Skip to main content
EnglandGeographySyllabus dot point

What spheres of influence are contested by superpowers, and what are the implications of the shifting balance of power?

Contested spheres of influence such as the Arctic and South China Sea create tensions over borders, resources and alliances, while shifting global power restructures economies and reshapes norms.

An Edexcel A-Level Geography answer to contested spheres of influence and the implications of shifting power, covering disputed borders, military alliances, intellectual property, resource conflicts in the Arctic and South China Sea, and the economic, environmental and ideological consequences of a multipolar world.

Generated by Claude Opus 4.813 min answer

Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed

Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page

Jump to a section
  1. What this dot point is asking
  2. Contested spheres and disputed borders
  3. Alliances, deterrence and intellectual property
  4. Resource conflicts and hotspots
  5. Implications of shifting power
  6. Examples in context
  7. Try this

What this dot point is asking

Edexcel wants you to explain why certain regions become contested spheres of influence, analysing the tensions created by disputed borders, military alliances, intellectual property disputes and resource conflicts, and then to evaluate the wider implications of shifting power for economies, the environment and global norms.

Contested spheres and disputed borders

Tensions cluster around strategic chokepoints and resource-rich frontiers. The Arctic is opening as sea ice retreats, exposing oil, gas and fisheries and the Northern Sea Route, while the South China Sea carries roughly a third of global shipping and sits over major hydrocarbon and fishing reserves. Crimea (annexed by Russia in 2014) and the Taiwan Strait show how disputed territory and contested sovereignty can flare into open confrontation between great powers.

Alliances, deterrence and intellectual property

Alliances such as NATO bind members into collective defence and extend a Western sphere of influence to the borders of Russia, while ANZUS anchors US power in the Pacific. Nuclear deterrence underpins the balance, raising the stakes of any miscalculation. Beyond hard power, control of intellectual property and technology, semiconductors, 5G and software, has become a strategic battleground, with the US accusing China of forced technology transfer and IP theft, and China building rival standards.

Resource conflicts and hotspots

Competition for energy and minerals drives many disputes. In the Arctic, five states press overlapping claims to the seabed under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, and Russia symbolically planted a flag on the seabed at the North Pole in 2007. In the South China Sea, China has built and militarised artificial islands to assert its "nine-dash line", and US Freedom of Navigation operations challenge those claims, keeping a flashpoint live over shipping lanes that carry trillions of dollars of trade.

Implications of shifting power

A move towards multipolarity restructures the world economy: deindustrialisation in the old core as manufacturing relocates, a swelling middle class in China and India, and new trade geographies created by China's Belt and Road Initiative. Being a superpower carries costs, military budgets, foreign aid and global policing all compete with domestic spending. The contest is also ideological, pitting democratic against authoritarian models and rival visions of internet governance, so contested futures range from renewed US primacy to a fully multipolar order.

Examples in context

Example 1: the South China Sea, 2013 onwards. China dredged and militarised reefs in the Spratly and Paracel chains, asserting its "nine-dash line" over waters claimed by Vietnam and the Philippines. A 2016 Permanent Court of Arbitration ruling rejected the claim, but China ignored it, while the USA runs Freedom of Navigation patrols. The case shows an emerging power asserting a sphere of influence over strategic shipping lanes and the limits of international law against a superpower.

Example 2: the Arctic, 2007 onwards. As sea ice retreats, Russia, Canada, the USA, Norway and Denmark have lodged overlapping continental-shelf claims, and Russia planted a titanium flag on the seabed at the North Pole in 2007. With an estimated 1313 per cent of undiscovered oil and 3030 per cent of undiscovered gas at stake, plus shorter shipping routes, the Arctic illustrates resource-driven tension on a melting frontier.

Try this

Q1. State two reasons the Arctic is a contested sphere of influence. [2 marks]

  • Cue. Any two of: newly accessible oil and gas, opening shipping routes as ice melts, fisheries, and overlapping EEZ or continental-shelf claims by Russia, Canada, the USA, Norway and Denmark.

Q2. Explain one economic implication of the shift towards a multipolar world. [4 marks]

  • Cue. Deindustrialisation in the old core as manufacturing shifts to emerging powers, or a rising middle class in China and India reshaping global demand and trade through initiatives such as Belt and Road.

Exam-style practice questions

Practice questions written in the style of Pearson Edexcel exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.

Edexcel Paper 2 (style)12 marksAssess the causes of tension in one or more contested spheres of influence.
Show worked answer →

AO1 sets up the idea of a sphere of influence, a region where a superpower expects deference over security, resources and trade, and identifies contested hotspots such as the Arctic and the South China Sea. AO2 then analyses the causes of tension. In the Arctic, melting ice opens shipping routes and access to oil and gas, so Russia, Canada, the USA, Norway and Denmark make overlapping EEZ and continental-shelf claims. In the South China Sea, China's "nine-dash line" overlaps the claims of Vietnam and the Philippines, with control of shipping lanes and fisheries at stake and US Freedom of Navigation patrols raising the risk of confrontation.

A balanced judgement weighs the relative importance of resources, strategic access and national prestige, and notes the role of military alliances (NATO, ANZUS) and weak international adjudication (China ignored the 2016 tribunal ruling). The conclusion should argue that tension is driven by a combination of resource value and the symbolic assertion of power, with the AO3 cases of the Arctic and South China Sea used to evidence the judgement.

Edexcel 20198 marksExplain the implications of a shift towards a multipolar world.
Show worked answer →

Led by AO1 with AO2 development. Explain that a multipolar world spreads power across several centres, so the post-1990 unipolar US order gives way to competition with China and India and blocs such as the BRICS. Develop the economic implications: deindustrialisation in the old core as manufacturing shifts to emerging powers, a growing middle class in China and India, and new institutions such as China's Belt and Road Initiative rerouting trade and investment.

Reward clear consequences plus a named case. Stronger answers add the costs of being a superpower (military spending, foreign aid, global policing carry domestic opportunity costs) and the contest of norms and values (democratic versus authoritarian models, rival internet-governance regimes). A brief evaluative comment on whether multipolarity raises or lowers conflict lifts the response.

Related dot points

Sources & how we know this