NUNU Problem Identification Process - EWB-SAprojects:projects...Alternative Cooking Technologies for Sheepshead Traders in NUNU EWB$SA’ Problem’Identification’Process’ October’2015’

Alternative Cooking Technologies for Sheepshead Traders in NUNU

EWB-‐SA

Problem Identification Process

October 2015

Project funded by

PROJECT TEAM

Project Initiator: Wiebke Toussaint

Table of Contents 1. SETTING THE SCENE ................................................................................................................ 4

Idea or Problem Context: Describe the situation out of which the problem arises. ................. 4 1.1. Idea or Problem Statement: How does the project team currently define the problem? ........ 4 1.2. Which community are you trying to empower? ....................................................................... 4 1.3. Which need within the community are you planning to address? ........................................... 4 1.4. Background to Investigation: Who raised this problem as a project? ..................................... 4 1.5. Who are the known Project Stakeholders? .............................................................................. 4 1.6. Objectives of Project ................................................................................................................ 4 1.7. Project Key Words .................................................................................................................... 4 1.8.

2. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 101 ............................................................................................ 5 Who is your key contact introducing you to the community? ................................................. 5 2.1. What steps will you take to obtain a thorough description of the problem? .......................... 5 2.2. What barriers to engagement do you anticipate? ................................................................... 5 2.3.

3. FIRST STAKEHOLDER MEETING ................................................................................................ 6 MEETING DETAILS .................................................................................................................... 6 3.1. OBJECTIVE ................................................................................................................................ 6 3.2. STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................... 6 3.3. PROBLEM DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................... 7 3.4. PRIOR ENGAGEMENT AND PROJECT HISTORY ......................................................................... 8 3.5.

4. FIRST SITE VISIT ....................................................................................................................... 9 VISIT DETAILS ........................................................................................................................... 9 4.1. OBJECTIVE ................................................................................................................................ 9 4.2. DESCRIPTION OF VISIT ............................................................................................................. 9 4.3. SITE ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................................... 9 4.4. INSIGHTS GAINED .................................................................................................................... 9 4.5. ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................... 10 4.6. PERSONAL IMPRESSION ......................................................................................................... 11 4.7. NEXT STEPS ............................................................................................................................ 11 4.8.

5. SECOND SITE VISIT ................................................................................................................. 11 VISIT DETAILS ......................................................................................................................... 11 5.1. OBJECTIVE .............................................................................................................................. 11 5.2. DESCRIPTION OF VISIT ........................................................................................................... 11 5.3. INSIGHTS GAINED .................................................................................................................. 11 5.4. PERSONAL IMPRESSION ......................................................................................................... 12 5.5. NEXT STEPS ............................................................................................................................ 12 5.6.

6. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................... 12 MEETING DETAILS .................................................................................................................. 13 6.1. OBJECTIVE .............................................................................................................................. 13 6.1. DESCRIPTION OF VISIT ........................................................................................................... 13 6.2.

INSIGHTS GAINED .................................................................................................................. 13 6.3. PERSONAL IMPRESSION ......................................................................................................... 13 6.4.

7. SECOND STAKEHOLDER MEETING .......................................................................................... 14 VISIT DETAILS ......................................................................................................................... 14 7.1. OBJECTIVE .............................................................................................................................. 14 7.2. DESCRIPTION OF VISIT ........................................................................................................... 14 7.3. INSIGHTS GAINED .................................................................................................................. 14 7.4. NEXT STEPS ............................................................................................................................ 14 7.5.

8. THIRD SITE VISIT .................................................................................................................... 15 VISIT DETAILS ......................................................................................................................... 15 8.1. OBJECTIVE .............................................................................................................................. 15 8.2. DESCRIPTION OF VISIT ........................................................................................................... 15 8.3. INSIGHTS GAINED .................................................................................................................. 15 8.4. PERSONAL IMPRESSION ......................................................................................................... 16 8.5. NEXT STEPS ............................................................................................................................ 16 8.6. ATTACHMENTS ...................................................................................................................... 16 8.7.

9. Problem Identification Process Conclusion ............................................................................. 16 PROBLEM DESCRIPTION ......................................................................................................... 16 9.1. PROBLEM QUESTION ............................................................................................................. 16 9.2. SCOPE ..................................................................................................................................... 16 9.3. LIMITATIONS AND EXCLUSIONS ............................................................................................. 17 9.4. STAKEHOLDER REVIEW .......................................................................................................... 17 9.5.

10. Congratulations! .................................................................................................................. 17

1. SETTING THE SCENE Well done for taking the initiative to come together as a team (or individual) to use your engineering knowledge to benefit society! What do you know about the problem so far? Let’s get started with

creating a baseline of the information you know.

Idea or Problem Context: Describe the situation out of which the problem arises. 1.1.

The City of Cape Town is upgrading the trading area around the Nyanga Transport Interchange. As part of this upgrade the trading area is being formalised and individual traders will be allocated a demarcated trading stand. The sheepshead traders currently occupy an extensive area with a pile of surplus wood offcuts that they use for fuelling their cooking fires. They also dispose of the animal waste products into the municipal waste water system. Both of these issues pose a risk to their continued ability to trade once the new regulations for the NUNU area are implemented.

Idea or Problem Statement: How does the project team currently define the problem? 1.2.

The sheepshead traders in the Nyanga Urban Node Upgrade area risk loosing their right to trade if they do not alter their cooking methodologies to comply with the City’s proposed new regulations.

Which community are you trying to empower? 1.3.

The sheepshead traders in the Nyanga Urban Node Upgrade vicinity

Which need within the community are you planning to address? 1.4.

Economic sustainability, which is threatened by changing municipal regulations

Background to Investigation: Who raised this problem as a project? 1.5.

The City of Cape Town’s Spatial Planning and Urban Design Department approached EWB-‐SA to ask that the organisation assist the traders in finding alternative cooking technologies that will remedy the non-‐compliance issues the traders will face if they continue to trade as usual.

Who are the known Project Stakeholders? 1.6.

• Sheepshead traders in the Nyanga Urban Node Upgrade vicinity • City of Cape Town

Objectives of Project 1.7.

To provide the NUNU sheepshead traders with the best suited technology solution to meet their operational and the City’s regulatory requirements. If resources allow, a secondary objective is to model and suggest improvements to the waste stream so that it complies with health standards.

Project Key Words 1.8.

cooking technologies, energy, sustainable cities, economic sustainability, trade

Now that you’ve got that down, you can read through the Community Engagement 101 to cover the basics for your first site visit.

2. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 101 In EWB-‐SA, the community comes first. Who ever your beneficiary, they should be 100% involved from defining the problem to maintaining and furthering the end result. Empowering communities

means giving people the power to help themselves. To be empowered, you need to understand the problems you face, and feel in charge of the solutions that can solve those problems – in short, the community you are serving needs to be involved in the entire project process – from problem

identification to solution implementation – to make it a success.

Moreover, the project is your chance to TRANSFER ENGINEERING KNOWLEDGE, so that communities have the power to use it on their own, for their benefit, in the future.

Throughout the project you should continuously stop to reflect on how you are engaging your community partners to ensure that your solution is relevant to their need.

Who is your key contact introducing you to the community? 2.1.

Nicky Sasman – City of Cape Town [Senior Professional Office: Urban Settlements Development Grant] Thando Myamya – City of Cape Town [Principal Environmental Health Practitioner – Klipfontein Sub-‐district] Xolisa Nkayi – City of Cape Town [Environmental Health Practitioner – Klipfontein Sub-‐district] Vivian Malgraff – City of Cape Town [Environmental Health Manager – Klipfontein Sub-‐district]

What steps will you take to obtain a thorough description of the problem? 2.2.

• LISTEN: to how the City of Cape Town Environmental Health Team describes the problem (stakeholder visit 1)

• OBSERVE: Site visit – observe location, surroundings, people (stakeholder visit 2 a, b, c, …) • CONNECT: With community members to understand their perspective of the problem and their

potential drivers for behavioural change (stakeholder visit 3 a, b, c, …)

What barriers to engagement do you anticipate? 2.3.

Describe the barriers to engagement that you foresee when first entering the community, and how you plan to bridge the gap between “them” and “you”.

Barrier Description and/or effect Bridging the gap Language I don’t speak Xhosa, which will

make it difficult to communicate with community members

Use a translator (short term) Use gestures, drawings

Appearance I very obviously don’t belong to the community there and will stand out quite clearly

Observe, tread lightly, be cognisant that I am not local, dress neutrally

Eating culture I don’t eat me Treat others’ eating habits with respect, don’t engage in philosophical food debates, assume normality

3. FIRST STAKEHOLDER MEETING Meet the most accessible stakeholder and listen to their description of the problem. Typically this will be the organisation or person who has requested your assistance, or a partner organisation you have

identified as the most suitable entry point into the community. Generally they will have existing, long-‐term relationships with members of the community. Collaborating with them and working under their guidance will greatly help you gain an understanding of the complexity of the problem.

Try to gather as much information as possible about all stakeholders involved, their individual motives

and their description of the problem. Understand the project’s history.

MEETING DETAILS 3.1.

Date 13 July 2015, 11am

Venue City of Cape Town Fezeka Environmental Health Department Office

Stakeholders present CoCT Spatial Planning & Urban Design Department CoCT Klipfontein District Environmental Health Department CoCT Air Quality Management Engineers Without Borders South Africa

Individuals present Nicky Sassman* Thando Myamya Xolisa Nkayi Mahjiedah Cornelius Wiebke Toussaint * meeting convenor

link to meeting minutes

OBJECTIVE 3.2.

Meet the key contact who will connect me to the community -‐ CoCT Klipfontein District Environmental Health Department and Xolisa Nkayi.

STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS 3.3.

Reactive, pro-‐active, non-‐active – how are your stakeholders currently engaging with the problem at hand?

Stakeholder Key motivator / behavioural driver CoCT Environmental Health Department Proactive CoCT Air Quality Management Reactive CoCT Pest Control Reactive CoCT Housing Department (?? Right name??) Non-‐active CoCT Solid Waste Department Reactive CoCT Spatial Planning & Urban Design Department Proactive Traders’ Association (find out which one) Non-‐active Sheepshead traders Re-‐active Customers of sheepshead traders Non-‐active

Power versus interest – which of your stakeholders can stop the job, which ones are your key players, who are your ambassadors?

PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 3.4.

3.4.1. How do your stakeholders describe the problem?

Stakeholder Problem Description Xolisa Nkayi The current trading activity in the sheepshead traders area results

in several major problems: • Dumping of ash and piling of wood • Resultant rodent activity and cockroach infestation • Smoke stains surrounding houses • Food waste is not removed and remains are dropped

into the storm water system Traders live a life full of risk and the risks posed by the cooking practices are by far not the greatest concern. Environmental Health officials are trying to assist traders to reach a certain point but are currently frustrated at the slow progress of the situation. Changing mind sets is the most difficult thing to do as people are heavily entrenched in tradition. Forbidding a process/imposing a regulation will only work if a viable alternative is suggested simultaneously. Environmental Health Department is aware of the developmental and informal context in which they are working and always tries to encourage change through talks rather than by enforcing.

Mahjiedah Cornelius

Two separate cookings systems exist: 1) the hair is burned off the sheep heads on a group fire 2) sheep heads are boiled and cooked

AQM acts on complaints and performs inspections to observe adherence to the City’s Air Quality bylaw. AQM generally takes a supportive approach and assists with available means to make people less of a nuisance.

Sheepshead traders Traders' Associa:on

Environmental Health Dpt

Customers Solid Waste Dpt Pest Control Housing Dpt

Spa:al Planning & Urban Design Department Air Quality Management

High Power Low Interest keep sa`sfied

High Power High Interest manage closely

Low Power Low Interest monitor

Low Power High Interest

keep informed

AQM requires that dry, untreated and chopped up wood is used as fuel. They have not been successful in improving fuel burning practices of the sheepshead traders.

Nicki Sassman Once new trading regulations are implemented in the area, the sheepshead traders won’t fit into the new demarcated bay. They will need to pay considerably more if they wish to use as much space as they currently do. This will cause financial strain and threaten their profitable operation. The area has a 50 year history of sheepshead trading and many of the traders have been working in the trade for years. Sheepshead traders are the only male meat traders (men are usually responsible for slaughtering and women for cooking). Customs and cultural traditions exist around the cooking of sheepsheads which should be understood before planning an intervention.

3.4.2. Do your stakeholders already have a solution in mind?

The CoCT Spatial Planning & Urban Design Department desires a technical solution that will reduce emissions and minimise waste. This should take the form of an alternative stove design that uses the same fuel source but results in a reduction of wood used, more efficient cooking and less air pollution.

PRIOR ENGAGEMENT AND PROJECT HISTORY 3.5.

3.5.1. Have any of the stakeholders previously engaged with EWB-‐SA or one of our chapters? Describe the engagement.

1. Several years ago the City engaged with some members from EWB-‐UCT on an alternative cooking project which was unsuccessful. It appears that no hard feelings and limited memories of the project remain and all parties are keen for a fresh attempt.

3.5.2. Has the community (or any stakeholder) previously attempted to solve this problem? What

solutions have been tried?

1. Continuous negotiations with the traders have resulted in them clearing up the area to some degree earlier this year. The traders have set up an agreement with someone to collect the wet waste (brains etc)

2. On 2 July 2015 Xolisa Nkayi arranged that the Specialised Services Unit from the Solid Waste Department cleared ashes on site and that Pest Control laid bait to resolve the rat infestation. This amounted to 21 truck loads of waste being removed and temporarily freed the area of ashes and waste. The traders have committed to keeping the area clear.

3. The City attempted a failed pilot project with Rocket Stove on site to demonstrate the viability of alternative cooking technologies to the traders. The City promised to return with a better solution. The pilot project failed for the following reasons: • New stove’s fuel source (coal) not matched to available fuel source (wood chips), resulting in poor

combustion performance • Mismatched capacity as new stove was not designed to handle the volumes required • Time taken to heat up the stove way exceeded acceptable limits for the traders

4. Some health education activities are conducted with the traders from time to time as the need arises. These have included the supply of hand wash facilities amongst others. Traders have tended to take the material provided home for private use where the need is more imminent.

4. FIRST SITE VISIT Don’t expect to arrive on site with answers to the world’s problems. The first site visit is your opportunity to approach with humility as an outsider. Be unintrusive and go to observe.

VISIT DETAILS 4.1.

Date 5 August 2015, 10am

Venue She epshead Trading Site, Nyanga

Stakeholders present CoCT Klipfontein District Environmental Health Department CoCT Klipfontein District Pest Control Engineers Without Borders South Africa Traders

Individuals present Xolisa Nkayi Wiebke Toussaint* * meeting convenor

OBJECTIVE 4.2.

See the site and gain an appreciation of the problem and its context.

DESCRIPTION OF VISIT 4.3.

Visited the NUNU project site in Nyanga with Xolisa. As expected a lot of ash, dirt and generally unhygienic conditions, though things have improved a lot according to Xolisa. Not many customers at this time of day. Traders getting the fires going and assistants were busy cleaning a couple of wheelbarrows of sheepheads for boiling. The waste collection truck came past to pick up all the waste collected in blue rubbish bags.

SITE ASSESSMENT 4.4.

4.4.1. Site Description

Nyanga sheephead traders close to Nyanga taxi interchange Google pin drop: 271 Ntlangano Crescent

Nyanga, Cape Town, 7750 -‐33.987518, 18.584357

4.4.2. Logistical Applicability

Rate the following logistical factors on a scale of 1 to 5 where 1 is poor and 5 is great:

1 2 3 4 5 Comments Accessibility by private or public transport X Close to taxi rank

Distance and travelling time X 30 minutes

Safety X Ok

Ease of access (special permissions, opening hours etc)

X Daytime only

4.4.3. Site Specific Challenges

Better to visit the site with someone who understands the community; trading site is predominantly for passers by, people come and go, no real space to sit. Observation has to be done standing and talking. Activity at the site is time-‐bound, as different processes happen at different times of day. Fridays and weekends are most busy, apparently. Access is easiest by private vehicle.

INSIGHTS GAINED 4.5.

Insights gained are predominantly based on the perspective of Xolisa.

Vision for area • Concrete floor to make it easier to keep the area clean • Rebuild traders’ shelters (at traders’ cost) • Fewer rats and cockroaches (with the help of pest control) • Daily waste and ash removal (once cold) • No working in the street or animal waste washed down city sewers • Small and stacked woodpile • Different cooking stove would be nice (especially for reduced smoke)

People & Attitudes • Traders are operating a business that makes pretty good money. • Traders are not very concerned about providing a great customer experience. • Customers don’t have very high demands; sheepheads are a cultural delicacy and that’s all they want. • People expect the city to provide. Traders must learn that business improvement is an investment that

they are responsible for. • Traders are happy to maintain the status quo, they’ve been in the business for a long time. So far there

has been no need to change their modus operandi.

Improvements & Constraints • Generally speaking the sheephead trading business is very traditional, people are set in their ways. • Conditions at home are often not better than conditions on site, so it’s hard to incentivise change if no

better reference point exists. • No standards exist for this kind of activity in the informal sector

ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS 4.6.

First gain an appreciation for the consequences of the problem by asking “So what?”

Then use the ‘Five Whys’ approach to obtain the root cause of the problem. Typically you will find one of three types of root causes: physical causes (material items failed), human causes (people did

something wrong) and organisational causes (a system, process or policy is not meeting the needs of the situation).

Problem Statement: Huge woodpile takes up a lot of space.

So what? The pile attracts pests and is, strictly speaking, not allowed by the city.

So what? The city will enforce new regulations for compliance within the next years

So what? Traders will be non-‐compliant and loose their livelihood (or revolt)

Why? Why do traders keep a big woodpile?

Because: Wood is delivered on an adhoc basis from surrounding construction sites.

Why? Why is the wood delivered there?

Because: Win-‐win situation: traders get free fuel and contractors do not have to pay for dumping

Why? Why is the wood not delivered to a more suitable storage location?

Because: This location is as convenient as it gets.

Root cause type Systemic – in the absence of regulation people are following the path of least resistance (note Xolisa’s earlier comments on regulation and enforcement – enforcement is currently not the objective)

Problem Statement: Ash and waste pile are a health hazard.

So what? Pests (cockroaches and rodents) reside in the waste and infest the area.

So what? Kids get bitten by rats and rats spread disease.

Why? Why do traders dump their ash and waste on the site?

Because: It’s the easiest solution; this is how they’ve always done it.

Root cause type Systemic – tied into traditional ways of doings things

PERSONAL IMPRESSION 4.7.

Traders appear to hold a monopoly on the sheephead trading space in Nyanga, thus little incentive exists to change or improve – customers are tied to them as the closest provider of a traditional meat delicacy. Like many people traders are risk averse, conservative and have limited exposure to conditions beyond their own context.

NEXT STEPS 4.8.

1) Return to site on a Friday afternoon or weekend in September when trading activities are in full swing. Customers like to buy sheepheads for the weekend (great food after hangovers). Spend the afternoon observing activities and getting an impression of the customer’s perspective.

5. SECOND SITE VISIT VISIT DETAILS 5.1.

Date 22 September 2015, 2h30pm

Venue Sheepshead Trading Site, Nyanga

Stakeholders present CoCT Klipfontein District Environmental Health Department Engineers Without Borders South Africa Traders


OBJECTIVE 5.2.

See the site at a different time of day and gain an understanding of the relationship between the traders and their customers, as well as their perspective of their situation. Possibly observe leverage points that can be used to incentivise the traders. Schedule a return visit for a discussion with the traders. Key question: How can traders improve their business environment?


• Xolisa is disappointed and frustrated – the state of site has deteriorated since our last visit • Woodpiles are now accumulating at 3 places on site, spilling onto the sidewalk and into the street • A new load of sheep heads arrived earlier in the day, estimating 30 to 50 heads. Workers were in the

process of shearing and cleaning the heads in the street • Not many customers around • Lively discussion with traders (some in Xhosa, some in English – spoke with Simon and the light, chubby

guy, as well as the lady business owner) regarding a way forward. Discussions lead and translated by Xolisa. Traders appear to be open to the option of using alternative cooking technologies, but want to know who will carry the cost. There is a need for consultation and arriving at a collective solution.


• Highly irregular business environment – traders do not know when and how many supplies they receive:

o Timber is delivered irregularly o Sheep heads are supplied in varying quantities o Customer demand is unpredictable

• Busy days are apparently Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays, especially after paydays • The business owner suggested putting up a barricade to prevent the woodpile spilling into the street • Department of Housing, who owns the land on which traders operate, has not been very responsive in

dealing with or even just responding to the situation

• Traders pay for the timber. They accept timber based on price (the cheaper the better). No indication could be given of the price paid for a load of timber. Some timber is not suitable for the cooking process. Unclear what happens to this wood. Presumably it remains on site, contributing to the growing woodpile.


It is unclear how much leverage traders have in negotiating purchased products (eg quality of wood, location where timber is dumped, regularity of sheep head delivery) and if the impact that this has on the business is understood. It seems like the status quo of continuing to do things as they have always been done is quite acceptable. Consultation is vital in moving forward. The traders must commit to any initiated improvement in order for it to have a chance of survival. All stakeholders must be involved in defining the way forward. The Department of Housing must give a clear indication of what their plans are for the site, so that improvement initiatives are not wasted. Dptmnt of Small Business Development may be able to contribute in some manner. Similarly, the City of Cape Town may be willing to provide some support. Understanding the end-‐to-‐end process and speaking to suppliers to understand how they can alter their process to improve regularity for the traders is important to understand if deliveries can be smoothed out. The solution will lie in everybody contributing something towards a joint improvement of the area. Ideally, the site itself should be upgraded (ie solid flooring, water run-‐off, dedicated sheep head processing area, waste collection area, new shelters, sitting facility, etc), while also developing (or identifying) a suitable alternative cooking technology that exceeds the current baseline of the cooking process.

NEXT STEPS 5.6.

Consultation • Nicky Sassman – exchange of thoughts on site; understand the leverage that the CoCT has • Department of Housing • Suppliers (timber, sheep heads) – may need to go back to site for this • Durban market designers

PROJECT HACK-‐ATHON

1. Process mapping Site map / civil plan indicating current site layout [location] Material flow / process map (what, when, for how long, how often) [goods] Business mapping (business intelligence and analysis) [money/opportunity] Customer mapping / market analysis [people]

2. Technology survey Analysis of available technologies Brainstorming and options proposal of alternative cooking technologies Proposal for site upgrade Convene stakeholders Present the possible to stakeholders Determine what a way forward can look like Define what each stakeholder will bring to the party

6. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS Speak to someone in an adjacent or similar industry to get their perspective on the problem and learn from their understanding of their trade. Listen to their take on the situation.

MEETING DETAILS 6.1.

Date 18 September 2015, 12h30pm

Venue Khayelitsha taxi interchange, Spine Road

Stakeholders present Engineers Without Borders South Africa United Khayelitsha Informal Traders Association

Individuals present Wiebke Toussaint* Thozama Gwente * meeting convenor

OBJECTIVE 6.1.

Speak to Thozama from UKITA in Khayelitsha to gain a better perspective on the meat trade, behavioural drivers and possible motivators for change.


I met Thozama in her store (hair salon, print shop, kitchen) next to the Spine Road meat market. Spent some time fixing her printer, while we had an informal conversation about trading in the townships, creating a voice for traders and motivating behavioural change.


Insights provided by Thozama • Cultural inertia to change is great • Training and workshops are required for people to understand how to do things better • People require constant reminding of how they ought to behave (especially where health & hygiene

are concerned) • Initially traders used to work individually and compete with each other, now they form a more

coordinated front that works together to maintain the area • Customers do not come first and have no real voice to demand better service/products. eg meat

stands are uncovered in the sun all day – this poses a health risk to customers. But customers want the braai meat, and there is not better alternative, so they buy it regardless.

• Traders are willing to maintain infrastructure that has been provided to them, but are not prepared to invest in infrastructure to improve their business

• Negotiation and cooperation, together with patience lead to the best results. The City of Cape Town financed the paving of the trading area, UKITA organised paint from CocaCola and together they revamped the meat market. Now the traders are responsible for the upkeep

• UKITA has tried to coordinate the traders to buy their meat together to benefit from bulk discounts, on site delivery (more time) and reduced transport costs. This still happens sometimes, but when the driver/leader/coordinator does not take charge, then everybody is doing things on their own again.

• Department of Small Business Development is responsive and a reasonable ally.


• There appears to be a lack of entrepreneurial zest and ability to seek new opportunities within the trader community – eg Youth go to the Barn at Lookout Hill and learn tech skills, but don’t necessarily find solutions/business opportunity for problems in the townships

• There appears to be a preference for cumbersome institutional solutions involving government and multiple stakeholders, rather than taking initiative and doing small improvements to one’s own business

You cannot change what you cannot measure. Insufficient business and financial acumen means that traders don’t know how much money they make, what products sell best and when their best sale days (and hours) are. With business intelligence and insights lacking, a real feeling for improved business conditions is lacking. Thus

making small changes to the business process will not necessarily result in an observed increase in income, which dis-‐incentivises change.

7. SECOND STAKEHOLDER MEETING Reconnect with your various stakeholders throughout the problem identification process to ensure that they are informed of your progressing ideas and able to give input and comments where necessary.

VISIT DETAILS 7.1.

Date 1 October 2015, 15h00

Venue 16th floor Civic Centre, CoCT

Stakeholders present CoCT Spatial Planning & Urban Design Department Engineers Without Borders South Africa

Individuals present Nicky Sassman Wiebke Toussaint* * meeting convenor

OBJECTIVE 7.2.

Touch base with the CoCT to exchange thoughts on the site and understand the greater vision of the city for the area. Ask specific questions and test assumptions to make sure I’m on the right track.


Brief 30 minute visit on Thursday afternoon at Nicky’s office providing feedback on site visits and comparative analysis.


Department of Housing The DoH has made the land available for trading activities, but will not engage with the issue in any other manner. Can develop a solutions with assumed land security, but should not hope for collaboration.

Assumptions testing Nicky agreed with assumptions relating to:

• lack of incentives for change • Traders’ unwillingness to invest in business improvement activities

Reiterated that the city cannot pay for technology acquisitions, but is prepared to work together and play their part in finding a collective solution.

Development of base line and solutions Comments from Nicky:

• Must ask traders for permission to take measurements for baseline – state all measurements that must be taken

• Ideally find a local engineer to help with taking measurements for baseline • Must be explicit that this is a volunteer activity and that the city is not paying EWB-‐SA to do this (ie not

stealing jobs) • Traders should be involved in solution design

NEXT STEPS 7.5.

Consultation • Traders – ask for permission and assistance to map site and value streams

PROJECT HACK-‐ATHON 1. Process mapping

Site map / civil plan indicating current site layout [location] Value stream map [product and information flow]

• Inventory • Cycle time (time taken to make one product) • Change over time (from last good piece to next) • Up-‐time (on-‐demand machine utilization) • Net available working time • Scrap rate • Pack size/pallet sizes • Batch Size

Business map (business intelligence and analysis) [money/opportunity/market analysis]

2. Technology survey Analysis of available technologies Brainstorming and options proposal of alternative cooking technologies Proposal for site upgrade

Convene stakeholders Present the possible to stakeholders Determine what a way forward can look like Define what each stakeholder will bring to the party

8. THIRD SITE VISIT VISIT DETAILS 8.1.

Date 26 October 2015, 14h00

Venue Sheepshead Trading Site, Nyanga

Stakeholders present CoCT Klipfontein District Environmental Health Department Engineers Without Borders South Africa Traders


OBJECTIVE 8.2.

Obtain permission to map processes: civil site map, value stream map, business map Set a tentative date for process mapping


Visited the NUNU trading site with Xolisa. The meeting with the traders took place under the shade of one of their shop stalls. The Mamma who owns the business and a couple of the senior traders were present. I proposed my baseline measurements and Xolisa translated my suggestion and requirements. Emphasis was placed on the next engagement being purely to take measurements in order to ensure that any subsequent technology suggestions and designs made were able to improve the current operating conditions.


The traders made some suggestions for solutions to the woodpile issue, such as having an open container on site to act as a contained area for the wood dump. They recognise the fire hazard caused by the distributed and unorganised woodpiles and the possibility of losing their business if a fire breaks out. It is clear that the traders want to be involved in the process of finding solutions to their problems.


The traders are willing to cooperate and support a baselining effort on site. They recognise that conditions on site could be better. While they wish to be included in the design process, their range of possible solutions to problems is limited to what they know and have been exposed to previously. Substantial engagement and co-‐design will be necessary to ensure that they are willing to consider solutions that are currently beyond their field of understanding.

NEXT STEPS 8.6.

• Set a date for the Injie Hackathon • Partner with EWB-‐UCT and source a student project leader • Plan and advertise the hackathon

ATTACHMENTS 8.7.

Process mapping.xlsx

9. Problem Identification Process Conclusion PROBLEM DESCRIPTION 9.1.

Sheephead traders in the Nyanga Urban Node Upgrade (NUNU) zone have been doing business on this site for a number of decades. Sheepheads are a traditional delicacy and the business is a local institution that has a trading monopoly in the area. Customer demand for sheepheads is high, especially on weekends and after payday, as the fatty meat soothes a babbelas. Despite their cultural significance, the NUNU sheephead traders are becoming a nuisance to residents that live in close proximity. The trading site is an environmental and health hazard that disturbs the lives of residents due to:

1. Poor air quality as a result of smoke pollution from burning treated timber 2. Soot stained and ash-‐laden environment resulting from continuous burning of timber 3. Rodent and cockroach infestation resulting from poor site maintenance and woodpiles 4. Waste from the cleaning process (wool, bones, etc) blocks municipal drains 5. Pedestrians forced to walk on busy street as sidewalks are occupied by the sheephead cleaning

process 6. Fire hazard due to high content of flammable materials and constant open fire

In addition to degrading the quality of life of passers-‐by and residents, the traders are at risk of clashing with the City of Cape Town when the new NUNU informal trading plan is rolled out. The trading plan foresees the provision of trading bays and a regulation of the trading process. The current operations of the sheephead traders will be deemed non-‐compliant. The district environmental health officers have tried numerous initiatives to motivate traders to improve their conditions on site. While some initiatives have been successful, the traders continue to drift back to their old habits. It is not desirable to engage law enforcement at this point, as they may forcibly remove the traders from site, which would be an undesirable manner of solving the problem. An alternative approach to improving conditions on site is thus required.

PROBLEM QUESTION 9.2.

How can we redesign the trading environment of the NUNU sheephead traders to turn their operations from being a hazard into being an asset for the area?

SCOPE 9.3.

EWB-‐SA’s scope of work is as follows: 1. Map the site, processes and value streams 2. Create a baseline of current operating conditions 3. Host an Injie Hackathon to:

a. Research and analyse existing solutions

b. Generate ideas to solve the problem c. Develop solution proposals to the problem d. Propose resources to be committed by each stakeholder

4. Convene all stakeholders and present solution options 5. Facilitate a negotiation process to obtain stakeholder agreement on a preferred solution and a

commitment to availing necessary resources 6. Provide allocated resources as agreed upon in 5. above and deemed necessary to test and

implement the solution

LIMITATIONS AND EXCLUSIONS 9.4.

• EWB-‐SA does not commit to providing free alternative cooking technologies to the traders. • EWB-‐SA does not commit to financing any civil improvements to the site.

Solving the problem will require all stakeholders to contribute some resources. Should the traders choose to withdraw from allocating resources to solve the problem, the project will close after the preferred solution has been identified. A report will be drawn up and handed over to the City of Cape Town so that the proposed solution is available for the traders once they are ready to continue with the project, or if the rollout of the NUNU trading plan forces a change in behaviour.

STAKEHOLDER REVIEW 9.5.

You are almost done. Create a project profile with the above information and obtain approval from your key stakeholders that they consent to your problem question and understand the scope of work and limitations.

Stakeholder organisation Stakeholder name Approved? CoCT Klipfontein District Environmental Health Department

Xolisa Nkayi

CoCT Spatial Planning & Urban Design Department

Nicola Sassman

10. Congratulations! Congratulations on successfully defining your problem. This process is essential in ensuring that you have considered the problem from a variety of perspectives and are sufficiently engaged to consider a

creative array of solutions. You can now move on to planning the solution development phase of the project.

Documents

NUNU Problem Identification Process - EWB-SAprojects:projects...Alternative Cooking Technologies for Sheepshead Traders in NUNU EWB$SA’ Problem’Identification’Process’ October’2015’