to commodity price volatility; diversification would spread risk across multiple sectors.

Answer

It shows that Veridia has chosen the wrong crop; diversification would allow the country to dictate global market prices.

Answer

It shows that Veridia is failing to modernise; diversification would guarantee higher prices for all future exports.

Answer

It shows that Veridia is inherently uncompetitive; diversification would eliminate the need for global trade participation.

Question 3

A transnational corporation opens a factory in the host country of Solara. It pays wages higher than the local average, trains its workers in technical skills, negotiates a five-year tax holiday, and sends all profits back to its headquarters abroad. What does Solara gain, and what does it not?

Accepted Answer

It gains higher wages than local employers pay and workers trained in skills that stay in the country even if the firm eventually leaves; it does not gain tax revenue during the holiday, and the profits go abroad, so most of what the factory earns does not circulate in Solara.

Answer

It gains nothing worth having: an arrangement of this kind is simply extraction, and a country is always better off refusing it.

Answer

It gains the whole value the factory creates, since the wages, the training and the output all take place inside Solara.

Answer

It gains a permanent stream of tax revenue, since a tax holiday postpones the payments rather than cancelling them for that period.

Question 4

Migrants move from the rural country of Kaltos to the industrial country of Urbis. In Urbis, the influx of workers fills labour shortages in construction. In Kaltos, the departure of these workers leads to a loss of skilled labour but an increase in household income through remittances. What does this case support?

Answer

Migration is universally beneficial; it solves labour shortages in both the sending and receiving countries.

Answer

Migration is universally harmful; it causes wage stagnation in the receiving country and poverty in the sending country.

Answer

Migration has identical effects everywhere; it always leads to a net loss of human capital for the destination.

Answer

Migration has different consequences at each end; it addresses labour needs in Urbis while providing financial support to Kaltos.

Question 5

Workers from the country of Luma send remittances home to their families, while the government of Luma receives official development aid from a donor state. How do these two flows differ in terms of decision-making and exposure?

Answer

Remittances are exposed to global market crashes, whereas aid is immune to any changes in the donor country's economy.

Answer

Remittances are always used for long-term investment, whereas aid is always used for immediate consumption.

Answer

Remittances are spent by households based on private needs, whereas aid is allocated by governments and exposed to political conditions.

Answer

Remittances are managed by the state to fund infrastructure, whereas aid is distributed to families to spend as they choose.