Geography 2025 Paper II 50 marks Compulsory Discuss

Q1

(a) On the outline map of India provided to you, mark the location of all of the following. Write in your QCA Booklet the significance of these locations, whether physical/commercial/economic/ecological/environmental/cultural, in not more than 30 words for each entry : 2×10=20 (i) Rushikulya River (ii) Datar Hill (iii) Kikruma (iv) Choritand Tillaya (v) Byalalu (vi) Neyyar (vii) Uttarlai (viii) Sri Vijayapuram (ix) Dharwas (x) Gitabitan (b) Referring to the location and physical formation of karewas, highlight their economic significance. 10 (c) How does Himalayan ecosystem regulate the cropping pattern and agricultural activities in Himalayan region of India ? Discuss. 10 (d) Write a critically argued essay on nautical tourism and its infrastructure in India. 10

हिंदी में प्रश्न पढ़ें

(a) आपको दिए गए भारत के रेखा मानचित्र पर, निम्नलिखित सभी की स्थिति को अंकित कीजिए । अपनी क्यू.सी.ए. पुस्तिका में इन स्थानों में से प्रत्येक का भौतिक/वाणिज्यिक/आर्थिक/पारिस्थितिक/पर्यावरणीय/सांस्कृतिक महत्व अधिकतम 30 शब्दों में लिखिए : 2×10=20 (i) रुशिकुल्या नदी (ii) दातार हिल (iii) किकरुमा (iv) चोरितंद तिलैया (v) ब्यालालू (vi) नेय्यार (vii) उत्तरलाई (viii) श्री विजयपुरम (ix) धारवास (x) गीताबीतान (b) करेवा के स्थान और भौतिक निर्माण का उल्लेख करते हुए, उनके आर्थिक महत्व को रेखांकित कीजिए । 10 (c) हिमालयी पारिस्थितिकी तंत्र भारत के हिमालयी क्षेत्र में फसल प्रणाली और कृषि गतिविधियों को कैसे नियंत्रित करता है ? चर्चा कीजिए । 10 (d) भारत में समुद्री पर्यटन और इसके बुनियादी ढांचे पर एक आलोचनात्मक तार्किक निबंध लिखिए । 10

Evaluate your answer to this question → See all 2025 Geography questions

Directive word: Discuss

This question asks you to discuss. 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 'discuss' in part (c) and the essay requirement in part (d) demand analytical depth with balanced argumentation. Allocate approximately 35-40% time to part (a) given its 20 marks and precision demands; 20% each to parts (b), (c), and (d). Structure: precise map marking with 25-30 word significance statements for (a); genetic classification and economic valuation for (b); ecosystem-agriculture nexus with altitudinal zonation for (c); and critical evaluation of Sagarmala, coastal regulation zones, and sustainable nautical tourism for (d).

Key points expected

  • Part (a): Correct map marking of all 10 locations with precise 25-30 word significance covering physical/commercial/economic/ecological/environmental/cultural dimensions—e.g., Rushikulya (olive ridley mass nesting), Byalalu (ISRO deep space network), Sri Vijayapuram (Indira Point renamed)
  • Part (b): Karewas as lacustrine deposits in Kashmir Valley (Pleistocene origin), their flat-topped terraced structure, and economic significance for saffron cultivation (Pampore), horticulture, and urban expansion pressures
  • Part (c): Himalayan ecosystem regulation through altitudinal zonation (tropical to alpine), temperature inversions, monsoon shadow effects, terracing adaptations, crop diversification (buckwheat, amaranth), pastoral transhumance, and climate change vulnerabilities
  • Part (d): Critical analysis of nautical tourism encompassing cruise tourism (Mumbai-Goa, Kochi backwaters), yachting, scuba diving (Lakshadweep, Andamans), infrastructure gaps (port modernization under Sagarmala, M-IV vessels, coastal pollution), CRZ regulations, and sustainable blue economy frameworks
  • Cross-cutting: Integration of contemporary policy references—Sagarmala Programme, National Maritime Heritage Complex, Mission Sagar, and climate-resilient agriculture in Himalayas under National Mission on Himalayan Studies

Evaluation rubric

DimensionWeightMax marksExcellentAveragePoor
Concept correctness20%10Demonstrates precise understanding across all parts: correct genetic classification of karewas (lacustrine vs. fluvial), accurate altitudinal bioclimatic zones in Himalayas (4,000m treeline), and nuanced grasp of nautical tourism typologies (cruise vs. coastal vs. marine adventure tourism)Shows basic conceptual awareness with minor errors—e.g., confuses karewas with bhars or misidentifies Himalayan agricultural systems as purely subsistence without commercial linkagesFundamental misconceptions dominate—e.g., treats karewas as volcanic formations, describes Himalayan agriculture without altitudinal context, or conflates nautical tourism with general coastal tourism
Map / diagram20%10All 10 locations marked with cartographic precision (within 50km tolerance), legible labels, and QCA booklet entries strictly within 30-word limit with multi-dimensional significance; optional sketch of Kashmir Valley cross-section showing karewa terraces7-8 locations correctly marked with minor positional errors; significance statements present but occasionally exceed word limit or miss key dimension (e.g., ecological for Rushikulya omitted)Fewer than 6 correct markings; significant positional errors (e.g., placing Uttarlai in Rajasthan instead of Gujarat); significance statements generic or missing; illegible handwriting
Indian regional examples20%10Rich specificity: Karewas—Wular Lake ancestry, Pampore saffron; Himalayan agriculture—apple belts of Himachal (Shimla, Kullu), Sikkim's organic mission, Zanskar's barley cultivation; Nautical tourism—Cordelia Cruises, Angria Bank diving, Gahirmatha marine sanctuarySome regional examples present but limited in range—e.g., mentions Kashmir for karewas without specific sites, or lists Himalayan states without crop-specific linkages; nautical tourism limited to Goa beachesGeneric or incorrect examples—e.g., 'Himalayan region' without state/valley specificity, confuses karewas with terai, or cites landlocked destinations for nautical tourism
Spatial analysis20%10Sophisticated spatial reasoning: explains Karewa distribution relative to Pir Panjal faulting and paleo-lake Wular; analyzes Himalayan cropping patterns through aspect (sunny vs. shady slopes), valley-bottom vs. slope agriculture; evaluates nautical tourism potential through coastline configuration, port hinterland connectivity, and EEZ accessBasic spatial awareness without analytical depth—e.g., notes karewas are 'in Kashmir' without explaining valley confinement; describes Himalayan agriculture as 'mountain farming' without slope/aspect differentiationAbsence of spatial thinking—treats all locations as discrete points without relational analysis; no explanation of why karewas occur only in Kashmir or why nautical tourism concentrates on west coast
Application / policy20%10Critical policy engagement: evaluates Sagarmala's cruise tourism infrastructure gaps, CRZ 2019 amendments' impact on nautical tourism, Mission Organic Value Chain Development for NE Region, climate-smart villages in Himalayas under NICRA, and sustainable tourism frameworks (carrying capacity, blue flag beaches)Mentions relevant policies superficially—e.g., lists Sagarmala without specific components (port modernization, cruise terminals) or cites organic farming without Himalayan-specific implementationPolicy vacuum or irrelevant references—e.g., discusses Smart Cities for nautical tourism, or cites Green Revolution for Himalayan agriculture; no critical evaluation of sustainability trade-offs

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 2025 Paper II