Search

Abstract The recent call to halt biodiversity loss by protecting half the planet has been hotly contested because of the extent to which people might be excluded from these landscapes. It is clear that incorporating landscapes that implicitly work for indigenous people is vital to achieving any sustainable targets. We examine an attempt to balance the trade‐offs between conservation and development in Enonkishu Conservancy in the Maasai Mara, using a working landscape approach. Mobile livestock production strategies are theoretically consistent with wildlife‐based activities and can present a win‐win solution for both conservation and development. We explore the success and failings of Enonkishu's evolving attempts to achieve this: addressing the criticism of the conservation sector that it fails to learn from its mistakes. We found that Enonkishu has had considerable positive conservation outcomes, preventing the continued encroachment of farmland and maintaining and improving rangeland health relative to the surrounding area, while maintaining diverse and large populations of wildlife and livestock. The learning from certain ventures that failed, particularly on livestock, has created institutions and governance that, while still evolving, are more robust and relevant for conservancy members, by being fluid and inclusive. Practical implication: Diverse revenue streams (beyond tourism, including a residential estate, livestock venture and philanthropy) enabled Enonkishu to withstand the pressures of COVID‐19. Livestock is crucial for defining the vision of the conservancy, and the institutions and governance that underpin it.

Background: Residency programs transitioned to primarily virtual interviews due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This shift raised questions regarding expectations and patterns of applicant cancellation timeliness. The purpose of this study was to examine changes in applicant cancellations after transitioning to virtual interviews. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of interview data from a three-year emergency medicine residency at a tertiary-care academic medical center. Using archived data from Interview Broker, we examined scheduling patterns between one in-person (2019–2020) and two virtual interview cohorts (2020–2021 and 2021–2022). Our outcomes were the overall cancellation rates relative to interview slots as well as the proportion of cancellations that occurred within 7 or 14 days of the interview date. Results: There were 453 interview slots and 568 applicants invited. Overall, applicants canceled 17.1% of scheduled interviews. Compared with in-person interviews, applicants canceled significantly fewer virtual interviews (in person: 40/128 (31.3%), virtual year 1: 22/178 (12.4%), virtual year 2: 15/143 (10.5%), P = 0.001). Conversely, applicants canceled significantly more virtual interviews within both the 14-day threshold (in person: 8/40 (20%), virtual year 1: 12/22 (55.5%), virtual year 2: 12/15 (80%), P