Social, moral and ethical issues in product design: planned and built-in obsolescence, fair and ethical trade (Fairtrade), worker conditions and globalisation, inclusive design, consumer culture, and the designer's social responsibility.

A Component 02 question marked by points within a levels structure. Markers reward the definition and developed concerns.

Award marks for: planned (or built-in) obsolescence is the practice of designing a product so that it wears out, becomes outdated or is difficult or uneconomic to repair, encouraging the user to replace it sooner than necessary; examples include non-replaceable batteries, parts designed to fail, frequent style changes (fashion obsolescence) and software that stops supporting older devices. The concerns: environmentally, it increases waste, raw-material extraction and energy use because products are replaced more often; ethically, it can be seen as deceiving or exploiting consumers and wasting resources for profit; socially, it pressures people to keep buying and can disadvantage those who cannot afford frequent replacement. A balanced answer may note manufacturers argue some replacement drives innovation and keeps industries and jobs viable.

A common dropped mark is defining obsolescence but not developing the social, ethical and environmental concerns.

A Component 02 levels-of-response question (AO3), marked by levels.

A top-level answer covers several responsibilities and weighs them. Worker conditions and globalisation: products are often made in low-cost countries, so a responsible designer and company should ensure safe conditions, fair pay and no exploitative or child labour in the supply chain, because cutting cost must not cut welfare. Fair and ethical trade: choosing Fairtrade or ethically sourced materials (and certified supply chains) supports better prices and conditions for producers, especially in developing countries. Inclusivity: designing so the product is usable by as many people as possible (age, ability, size) is a social responsibility, not just a feature. The evaluation should weigh the tensions: ethical sourcing and inclusive design can raise cost and price, supply chains are hard to monitor, and there is a trade-off between affordability and welfare. A justified conclusion is that a designer has a real social responsibility across welfare, fairness and inclusivity, and that meeting it builds trust and long-term value even where it adds cost.

Markers reward covering several responsibilities and weighing the cost tensions with a judgement.