Geography 2024 Paper I 50 marks Explain

Q7

(a) Explain the basis of D. Whittlesey's classification of agricultural regions of the world. 20 (b) What is Transnationalism ? Why has the scale and scope of transnational linkages of diaspora multiplied in recent times ? 15 (c) Assess the criteria required for selecting regions for developmental planning. 15

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) डी. हिटलेसी के विश्व कृषि प्रदेशों के वर्गीकरण के आधार की व्याख्या कीजिए। 20 (b) पाराष्ट्रीयता क्या है ? हाल की अवधि में प्रवासियों के पाराष्ट्रीय संबंधों का पैमाना एवं दायरा क्यों अत्यधिक बढ़ गया है ? 15 (c) विकासात्मक योजना के लिए प्रदेशों के चयन में अपेक्षित मानदंडों का आकलन कीजिए। 15

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

The directive 'explain' demands clear causal reasoning and systematic exposition. Allocate approximately 40% of time/words to part (a) given its 20 marks, with 30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure: brief introduction acknowledging the three distinct themes; body addressing each sub-part sequentially with clear sub-headings; conclusion synthesizing how agricultural classification, transnationalism, and regional planning collectively inform contemporary development geography.

Key points expected

  • For (a): Whittlesey's five criteria—crop and livestock combination, intensity of cultivation, crop and livestock association, degree of commercialization, and related characteristics of land tenure, power, and technology—with explicit mention of his 13 world agricultural regions
  • For (a): Critical evaluation of the classification's static nature and failure to account for technological diffusion, climate change adaptation, and policy shifts in contemporary agriculture
  • For (b): Definition of transnationalism as sustained cross-border social, economic, and political practices linking migrants to homelands, distinct from assimilationist models
  • For (b): Drivers of multiplied diaspora linkages—digital connectivity/remittances (India's $125B+ annual inflows), dual citizenship policies, transnational entrepreneurship, and geopolitical instrumentalization of diaspora by home states
  • For (c): Criteria for regional planning selection—resource endowment mapping, carrying capacity assessment, existing infrastructure gradients, demographic pressures, environmental vulnerability indices, and institutional feasibility
  • For (c): Critical assessment of how these criteria interact, with reference to India's agro-climatic regional planning, backward area development programmes, and contradictions between efficiency-oriented versus equity-oriented regional selection

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness22%11Precisely defines Whittlesey's five classification criteria with correct terminology; accurately distinguishes transnationalism from diaspora/dispersal concepts; correctly identifies planning criteria including carrying capacity and threshold concepts; no conflation of Whittlesey with von Thünen or Weaver's methodLists Whittlesey's criteria with minor inaccuracies; defines transnationalism vaguely as 'migration'; mentions planning criteria without systematic framework; may confuse intensity with productivity or commercialization with mechanizationMisidentifies Whittlesey's basis as solely physical factors or economic determinism; conflates transnationalism with globalization generally; lists planning criteria without conceptual linkage; significant factual errors on any sub-part
Map / diagram18%9Includes hand-drawn world map locating Whittlesey's 13 regions with approximate boundaries; flow diagram showing transnational linkage multipliers (remittance corridors, digital networks, return migration); planning framework diagram showing criteria hierarchy; all maps labeled, oriented, and integrated with textMentions map of agricultural regions without reproduction; describes transnational networks textually without visualization; lists planning criteria in tabular form without spatial representation; maps present but poorly integratedNo maps or diagrams despite spatial content; or includes irrelevant diagrams (e.g., von Thünen rings for Whittlesey); maps unlabeled or misoriented; diagrams decorative rather than analytical
Indian regional examples20%10For (a): Maps Whittlesey's regions onto India (e.g., Eastern Intensive Subsistence Rice in Gangetic plain, Commercial Grain Farming in Punjab-Haryana); for (b): Specific Indian diaspora cases—Gujarati entrepreneurs in East Africa, Kerala nurses in Gulf remittance corridors, IT professionals in US-India transnationalism; for (c): References to Dandakaranya, Bihar's backwardness criteria, or Western Ghats ecological planningGeneric mention of 'Indian agriculture' without regional specificity; references NRIs without diaspora-transnationalism distinction; mentions Five Year Plans without specific regional planning cases; examples accurate but underdevelopedNo Indian examples; or inappropriate examples (e.g., Chinese agricultural regions for Whittlesey); conflates Indian diaspora with South Asian generally; confuses regional planning with national planning
Spatial analysis20%10For (a): Analyzes spatial pattern of Whittlesey's regions—latitudinal zonation, coastal-inland differentiation, altitude effects; for (b): Maps spatiality of transnationalism—corridor geography, gateway cities, translocal spaces; for (c): Evaluates spatial justice implications of regional selection criteria—core-periphery tensions, cumulative causation, polarization reversalDescribes spatial distribution without analytical framework; mentions 'global networks' without spatial specificity; discusses regional disparities without theoretical grounding in Myrdal or HirschmanAspatial treatment of all three sub-parts; no engagement with distance, scale, or territoriality; confuses regional planning with sectoral planning
Application / policy20%10Critically evaluates Whittlesey's relevance for contemporary agricultural policy—precision agriculture disrupting traditional regionalization; assesses diaspora engagement policies (India's OCI, Pravasi Bharatiya Divas, SWAYAM portal); evaluates regional planning success/failure through Drought Prone Areas Programme, Hill Area Development Programme, or NITI Aayog's aspirational districts frameworkMentions policy relevance without critical evaluation; lists government schemes without connecting to conceptual frameworks; uncritical acceptance of planning criteria efficacyNo policy engagement; or purely descriptive account of schemes without conceptual linkage; anachronistic application (e.g., suggesting Whittlesey for GMO policy without acknowledging classification limitations)

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 2024 Paper I