Geography 2024 Paper II 50 marks Explain

Q3

(a) India has wide-ranging regional disparities in economic development. Explain the patterns, implications and challenges. (20 marks) (b) Discuss the variations in nature of glaciers in India and the emerging issues due to climate change. (15 marks) (c) Domestic tourism in India has immense local resource potential. Discuss the reasons and its various dimensions. (15 marks)

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) भारत में आर्थिक विकास में व्यापक क्षेत्रीय असमानताएँ हैं। प्रतिरूप, निहितार्थ और चुनौतियों की व्याख्या कीजिए। (20 अंक) (b) भारत में हिमनदों की प्रकृति में विभिन्नताओं और जलवायु परिवर्तन के कारण उत्पन्न होने वाले मुद्दों पर चर्चा कीजिए। (15 अंक) (c) भारत में घरेलू पर्यटन में अपार स्थानीय संसाधन क्षमता है। कारणों एवं इसके विभिन्न आयामों की विवेचना कीजिए। (15 अंक)

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2024 Geography questions

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' for part (a) demands causal reasoning and structured elaboration, while parts (b) and (c) require 'discuss' which needs balanced argumentation. Allocate approximately 40% of time/words to part (a) given its 20 marks, and roughly 30% each to parts (b) and (c). Structure as: brief integrated introduction → three distinct sections with clear sub-headings → conclusion synthesizing inter-linkages between regional development, climate vulnerability, and tourism potential.

Key points expected

  • Part (a): Patterns of regional disparity using Williamson index, per capita income gradients (west-east, north-south), human development indices, and infrastructure gaps; implications for social cohesion and national integration; challenges of inclusive growth and federal fiscal imbalances.
  • Part (b): Variations between Himalayan (valley/alpine) glaciers and Trans-Himalayan (cold desert) glaciers; differences between clean-ice, debris-covered, and surge-type glaciers; climate change impacts including accelerated retreat, GLOF risks, and altered hydrological regimes.
  • Part (c): Reasons for domestic tourism growth—rising middle class, improved connectivity, spiritual/cultural circuits; dimensions including economic (employment, multiplier effects), social (cultural exchange, urban-rural linkages), environmental (carrying capacity pressures), and regional development (backward area revitalization).
  • Inter-linkage: How regional disparities affect tourism potential distribution and how glacier-dependent regions (Himalayan states) face unique development-tourism-climate trade-offs.
  • Policy connectivity: Mention of Aspirational Districts Programme for (a), National Action Plan on Climate Change for (b), and Swadesh Darshan/Dekho Apna Desh for (c).

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness20%10Precise use of technical concepts: for (a) Williamson index, Gini coefficient, and convergence/divergence theories; for (b) glacier mass balance, equilibrium line altitude, surging mechanics, and GLOF dynamics; for (c) tourism multiplier, carrying capacity, and leakages. No conceptual conflation between types of glaciers or tourism categories.Basic definitions provided but limited theoretical depth; some confusion between debris-covered and clean-ice glacier behavior; generic treatment of tourism impacts without distinguishing between domestic and international.Fundamental errors such as conflating glaciers with snowfields, treating regional disparity purely as rural-urban divide, or describing tourism only as leisure travel without economic dimensions.
Map / diagram20%10Minimum two relevant diagrams: for (a) a map showing regional development indices or Lorenz curve; for (b) annotated sketch of glacier structure (accumulation/ablation zones) or GLOF formation; for (c) flow diagram of tourism multiplier effects or map of major domestic circuits. All properly labelled with Indian examples.One diagram attempted but poorly labelled or generic; OR two diagrams with minor errors in representation (e.g., incorrect zone labelling in glacier cross-section).No diagrams or maps; OR irrelevant sketches (e.g., random climatic graphs) that do not illuminate any sub-part; illegible or unlabelled figures.
Indian regional examples20%10Rich specificity: for (a) cites Bihar vs. Punjab HDI gaps, or Dholakia's regional growth analysis; for (b) names Siachen, Gangotri, Zemu, or Pindari glaciers with state locations; for (c) identifies specific circuits (Char Dham, Buddhist, coastal heritage) and states like Kerala, Rajasthan, or Northeast examples.Some examples given but lacking precision—mentions 'Himalayan glaciers' without naming any, or 'southern states' without specificity; generic tourism references without circuit names.No Indian examples; OR factually wrong attributions (e.g., placing glaciers in Western Ghats, confusing domestic with foreign tourist data).
Spatial analysis20%10Explicit spatial reasoning: for (a) explains core-periphery gradients, coastal-hinterland divides, and border vs. heartland disparities; for (b) correlates glacier types with latitude, altitude, and precipitation regimes (monsoon vs. westerly influence); for (c) analyzes tourism distribution against accessibility, attraction clusters, and accommodation infrastructure.Some spatial awareness evident but not systematically developed; mentions location without explaining spatial processes or interactions between physical and economic geography.A-spatial treatment—lists facts without geographic explanation; no recognition of why disparities/tourism/glacier variations follow particular spatial patterns.
Application / policy20%10Integrated policy discussion: for (a) evaluates Special Category State status, GST compensation, and Aspirational Districts Programme effectiveness; for (b) assesses NAPCC, SECURE Himalaya, and early warning systems for GLOFs; for (c) critiques Swadesh Darshan, PRASHAD, and sustainable tourism guidelines with implementation gaps.Lists schemes without critical evaluation; OR focuses on one sub-part's policies while neglecting others; generic mention of 'government initiatives' without specificity.No policy content; OR irrelevant/outdated schemes; OR proposes unrealistic solutions without institutional or fiscal feasibility assessment.

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 II