You should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 14-26, which are based on Reading Passage 2 below.

Chimps and humans: how different are we?

Researchers are observing that chimpanzees show many similar behaviours to those of human beings – but how similar are chimps and humans really?

A

A chimp called Santino in Furuvik Zoo in Sweden has been found to be capable of planning ahead of time by calmly building up a pile of stones in the early morning hours ready for opening time when he would then hurl them at visitors. According to scientist Mathias Osvath of Lund University, Santino’s behaviour shows that our fellow apes think in a very complex way.

‘It implies that they have a highly developed consciousness, including life-like mental simulations of potential events,’ Dr Osvath said. ‘They most probably have an ‘inner world’ like we have when reviewing past episodes of our lives or thinking of days to come. When wild chimps collect stones or go out to war, they probably plan this in advance. I would guess they plan much of their everyday behaviour.’ This is not the behaviour we come to expect of ‘dumb’ animals.

B

There are several different observations that point to chimps having a human-like nature. For instance, the hand gestures of chimps – such as the open-palm begging posture – are similar to those of humans and might derive from a common origin. Wild chimps have also been found to engage in a form of primitive warfare against neighbouring chimps. As well as these voluntary actions, they also experience infectious yawning, when one yawning member of a group sets off yawning in everyone else.

C

Chimps can be trained to accomplish ‘human’ challenges. A female chimp called Ai, for instance, was taught to count to ten and to remember five-figure numbers, just two short of the seven-digit telephone numbers most people can recall. Another chimp called Panbanisha had been trained to understand simple English sentences, although this fell short of being able to communicate in a true spoken language. The chimp was brought up to remember a lexigram, a computer screen full of symbols which she can press to produce a rudimentary response to a human voice. Panbanisha became able to recognise certain favourite or key words, such as ‘outdoors’ and ‘M&Ms’ when spoken in the proper context with a certain intonation.

D

Of course animals kept domestically can be trained to perform a wide variety of seemingly clever tricks, although there is mounting evidence that wild chimps have a more sophisticated understanding of the world than scientists once gave them credit for. Take, for example, the use of tools, which was once considered to be a defining feature of humanity. Wild chimps are now known to use tools, such as the use of sticks to ‘fish’ for termites or stones to crack open hard nuts. Indeed, a few years ago scientists filmed chimps using a ‘tool kit’ to fish for termites. They would create a hole in a termite nest with one, thick stick and push another, thinner stick with a deliberately frayed end down the same hole to catch the termites. This was the first known example of chimps using two different tools to perform a given task.

E

If culture is defined as passing on learning and customs to future generations, then chimps have it. Ten years ago, scientists published a large study drawing on a knowledge of more than 150 years of chimpanzee observations in the forests of central Africa showing that wild chimps have an array of behaviours that they pass on to their offspring. The scientist showed that while there were several examples of chimp behaviour, such as drumming on trees, that were shared across the entire region, there were many other examples – about 40 in total –  that had evolved separately in different areas of the region and been handed on to subsequent generations inhabiting that area.

The chimps in Gombe national park in Tanzania, for instance, would fish for ants using a long branch which they would regularly swipe with their hands to collect the insects into a ball that they would put into their mouths. The chimps at other sites, meanwhile, would fish with shorter twigs that they would lick with their lips and tongues – a far more inefficient method. Scientists said that the difference came down to cultural practice passed on down the generations of geographically separated troupes of chimps.

F

While humans and chimps are close in terms of their genes, brain size is probably the most important distinguishing physical feature. The human brain is about three times larger than the brain of chimps in relation to body size. It is this immense growth of the human brain during the few million years of evolutionary history that really sets the two species apart and determines the uniquely human traits such as language, consciousness and creativity.

Humans also walk on two legs, whereas chimp have gone down the less-efficient knuckle-walking path. Bipedalism has freed our hands for using tools and allowed us to move large distances over open savannah, rather than being confined to forested areas. More sophisticated tools and their mastery of fire have enabled humans to exploit a different, more nutritious diet than chimps. So, while chimps are more closely related to humans than they are to other apes like gorillas, they are a nevertheless a distinct species of animal separated by millions of years of evolution.

You should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 27-40, which are based on Reading Passage 3 below.

The future of cities

Professor of Urban Planning Sarah Holmes looks at the challenges of urban living

The World Health Organisation has produced a report predicting that 9.8 billion of us will be living on this planet by 2050. Of that number, 72% will be living in urban areas – a higher proportion than ever before. Presented with this information, governments have a duty to consider how best to meet the needs of city residents, and not just for the short-term. Certain problems associated with urban living have been highlighted by research company Richmond-Carver in its latest global survey. At the top of the list of survey respondents' concerns is the fact that competition amongst tenants for rental properties has driven the median price up – so much so people need to hold down two or more jobs to meet all their expenses. Another issue the survey highlighted is the difficulty commuters face. Overcrowding means that seats are often not available on long journeys, but more significant is that schedules are unreliable. Many studies have shown the effect that has on a country's productivity. Interestingly, certain problems seem more common in some cities than others: respondents from increasingly crowded European cities, including Manchester and Barcelona, commented on how their quality of life was affected by loud machinery, other people's music and car alarms. Something the survey failed to ask about was the value people placed on having access to nature in urban neighbourhoods. However, some countries are already moving forward. Singapore is a prime example; its rooftop gardens make the city a far more desirable place to live. It is the Singaporean government that is behind this push for sustainable living.

Perhaps some clearer government direction would benefit other cities. Take New York City, a place where I frequently meet up with other researchers in my field. Luckily for me, I am driven from the airport to the research centre, so do not need to navigate the freeways and constant congestion. Admittedly my experience of the urban lifestyle here is limited to the hotels I stay in, and the blocks within a three-kilometre walk. But whenever I leave my room in search of an outlet providing fruit or anything with nutritional value, none can be found. It seems ridiculous that this should be the case. New York has made great advances in redeveloping its museums and arts centres, but authorities must recognise that people's basic needs must be met first.

Sometimes these basic needs are misunderstood. In some urban areas, new residential developments are provided with security features such as massive metal fences and multiple gates in the belief that these will make residents safer. There is little evidence such steps make a difference in this way, but we do know they make residents feel reluctant to go outside and walk around their neighbourhood. Instead they are more likely to remain inactive indoors. Grassy areas inside fenced developments are hardly used by householders or tenants either. All this adds up to a feeling of being cut off from others.

So where are planners and developers going wrong? Inviting a group of locals to attend a consultation event is the conventional method for discovering what a community might want. The issue here is that it often attracts the same few voices with the same few wishes. But the internet now makes it possible for others to contribute. A community website can be a place where local people propose ideas for making their neighbourhood a better place to live. Developers that pay attention to these ideas can get a clearer picture of the things residents actually want and reduce the risk of throwing away money on things they don't.

An example of a project that truly meets the needs of residents is Container City – a development in London's Docklands area. Constructed from metal containers once used to transport cargo on ships, it is a five-storey architectural masterpiece. The containers have been turned into sunny work studios, and despite their limited size, some come with a bed, shower and kitchen unit. Smart planning and skilful construction mean they take up very little room. Furniture and fittings are made from recycled products. Other countries have their own versions of Container City — Amsterdam and Copenhagen have created container dormitories to house students – but the Docklands site shows how work and living areas can effectively be combined. The units are ideal for young entrepreneurs hoping to establish a business while keeping costs down.

Successful development is taking place in many urban areas around the world, and city planners have a duty to see for themselves the transforming effect this can have on residents' lives. There is no better way to do this than to visit these places in person. These might be neighbourhoods constructed for the first time, or developers might have transformed what was already there. In either case, the idea of cars determining urban planning, and indeed the whole concept of private car ownership, is now outdated and must be abandoned. Instead, the layout of an area under development must make it easier for people to meet up in pedestrianised zones and community spaces. At the heart of the development should be a cultural area, providing venues for art, music and street theatre. Such activities bring communities together, and do far more for positive relations than a new mall or shopping precinct. For this reason, these kinds of performance spaces should be prioritised. Finally, planners and developers must be obliged to create, within the same neighbourhood, different types of homes for wealthy professionals, for families, for the elderly and for young people just starting out. This kind of mix is essential to ensure people can buy a home in an area convenient for work, and for a community to stay alive.