Defining the balance between conservation and national development is fraught with
conflicting ideals: at what point should a country prioritize new infrastructure developments above
its natural heritage? In the case of Tanzania, the government has identified the need for developing
a paved national transportation corridor to Lake Victoria as part of its national development strategy
that would facilitate trade and alleviate poverty in the north-western part of the country (United
Republic of Tanzania 2010). Although this area is globally recognized for its protected areas, wildlife
migrations, and unique biodiversity, the local communities in the region routinely face economic
hardship and poor access to social services such as schools and hospitals. The promise of a highway
connecting this area is welcomed, however we argue that all potential routes must be critically
evaluated and compared. Of the three possible routes that have been suggested one in particular
has generated international controversy; the Serengeti route bisects the National Park and passes
through the core dry season refuge of the wildebeest migration potentially separating them from
the only permanent water source (Dobson et al. 2010). From a conservation perspective this could
lead to catastrophic declines in the abundance of this keystone species (Holdo et al. 2011),
potentially change the entire dynamics of the ecosystem (Hopcraft et al. in press), and threaten the
economic benefits from tourism. However, how does this balance against the potential benefits of
the road in terms of human poverty alleviation and provisioning socio-economic opportunities for
the people?
A recent opinion article by Fyumagwa et al. (2013) suggests that the development of a road through
the Serengeti National Park could reduce poverty and improve the quality of life by fuelling the local
economy. Unfortunately, their analysis fails to deliver meaningful insights because they do not
compare the costs and benefits between all potential routes (their results are only based on
interviews in 12 villages along a single route). Critically, their analysis does not consider the opinions
of people living along other more populous routes, nor does it consider the opinions of the 11.9% of
employed Tanzanians working in the accommodation and tourism sector (United Republic of
Tanzania 2012a) whose livelihoods could be at stake if a road were built through Tanzania’s prime
tourist location (Sekar et al. 2014) (Tanzania’s tourism sector contributed US$1.279 billion, or
roughly 5.5% of Tanzania’s GDP in 2010 (United Republic of Tanzania 2012b)). We outline an
alternative solution by which Tanzania could alleviate poverty and achieve its national infrastructure
development goals more successfully, without compromising the country’s natural heritage and
tourism industry.