Overview
A top-band Paper 1 essay is not a data dump of everything you know — it is a tight chain: define the terms, draw and explain a diagram, build the theory, then evaluate to a reasoned judgement backed by a named real-world example. Get that skeleton right and the marks follow. This is a deep, part-by-part method for structuring both halves of the essay under time pressure. For the whole-subject picture first, read [how to get a 7 in IB Economics](/blog/ib-economics-how-to-get-a-7); this guide zooms into the one paper where structure is everything.
How Paper 1 is marked
Paper 1 is an extended-response essay paper, sat by both SL and HL. You get a small choice of questions drawn from microeconomics, macroeconomics and the global economy, and you write one complete essay. That question always comes in two parts, each marked against its own level descriptors (markbands). Know exactly what the top band of each part rewards, because examiners place your answer in the band it fits and then fine-tune within it.
| Part | Marks | Command term | What the top band needs |
|---|---|---|---|
| Part (a) | /10 | Usually explain (markband A) | Clear, accurate definitions; a relevant, correctly labelled diagram referred to in the text; accurate theory shown as a chain of reasoning |
| Part (b) | /15 | Evaluate or discuss (markband B) | Everything in (a), plus balanced evaluation ending in a reasoned, supported judgement, plus a specific, developed real-world example |
The key insight: part (b) is not a bigger version of part (a). It contains all of part (a)'s demands and adds two things part (a) never tested — evaluation and a developed real-world example — and those two additions are where most of the gap between a mid-band and a top-band script lives. Because the command term sets the whole task, read it first every time; misreading evaluate as explain is the single most expensive mistake on the paper. If command terms are fuzzy, spend ten minutes on IB command terms explained and IB markbands explained first.
A repeatable structure for part (a) /10
For the IB Diploma Programme, part (a) rewards a clean, linear explanation. Use the same four-move skeleton every time so you never stall:
- Define the key terms — accurately and in your own words. For "the effect of an indirect tax on a demerit good", define indirect tax and demerit good. One precise sentence each; no padding.
- Diagram. Draw it fully labelled — axes, curves, a title, original and new equilibria, and any shaded areas that matter. Draw it for this question, not from memory.
- Explain the chain. Walk through the mechanism step by step, referring to the diagram: "the tax shifts supply from S1 to S2, raising price from P1 to P2 and reducing quantity from Q1 to Q2, because…" Every step needs a because.
- Link back to the exact wording of the question in a closing sentence.
A diagram only earns marks when it is accurate and explained in words tied to your analysis. A perfect diagram you never mention is close to wasted; theory with no diagram leaves marks on the table. The two must talk to each other.
A repeatable structure for part (b) /15
For the IB Diploma Programme, part (b) is where structure earns the top band. Do not simply write a longer part (a) — follow this order:
- Brief theory (with diagram). Establish the mechanism quickly — you have already proven you can explain, so be efficient. One well-explained diagram and a tight analysis chain is enough; over-writing this section is what starves the evaluation of time.
- The real-world example. Introduce a specific, named case — a country, firm, policy or dated event — and use it to ground the theory. This is the single biggest differentiator in the whole paper (see below).
- Balanced evaluation. Weigh both sides deliberately: short run vs long run, different stakeholders, the assumptions the theory relies on, and the magnitude and likelihood of the effects. This is where AO3 marks are won.
- Supported judgement. Commit to a conclusion that answers the command term. Not "it depends" and stop — but "it depends on X; given [the context or your example], Y is the more likely outcome because…" A verdict without reasons is not a judgement; reasons without a verdict is not evaluation. You need both.
The real-world example — where students win and lose marks
For the IB Diploma Programme, take one thing from this guide: the top part (b) band explicitly requires a developed real-world example, and it is the mark most often thrown away. A throwaway mention — "for example, in some countries the government does this" — earns almost nothing. A developed example does three things:
- Specific. Name it — a country, a firm, a policy, a dated event. "The UK sugar levy," "OPEC's 2023 output cuts" — precise, not generic.
- Developed. Give a detail or two that connects to the theory: a rough figure, a direction of change, an outcome. Enough that the example does analytical work, not decoration.
- Relevant. It must illustrate the mechanism in this question, not just sit in the right topic area. A real example about the wrong effect is barely better than none.
Build a small bank of five or six precise cases you know well, so under exam pressure you are retrieving, not inventing. One strong, developed example beats three vague gestures every time.
Evaluation techniques that reliably score AO3
For the IB Diploma Programme, evaluation is a skill, not an instinct, and there are only a handful of reliable angles. Pick the two or three that fit the question and develop them properly rather than listing all of them shallowly:
- Short run vs long run. Effects often reverse or fade over time — say so.
- Stakeholders. Who gains and who loses? Consumers, producers, government, workers, foreign firms, future generations.
- Assumptions. What does the theory quietly assume — ceteris paribus, rational agents, a particular elasticity? Question it.
- Magnitude / "depends on". How big is the effect, and what does it hinge on — elasticity, the multiplier, the state of the economy?
- Pros vs cons, and alternative policies. For a policy question, weigh it against what else the government could have done.
Each angle should point toward your judgement, not float free. Evaluation that does not feed the conclusion is just a second description.
Timing and diagram discipline
For the IB Diploma Programme, you have roughly 45 minutes per question, and it goes fast. A workable split: about 15 minutes on part (a) and about 30 on part (b), which is worth more and carries the high-value evaluation. Spend the first two or three minutes planning — jot the definitions, sketch which diagram, and note your example and two evaluation angles *before* you write. Planning prevents the classic failure of running out of time on the judgement because part (a) sprawled.
Diagram discipline also saves minutes: know the core micro, macro and trade diagrams cold — axes, curves, equilibria, shaded areas — so drawing is automatic and your thinking time goes on applying them, not remembering them.
Common mistakes that cap part (b) at mid-band
For the IB Diploma Programme, each of these, on its own, is usually enough to keep an otherwise fluent essay out of the top band:
- No real-world example, or a vague one. The single most common cap. The top band requires a developed, named case.
- No judgement. Strong two-sided analysis that never commits stalls in the middle bands. You must land a verdict.
- One-sided evaluation. Arguing only the pros (or only the cons) is not evaluation, however detailed.
- Diagram not linked to the question — dropped in from memory rather than applied to the specific scenario.
- Misreading the command term — writing an explanation when the task says evaluate or discuss.
- Running out of time on the evaluation because earlier parts sprawled.
How MarkScheme helps you practise and get marked
Structure improves fastest through one loop: plan a real question → write it to time → mark it honestly against the band descriptors → fix the weakest part next time. Work syllabus-by-syllabus with the free [IB Economics SL course](/ib/courses/economics-sl) or [HL course](/ib/courses/economics-hl) to lock the theory and diagrams, then pull timed essays from the [SL past papers guide](/blog/ib-economics-sl-past-papers-guide).
Self-marking is essential, but evaluation paragraphs and judgements especially benefit from an outside read — that is where band placement is subtle. After a timed essay, get your essay marked against the criteria, keep a short log of your recurring errors (usually: missing example, missing judgement), and drill those first. Browse everything else from the IB guides hub.
Frequently asked questions
For the IB Diploma Programme, there is no word count — quality and structure are marked, not length. In roughly 45 minutes, aim to *complete the structure* (definitions, diagram, chain, example, balanced evaluation, judgement) rather than hit a page target. A tight, complete essay beats a long, unfinished one.
How long should an IB Economics Paper 1 essay be?
Do I need a real-world example?
For part (b), effectively yes — the top /15 band explicitly requires a developed, specific real-world example. Without one you are capped below the top band, however fluent your theory. Part (a) does not require an example, so save your named cases for part (b).
How are the two parts marked differently?
Part (a) /10 uses markband A and tests explanation — definitions, an accurate applied diagram, and a correct theory chain. Part (b) /15 uses markband B and tests everything in (a) plus balanced evaluation, a supported judgement, and a real-world example.
How much time should I spend on part (b)?
Roughly two-thirds of the time — about 30 of your 45 minutes — because it carries more marks and the harder evaluation. Protect that time by not over-writing part (a).
What's the difference between "evaluate" and "discuss"?
Both call for a two-sided, judged response rather than a one-way explanation, so your part (b) structure works for either. Always read the command term first and let it set the task — see IB command terms explained.