http://www.localfirst.org.uk/concept/

‘Success should not be measured by outputs or the amount of money spent, but by the ability of Afghan institutions to deliver services, the Afghan private sector to generate jobs, and Afghan civil society to provide avenues for citizens to hold their governments accountable’ (US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations 2011).

Local First is a development approach that looks first for the capacity within countries before bringing in external expertise and resources, recognises that much of this capacity is found outside central government, and understands that local people need to lead their own development.
It’s hard to imagine a simpler or more commonsense idea – that development initiatives should support and amplify existing local activity, including civil society, private sector suppliers and government, rather than starting from scratch with concepts or goods and services from outside; and that development initiatives should be judged to a significant degree on the extent to which they leave local organisations stronger and more capable than at the outset.
Aid is not development, although it can lead to development. Development happens when all the resources of a country are used to the greatest effect – when the dynamism that exists is tapped into, and people practice self-help and mutual help, leading to self-reliance. Nowhere is this needed more than in countries that are emerging from conflict.
The way that outsiders work with local organisations really mat ters. Outsiders, with the best of intentions, can end up destroying the organisation that they wanted to support. Local First argues for initiatives that are:

• Locally led, where the local partner formulates the approach,and the outside agency provides, for example, resources and connections to organisations working in similar ways for mutual learning and support.

Or else:

• Locally owned, where the approach comes from outside but there is a determined effort to ‘transplant’ the ownership of the work to a legitimate local organisation that over time can transform the programme into one that is locally led.

This is in contrast to the very common phenomenon of:

• Locally delivered, where the approach comes from outside and a local organisation is selected to implement it, without having been involved in setting the priorities or the approach, and where there is no transfer of ownership.

Local First is not a wholly novel approach and there are many encouraging examples where it has been put into practice. However, most aid is still heavily influenced in its deployment by outside agencies. This is also the case with peacebuilding. Power is largely kept in the hands of outsiders. Yet the case studies summarised in this pamphlet, and described in more detail in the accompanying book, illustrate how locally led activities can be large-scale and effective in the areas defined by the World Bank as priorities in post-conflict countries – security, justice and livelihoods:

• Building Markets found markets for Afghan businesses at a scale which amounted, in one year, to 2 per cent of Afghanistan’s GDP.
• Luta Hamutuk, in Timor Leste, has mobilised citizens to scrutinise infrastructure projects for a typical cost of $1 per $1,000 of investment.
• IBJ Cambodia is providing legal defence services in 17 out of 24 provinces in Cambodia.
• FOMICRES worked with the Christian Council of Mozambique to collect weapons and spread a culture of peace nationwide.
• CEDAC created peace committees across Burundi in 2006, 60 per cent of which are still active.
• In DRC, the Centre Résolution Conflits demonstrated a 90 per cent success rate in its disarmament, demobilisation and reintegration programme by focusing on effective reintegration.

But Local First does not mean ‘local only’. The case studies illustrate a number of successful partnerships between local and outside organisations, where outsiders added value, but did not take over – for example, the technical support to weapons collection provided by the South African army to FOMICRES in Mozambique. Conversely, the CEDAC case study suggests that while agencies such as UNDP used CEDAC to deliver their programmes across the country, they were unwilling to fund CEDAC’s own priorities.
Putting Local First into practice requires rethinking assumptions about impact, developing new approaches to finding local capacity and shaping partnerships that work with locals on an equal footing.

Dilemmas

a) Finding and assessing local capacity

Finding and assessing local capacity to act on a particular issue requires specialist knowledge and experience – from a donor’s field-based staff, an INGO or a local entity such as a chamber of commerce or a network.
Organisations need to be judged realistically, by what they have achieved in often challenging circumstances, with limited resources, and against their own objectives. Where organisations claim to be working for community benefit, their legitimacy needs to be tested. Interviewing ‘beneficiaries’ may not work when people feel that their answers will determine whether badly needed resources are to be provided. A better test may be the extent to which an organisation mobilises voluntary effort. People don’t give their time to an organisation which they do not feel is working in their interests.
This is a far cry from the calls for tenders to be completed in a highly complex form, often in the applicant’s second or third language, which have been criticised as favouring ‘NGO businesses’ specialising in bid writing. There is a place for open competition, but it should be supplemented by other forms of assessment by people with an in-depth knowledge of the field.

b) Supporting without distorting

Generally where local organisations receive external funding, it is in order to scale up their operations. This needs care, if it is not to destroy the qualities that made the organisation successful in the first place. Masooda Bano’s chastening account of how external funding destroyed functioning civil society organisations in Pakistan, also draws a sharp distinction between voluntary organisations and NGOs. Voluntary organisations engage volunteer effort, operate with a low cost base, and show long-term commitment to their mission and their community. NGOs don’t have volunteers, have a cost base more in line with international NGOs, and take on the work that someone will fund. Turning a voluntary organisation into an NGO is unhelpful.
These case studies line up with Bano’s analysis in showing how organisations can grow considerably in scale, as well as employ a team of paid staff, without losing their ability to mobilise voluntary effort. This is a function of how they engage with outside funders:

• They were pre-existing organisations, which had been created in response to a need, not to a funding opportunity.
• The organisations began with a voluntary self-help ethos.
• They sought funding or partnership (or in the case of IBJ Cambodia, where the local director moved from his previous position, a job) on their own terms.
• They limited the rewards to paid staff.

There is a symmetry here with Bano’s recommendations (2012: 175 ff.) about how to avoid destroying organisations through external funding:

• Do not pay high salaries to initiators – these sap both their motivation and that of their followers.
• Fund material activities that benefit the whole organisation.
• Monitor performance in terms of members’ satisfaction and engagement.
• Be willing to work with organisations on equal terms, listening to their perspectives and approaches to development.
• Adjust incentives over time as the work develops

Another form of distortion occurs when local procurement is developed for a commodity that has only a temporary market, or where the local supplier is fundamentally uncompetitive. The Building Markets case study of local procurement in Afghanistan shows, among many positive outcomes, the challenge of an Afghan boot producer that succeeded for a while in supplying boots to the US Army, but was ultimately undercut by a Pakistani company. Hence Building Markets are emphasising working with private sector companies to procure locally.

c) Working at scale

It takes time for organisations to get to a size where they match the scale at which donors prefer to fund. The increasing emphasis on showing impact also tends to work in favour of large-scale projects. Almost always, external contractors, or multilateral agencies, are seen as the only organisations able to bid for work at the largest scale.
Yet it is at this scale that prioritising the use of local capacity could have the biggest long-term impact. Donors who genuinely want to prioritise locally led initiatives, will find ways to support groupings of organisations who collectively can deliver at scale. For example, the community-based DDR work described in the case study of the Centre Résolution Conflits (CRC) could be carried out, with support from CRC, by a number of other organisations based across Nord Kivu. Rather than demobilising 4,300 combatants and reintegrating 1,300, a consortium could work with five or ten times this number.

d) Redefining roles

Even if donor governments could be persuaded of the benefits of a Local First approach, would recipient governments accept it? Would the trade-off of greater use of local capacity, and a greater role for recipient governments in shaping their own contribution, compensate for the possible loss of access to aid funds and the prestige that comes from deploying those funds? Can desire to provide better public goods be harnessed?
The enthusiasm for the post-Busan New Deal for building peaceful states suggests that the principle of involving civil society more closely in a coherent national plan for peacebuilding is gaining acceptance.
Multilaterals will continue to have a big role to play. As the case studies demonstrate, their access to resources, technical expertise and logistical capacity can be invaluable to their local partners. But they need to be genuinely doing things that could not be done by one or more local organisations. Good examples of partnership need to be encouraged, for example the principle of co-design of projects with local partners.
Local First also represents a challenge for INGOs. There will certainly continue to be a role for them, but it may be a changing one – less an implementer, deliverer of stand-alone capacity-building programmes and conduit for donor funds, and more a discoverer and nurturer of talent, with a very clear objective of enabling organisations to lead from the beginning, and to contribute their knowledge to the INGO and its other partners.

http://www.localfirst.org.uk/concept/

Luta Hamutok is a Timorese NGO that trains local citizens and groups to effectively monitor government expenditure and oil revenues

Luta Hamutok is a Timorese NGO that trains local citizens and groups to effectively monitor government expenditure and oil revenues. Formal transparency mechanisms exist for both, and 90 per cent of government revenue comes from oil. Luta Hamutok is supported by Integrity Action in this work.

After a long history of violent conflict, Timor Leste celebrates its first decade of independence in 2012. Reconstructing the country’s physical and social infrastructures is a priority, but building a large number of infrastructure projects that either were destroyed or did not exist in the pre-independence era comes with risks. Whether they are managed by government agencies or private contractors, such projects are prone to corruption and misappropriation of resources. Therefore improving transparency and accountability is critical.
Economically, the country sources almost 90 per cent of its income from petroleum revenues, making it one of the world’s most oil-dependent economies. However, little of the wealth trickles down to the population. This is despite the fact that the government of Timor Leste has complied with the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) by promulgating the Petroleum Fund Law in 2005. Under this law, the government established the Petroleum Fund, where oil revenue is deposited in order to secure the national budget for development. In 2009 an anti-corruption commission was established (Comissão Anti-Corrupção, or CAC).
Luta Hamutuk was established in 2005 by a group of activists passionate about ensuring accountable and participatory development in their country. Luta Hamutuk believes that local people best understand the specific needs and circumstances of their communities because they live in or near these project sites. Thus their voices must be counted. Luta Hamutuk enables communities to convey their concerns to those who are responsible for infrastructure projects, and to engage with key stakeholders in order to foster greater accountability at local, district and national levels.
They hold a three-stage theory of change:

1. People are made aware and informed of their rights.
2. People take action to hold the state accountable.
3. The state is more accountable and responsive.

Luta Hamutuk plays the role of catalyst and facilitator in these three stages of the change process. In stage 1, its role is to provide information and knowledge that otherwise would not be available to local people. This ranges from information about the state budget and oil revenues to local infrastructure projects. In stage 2, to enable local people to take action, Luta Hamutuk provides them with necessary capacities and resources, such as training on data collection, report writing and advocacy. In stage 3, Luta Hamutuk engages with and pressurises the government to perform its duties, as well as to be more responsive and accountable to the citizens of Timor Leste.
The process begins with community briefings by Luta Hamutuk staff, seeking out remote areas where people may have less access to information. During the briefing, staff try to identify members of the audience who could act as volunteer focal points. Their role is to collect evidence about the delivery of specific infrastructure projects, write reports and engage with local leaders and national policy-makers. One hundred and forty-six focal points have been trained so far in all 13 provinces.
A typical community briefing agenda includes the presentation of faktus informasaun (factsheets) about national and local issues relevant to the community, prepared by Luta Hamutuk staff. Factsheets focus on budget allocations for infrastructure projects in their area, the national budget, and oil and gas issues. This is followed by a discussion session to address questions from local residents. Often, this part of the meeting triggers critical thinking about government plans and policies, especially as this relates to local developments and projects.
This is reflected in comments from two participants at a community briefing, held in April 2008 in the village of Maumeta Vila (Atauro Island) in the District of Dili. As villager Patricio de Jesus says:

It is clear that Timor Leste is a state rich with natural resource but we, the people, don’t feel it, since the government do not realise its programmes like they said during campaign’ (Luta Hamutuk activity report, 2008).

Where the focal point has the time and skills, and the local government is responsive, a monitoring committee may also be established. These committees (there are currently three) focus on particular local projects, ranging from road rehabilitation to developing schools and healthcare facilities. And where appropriate, Luta Hamutuk may mount a media campaign to pressurise the government to act.
Because of its entirely local content, Luta Hamutuk’s initiatives can be very cost-effective – one example calculated a cost of $1 for every $1,000 of project that was monitored.
From their own experience Luta Hamutuk recommend that:

• More people, especially the marginalised, should be encouraged to take part in community-driven accountability processes.
• These processes should take into account Parliament’s responsibility in relation to government projects.
• Networking with donors and other civil society organisations can help these approaches to spread.
• In the long run, formal accountability mechanisms should be set up that require public participation.

https://projetutl.crowdmap.com

http://www.laohamutuk.org

www.lutahamutukinstitute.org

FINI FOUN AGRIKULTURA

FINI FOUN AGRIKULTURA

Husi Fini ba Moris FbM ou Seeds Of Life (SoL) MAP.

ESTUDU KI’IK husi :

Remigio LAKA Vieira

Objetivu SoL iha MAF mak :Atu promove siguransa aihan.

Metodu nebe uza halao aprosimasaun ne’ebe diak no bele hateten sai kona ba variedade ne’e ho diak no hasai osanmentu barak liu iha tempu naruk tebes. Ita nia rain Timor Leste mak bele husik hodi peskizador sira halao peskizasaun ne’ebe ho valor mekanismu peskizasaun ne’ebe diak maibe kontiudu ne’e hateten de’it kona ba geologia ou tekstur rai ninian. Nufim ikus mai, produtu ne’ebe foun ne’e hodi produs barak no estudu viabilidade ba rai nebe viable ne’e mak ita presija hatene tuir. Ita presija apresia ba metodu hirak ne’ebe iha no istudu iklima ne’ebe profundu.  No so’e tempu barak liu.

Bazea ba Livru Seeds of Life SoL ka Fini ba Moris FbM bazea ba relatoriu peskiza annual 2010. Ne’e, intermus ba estudu viabilidade ba fatin no kondisaun rai ba estudu viabilidade ida ne’e, liu husi iklima ba mudansas klimatika, hatudu potenisal ba fini ne’ebe kria ne’e iha viabilidade hanesan tuir rekomendasaun husi SoL ou FbM hatudu; iha fini foun balun ne’ebe rekomenda husi relatoriu ne’e, liu husi textu replikasaun no demostrasaun batar iha tinan ida idak ka liu:

FINI FOUN sira mak iha, husi maluk tekniku SoL sujere husi estrangeiru sira rekomenda mak?

·         Batar kinur, Fehuk midar, Ai-farina, Hare, Forerai, Koto nani, Ai horis rai malirin, nomos Fehuk Ropa. Hodi habelar liu tan.!! Pontu diak ou at?????

Tanba ho kondisaun viabilidade ba tinan sanulu nia laran.Kona ba produsaun kada tinan ne’ebe bele produs aihan barak.Maibe iha parte balun ne’ebe presija iha klarifikasaun ou presija hatene tuir mak oinsa kona ba komposisaun ninian. Tanba komposisaun husi variedade ou komoditi ida-ida ne’e sidauk iha hanoin ne’ebe hatudu iha seed of life nia relatoriu ne’e, no Sidauk iha estudu purfundu kona ba komposisaun ne’e viable ba saude ema niniandala ida tan sidauk klaru! (presija klarifika) tanba ne’e hanesan kondisaun ou faktor ida kona ba dezenvolvimentu sustentavel ba rai ida ne’e.

Iha parte ne’e mos hanesan parte ida hodi dudu prosesu dezenvolvimentu sustentavel ne’e bele hakat ou lae? Hanesan tuir ami Sosiedade sivil nia Hare’e katak:

Iha matenek  nain sira halo deskripsaun ida kona ba batar ne’ebe halao peskiza iha tinan 2010 mak;Hateten katak, Deskripsaun Batar « on: January 28, 2010, 02:30:05 pm »Batar ne’e iha naran latina ZEA MAYS. Bele loke iha http://um.ac.id) karik naran ida ne’e lori ita ba Tepun maizena, no ita hatene  buat hirak ne’e husi batar duni. Naran Zea mays rasik hanaran husi Carolus Linnaeus iha tinan 1939.Lia fuan “Zea” foti husi liafuan grego ninian hateten ne’e indika ba hahan iha lian malayu ou Indonezia dehan “Padi-padian”.nunemos liafuan “MAYS” ne’e hanesan liafuan ida ne’ebe mai husi ema Indian sira ho naran “Mahis” ou fataluku dehan Cele.

Iha parte seluk, ses husi lian latin nian ita mos bele istuda tuir kona ba klasifikasaun sira ne’ebe barat iha. Bele hatene no loke iha http://ksupointer.com  hodi bele hatene kona ba tipu batar hirak nebe iha. Rejultadu husi variedade aihan ida ne’e hanesan rejultadu ne’ebe barak akontese iha ita nia Vizinhu nasaun bo’ot ida ho naran Indonezia liu-liu iha parte jawa oeste ninian.

Ingeral katak batar hanesan aihan nia hu’un ba necesidade baziku.Iha fatin seluk mos sai hanesan aihan ema barak ninian.Nunemos sai hanesan hu’un ou posu karbohidrat nian. Batar mos sai hu’un ou posu protein ne’ebe importate ba ema iha ita nia rai pedasuk ida ne’e. nia komposisaun bokur importante mak ne’e hanesan pati (72-73%), ho nisba amilosa no amilopektin iha 25-30%; 70-75%.

Maibe iha batar Pulut (Waxi Maize) 0-7%.; 93-100%. Kadar ou kbi’it midar ninian hanesan glukosa, fruktosa, nomos sukrosa) iha nia kisaran entre 1-3%. Proteina batar entre (8-11) husi parte lima fraksi ninian, mak tuir mai ne’e; albumin, globulin, prolamin, glutelin, dan nitrogen nonprotein. tuir mai klasifikasaun sira academia nian mak;

Batar academia formal ninian mak

Philum             :Plantae
Divisiu             :Angiospermae
Klase               :Monocotyledon
Ordu                :Poales
Familia            :Poaceae/Gramineae
Genus              :Zea
Espesies           :Zea mays

Batar ida ne’e mos nia vitamin ou karbohidrate no vitamin E. liu-liu batar kinur. Iha parte seluk bele sai funiona hanesan mikro nutrisaun diak, vitamin ida ne’e nia knar hanesan natural antioksida ida ne’ebe bele hasae imunitas ba isin no bele intenta sell sira hodi istraga degenerative selula ninian.

Batar mos iha komposisaun sira ne’e hetan essensial mineral sira, hanesan K, Na, P, Ca, nomos Fe.Faktor genetika ne’e bele influensia ba komposisaun kimiku no caracteristiku funsaun sira bele hare’e iha (http://ksupointer.com).

Iha industria nia laran, batar baibain mos bele uza ba komposisaun protein ne’ebe a’as duque batar midar.Iha parte seluk furak los hodi ha’an. Batar ida ne’e mos dala barak uza ba aimoruk. Dalabarak bele uza ba kura moras nian. Hanesan iha fu’uk bele uza ba kura moras fatuk empedu nian, batu ginjal, busung air iha radang ginjal, malnutrisaun iha kabun, hepatitis, nunemos ba mi midar, radang kandun empedu, sirosis, nunemos tensaun ne’ebe as nunemos sira seluk sei ne’e ba batar bai-bain ou batar mutin ita nian. Rai laran hanesan akontese iha Indonesia no fatin sira seluk.

Kategoriabatar midar ou kinur ida ne’e bele rezulta: Diabetes, Fruktosa, Fuan, Hahan, moras sira

Iha matenek barak nebe hatudu ona rezultadu dahuluk katak, masin midar ne’ebe uza ba produtu hahan sira no liguida siplis sira bele istraga metabolism isin ema nian no bele hatudu Obesitas.Hanesan  Friktosa, sai hanesan hamidar ou halo midar ne’e bele fo perigoju ba selulola sira ne’ebe habi’it an. Iha orgaun nukleu sira nomos bele hamosu pra-diabetes nomos moras kurasaun. Tipu masin midar ida ne’e uza barak ona hodi troka masin midar ne’ebe folin sae makas. Hanesan iha nasaun awansadu sira ita hatene kona ba Yoghurt, dosi, salada, susu instant sira. Iha fatin seluk agua kaleng hemu hirak mos hanesan sai additional hodi ita ema bele hemu ho objetivu atu hadia ita nia isin nufim iha moras ida ho naran Fruktosa,

Matenek nain sira to’o oni loron mos fiar katak Fruktosa naturalmente hafalun an iha buah sira ne’ebe bele hamosu ou stimula Diabetes ba labarik sira. No halao prediksaun katak iha labarik sanulu iha nasaun avansadu sira labarik ida mak hetan diabetes.1/10 pesoas mak hetan ona. Ne’ebe hetan obesitas iha tinan 2015.

Peskizador sira halao peskiza iha tempu uluk liu ba kona ba disvantagen ou parte negative frutosa ninian ne’ebe koko ba laho. Maibe esperimental ida ne’e hahu uluk liu ba umanu ou ema maibe hatudu katak saude ema nian hafraku liu tan. Barak liu husi 10 semana nain 16 ne’ebe halao dieta, halao kontrala ba dieta sira katak fruktosa sae liu tan produsaun selulosa sira  iha fuan sira sorin. Aten nunemos orgaun produsaun mechanism iha hahan husi ibun to’o kakaluk sira hamosu oin seluk kona ba mekanismu hahan ninian. Parte hanesan ne’e bele dada ba Diabetes nunemos fuan moras .

Iha voluntariu groupu seluk nian ne’ebe diat hanesan.Maibe troka ho Glukosa, ne’e laiha indikasaun katak iha efeksaun rum aba saude.Voluntariu hirak ne’e foti husi ema sira nebe todan hanesan. Maibe liu husi peskizador sira husi California University mos halao peskiza ne’ebe hanesan.

Maibe pekizador sira hateten katak nivel todan ema ninian ba iha konsumedores Fruktosa sei aumenta iha tempu naruk nia laran. Hatudu mos katak fruktosa ida ne’e bele liu husi mekanismu hahan nia fatin iha kakaluk sira hodi bele halo fera ou hafera midar sira. Hodi ne’e komposisaun fruktosa sei metin no lahusik malu.Buat hirak sei hatudu reasaun abnormal. Inklui mos mekanismu isin ne’ebe bele husu an rasik iha ema nia isin lolon. Liu husi peskiza ida ne’e lahatudu klaru katak bele sunu ou rai an rasik iha bokur.

Bazea ba matenek ida ho naran Kimber Stanhope, ne’e ema ida ne’ebe professional tebes ne’ebe lidera peskizasaun kona ba ne’e, parte ida ne’e hanesan sai faktus dahuluk ne’ebe hatudu katak Frutosa mak sai alvu ba diabetes. Nunemos moras fuan nian. Ne’ebe lahatudu iha mudansa ida iha volutariu sira ne’ebe konsume glukosa. Ne’e hanesan estudu komparasaun ida ne’ebe matenek nain ne’e hetan. Tanba iha glukosa laran lahatudu imagine ida ne’e.

Fruktosa naturalmente iha kuaze 5%-10% iha type buah sira hotu.Funsionalizasaum ba iha aihan husi mekanizasaun konroladu ninian 1971 ne’e halo sintesa husi 55% fruktosa nomos 45 % glutosa husi batar, katak material batar baratu liu nomos dala ne’en midar liu husi masin midar tohu ninian.

Sirup a’as liu fruktosa husi batar. Nunemos sirup glukosa-fruktosa lista an barak liu iha produtu aihan no be’e hemu sira. Maske imposible lahalimar atu konsumedores sira atu hatene kona ba total no rasio Fruktosa ne’ebe uza.

Maibe nia speakersmen ou juru bicara husi Food no Drink Federation, Goupu Trade Inglatera ninian kontra no hateten katak, ida ne’e la logika atu sai impedimentu ba obesitas.

Referensia sira ne’ebe iha hodi bele kompleta hanoin hirak iha leten mak tuir maio ne’e:

Aritonang, D. C. 1991. Livestock Feeds and Feeding. 3^rd Edition. Prentice Hall International, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.

Chambell, J. R. , M. D. Kenealy, and K. L. Campbell. 2003. Animal Science. The Biology, Care and Production of Domestic Animal.9^th Ed. MacGraw-Hill Companies. New York.
Cheeke, P. R. 2004. Animal Agriculture. 3^th Ed. Upper Saddle Rive. Prentice Hall. New Jersey.
Church, D. C. 1991. Livestock Feeds and Feeding. 3^rd Edition. Prentice Hall International, Inc. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Esminger, M. E., J. E. Oldfield and W. W. Hineman. 1990. Feed and nutrition (Formaly Feed and Nutrition Complete). 2^nd Ed. The Esminger Publishing California, USA
McDonald, P., R.A. Edwards., J.F.D. Greenhalgh and C. A. Morgan. 1995. Animal Nutrition. 5^th Edition.Longman Singapore Publisher. Singapore.
Sarwono, B. 2002.Beternak Kelinci Potong dan Hias.PT. Agro Media Pustaka.Tangerang.
Simanjuntak, S.D.D. 1998. Penggunaan Aspergillus niger untuk meningkatkan nilai gizi bungkil inti sawit dalam ransum broiler. Thesis Pasca Sarjana.Institut Pertanian Bogor. Bogor.
Sapienza, A. dan Bolsen. 1993. Teknologi Silase. Terjemahan: Rini, B.S. Martoyoedo. Kansas State University.