A comparison of scenarios for rural development planning and conservation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo

- Optimization scenarios for agricultural zoning explore trade-offs for conservation and development.
- 43-55% more agricultural land needed by 2050 in MLW for growing human populations.
- Wildlife corridors are most vulnerable to future agricultural expansion.
- This process should complement participatory, stakeholder-driven planning procedures.

Including a diverse set of stakeholders in collaborative land use planning processes is facilitated by data and maps that communicate and inform an array of possible planning options and potential scenarios of future land use change. In northern Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the African Wildlife Foundation (AWF) has engaged stakeholders and the DRC Government to lead a participatory zoning process in the Maringa-Lopori-Wamba (MLW) Landscape. To assist landscape scale macro-zoning efforts, we employed a spatial allocation decision support tool called Marxan to develop a set of three scenarios of potential human and agricultural expansion for 2050. The results offer guidance to stakeholders and assist decision-makers in determining the most suitable land for inclusion in a proposed Rural Development Zone (RDZ), designed to accommodate the expansion of agricultural activities and subsequent deforestation while considering conservation priority areas. We used data describing current patterns of human activity, including historical primary forest loss, land cover suitability for agricultural activity, and presence of important wildlife connectivity zones and protected areas to identify locations where future agricultural expansion might be encouraged. We found that future agricultural demands can be met by expansion around historically intensive agricultural areas in the eastern portion of MLW without significantly compromising conservation priority areas. Wildlife connectivity zones are most vulnerable to future agricultural expansion because of their proximity to current agricultural activity. Our results demonstrate the need to prioritize conservation action in these areas and illustrate how competing needs might be balanced in planning for both agricultural expansion and terrestrial biological conservation in this landscape.