Analytical statement 4: Although learning has been shaped by external influence, a sizable

amount of learning was achieved through social interactions amongst communities of practitioners and the practice

Drawing on the findings in Chapter 4 (Section 4.3), evidence showed that learning in communities of practice is shaped by external influences which include long term historically constituted factors such as power relations, gender relations, poverty etc (at the level of the real, as shown in Figure 6.2), but also that learning in these communities of practice has been shaped through external influences (at the level of events) such as training programmes, interactions with experts and extension support services. However, as much as this has contributed to the learning outcome, observations and interviews showed that, at the level of the empirical, people are learning everyday through social interactions and social practices with other community members. Learning occurs through meetings, social interactions, observations and conversations within villages (see Sections 4.3.2; 4.3.3; 4.3.4; 4.3.5; 4.3.6; & 4.3.9). The Water for Food group for example, conducts both formal and informal meetings to share information, knowledge and the opportunity to learn from one another. Such meetings are very useful as they provide a platform for interactions and an opportunity for the members to come together, discuss issues affecting them and learn as a community of practice. During these interactions members share best practices, experiences and discuss problems and provide possible solutions for each other.

Downsborough (2009) (see Section 2.6) contends that the importance of social interaction and participation in activities is seen as an integral part of learning. Through their interactions and relationships in the three communities of practice observed in this study, people have developed into a knowledge community, whereby knowledge of water resource management lies with them as a resource (shared repertoire), which they are able to communicate and share with other people. Interaction with and reaction to the environment plays a crucial part in everyday learning. People learn from their experiences in the world by experimenting, reading, experiencing field trips, thinking and reflecting, engaging in conversations and making connections between experiences (ibid.). Lotz-Sisitka (see Section 2.6) supports this view and maintains learning includes active reflection on experiences to integrate them with the existing stock of knowledge in society, drawing conclusions or generalizations from patterns, and generating predictions and expectations (Lotz-Sisitka, 2011). In other words, we learn a lot by doing, such as by interacting with each other in the doing. Learning is viewed as an aspect of all activity, as an integral part of the social practice.

105 | P a g e Chapter 4 also shows that people in the various communities of practice in this study, learnt through a practice, in this context water resource management such as rainwater harvesting and invasive alien plant removal which was integral to other practices (for example, food production) (see Section 4.4). For example the Cata Agriculture Project conducts bi-weekly meetings with workers where information and lessons are shared amongst workers and management. In another instance, the contractor for the Working for Water project indicated that she briefs the workers regularly before starting as a way for workers to learn (see Sections 4.3.3; 4.3.5; 4.3.6; & 4.3.9). By participating in a community of practitioners people understand and engage with tools and are developing practices in relation to their communities of practice.

It is through communities of practice that learners interpret, reflect, and form meaning (see Section 2.6.1). Community creates the environment for the social interaction needed to engage in dialogue with others to experience the various and diverse perspectives on any issue (Lave & Wenger, 1991). The authors argue that community is the joining of practice with analysis and reflection to share the tacit understandings and to create shared knowledge from the experiences among participants in a learning opportunity. Stein (1998) further identifies practitioner knowledge and cultural knowledge as significant in communities in which a new member must learn to perceive, interpret, and communicate experience through interactions with other members of that community. Community provides the opportunity for interaction; and participation provides the learner with the meaning of the experience (see Section 2.6.1). In Chapter 4 (see Sections 4.2 & 4.4), as communities are participating in the three communities of practice, the enabling structures for participation and learning, they are engaging in IWRM practices with other community members, in understanding the meaning of the practice and learning how to it, developing cultures of practice that are seen to be useful in the context.

This idea of learning through a practice is discussed by Daniels (2008: 99 citing Brown et al., 1999; see Section 2.6.1), who argues that ”knowing and doing are reciprocal – knowledge is situated and progressively developed through activity and that one should abandon the notion that concepts are self-

containing entities, instead conceiving them as tools, which can fully be understood through use.

Learning is understood as a process which is often tacit and takes place through shared or joint action and has a generative effect on the pattern of activities in which it occurs”. This was evident in the study, as reported in Section 4.3.5 where members of the Water for Food group who did not attend training programmes learnt how rainwater is harvested (Figure 4.7, Section 4.4), how to control erosion and

106 | P a g e pests such as ntuku (mole), how to prepare trench beds for vegetables (Figure 4.4 above, Section 4.3.4), and how to improve the soil fertility of their gardens through the practical demonstrations and observations they experienced at other members homesteads. Further evidence is reported in Section 4.3.6 where the Cata Agriculture Project uses the apprenticeship system whereby new workers are attached to old and experienced workers to promote learning by the new workers undertaking the activities on their own. In this process, the new members are learning and mastering the skill. As Smith (2003) argues, there is no learning without participation, and learning becomes a social process dependent upon transactions with others placed within a context that resembles as closely as possible the practice environment. Knowledge is created through the interactions of the learner with others and the environment.

5.2.5 Analytical Statement 5: Learning takes place through facilitated interventions

The findings in Chapter 4 (see Section 4.3.1) showed that community members in the three selected community of practices are learning from facilitated training programmes. Learning occurs through training workshops facilitated by the Working for Water project, the Border Rural Committee, Cata Communal Property Association, Department of Water Affairs, Department of Agriculture and other rural development Non-Governmental Organisations.

In Section 2.4.5, Sfard (1997) contends that there are two metaphors of learning that guide our work as learners, teachers and researchers, the acquisition and participation metaphors. The acquisition metaphor involves reception, acquisition, construction, internalisation, appropriation, transmission, attainment, development and accumulation. This may be through the teacher helping the learner attain his or her goal by delivering, conveying, facilitating, mediating, and so forth.

In Cata, people are acquiring both formal (expert knowledge) and informal knowledge through social interactions. Social interactions can either take place through informal and/or formal processes such as meetings, training workshops, conversations and interactions with outsiders. Through these interactions, people build relationships with each other and develop into knowledge communities (Lotz- Sisitka, 2011)

107 | P a g e The findings reported in Chapter 4 (see Section 4.3.1) revealed that, for example, most of Water for Food group members of Cata underwent a training programme at Matsepo in Pretoria. Information learnt included rainwater harvesting, improvement of soil fertility, erosion control and garden management. Further evidence from participants during individual interviews also showed that learning takes place through training workshops provided by Consultants/Service Providers. For example, workers under the Working for Water project were provided with training in the practical use of a chainsaw, herbicide application, first aid and others depending on what had been prepared by the Service Providers. Similar training interventions were also reported for the Cata Agricultural Project, where both new and old workers were trained in their respective jobs such as pest identification and control, furrow making, flood irrigation and soil conservation practices by consultants with support from the National Development Agency.

Masara (2010) (see Section 2.7) found that social learning in particular, through intervention workshops is supported by the different knowledge bases of participants. He argues that in such learning processes distributed knowledge – divergent nature culture views on the use of ecologically sensitive areas – existed and interacted in a learning process oriented towards understanding learning and sustainable development issues in the context of commercial beekeeping taking place in a complex social-ecological context. He said such knowledge bases were the source of information for learning and constructing model solutions (ibid: 17). In Cata, through these facilitated learning interventions, members of communities of practice come together to share experiences, best practices, lessons and challenges they encounter.

In Section 2.7, Burt and Berold (2011) also found that knowledge construction and learning are always mediated. They revealed that mediation was one of the main themes to emerge. In this context a mediator is understood as an individual who “re-interpret[s] knowledge in a way that is relevant to a particular water practice and to those involved” (ibid: 4). Through discussion groups many participants felt that “the best learning is direct human-to-human interaction” (Burt & Berold, 2011: 10). The mediation of knowledge, however, occurs on many different levels other than just through an individual. Knowledge is mediated in implicit (invisible) and explicit (visible/clearly defined) ways within the context of community-based water research management.

Explicit mediation refers to mediation that mediates a specific category of reasoning (Daniels, 2008). An example of explicit mediation within water knowledge is the use of reports, learning resources and

108 | P a g e actual individuals who re-interpret knowledge in a specific way and aim to teach or inform through a particular category of reasoning as was seen through the training materials used by the Working for Water programme in the Cata district for example.

109 | P a g e

CHAPTER 6

RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION