Use the Country Databank to explain the connection between geographical size a GDP for countries in the Pacific region.
What opposing claims can be made using the evidence?
How would you respond to those opposing claims?
The Country Databank shows that countries in the Pacific region vary greatly in terms of geographical size and GDP. Larger countries such as Australia and Indonesia tend to have higher GDPs, while smaller countries like Fiji and Samoa have lower GDPs.
Opposing Claim 1: Some might argue that geographical size is not directly related to GDP, as seen in the case of smaller countries like Singapore or Hong Kong, which have high GDPs despite their small size.
Response: While this is true, it is important to consider other factors such as natural resources, population size, level of industrialization, and economic policies when analyzing the relationship between geographical size and GDP. Countries like Australia and Indonesia have larger land masses with abundant natural resources, which can contribute to their higher GDPs.
Opposing Claim 2: Others may argue that GDP can be influenced by factors other than geographical size, such as political stability, access to markets, and level of infrastructure.
Response: This is a valid point, as these factors can also play a significant role in determining a country's GDP. However, geographical size can still be a contributing factor, as larger countries may have more resources and opportunities for economic growth compared to smaller countries with limited land and resources.
Overall, while geographical size alone may not dictate a country's GDP, it can still have a significant impact when coupled with other factors. It is important to consider a combination of factors when analyzing the connection between geographical size and GDP in the Pacific region.