Bridging the conservation and development trade‐off? A working landscape critique of a conservancy in the Maasai Mara

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

Evolution of models to support community and policy action with science: Balancing pastoral livelihoods and wildlife conservation in savannas of East Africa

We developed a “continual engagement” model to better integrate knowledge from policy makers, communities, and researchers with the goal of promoting more effective action to balance poverty alleviation and wildlife conservation in 4 pastoral ecosystems of East Africa. The model involved the creation of a core boundary-spanning team, including community facilitators, a policy facilitator, and transdisciplinary researchers, responsible for linking with a wide range of actors from local to global scales. Collaborative researcher–facilitator community teams integrated local and scientific knowledge to help communities and policy makers improve herd quality and health, expand biodiversity payment schemes, develop land-use plans, and fully engage together in pastoral and wildlife policy development. This model focused on the creation of hybrid scientific–local knowledge highly relevant to community and policy maker needs. The facilitation team learned to be more effective by focusing on noncontroversial livelihood issues before addressing more difficult wildlife issues, using strategic and periodic engagement with most partners instead of continual engagement, and reducing costs by providing new scientific information only when deemed essential. We conclude by examining the role of facilitation in redressing asymmetries in power in researcher–community–policy maker teams, the role of individual values and character in establishing trust, and how to sustain knowledge-action links when project funding ends