Key Idea: Topic 2.3 is about how the world responds to climate change — and there are two answers that work together: 2.3.1 — mitigation: tackle the causes. Cut greenhouse-gas emissions (renewables, carbon pricing, carbon capture) or remove CO₂ from the air, through technology, policy and international agreements. 2.3.2 — adaptation, resilience & agreements: adjust to the effects already coming (sea walls, drought-tolerant crops) and build resilience so a place can recover. Because emissions cross borders, much of the response is geopolitical — the Paris Agreement, Kyoto, the IPCC, carbon trading and the UN SDGs. This is core content, examined on Paper 2 — a short structured Explain of a strategy, a data-response read off a graph, and the markband 'to what extent' essay.
♻️ 2.3.1 — Mitigation: reducing the causes
Mitigation attacks the source of climate change — it cuts or removes greenhouse-gas emissions so warming slows. The skill examiners test is naming a strategy and giving its mechanism: strategy → how it works → lower emissions. Top answers name a real scheme and give its effect.
The main mitigation strategies
- Renewable energy — solar, wind and hydro replace fossil-fuel power stations, so far less CO₂ per unit of electricity.
- Carbon pricing — carbon taxes and carbon trading (a cap plus tradable permits) make polluting cost money.
- Carbon offsetting — funding emission cuts elsewhere (e.g. tree planting) to balance your own.
- Carbon capture & geoengineering — capturing CO₂ from power stations or the air and storing it.
- International agreements — countries jointly pledge emission cuts (e.g. the Paris Agreement).
🛡️ 2.3.2 — Adaptation, resilience & global agreements
Adaptation manages the impacts already arriving — defending and adjusting rather than reducing emissions. Doing both builds resilience: the capacity to absorb shocks and bounce back. Because a tonne of CO₂ warms the planet wherever it is emitted, no country can fix this alone — so much of the response is geopolitical, run through global agreements.
Mitigation vs adaptation — the core contrast
| Mitigation (2.3.1) | Adaptation (2.3.2) | |
|---|---|---|
| Targets | The causes — emissions at the source | The effects — impacts already happening |
| Goal | Stop the problem getting worse | Live with the problem and recover |
| Examples | Renewables, carbon trading, carbon capture, reforestation | Sea walls, flood defences, drought-tolerant crops, early warnings |
| Time focus | Long-term — slows future warming | Near-term — copes with present impacts |
Key global climate agreements and bodies
| Agreement / body | Year | What it does |
|---|---|---|
| IPCC | 1988 | UN science panel that reviews the evidence and reports on the risks |
| UNFCCC | 1992 | The UN framework treaty: countries agree to cooperate on climate change |
| Kyoto Protocol | 1997 | First binding emission-cut targets — for developed countries only |
| Paris Agreement | 2015 | Almost every country pledges to limit warming to well below 2 °C, ideally 1.5 °C |
| UN SDGs | 2015 | 17 development goals to 2030 (Goal 13 = Climate Action) |
Key terms to use precisely
- Mitigation — action that reduces or removes greenhouse-gas emissions (the cause).
- Adaptation — adjusting life and infrastructure to cope with impacts already happening (the effect).
- Resilience — the capacity of a place to absorb shocks and recover from climate impacts.
- Carbon capture and storage — capturing CO₂ from power stations or air and storing it underground.
- Geoengineering — large-scale technology to remove CO₂ or cool the planet.
- Carbon trading — a cap on total emissions plus tradable permits, so polluting costs money.
- Geopolitical strategy — action taken between countries (treaties, agreements) rather than by one place alone.
- Paris Agreement — the 2015 global treaty to keep warming well below 2 °C, via national pledges reviewed at COP summits.
If a strategy reduces emissions, it is mitigation (renewables, carbon trading, carbon capture). If it helps people live with the effects — sea walls, drought-resistant crops, early-warning systems — it is adaptation. Global agreements can do both: Paris drives mitigation through pledges, and climate finance funds adaptation in poorer nations.
✍️ IB-style questions
Explain two strategies that governments can use to reduce the causes of climate change.
🔒 Model answer plan
See the mark-by-mark plan — for / against / judgement, with marking guidance — in study mode.
"Mitigation is more effective than adaptation in responding to climate change." To what extent do you agree?
🔒 Model answer plan
See the mark-by-mark plan — for / against / judgement, with marking guidance — in study mode.
✅ Quick self-check
Tap each card to reveal the answer.
Difference between mitigation and adaptation? Mitigation reduces the causes (cuts emissions); adaptation copes with the effects already happening (sea walls, drought-resistant crops).
What is carbon trading? A cap on total emissions plus tradable permits — so polluting costs money, and firms are paid to cut emissions (e.g. the EU ETS).
Name a real mitigation case study and its effect. Costa Rica — ~99% renewable electricity plus forest protection. Or EU ETS — caps emissions + tradable permits → a financial reason to decarbonise.
How does the Paris Agreement reduce warming? Almost every country agrees a shared target (well below 2 °C), pledges national emission cuts, and reviews progress at COP summits.
What does 'resilience' mean here? The capacity of a place or community to absorb shocks and recover from climate impacts — built by combining mitigation and adaptation.
🎯 Highest-yield exam reminders
Exam tips
- Keep the line clear: mitigation = cut the CAUSES (emissions); adaptation = manage the EFFECTS (defences). Examiners penalise mixing them.
- For an 'Explain', give the MECHANISM: strategy → how it works → lower emissions. Naming a strategy alone earns only part of the marks.
- Always name a REAL scheme — Costa Rica, EU ETS / carbon trading, the Paris Agreement, the SDGs — and state its effect, not just 'use renewables'.
- The Paris Agreement works through shared targets → national pledges → COP reviews; Kyoto bound only developed countries, which is why Paris included all.
- For a graph (e.g. CO₂ emissions over time): DESCRIBE first — overall trend + figures with units — before any explanation.
- On the [10] To-what-extent essay, argue BOTH sides with named examples and finish on an explicit, justified judgement.