Knowledge and skills transfer

How can the building-knowledge and skills be shared with the Semai people?

The results of the infield interviews showed that 90% of the people have building experience and 86% would like to learn new building skills (Appendix 3). This gives the impression that the Semai are knowledgeable with building and eager to learn and participate.

3.2.1. Participatory observation

The main findings based on observations Kampung Batu 17, 29-09-2016 (Appendix 4):

 The people of Kg Bt 5 are well known with the given building techniques and are willing to participate when they are done with their agricultural activities, which is usually in the afternoon.

 Semai people are capable to mobilise materials quickly to remote locations, with the exception of plywood.

 Putting out an exact rectangular grid can be difficult for Orang Asli. Caution is needed.

Preferably done by someone with experience.

 Semai are capable of setting out grid, digging, using a spirit level and levelling using a hose filled with water.

 Imperial system can be a bit confusing sometimes. Also, two systems on one measurement tape is confusing.

 Semai don’t use bolt and nut connections in their traditional building method, but are familiar with it. Wrenches are present, but no drills.

 An electric drill is much more used preferably over a hand drill.

 Semai are capable of understanding simple sketches made on site. This sketch is showed in Figure 25.

 Semai are very familiar in making concrete. The particular sand is collected by women and the cement is made by men with shovels.

 The concept of the design is understood, but in detail some wooden parts are used differently.

 Simple appointments can be made.

 Minor changes in execution can extend the durability.

39

Figure 25: Sketch used on site

Own work, taken on 01-10-2016

3.2.2. Experiments

The current knowledge and skills among the TSP participants is very diverse. Some can speak basic English and have wide experience in building. On the other hand, some are illiterate and never had any building experience. This naturally heavily influences the understanding of a manual.

The ability of testing the manual was limited, because the first 4 units during this analysis largely built by experienced volunteers from outside. A copy of the manual can be found in Appendix 5.

The manual was only used by my guidance for one unit because of miscommunication, as further explained in the appendixes. On the visit on 16 October 2016, two weeks after start, the main structure of the house was completed. Walls, windows and doors just needed to be made. The Semai builder said he used the manual when building. After that, he helped building the next house using the knowledge he gathered from me and the manual.

On site the Bloom’s taxonomy level of “manipulate” was achieved. The Semai were capable of excecuting given tasks, although not capable to do it with exact precision of the given

measurements. Most of the tasks goes by the saying “agak, agak”, which means approximately.

The current building-knowledge and skills among Semai people varies, but is consistently present.

During the building trip on 29-09-2016 there was only me. The building process not only involved me telling how it is done. Semai have building techniques that I am not familiar with. Making concrete with cement, water and gravel was all done by Semai. Also leveling the PVC pipe using a hose was something they were teaching me. Three of the TSP participants interviewed had no building experience at all. At the same time two other participants started to make an extension to their house by themselves. Some people depend on other people to start building. Although it is a close community with big families, it is to say that everyone could arrange help from skilled neighbors. This contributes to motives to give them extra money.

The use of a manual is possible with a minimum of education required. The use of a manual was discussed with five people. Although the sample size in this questionnaire is small, it was clear

40

that their response was dependent on their education level. If the person is illiterate, use of a manual is excluded. It is only possible to give an impression with an image of the building. The people with primary school education seemed to understand it more, but the concept of a 2d floor plan is too unknown for them to understand. People with high school education were able to understand it fully, according to them. The actual use of the manual when given together with materials is questionable. The manual might function as a guideline, not as a strict steps to follow up. It was noticeable when building was left to Semai, chances of wood overuse is high. When asked, most of them said they would not use the manual. In case of Jalil, the man I was building with, he said he used 80% of it after I left. Side notes must be placed in this case, since it was asked in presence of other people.

Knowledge and skills transfer by personal guidance is possible. Although the use of a manual is questionable, it is useful for knowledge transfer with personal assistance. The manual enabled, even with the language barrier, to make clear what materials to use in which position. With a few words Bahasa Malaysia and my hands and feet, I was able to set up the footing, floor beams, columns and floor joists.

41

3.2.3. Expert interview

Expert interview Henk Meijerink

“Testing and elaborating current knowledge of the people within their context is essential before choosing a method of action” – Henk Meijerink (Appendix

2)

The interview by Eefje Hendriks with Cordaid worker Henk Meijerink gave the following recommendations:

 Try to train the unskilled workers in the informal circuit;

 To let a manual succeed you need a combination of activities, education and guidance.

 Manuals need to be adapted to the local habits and environment. Certain colors can have a deeper meaning, people can be recognized in pictures. Local drawing techniques, drawers and promotion techniques of commercial companies can help with this.

 A manual should not be the end focus. It can be a tool which follows after a vision that underlies the organization.

 Scale models can also be such a tool.

42

4. Conclusion

The main question of this research is:

What is the optimal self-help building strategy for TSP which contributes to sustainable livelihood for the Semai in Kampung Batu 17, Malaysia?

Literature review shows that the critical factors in constructing houses to obtain a sustainable livelihood are: legal status, education and income. However, most of the factors of a sustainable livelihood, are outside the reach of the organization. The legal status of the Orang Asli is very concerning since there is a major gap between policy and actual realisation. Because a higher level of education relates to sustainable livelihood, the high dropout rate of Orang Asli students is very concerning. The priority of Semai are their agricultural activities, since it’s their only source of income. Literature does emphasise that in action of a sustainable livelihood the priority is to help the poorest of the community to prevent any environmental destruction.

Literature in this discipline is extensive and does not give a clear answer or ideal model of community participation. The suitable approach is strongly dependent on socio-politico-economic context (Davidson, Johnson, Lizarralde, Dikmen, & Sliwinski, 2007). This paper also suggests that when user participation occurs at later stages, there are frequently problems in the project’s process and/or project outcomes. In participatory approach attention must be paid to those who tend to be excluded by inequality of gender, age and income.

Culturally Semai people are reserved, which resulted in a passive position of the owners during the project. Therefore, downward accountability through cultural appropriate communication is essential to clarify expectations of all actors. People are willing to participate, as long as it doesn’t clash with their work and income. This means for an individual to participate, they have to weigh the cost of time, social costs and psychic costs.

From the field interviews and expert interviews it can be concluded that financial contribution by the owner is not realistic. Contribution of material goods or physical, however, can be possible. A different expectation level and an overload of volunteers leads to reduction of participation in constructing. This confirms the importance of downward accountability.

From the field research in Kampung Batu 17 and the expert interview, the conclusion can be made that the Semai people are overall knowledgeable of building houses and are willing to participate, both in constructing their own house and in another family’s house. Knowledge and skills transfer can take place by personal guidance with a basic building experience. The use of a manual independently by the people is unlikely. It can be used as a tool which follows after a vision that underlies the organization, but for it to succeed, a combination of activities, education and guidance is needed.

43