Geography 2023 Paper I 50 marks 150 words Compulsory Explain

Q5

Answer the following in about 150 words each: (a) Explain the sequential development of areal differentiation as a fundamental concept in Human Geography. (10 marks) (b) Discuss critically food and nutrition problems associated with the developing world. (10 marks) (c) Human migration is a reflection of the balance between push and pull factors. Elaborate with reference to the most recent diaspora. (10 marks) (d) Has Malthusian Theory been discredited in contemporary times? Justify your answer. (10 marks) (e) Discuss the different types of polarisation induced spatial inequalities and imbalances associated with growth poles. (10 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

निम्नलिखित में से प्रत्येक का लगभग 150 शब्दों में उत्तर दीजिए : (a) मानव भूगोल में एक मौलिक संकल्पना के रूप में क्षेत्रीय विभेदन के क्रमिक विकास की व्याख्या कीजिए । (10 अंक) (b) विकासशील विश्व से संबंधित खाद्य एवं पोषण समस्याओं का समालोचनात्मक वर्णन कीजिए । (10 अंक) (c) मानव आप्रवास (ह्यूमन माइग्रेशन) प्रतिकर्ष एवं अभिकर्ष कारकों (पुश एवं पुल फैक्टर्स) के मध्य संतुलन का प्रतिबिंब है । सबसे नवीन प्रवासी जन समूह के संदर्भ में विस्तार से बताइए । (10 अंक) (d) क्या माल्थूसियन सिद्धांत को वर्तमान समय में मान्य नहीं किया गया है ? अपने उत्तर का औचित्य सिद्ध कीजिए । (10 अंक) (e) वृद्धि ध्रुव से जुड़े हुए विभिन्न प्रकार के ध्रुवीकरण से प्रेरित क्षेत्रीय असमानताओं एवं असंतुलनों पर चर्चा कीजिए । (10 अंक)

Directive word: Explain

This question asks you to explain. The directive word signals the depth of analysis expected, the structure of your answer, and the weight of evidence you must bring.

See our UPSC directive words guide for a full breakdown of how to respond to each command word.

How this answer will be evaluated

Approach

Explain requires clear, logical exposition of concepts with sequential development. Allocate ~30 words/3 minutes per sub-part (equal marks distribution). Structure each part with: brief definition → core explanation → 1-2 contemporary examples → concluding link to broader significance. For (a) trace Hartshorne to Sauer; (b) use India-specific data; (c) cite post-2010 diaspora; (d) balance critique with neo-Malthusian revival; (e) apply Perroux/Myrdal to Indian growth corridors.

Key points expected

  • (a) Areal differentiation: Evolution from Hartshorne's 'areal differentiation as goal' (1939) to Sauerian cultural landscape, Schaefer's exceptionism critique, and contemporary post-positivist interpretations including GIS-based regional analysis
  • (b) Food-nutrition problems: Calorie-protein gap, micronutrient deficiencies (Vitamin A, iron, iodine), food availability decline vs entitlement failure (Sen), structural adjustment impacts on food security, double burden of malnutrition
  • (c) Push-pull balance: Recent diaspora (post-2010) including Syrian refugee crisis, Rohingya exodus, Ukrainian displacement, Indian emigration to Gulf/USA; demonstrates how conflict/political push overrides economic pull
  • (d) Malthusian discrediting: Green Revolution, demographic transition, Boserup's intensification, but neo-Malthusian revival via climate change, resource depletion, planetary boundaries—contemporary relevance not fully negated
  • (e) Growth pole polarisation: Backwash vs spread effects (Myrdal), core-periphery widening, agglomeration diseconomies, social-spatial segregation; types include sectoral, spatial, and functional polarisation

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness20%10Precise chronological tracing of areal differentiation (Hartshorne→Sauer→Schaefer); accurate Sen entitlement theory for (b); correct application of Lee's push-pull model with recent diaspora specifics; nuanced neo-Malthusian positioning; correct Myrdal/Perroux terminology for growth polesBasic definitions correct but chronological gaps in (a); generic food security discussion without Sen; push-pull mentioned without diaspora specificity; binary discredited/supported stance on Malthus; conflates polarisation typesConfuses areal differentiation with regionalization; omits entitlement theory; anachronistic diaspora examples (pre-2000); absolute discrediting of Malthus without qualification; misunderstands backwash/spread effects
Map / diagram15%7.5Sketch for (a) showing regional variation exemplars; (b) includes India's malnutrition hotspot map; (c) flow map of recent diaspora with magnitude arrows; (e) core-periphery diagram with polarization gradients—minimum 2 relevant diagrams across partsOne generic diagram (e.g., push-pull schematic) without data; mentions maps without sketching; labels incomplete or misplacedNo diagrams despite spatial content; irrelevant or incorrect sketches; poor cartographic conventions
Indian regional examples20%10For (b): NFHS-5 data on stunting/wasting by state (Bihar, Jharkhand); for (c): Indian diaspora 2020-2024 (Canada student surge, Gulf return migration post-COVID); for (e): Mumbai-Pune corridor, Delhi-Mumbai Industrial Corridor polarization effects; minimum 3 distinct Indian exemplarsGeneric 'India' references without state/region specificity; outdated diaspora references (pre-2010); one concrete Indian example onlyNo Indian examples where clearly applicable; incorrect regional attribution; Eurocentric examples throughout
Spatial analysis25%12.5Demonstrates spatial thinking: (a) regional personality vs uniqueness debate; (b) spatial epidemiology of malnutrition; (c) migration field analysis, distance decay, chain migration networks; (e) explicit spatial inequality metrics (Gini, Theil index), cumulative causation geographyImplicit spatial awareness without terminology; mentions regions without analytical framework; conflates spatial with regional descriptionAspatial treatment of inherently geographical phenomena; no spatial pattern recognition; confuses scale levels
Application / policy20%10Contemporary policy relevance: (b) PDS reforms, POSHAN Abhiyaan; (c) emigration policy 2023, portability of social security; (d) SDG 2, climate-smart agriculture; (e) inclusive growth strategies, dispersed industrialization (SEZs in backward areas); critical evaluation of policy efficacyLists policies without critical evaluation; outdated schemes; generic 'government should' statements without specificityNo policy dimension; irrelevant policy references; purely theoretical treatment where applied geography expected

Practice this exact question

Write your answer, then get a detailed evaluation from our AI trained on UPSC's answer-writing standards. Free first evaluation — no signup needed to start.

Evaluate my answer →

More from Geography 2023 Paper I