This morning Morning Feature will look at the Serengeti Road, a new national highway planned for Tanzania, and dig deeper into the dilemma faced when a local economy clashes with its environment. (More)
The Tuesday Digging Deeper Morning Feature surveys an ongoing news topic through multiple sources to invite in-depth conversation. Please check back over the coming days for additional comments. This week’s Digging Deeper topic is the Serengeti Road, and here is the story in a nutshell:
The 480-kilometre road will link the Lake Victoria area with eastern Tanzania and, according to the Tanzanian government, bring essential economic development to the region – linking remote communities to the major road network, allowing transport of people and goods and connecting farmers with markets.
The road will bisect the path of the renowned ‘great migration’ of wildebeest and zebra, when each year millions of animals migrate between the Tanzanian Serengeti and Kenyan Masai Mara in search of fresh water sources.
The Great Migration
Let’s start with some eloquent word pictures from the New York Times on Oct. 31:
Every spring, out here on this endless sheet of yellow grass, two million wildebeest, zebras, gazelles and other grazers march north in search of greener pastures, with lions and hyenas stalking them and vultures circling above.
It is called the Great Migration, and it is widely considered one of the most spectacular assemblies of animal life on the planet.
But how much longer it will stay that way is another matter. Tanzania’s president, Jakaya Kikwete, plans to build a national highway straight through the Serengeti park, bisecting the migration route and possibly sending a thick stream of overloaded trucks and speeding buses through the traveling herds.
Scientists and conservation groups paint a grim picture of what could happen next: rare animals like rhinos getting knocked down as roadkill; fences going up; invasive seeds sticking to car tires and being spread throughout the park; the migration getting blocked and the entire ecosystem becoming irreversibly damaged.
“The Serengeti ecosystem is one of the wonders of the planet,” said Anne Pusey, an evolutionary anthropologist at Duke University. “It must be preserved.” “
The Frankfurt Zoological Society has prepared a presentation on the concerns and a possible alternative.
The Times also raises the specter of Road Kill in the Serengeti?
Imagine. You are lying in the grass in the east African savannah, watching wildebeest fording a shallow river. You can hear the funny grunting noises they make, and as they pass by, you can feel the impact of their hooves on the ground and smell their rich animal smell. You see their kicking heels, their beautiful sleek bodies. Then you look up, and you realize that the herd stretches as far as you can see, that the plain is dark with wildebeest. If you were to wait for them all to pass, you would be there for days.
The sight is magnificent, primal and profoundly moving. It is the wildebeest migration.
Every year, more than a million wildebeest, along with hundreds of thousands of zebras and gazelles, move through the Serengeti-Mara ecosystem of Tanzania and Kenya, following the rains. In the course of a year, an individual wildebeest may cover as much as 2,100 kilometers. (That’s more than 1,300 miles — which is further than the distance between New York and New Orleans.) It is the last great migration on Earth.
But for how much longer? A large part of the migration takes place within the vast Serengeti National Park in Tanzania, and there are reports that the Tanzanian government is preparing to build a major road through the northern part of the park: through a designated wilderness area, through the migration route.
Roads are catastrophic for wildlife. The experiment has been done again and again all over the world: we know. Among the problems: roads allow the easy spread of invasive plant species, as car tires often carry their seeds. Roads also allow the rapid spread of animal diseases, and lead to an increase in poaching, building and other human activities.
Serengeti Highway Would Disrupt World’s Greatest Migration, Conservationists Warn:
“The Serengeti is the site of one of the last great ungulate migrations left on Earth, the pre-eminent symbol of wild nature for millions of visitors and TV viewers, and a hugely important source of income for the people of Tanzania through ecotourism,” said Dr. James Deutsch, Executive Director of the WCS’s Africa Program. “To threaten this natural marvel with a road would be a tragedy. We implore the Tanzanian government – known around the world for its commitment to conservation – to reconsider this proposal and explore other options.”
“A commercial road would not only result in wildlife collisions and human injuries, but would serve to fragment the landscape and undermine the ecosystem in a variety of ways,” said Prof. Jonathan Baillie, Director of Conservation Programmes for ZSL, which partners with WCS in the long-term monitoring and conservation of Serengeti’s cheetahs. “To diminish this natural wonder would be a terrible loss for Tanzania and all future generations.”
The Human Needs
Government On Why Serengeti Road is a Must Project
The government has said plans to construct a road through the Serengeti National Park (Senapa) are still on course despite emerging opposition from environmental lobbyists and conservationists.
Minister for Natural Resources and Tourism Shamsa Mwangunga pointed out that the government is obliged to fulfill a campaign promise, made by President Jakaya Kikwete in 2005, that the fourth phase administration under CCM would complete construction of the $480 (Sh372) billion Arusha-Musoma road. But in a quick government reaction to campaigns among local and international groups that got underway over two weeks ago to oppose the project, Ms. Mwangunga dismissed growing fears that the road would interfere with the Serengeti ecosystem.
In an interview with The Citizen this week, the minister said the main reason the road connecting Arusha-Musoma was considered was because of the need to satisfy public interests. She said the construction of the road wouldn’t disturb the popular annual wildlife migration as claimed by the campaigners.
Seeking to allay fears, she said the road, which would link Serengeti-Loliondo districts with the national grid of major roads, won’t cut cross Senapa but would be routed in a manner that won’t affect wildlife migration patterns.
Work on the project, according to Mr. Deusdedit Kakoko, who is the regional manager for Tanzania Roads Agency (Tanroads), will begin early 2012. A feasibility study is currently underway, he said. Users currently loop more than 418km to the south to skirt the protected Serengeti.
“Those criticising the road construction know nothing about what we’ve planned…We’re all keen to preserve our natural resources…We’ll never compromise on that,” declared Ms. Mwangunga.
The life of the Tanzanian people is harsh:
Farmers are completely reliant upon beneficial rainfall (not too much, not too little and all at the right time) if they are to produce a harvest that will both feed them and leave a surplus to be sold or bartered. Even if the rains come, they have little recourse to pest control and so must just hope that they are free of pestilence – whether elephant or locusts. Fertiliser is expensive and hard to get; it is also often poisonous after prolonged use. Medical services are difficult to access and prohibitively expensive. Life is hard.
Agriculture is important to Tanzania:
Agriculture is the foundation of the Tanzanian economy. It accounts for about half of the national income, three quarters of merchandise exports and is source of food and provides employment opportunities to about 80 percent of Tanzanians. It has linkages with the non-farm sector through forward linkages to agro-processing, consumption and export; provides raw materials to industries and a market for manufactured goods.
Agriculture in Tanzania is dominated by smallholder farmers (peasants) cultivating an average farm sizes of between 0.9 hecters and 3.0 hecters each. About 70 percent of Tanzania’s crop area is cultivated by hand hoe, 20 percent by ox plough and 10 percent by tractor. It is rainfed agriculture. Food crop production dominates the agriculture economy 5.1 million ha. are cultivated annually, of which 85 percent is under food crops. Women constitute the main part of agricultural labour force. The major constraint facing the agriculture sector is the falling labour and land productivity due to application of poor technology, dependence on unreliable and irregular weather conditions. Both crops and livestock are adversely affected by periodic droughts.
The Fragile Ecosystem
Some environmentalists are concerned about destroying a major carbon sink:
The project has attracted criticism from environmental groups which fear the effects on the ecosystem could be devastating and may even result in huge releases of carbon into the atmosphere.
Andrew Dobson, Professor of Conservation Biology and Infectious Disease Ecology at Princeton University, who has worked in the Serengeti since 1986, said this decline in wildebeest numbers could indirectly destroy the region’s function as a major carbon sink.
“If the wildebeest population declines by even fifty percent it could lead to an increase in the fire frequency in the park, as less grass would be eaten – this could flip the entire system from a major carbon sink into a major source of carbon.”
The Serengeti road to disaster :
These instantly recognizable images belong to a very small part of Africa–the Serengeti ecosystem of northern Tanzania and southern Kenya. It’s so spectacular that it burns our consciousness out of all proportion to its size of about 30,000 km2 (12,00 square miles). It defines Africa in a unique way, perhaps, as some scientists argue, because it’s the landscape where we became human.
If a planned road cuts it in half, it may be a landscape our children will watch only as history.
.
I encourage you to follow the links and read the articles.
Here are some questions to get us started, not in any order and not intended to be all inclusive:
– If every harmed habitat and lost species harms us all, do we all have a veto when it comes to the enviromental impact of a change?
– At what point does “economic need” override “environmental damage”?
– Do we have the right to dictate policy that impacts the lives of farmers getting their crops to market and a country linking remote villages to vital government resources?
– Is this really a clash of “I want wildebeest photos for my coffee table” versus “People are starving”?
.
Please share your thoughts and additional links in the Comments.
+++++
At BPI Campus.com our Progressive Agenda is:
1. People matter more than profits.
• Corollary: Each person matters … equally.
2. The earth is our home, not our trash can.
3. We need good government for both #1 and #2.
I will kick off the conversation since I don’t have to read the piece.
This is an incredible dilemma and it is one we will be facing all over the globe as we try to find a way to balance the needs of the entire earth with the needs of real people in an area of the earth.
The biggest moral dilemma I see is do we have the right to dictate to a people from the comfort of a country that uses and used up the natural resources of the planet?
But we only have one planet. If we don’t put up a fight, are we incrementally causing the death of our planet? Yesterday the Amazon rain forests, today the planes of Serengeti, tomorrow…what?
The “Do as I say, not as I do” position. Very easy to fall into, and you’re right, from our relative comfort it would be easy to forget the farmers and want to stop the road.
But when presented as you have presented it, the real dilemma becomes clear. Those are the dilemmas we need to consider deeply, and painfully. What is right?
Danged if I know.
Poor South Africans migrate to the cities hoping for jobs, access to education and medical services. Mostly what they find is they are just crowded and poor instead of rural and poor. Services are mostly for those who can afford them. This photo doesn’t really capture the density of the place.
I am unclear, other than it was a campaign promise, why the government wants the road. The description of agriculture makes it sound iffy at best. It doesn’t say that there is extra food in the countryside and they need a road to move it to hungry city people. I so hope they are not just looking at the west or the US and saying, we must have roads to be a modern nation.
I was not 100% sure either. Every time I tried to dig deeper, I stumbled over more of the “we should not have this road”.
If it is a campaign promise that is a bad idea, you can say “that was a bad idea, let’s not do it”. Especially since the world is not on your side.
Reading about the agriculture needs suggests that getting the farmers better access to market could be important.
I commented below with excerpts from an interview with Tanzania’s president on that issue, Jan. Farmers having better access to markets is very important. Without it, rural farmers have no incentive to increase their yield beyond subsistence levels and their villages continue to hover on the verge of starvation.
Good morning! ::hugggggs::
Yet as pointed out these farmers aren’t even reliable food producers: totally dependent on rain, and use of fertilizers can become poisonous.
Will finding them bigger markets only result in greater devastation for them?
I don’t know.
Among other things, the Tanzanian government is trying to increase the use of irrigation farming, so they’re less dependent on rainfall. The farmers have no incentive to make that switch if they can’t get surplus crops to market … and no means to make that switch if they can’t install and maintain irrigation systems in these isolated regions.
Good morning! ::hugggggs::
Thank you, Jan, for bringing this to our attention. It’s the type of story that most of us in this country never hear about because we are so focused on what’s happening in our immediate vicinity.
This is a tough situation to rectify, and seems to call for a solution that hasn’t been tried yet. People seem to be getting constrained into thinking that there is only a choice between two solutions – either build the highway through the park, or don’t do anything at all.
In reading some of the links that have been provided, and remembering to keep in mind that I’m almost totally ignorant of the geography and customs in that part of the world, it would seem that there should be at least some different questions being asked:
1) Is there a way to reroute traffic temporarily during the Great Migration to allow human traffic to yield to the animal traffic?
2) Could there be a different form of transportation used for that part of the route? Why does everyone think that a road needs to be used?
I’m sure that there are other questions that must be asked, but since I know so little about this, I can’t think of anything else right now.
You highlighted two things about this series that is important. First, I wanted to dig deeper into this story when I came across it a few weeks ago because it is not something I know much about. We are very USA-centric and certainly we have had to be for the last couple of months. When I dug deeper, I saw the moral dilemma presented by the problem.
The other thing is that we don’t have to solve this problem here this morning (as my first reaction was to do). It is enough for the first pass to understand some of the issues and generate some conversation. The result may be a template for how we can make these decisions and then maybe a solution or at least a greater awareness.
We don’t live on the planet by ourselves. We need to know more about our global neighbors.
That would be a good starting point. Excellent comments from you and glenda.
This made me think of the changes to the Yellowstone ecosystem that happened when the wolves were removed that put it in drought conditions and increased the fire danger. Both conditions were repaired when the wolves were reintroduced and nature’s balance restored.
I think we as humans grossly underestimate the impact of our meddling.
I was particularly struck by the article about the carbon sink. Every change to our ecosystem can impact the carbon plus/minus of our entire planet.
We have been treating the earth as our trash can for so long we are blind to things like this. This was eye opening.
After all the uproar about the tropical forests and carbon, it turns out that grasslands soak up more carbon than forests. Which makes the Serengeti even more important than its size would indicate.
I am reminded that here we are now trying to rebuild the migratory roads for animals, by getting ranchers to agreee to leave part of their land unfenced. Struggling to restore what we so blithely disrupted.
Again, no easy answers. I wish there were.
This is indeed a dilemma, Jan. Human beings are also part of nature. My first reaction upon reading some of this was to think it’s very easy for white environmentalists in the U.S. and Europe to think protecting the Serengeti in its pristine state is more important than providing for the human needs of black Tanzanian farmers. You asked this question:
I think the answer is partly “Yes.”
There are also legitimate and important environmental concerns here, but I think it’s important to weigh those concerns through the Shoe On The Other Foot lens: How would we Americans respond if Tanzanians objected to an environmentally sensitive infrastructure project here in the U.S.?
I’m glad we’re exploring the issue. In terms of our progressive values, this is where “The earth is our home, not our trash can” meets the corollary to “People matter more than profits: All people matter … equally.” Including Tanzanian farmers.
Good morning! ::hugggggs::
A bit of African trivia- they say the Wildebeest is what God made with all the leftover parts. Africans think of them as the ugliest of the wild animals and they are the bad guys in most folk stories. This may also contribute to them not being too worried about disrupting their migrations.
That’s fascinating, addisnana. Wildebeest aren’t pretty by any measure, but they are important to the Serengeti ecosystem. On the other hand, humans are part of the ecosystem also.
Good morning! ::hugggggs::
That’s a fascinating tidbit, addisnana. I must be in a minority since I think wildebeest are beautiful in an odd way. LOL
Yes, that kind of storytelling would probably have an impact on how much locals care about their migration.
It may be a move to develop the region. Access to markets could replace small subsistence farms with big ag.
It is a move to develop the region. The Tanzanian government are clearly hoping the road will improve the material well-being of those isolated beyond the Serengeti. As for the conflict between small farmers and big agribusiness, that conflict already exists in southern Tanzania. The government are trying not to repeat the pattern we’ve seen in other developing nations – and in the U.S. – of small farmers losing their land and becoming mere tenant workers on corporate-owned property.
Good morning! ::hugggggs::
A quick shorthand response before I go back to re-read and consider your questions directly. (My eyes are not focusing this morning.)
One potential problem that was not mentioned was disease. Most of us have heard of ebola, or the Marburg virus. It seemed to explode onto the scene out of nowhere, a new, usually fatal, and quite horrific hemorrhagic fever.
In fact, after years of study, researchers learned the disease was not new, but it had been severely limited in geographic scope to a very small area that went unnoticed because it wasn’t connected to the rest of the world. When the Trans Africa highway was built, ebola was unleashed elsewhere.
That’s a legitimate health issue, winterbanyan. The flip side of it is that isolated people often don’t have access to health care and consequently have much higher infant and childhood mortality rates. On the one hand, we do need to be sensitive to the risk of local diseases spreading. On the other hand, we can’t use that as a reason not to improve the quality of life for people in isolated regions.
Good morning! ::hugggggs::
I’m not disagreeing, merely pointing out another of those unintended consequences we’re so good at not imagining when we start messing with Mother Nature.
One of the links in the article (the one about life being harsh) is to the report of a fellow who was visiting the home of someone whose husband had just died of TB and who likely had the disease herself. Diseases that we consider eradicated are a real problem for people in third world countries.
Very true, and antibiotics no longer work on TB. It has returned to the U.S., though in small numbers yet, but we can soon expect to see a public health recommendation that we resume testing everyone, as we did when I was a child.
I found an All-Africa interview with Tanzanian President Kikwete on developing agriculture in his country. Some snippets:
And on infrastructure development:
Good morning! ::hugggggs::
Thanks for that interview. It really sheds light on the scope of what they are trying to accomplish.
I tried to imagine the response if President Obama proposed that the U.S. government buy no more new vehicles – including military vehicles – and instead spend that money on shared-use tractors or mass transit. I decided to stop trying to imagine the response because I didn’t want my head to explode.
Good morning! ::hugggggs::
These are some questions. My response it to walk away from my computer and try to think them through in some way that makes moral sense to me. And the questions remain. They aren’t easy.
I believe in protecting the environment. Treating it like a resource to be used any way we want has gotten us nowhere good, really. We’re about to pay for our carelessness. But at the same time, we can’t let our fellow humans suffer and starve.
At this point my only answer is a weak one: If we want to protect the Serengeti, then the rest of the world needs to step up with alternatives to this road and then help pay for them.
This is something I’m going to ponder for weeks. I can see why this plagued you, Jan.
Absolutely fantastic “Digging Deeper”. This is the stuff too many headlines never force us to think about.
You’re right, winterbanyan. There are no easy answers here. The good part about the Digging Deeper format is that it encourages us to research more articles and continue the discussion throughout the week. I doubt we’ll find The Answer – if there were a simple Answer, it would already have been found – but at least we’ll understand The Questions better.
Good morning! ::hugggggs::
I hope that is true. Certainly the initial list of questions I came up with does not cover most of the issues at play.
And the more I read what others have added, the more the Questions seem to be winning.
Jan, can we talk about the Brewers and Dodgers?
What a dilemma. I think I’m going to defer to this expert.
I tried to read the report from the Frankfort Zoological Society but it didn’t come up. I hope their alternative is workable.
Living in the Hamptons, which is really a beautiful place, is a constant reminder about the health of an ecosystem and the human desire to use it, exploit it, enjoy it. We always talk about preserving our heritage of agricultural, fishing and recreation. But, of course, we also want to build stuff. This is a less beautiful place and I worry about the ecosystem, especially when our bays and other waterways turn a coffee-like color, usually near the end of summer, but also during other times. This area was rich with mollusks: clams, scallops, etc, were abundant. In the sixties I could walk in the bay twist my feet around for 1/2 an hour and bring home dozens of clams.
Not so much anymore.
I guess my inexpert opinion is that progress can extract a terrible price.
Yes, compared to this the Brewers and the Dodgers are not a dilemma although our local paper begs to differ. 😉
Progress or the lives of the people of Tanzania? When it is put in contrast to the beauty of the landscape and the lives of the wild animals, I hope there is an alternative that will work.
(The Frankfort Zoological Society link is a PDF file but it runs on my computer like a Powerpoint presentation. Let me see what I can do.)
We have the same issues here in Florida, Mike. The failed Hometown Democracy Project – requiring voter approval by referendum for any new or amended comprehensive zoning plan – was pitched to our local DEC as “I want to keep my county as it was when I moved here.” I didn’t support it at the time, and was ambivalent even when I voted, because I don’t like the My Cup’s Full So Turn Off The Spigot attitude.
I wasn’t born in Florida, although my dad was and the Springoffs are all native Floridians. But I moved here. And later moved into a newly-built home. What right do I have to tell others, “No more growth; we must protect the natural environment I moved into?”
And that’s here in my hometown. Now what right do I have to tell Tanzanian village farmers on the edge of starvation, “No infrastructure for you; we have to protect this pristine environment for white academics to study and white Americans and Europeans to visit on vacation?”
Yet I do care about the environment here in Florida, and in Tanzania. We humans must live better as parts of nature, and not simply exploit it for our own benefits.
This is a real dilemma, not a Faux Noise pseudo-controversy. And there are no easy answers.
Good morning! ::hugggggs::
I hear you, Crissie. By my comment below, though, I’m pretty pessimistic about things. But, like you, I wind up in the position of asking myself — who am I to impose my views on people living1/2 the globe away.
You’re usually our resident optimist, Mike! 😯
I have a more positive outlook on this. Just 50 years ago, this would have been a one-dimensional (economic) issue. Now this is a two-dimensional (economic and environmental) issue. I agree that the Tanzanian government won’t find a Permanent Perfect Solution to this two-dimensional problem, but merely that they’re trying to solve it in two-dimensions is a huge step forward.
That may be our big takeaway from this and our other attempts to solve problems in N-dimensions. Each added dimension makes it more apparent that there is no Permanent Perfect Solution … but in weighing those added dimensions we look for better solutions than we would have found 50 years ago.
Good morning! ::hugggggs::
Usually I am optimistic, but now I see Pres Obama frittering away his presidency. I guess a topic for another day.
FZS is not disputing the need for the road. Here is their alternative:

Well that really makes the problem clear. Thanks.
Maasai are herders. For centuries, if not millennia, they have followed the migratory route of the elephants. As the Maasai noted, the elephants would graze an area until all the trees were gone, leaving behind grasslands. Then they would move on and the Maasai and their cattle moved in. Over time, trees and brush began to grow again, the cattle had less to graze on, and the Maasai again moved into an area recently abandoned by the elephants. The cycle worked for ages, elephants followed by herdsmen, followed by forest regrowth. Round and round in perfect harmony.
Then poachers and fences reduced the elephants’ numbers and their food sources. Soon there were no extensive grasslands for the cattle. And the Maasai are no longer nomads following the elephant herds and living in relative wealth. Today they are bound to small plots of land where a man is lucky if he can have two cows. These, a people who once had extensive herds, now have nothing. Not even a bride price.
They mourn the elephants. They understood the migration that worked so well for them. And now it’s gone.
Human progress brought us climate change. I am convinced this planet is doomed. We now have the scientific and technological capability to halt the accumulation of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. However, we don’t have the political will to mount a comeback for homo sapiens. Likewise with the Serengeti. My hunch is that they will try to mitigate any ecosystem damage, but they will fail. For a century or 2, or less, or whenever, the damage to the ecosystem will create forces that overwhelm whatever short term benefit that highway creates. Unless, of course, climate change tipping points are so acute that it won’t matter much in the scheme of things.
But I’m glad I’m not making this call. Who am I to deny some material and economic progress to the peoples of that region.
Can I please now go back to fighting the Republicans on things like the minimum wage and the Bush Tax cuts?
Only kidding. I appreciate the opportunity to read such a thought-provoking diary, Jan.
I believe that to be true. In instance after instance where the DNR in Wisconsin has given developers the opportunity to mitigate the damage, the alternative has been worse. You can’t just “create” a new wetland to replace the one you filled in for your factory (hint: it creates flooding).
We can go back to fighting the republicans but we ignore this at our own peril. Btw, the new Congress will be rich in one thing: climate change deniers.
My inlaws made a couple of trips to the Serengeti, so I learned a little about how fragile it is. I don’t know what the impact of creating that highway will be, especially without thinking about it for a while.
There is plenty of plundering in Africa, though. Not far away, the Congo basin is really endangered — that’s about 20% of the world’s tropical rainforest for starters. Big climate impact there.
I think Jan’s point about what leg we have to stand on is well taken. But I think we have to have a say about some of it, because our markets are partly what’s driving the development. we have a responsibility to not cripple a country’s development, as well.
I don’t know.
It’s okay to “not know” and also to want to “think about it for a while”.
Both of those are what the intent of this piece is.
Your comment made me think about something I did not consider…do our markets drive that country’s need for development? Is the insatiable “buy buy buy” and the resultant “sell sell sell” driving all economies to consider “progress” as requiring more things rather than simply a better life?
If you want to post a longer comment on the Congo, that would be most welcome.
I’ll have a couple of whole diaries on the DRC before long. There is some bug stuff happening there — I just have to wait for the story to unfold.
Thanks, rb137.
“I don’t know” is the correct answer here, rb137. Sincerely.
At the very least, the Tanzanian government are trying to solve this as a two-dimensional problem – economic and environmental – and not solely as a one-dimensional problem. We should encourage that, in Tanzania and here in the U.S. Ideal solutions only exist when we ignore the parts of the problems that our solutions don’t address. But ignoring those parts of the problems is not the same as addressing them.
Good afternoon! ::hugggggs::
I see a big difference between the west saying ‘don’t build a road’ and the west saying, ‘we’ve intervened in nature with disastrous consequences. Please try and learn from our mistakes.’ I would be in the latter camp and hope that they can make progress for the benefit of their people and do it without making our mistakes.
I trust that the government of Tanzania will do what’s best for its people, and its environment. The Chama cha Mapinduzi Party, though it is no longer the pure African Socialist Party of its founder Julius Nyere, is still one of the most progressive on the continent.
To get a better understanding of not only Tanzania, but of African politics and history – I’d like to suggest a documentary series which though dated is still quite relevant today:
The Africans: A Triple Heritage, by Dr Ali Mazuri.
http://dickinsg.intrasun.tcnj.edu/films/mazrui/#videos
Thank you for the insights about the Tanzanian government, Dee. I’ll look for those documentaries. 🙂
And welcome to BPI, dear sis! 😀
Thank you, Dee. You have an insight that most of us don’t have here. I hope you’ll keep informing us. And I’m definitely hunting for that documentary.