Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives 0457/12 is the May/June 2026 Paper 1 (Written Exam), variant 2. It lasts 1 hour 25 minutes, is worth 70 marks and is the one written exam every 0457 candidate sits. It had four compulsory questions, all based on four sources about vehicle crime in a separate insert. The biggest task was Question 4, a 20-mark recommendation to a government, and together with the 16-mark blog comparison in Question 3 it made up more than half the paper. This guide goes through each question and shows how the official mark scheme gave marks. The paper, insert and mark scheme are free on the Tutopiya Learning Portal.

For an overview of the 0457 paper from this series, see IGCSE Global Perspectives 0457 May/June 2026 past paper: what came up and how it was marked.

0457/12 at a glance

Question	Source(s)	Task	Marks	How it is marked
1(a)	1	Pick out a figure	1	Single answer
1(b)(i)	2	Identify a generalisation	1	Single answer
1(b)(ii)	2	Explain why it is a generalisation	2	2, 1 or 0
1(c)	2	Describe a perspective	6	One grid, 3 levels
1(d)	1 and 2	Justify the most significant cause	8	One grid, 4 levels
2(a)	3	Evaluate a piece of research	8	One grid, 4 levels
2(b)	3	Design research to test a claim	8	One grid, 4 levels
3	4	Judge which of two arguments is more convincing	16	Two grids (8 + 8)
4	All, plus own ideas	Recommend one of three government actions	20	Three grids (8 + 8 + 4)
		Total	70

The four sources

• Source 1: research figures on the value of vehicles stolen worldwide in 2020 and the average loss per theft, a note that theft has risen since 2008, and a bulleted list of five causes of vehicle theft, from thrill-seeking to poor vehicle security.
• Source 2: a 2020 extract from an international police organisation’s website on the costs of vehicle crime, its links to wider international crime, and what the organisation does about it.
• Source 3: a student’s account of interviewing a newly appointed manager at a local building firm, in a busy café, about one recent theft of tools from a van, which led the student to conclude that vehicle crime is rising nationally.
• Source 4: a 2022 blog. Abilo, a police volunteer, blames careless owners and peer pressure on young offenders. Berta, who works in the motor industry, argues that theft is driven by profit and international crime, and calls for better vehicle security and more police.

Question-by-question walkthrough

Question 1: Sources 1 and 2 (18 marks)

1(a) The average loss per theft (1 mark). The answer was $9166. The scheme was strict on units: without $ or “dollars”, no mark.

1(b)(i) A generalisation (1 mark). Any of six statements from Source 2 scored, for example the claim that theft leads to higher insurance prices, that theft is a significant issue, that crime costs businesses money, or that car theft can only be solved if everyone works together.

1(b)(ii) Why it is a generalisation (2 marks). The scheme defines a generalisation as a statement that presents something as always true when it is only sometimes true, or that applies what is true of a small sample to everyone. Two marks need that idea applied clearly to the example you chose. If you showed you knew what a generalisation is but didn’t connect it to your example, you got 1.

1(c) The police organisation’s perspective (6 marks). Marked on a three-level grid (1–2, 3–4, 5–6). The top level describes a wide range of elements of the perspective and draws on the source often. The scheme breaks a perspective into five elements, and covering several of them is what “wide range” means here:

• Issue: vehicle theft and its impact.
• Values: vehicle crime is wrong or important, concern for victims, and the belief that working together is the only way to solve it.
• Causes: financing international crime.
• Consequences: higher insurance, damage to manufacturers’ reputations, costs to businesses, and effects on mental health.
• Actions: the stolen-vehicle database, awareness conferences and cooperation.

A list of facts from the source, with no sense of what the organisation believes, stays in the lower levels.

1(d) The most significant cause (8 marks). Marked on a four-level grid that rewards how well you justify an opinion, not which cause you choose. Any cause from the sources was acceptable: boredom, the thrill of driving, demand for parts, profiteering, poverty, lack of security, or financing international crime. A top-level answer explains and supports the opinion clearly, and the explanation is credible and tied to the cause. An opinion that is simply asserted, or explained in general terms that drift off the issue, sits in Level 1. The scheme suggested reasons that make a cause “most significant”: it affects the most people, it has the greatest impact on young people, it is the most important morally, it has several knock-on consequences, it creates a vicious circle, experts agree on it, or it is the hardest to solve.

Question 2: Source 3, research (16 marks)

2(a) Strengths and weaknesses of the research (8 marks). Four levels. Level 4 (7–8) requires both strengths and weaknesses, each explained and linked to what the research was trying to find out. Points that are mostly described with little explanation sit in Level 2.

The strengths the scheme listed:

• the research had a clear purpose
• the student’s study of international law might help them understand the issue
• it was ethical: permission was asked for and confidentiality agreed
• it was primary research, giving first-hand, qualitative data from someone with experience of a crime
• the interview was recorded, so the data would not be lost or misremembered.

The weaknesses:

• there was no clearly stated research question
• a building firm may not be a representative organisation for studying vehicle crime
• only one method was used, so the findings could not be cross-checked
• the noisy café made accurate data harder to collect, and other people nearby could have affected the answers
• a sample of one person at one company is not typical
• the interviewee, new to the job and unable to answer key questions, may lack knowledge or have a bias.

The explained version of a weakness links it to the purpose: one theft from one firm can’t show a national trend.

2(b) How to test the claim that vehicle crime is rising nationally (8 marks). Four levels again. The top level gives a wide range of methods and evidence, each with a credible reason clearly tied to testing the claim. A list of methods with little explanation reaches Level 2.

• Methods the scheme suggested: interviews with experts, victims or offenders; surveys of the public, police, car dealers or manufacturers; questionnaires; reviews of secondary sources and literature; internet and media searches; case studies of people or businesses affected; and observation of hotspots, perhaps using video.
• Evidence it suggested: national statistics and trends on vehicle crime; personal testimony; documents from the police, insurance companies or government; material from charities, pressure groups and national organisations; and a mix of primary and secondary, quantitative and qualitative data.

The word “nationally” matters. Because the claim is about a national trend over time, national crime figures across several years test it directly, and saying so is the kind of reasoning that lifts an answer up the grid.

Question 3: Abilo or Berta? (16 marks)

The question asks which blogger’s argument is more convincing, and tells you to consider both, evaluate their reasoning, evidence and language, and back your judgement with their words and ideas. It is marked on two grids, each worth 8 marks.

• Analysis (8 marks): the top level analyses a wide range of aspects of both arguments, uses the source often, and makes a clear and explicit comparison. Writing about Abilo and then Berta with no link between them counts only as an implied comparison, which is a Level 2 feature. Analysing one argument only keeps you in Level 1.
• Evaluation (8 marks): the top level explains a wide range of evaluative points, evaluates both reasoning and evidence explicitly, and reaches a clear, supported judgement that is consistent with the rest of the answer. A judgement that is unclear, missing or contradicts your own argument holds you in Level 1.

The scheme’s indicative content lists what to weigh: the logic, structure, balance and claims of each argument; tone and clarity of language; the range, relevance, sufficiency, source and date of the evidence; whether it is fact, opinion or anecdote; bias or vested interest; consequences; and whether other people would accept their values.

It also gave examples for each blogger:

• Abilo, strengths: his police volunteering gives relevant knowledge, his friend’s experience is personal evidence, he quotes a car magazine, and his language is confident and persuasive.
• Abilo, weaknesses: he is very assertive, gives little factual data, does no systematic research, generalises, and relies on anecdote. He is a volunteer rather than a full-time officer, so his level of responsibility and access is unknown.
• Berta, strengths: her work in the motor industry suggests knowledge, she partly accepts Abilo’s view, she takes a wider, global view of the issue and its consequences, and she cites a United Nations source that a news report supports.
• Berta, weaknesses: her exact role isn’t stated, her sources are undated, she places the blame elsewhere without looking at all the consequences, and she doesn’t accept that car owners carry any responsibility.

Question 4: recommend a government action (20 marks)

A government wants to reduce vehicle crime and is considering three actions: more police, a national awareness campaign, or encouraging manufacturers to improve vehicle security. You recommend one, with reasons and evidence, using the sources and/or your own ideas, and considering other arguments and perspectives. Three grids:

• Evidence and reasons (8 marks): the top level uses a wide range of evidence and reasons, all clearly relevant to the issue, that fully support your argument.
• Line of reasoning (8 marks): the top level is clear, convincing and sustained, with well-structured and explicit consideration of other perspectives or actions. In practice, that means explaining why the other two options are weaker, not only why yours is best.
• Judgements (4 marks): one mark per level. Four marks need judgements that are clearly related to the issue, clearly explained and consistent with your argument. An asserted judgement gets 1.

The scheme says you should interpret the sources rather than repeat them. It lists ideas worth weighing: how many people and places an action would reach, its consequences for different groups, how long it would take to work, barriers to it, cooperation between organisations or countries against international crime, the influence of business leaders, criminal gangs, police and politicians, bias and vested interests, possible conflict or protest, the difficulty of coordinating action, cost (for example through taxes), and the opportunity cost of spending on crime rather than other services. Any of the three actions can reach full marks if it is argued well.

Where the marks are on 0457/12

Every mark on this paper assesses one objective, AO1 (research, analysis and evaluation), but the grids reward different skills:

Skill	Questions	Marks
Short identification and explanation	1(a), 1(b)	4
Describing a perspective	1(c)	6
Justifying an opinion	1(d)	8
Evaluating research	2(a)	8
Designing research	2(b)	8
Analysing arguments	3	8
Evaluating arguments and judging	3	8
Using evidence and reasons	4	8
Developing a line of reasoning	4	8
Making judgements	4	4
Total		70

Only 4 marks are point-marked. The other 66 depend on where your whole answer sits on a grid, so quality of explanation matters far more than the number of points you make.

How to self-mark 0457/12 with the mark scheme

1. Mark the short questions exactly. Check the unit in 1(a), and check that your 1(b)(ii) explanation refers to your own example, not just the definition.
2. For every other question, start at the top level and work down. Stop at the first level whose description fits your whole answer, as examiners do.
3. Then place yourself within the level. If you consistently meet the description, take the top mark. If you only just reach it, or sit on the borderline with the level below, take the bottom mark.
4. Mark Questions 3 and 4 on each grid separately. An answer can be Level 4 for analysis but Level 2 for evaluation. Record each mark, then add them.
5. Use the indicative content as a checklist, not a mark tally. It shows the range of points available. You don’t earn a mark per point; range and explanation lift the level.
6. Check the “both” requirements. Strengths and weaknesses in 2(a), methods and evidence in 2(b), both bloggers compared in 3, and the other actions considered in 4. Missing one half caps the level.

Sit 0457/12 as a timed mock

You have 85 minutes for 70 marks. Reading the insert carefully first saves time later, because every question uses it.

Block	Marks	Time
Read and annotate the insert	–	8 minutes
Question 1	18	18 minutes
Question 2	16	18 minutes
Question 3	16	18 minutes
Question 4	20	20 minutes
Check judgements and conclusions	–	3 minutes

Before writing Question 4, jot down your choice, two reasons with evidence, and one sentence on why each of the other two actions is weaker.

Practise and download

• Download 0457/12, its insert and the mark scheme on the Learning Portal →
• 0457 May/June 2026: overview and marking patterns
• Try a free IGCSE Global Perspectives quiz

Need help with a 0457 topic? Book a free trial lesson with an IGCSE Global Perspectives tutor →

Frequently asked questions

What was 0457 Paper 12 May/June 2026 about? +

Vehicle crime. The insert had four sources: global theft figures with a list of causes, a police organisation's website, a student's interview-based research project and a blog debate between a police volunteer and someone who works in the motor industry.

How many marks is 0457/12 and how long is it? +

It is out of 70 marks and lasts 1 hour 25 minutes. All four questions are compulsory. Question 4, recommending a government action to reduce vehicle crime, is the biggest at 20 marks.

What was the answer to 0457/12 Question 1(a)? +

The average loss per vehicle theft in 2020 was $9166, taken from Source 1. The mark scheme only gave the mark if the unit was included, either as $ or as dollars.

How is Question 3 on 0457/12 marked? +

On two separate 8-mark grids: one for analysis and one for evaluation. The top analysis level needs a clear, explicit comparison of the two bloggers. The top evaluation level needs both reasoning and evidence evaluated and a supported judgement that matches your argument.

Can you use your own ideas in 0457/12 Question 4? +

Yes, but you don't have to. The mark scheme says other material may be brought in but is not needed for full marks. What it does require is that you interpret the sources rather than just repeating them.

Where can I download 0457/12 May/June 2026 and its mark scheme? +

The question paper, the source insert and the mark scheme are all free to download and print on the Tutopiya Learning Portal, on the Cambridge IGCSE Global Perspectives 0457 past papers page.

Ready to Excel in Your Studies?

Get personalised help from Tutopiya's expert tutors. Whether it's IGCSE, IB, A-Levels, or any other curriculum — we match you with the perfect tutor and your first session is free.

Book Your Free Trial