5.1 - Semi-Structured Interviews with Individual Officers
5.2 - Rapid Rural Appraisal Interviews with Kuruman
5.0 - METHODS
For this research, we began with a thorough literature review of South Africa's documented laws, policies and progress reports regarding issues of asbestos pollution. We also conducted an extensive literature survey on ARDs and their epidemiology, as well as technical and health issues arising from the international transition to substitutes for chrysotile. We then conducted structured and semi-structured interviews (SSIs) with individual and organisational stakeholders on the issues addressed in this report. When collecting information in towns around Kuruman, we used the research methods known as Rapid Rural Appraisal (RRA) or Participatory Rural Appraisal (PRA).
As we assured confidentiality to the individuals with whom we spoke, we will not include their names in this report. Unless otherwise noted, all uncited quotes and statements derive from these conversations.
5.1 Semi-Structured
Interviews with Individual Officials
We conducted SSIs with various government and non-governmental officials, researchers,
health care providers, environmental rehabilitation consultants, business people
and academics. The SSI uses open-ended questions and a checklist of topics rather
than a list of precise questions. The interview thus incorporates the flexibility
and fluidity of a conversation and generates rich information. The purposes
of these meetings were to better understand the systems of compensation, health
surveillance and health promotion around ARDs, to gain the perspectives and
opinions of various experts and officials and to follow-up on Asbestos Summit's
policy recommendations.
We met with individuals and groups from the following:
- The Parliamentary Portfolio Committee on Environmental Affairs and Tourism
- The Industrial Health Research Group at the University of Cape Town
- The National Union of Mineworkers in Cape Town, Kimberley, and Johannesburg
- The Workhealth (Workers' Health) Clinic in Cape Town
- The Medical Bureau of Occupational Disease in Johannesburg
- The Compensation Commission of Occupational Disease in Pretoria
- The National Centre for Occupational Health in Johannesburg
- The Occupational Health Unit at Kimberley Hospital in the Northern Cape Province
- The Department of Minerals and Energy
- The Department of Labour
- The Department of Economic Affairs and Tourism of the Northern Cape Province in Kimberley
- Concerned People Against Asbestos in Prieska
- Representatives from the Kgalagadi District
- Everite, AC Pipes Ltd.
- Klinger Insulectric/Interohm and Hudaco Friction
- A pathologist from Brown University
- Academics from Peninsula Technikon
- Academics from the University of Cape Town
- National Progressive Primary Health Care Network
- Environmental Advocacy NGOs
- Eko Rehab, (DME's rehabilitation contractor)
- A practitioner in private practice in Kuruman
- A hospital and public clinic in Batlharos
- A hospital, public clinic and the Occupational Health Unit in Kuruman
- An administrator for the Kgalagadi District.
Unfortunately we were unable to meet with representatives from the National Department of Environmental Affairs and Tourism, nor with the national Department of Welfare or Housing. Although we met with the MBOD, we were not able to meet with the Chief Director of the DoH or Water Affairs, or with the Local Authorities in the Prieska or greater Kuruman region. In addition, we wanted to interview all of the major asbestos-using industries in South Africa, but were unable to do so because of time and transportation constraints. We sought additional interviews with trade unionists but could not finalise them in the available time.
5.2 Rapid Rural
Appraisal Interviews in Kuruman
RRA is a qualitative and participatory research method. Its methodology is concerned
with allowing local involvement in the collection and analysis of information
by outside researchers. The qualitative aspect of the method enables its users
to ask not only what the situation is, but also why and how it came to be. And
as its name entails, it is a quick and effective way to collect information.
All this is accomplished through group interviews that use activities or "tools"
to collect and or analyse qualitative information quickly. RRA calls for a variety
of tools and informants as well as a multi-disciplinary team to crosscheck information
and offset unwanted biases(49). One
drawback to the method is that these interviews can be dominated by one or two
people.
We conducted RRA interviews in five different locations in the Kuruman area: Seven Miles, Ga-Mopedi, Sedibeng, Ncweng and Kuruman. We also spoke with a few individuals from Lekalang. Our goals were to gain a sense of the ARD problem in this area, to assess the functioning of the system's compensation and health management in the area, and to gather information on local perceptions of ARDs.
When working in villages in the Kuruman area, we took care to inform people of our arrival through community leaders and our contact network. We tried to be open about our motives and intentions. This did not eliminate all mistrust and suspicion. People were often suspicious of outsiders, who, in the past, have taken money and left false hopes of compensation. We believe, however, that many of these suspicions diminished as we explained our project and intentions. Attendance at our activities was relatively high and interest was strong.
During RRA research, we worked in small groups that shared findings at the end of each day. The foreign interviewers used interpreters to translate between Setswana and English. In the first week of field research, we used different RRA tools such as maps, matrices and Venn diagrams to collect general information and stimulate discussion. Because the attendance was so high, we often divided our informants into two groups that members of our team interviewed simultaneously on different research topics. At the end of each activity, people were given the chance to ask us questions and to speak of other issues. During the second week, questions were more precise SSIs were preferred over the other RRA tools.
After gathering more general information, we gave presentations about the logistics of the rehabilitation and compensation systems in each village by using visual charts. We then allowed ample time for questions and feedback.
At the end of this research phase, we held a final feedback session at the Moffat Mission with five representatives from each village where we had conducted interviews. We compiled and presented the findings from each village separately. After our findings were presented, there was a short period for comments, questions and corrections. Participants at the feedback session added information and corrected misunderstandings. The representatives were extremely attentive and even critical. In the course of our research, we introduced local asbestos committees to our research techniques with hopes that they could conduct participatory grassroots research on asbestos problems and solutions (see Appendix A.1 on PRA for further applications of the participatory methods).
Despite the many hurdles and constraints we faced in the field, we feel confident that affected individuals and communities were able to speak for themselves. We also believe that RRA enhanced our capacity to understand the viewpoint of local people.