January 8th, 2016

Belajar bahasa Melayu secara integratif pupuk perpaduan

PEMIKIRAN dan perasaan kaum Cina di negara ini terhadap bahasa Melayu, boleh antaranya diteliti pada cara bahasa Melayu itu dipelajari.

Walaupun sebagai bahasa negara, bahasa Melayu rata-rata dipelajari atas orientasi instrumental sahaja oleh kaum Cina. Ini dapat dilihat pada tujuan dan cara penguasaan murid dan pelajar Cina terhadap mata pelajaran Bahasa Melayu.

Melalui orientasi instrumental, mata pelajaran Bahasa Melayu dipelajari semata-mata untuk memenuhi syarat pendidikan sahaja, iaitu untuk tujuan lulus dalam ujian dan peperiksaan.

Sehubungan ini adalah syarat wajib lulus dalam peperiksaan Sijil Pelajaran Malaysia (SPM) bagi tujuan memperoleh sijil penuh oleh semua pelajar.

Belajar dengan tekun

Oleh itu, bahasa Melayu dipelajari, kadangkala dengan tekun sekali, dengan menghadiri banyak kelas tuisyen pula, khusus untuk lulus pada peringkat SPM, kalau boleh dengan baik pula, kerana ia adalah syarat lulus yang penting dalam persekolahan seseorang pelajar di Malaysia.

Sebaliknya, bahasa Melayu boleh dikatakan jarang sekali dipelajari atas orientasi integratif oleh kaum Cina, iaitu untuk menjadi sebahagian daripada komuniti bahasa Melayu.

Orientasi ini penting diamalkan supaya kaum Cina dapat berfungsi dengan baik ketika berkomunikasi dalam bahasa Melayu, iaitu mereka bukan sahaja fasih, tetapi juga mengetahui budi bahasa Melayu yang terkandung di dalamnya.

Apabila ini berlaku, kita tidak akan kedengaran lagi, misalnya ungkapan daripada wartawan Cina, yang menggunakan kata ganti nama orang kedua kamu ketika bertanya kepada menteri, seperti pada soalan: "Datuk Seri, apa pandangan kamu mengenai harga rumah pada masa ini?"

Sesungguhnya pembelajaran bersifat integratif ini penting sekali untuk dimensi kemasyarakatan dalam usaha pembentukan negara bangsa yang bersatu padu di negara ini, dengan kaum Melayu sebagai kelompok majoritinya.

Selain menjadi sebahagian daripada komuniti bahasa Melayu yang mengetahui aspek budi pada bahasa Melayu dengan baik, cara ini juga didapati boleh memupuk perpaduan yang jauh lebih berkesan.

Dengan mengetahui aspek budi bahasa Melayu, yang mempunyai banyak kaitan rapat dengan budaya Melayu, kaum Cina akan lebih mengenali kaum Melayu yang juga kelompok dominan di negara ini.

Tak kenal maka tak cinta. Itu pepatah Melayu yang boleh merungkai masalah yang dihadapi.

Dengan pengenalan melalui bahasa Melayu ini, khususnya mengenai budi bahasa Melayu, pasti banyak prasangka, buruk sangka, stereotaip, salah konsep, kejutan budaya dan lain-lain yang negatif daripada kaum Cina terhadap kaum Melayu dapat dikurangkan, malah dibanteras pada akhirnya.

Dengan kata lain, sikap negatif terhadap kaum Melayu sebelum mengetahui budi bahasa Melayu, pasti boleh berubah menjadi positif, setelah bahasa Melayu itu diketahui dan dikuasai secara integratif.

Hal ini bukan andaian dan dapat dilihat buktinya dalam kalangan kaum Cina Kelantan. Mereka ini bukan sahaja fasih berbahasa Melayu, tetapi juga didapati amat positif pemikiran dan perasaan mereka terhadap kaum Melayu.

Bagaimanapun perkara sebaliknya berlaku pada kaum Cina yang tidak fasih, apatah lagi yang tidak boleh berbahasa Melayu langsung.

Mereka ini didapati kurang mesra terhadap kaum Melayu, dan mempunyai banyak sangkaan buruk dan salah mengenai mereka.

Penerimaan positif

Jelas sekali pengetahuan dan penguasaan bahasa Melayu yang baik, khususnya dari aspek budi bahasa Melayu, akan membawa kepada penerimaan positif oleh kaum Cina terhadap kaum Melayu, selaku penutur jati bahasa Melayu dan lebih penting sebagai kelompok dominan di negara ini.

Perkara ini sangat baik untuk pemupukan perpaduan yang lebih utuh.

Oleh itu, cara pembelajaran integratif ini perlu dipupuk untuk dikuasai dalam kalangan murid dan pelajar Cina.

Selain dapat mencapai tujuan integrasi yang menjadi matlamat kemasyarakatan penting dalam sistem pendidikan negara, ia juga pasti mampu meningkatkan kemahiran berbahasa Melayu dalam kalangan kaum Cina.

Mereka yang mempelajari sesuatu bahasa atas orientasi integratif didapati lebih bermotivasi ketika mempelajarinya, selain didapati lebih cekap di dalamnya berbanding dengan orientasi instrumental.

Sebenarnya orientasi integratif ini didapati berjaya sekali untuk membentuk pemikiran dan perasaan positif mereka yang mempelajari bahasa itu terhadap komuniti bahasa berkenaan. Teo Kok Seong Berita Harian KOLUMNIS KHAMIS, 7 JANUARI 2016 @ 6:10 AM

Media baharu gugat masa depan akhbar

ANCAMAN media baharu dan masa depan media tradisional di seluruh dunia yang dianggap tidak menentu, sudah lebih 20 tahun diperdebatkan, bermula di Amerika Syarikat.

Setelah sekian lama, kebanyakan negara termasuk Malaysia hanya memerhati dengan teliti perkembangan media di Amerika Syarikat dan negara Eropah untuk menilai dan mengukur sejauh mana kesannya kepada industri media global.

Dalam industri media, Amerika Syarikat dan Eropah diterima sebagai negara penanda aras kepada kemajuan atau kegagalan media.

Jika media Amerika Syarikat tidak dapat menahan kemaraan media baharu, bermakna negara lain juga akan menghadapi risiko dan tempiasnya, malah kemungkinan menerima kesan lebih teruk.

Bagi pengkaji media khasnya sarjana dan cendekiawan komunikasi serta media di Amerika Syarikat, mereka melihat tanda krisis media di negara itu bermula apabila kurangnya berita penting atau hard news dalam akhbar atau media elektronik yang biasanya ditunggu-tunggu oleh rakyat, pembaca dan pelanggan tetap media.

Sebaliknya, pelanggan media mendapat maklumat dan berita seperti itu daripada sumber lain, khasnya media baharu berikutan meluasnya akses internet.

Berita lewat disiarkan

Berita yang mereka harap dapat dibaca di media cetak atau ditonton di televisyen, tidak disiarkan atau lewat disiarkan. Jika disiarkan, ia berbeza daripada skop atau kecenderungan berita yang mereka baca di media baharu atau mereka terima di media sosial.

Akhbar atau televisyen juga sudah hilang sifat kesemasaannya kerana sering ketinggalan sedangkan media baharu mampu memberi maklumat paling pantas, malah laporan selari ketika peristiwa berlangsung.

Seiring dengan penurunan minat masyarakat terhadap media di Amerika Syarikat, penerimaan media tradisional diburukkan lagi dengan pertumbuhan pesat industri infotainmen (maklumat dan hiburan) melalui media baharu dengan golongan muda lebih menjurus kepada maklumat berkaitan dengan dunia hiburan dan beberapa faktor penting yang lain.

Berikutan senario ini juga, ramai sarjana dan cendekiawan komunikasi serta media di Amerika Syarikat teruja untuk mengikuti perkembangan industri media pada abad ini.

Mereka melihat wujud korelasi atau kaitan kemerosotan media dengan media ekonomi (media economics). Jika ekonomi-politik (political economy) meliputi kecenderungan berhubung soal pemilikan, kuasa dan kawalan terhadap media, media ekonomi pula melihat kaitan bisnes dan produk yang dikeluarkan oleh syarikat media.

Sesuatu perniagaan hanya mampu bertahan jika produk syarikat relevan kepada cita rasa pengguna. Sebagai contoh, produk syarikat pengeluar minuman adalah air minuman pelbagai jenama dan perasa yang boleh menghilangkan dahaga dan paling penting memberi kepuasan kepada pengguna.

Pembeli akan menentukan dan membuat pilihan jenama mana paling sesuai dengan cita rasa dan selera mereka. Mereka akan beralih kepada minuman lain jika mendapati minuman yang mereka selalu minum berubah rasa. Begitu juga dengan produk makanan atau keluaran kecantikan untuk wanita.

Produk syarikat media


Produk syarikat media pula ialah berita dan maklumat yang sepatutnya menjawab atau menghilangkan keraguan pelanggan selain memberi keyakinan kepada mereka mengenai bahan yang disiarkan.

Pelanggan tidak akan melanggan produk yang tidak memuaskan hati atau bertentangan dengan naluri mereka.

Sarjana dan cendekiawan komunikasi dan media mendapati jika pelanggan tidak mendapat berita serta maklumat yang mereka harapkan, mereka akan beralih kepada sumber lain yang boleh memberi mereka kepuasan.

Sejak 1977, sudah banyak kajian mengenai media ekonomi dijalankan di Amerika Syarikat. Untuk kelangsungan, industri media di Malaysia perlu menjalankan kajian yang sama, mengambil kira model kajian di Amerika Syarikat.

Skop kajian media ekonomi meliputi perkara berkaitan dasar ekonomi dan amalan syarikat media, sikap pengamal media dan kepentingan syarikat berkaitan media selain bidang kewartawanan.

Sudah tentu kajian juga memberi tumpuan kepada media baharu, penerbitan filem, program hiburan, media cetak dan penyiaran. Ia juga berkaitan komunikasi mobil, internet, pengiklanan dan perhubungan awam.

Selain itu ia juga mengkaji soal pemilikan media, hak harta intelek, persaingan strategi ekonomi, ekonomi syarikat, cukai media dan pelbagai isu lain.

Jika Malaysia tidak memulakannya sekarang, ia akan ketinggalan jauh ke belakang dalam tempoh lima tahun lagi.

Mior Kamarul Shahid.Berita Harian Kolumnis Jumaat 8 Januari 2016 @ 6:05 AM

Ethics and integrity must not just appear in slogans

IN a democracy, citizens expect a lot from their government. If you take the classic definition of representative government (government of the people, by the people, for the people) literally, the people are the government; that is, they participate in the affairs of government.

Etymologically, the word “democracy”, which comes from the Greek root words “demos” and “kratos”, bear the meaning that the people are in power, and that all democracies are participatory.

True representative government comes with the promise that there is individual participation by citizens in political decisions and policies that affect their lives, directly rather than through elected representatives.

In practice, however, all the world’s democratic governments are participatory through their elected parliaments. In young, functioning democracies, where the people are better educated and exposed through the media and other communication tools, they are fast awakening to their rights and the government expediently claims to put citizen interests first.

Accordingly, citizen expectations that the government will deliver on its promise are high. I cannot speak for other nations but we know that in Malaysia, the government makes this claim repeatedly.

Everything is being done in the interest of the rakyat, the people.

The more often the government says this, the greater the people’s expectations that the promises will be delivered.

One can say that public trust and confidence in the government are in direct relation to the efficacy and speed with which they manage their delivery systems.

Dead fish floating in Sungai Tonggak near Gebeng. A very important aspect of fighting corruption and building ethics, governance and integrity into a democracy is to make sure that the right regulations and laws are in place.
In this era where communication is instantaneous and information can be obtained at the switch of a button or the click of a mouse in texts, audio, videos and visuals, the public is quickly informed of governmental administrative performance, economic activities, political and socio-cultural developments, technological and infrastructural innovations, modernisation of public services, policy failures and financial scandals — that is, everything good or bad that affects their lives and the communities, institutions and organisations they belong to.

And, citizens respond and react as fast through the media, public forums, community and workplace interactions, social networking, complaints bureaus, street demonstrations, state assemblies and Parliament, and ultimately through their votes at the general election.

On the Internet and social media, news gets posted fast, and response is immediate, reaching a wider audience than any newspaper or tabloid can have. In modern parlance, they go “viral” in seconds.

 Communication can be effective through these instantaneous communication modes. People can be efficient communicators and workers if these modern tools are managed with care and efficiency. And people expect the same fast communication with and from the government.

However, on the ground, we know that we are slowed down considerably by government bureaucracy equipped with traditional systems and mechanisms.

To a great extent, this affects the attitudes towards the work of the public servants that manage them. They become slow and sluggish because they know that the decisions and actions by their colleagues and department heads will be not be forthcoming.

Citizen expectations of fast decision-making and delivery are more often than not let down, and they become complaining and cynical. In the last couple of decades, regular media reporting of both petty and grand corruption committed by public officials has made people aware of the extent and seriousness of the problem in the country.

There is growing citizen demand seen in newspaper articles and columns and letters to the editor, as well as postings on social media that concerted efforts must be made by the government to eradicate corruption among public servants, the very people entrusted with the duty and responsibility of managing the country’s resources.

The government has responded with some relevant initiatives, two of which are the establishment of the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) — now rebranded as the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) — and the Integrity Institute of Malaysia (IIM), each with its own role and function, objectives, mission and vision.

What is strategically important is that their functions are now realised in complementary and collaborative efforts to eradicate corruption and promote integrity.

By setting up integrity units in public and private sector bodies and getting the relevant institutions and corporations to sign integrity pledges, they work at different levels, directly and indirectly, to instil ethics in government and business.

The government imposes rules and regulations, and conducts programmes to instil good governance in its ministries and institutions and their various departments.

Integrity and ethical standards are being infused into the government systems and the civil servants that manage it.

This is the claim and the promise. More recently in 2011, a ministry overseeing governance and integrity was established and is now relentlessly pursuing its objective of getting the commitment of the relevant bodies and businesses to erect a sound integrity and governance infrastructure.

It looks as though Malaysia is on the fast track to putting ethics to work in business and government. The public must welcome these initiatives and give their full cooperation.

Three questions are pertinent here: HOW does Malaysia as a democracy fare in promising its citizens a corruption-free society?; ARE our citizens happy with these initiatives and cooperating effectively?; and, CAN one assume that because these mechanisms are in place, Malaysians have high ethical standards and are not corruptible or corrupted?

A bane in the MACC’s cap in its fight against corruption is the Corruption Perception Index (CPI) released annually by Transparency International (TI). For the last few years, Malaysia’s ranking has been in the 50s among more than 170 countries.

The CPI measures the perceived level of public sector corruption, and most people believe, rightly or wrongly, that it is the most accurate measure.

Concerned citizens therefore opine endlessly about Malaysia’s relatively low scores and ranking, compared with that of Hong Kong and Singapore, the two Asian city states that are among the top 10 scorers.

As a result, the Malaysian government’s efforts to eradicate corruption are thought to be less than successful. The MACC has to constantly manage the negative public perception and assure the public that the TI figures are improving annually and that the commission’s own data show greater success rates.

Figures aside, we know through media reports that corruption is still rampant, if not rife, at all levels of Malaysian society. Malaysian citizens are still giving and accepting bribes, abusing public office, seeking “rent” and favours, and covering up their corruption trail with impunity, sometimes with the help of the enforcement agencies.

We know that the standards of integrity, ethical and moral conduct in work and business are still questionable. There seems to be an acceptable Malaysian way of doing business.

There appears to be some kind of under-the-table complicity between the givers and takers of bribes and graft, and the stumbling block in corruption investigations is often the lack of evidence and witnesses.

Whistleblowers do not come by easily and even when they do come forward, they often turn hostile on the witness stand.

Let us revisit the current scenario where the government and those holding public office have verbally pledged to uphold integrity and fight corruption.

The movers and shakers in business and industry have signed pacts to observe rules of good governance, transparency and accountability both internally, within their organisation and externally, in their dealings with the government and other business associates.

However, from what is being reported about the wheeling and dealing in some companies being investigated, the abuse of power is rife as the top management of these organisations, that is the chairman, chief executive officer (CEO), chief financial officer (CFO), directors and trustees entrust their company lawyers and accountants with the task of coming up with the most strategic business plans to rectify past maladministration.

To the company accountants and lawyers, this provides them with the opportunity to further manipulate loopholes in the laws. The public, including shareholders, are continuously fed with promises, explanations and rationalisation plans to ensure them that their interests are being protected.

The overriding justification is that they are doing it in the interest of the company, the people and the nation. These goals and objectives seem noble and honourable, indeed!

The organisation cares for its stakeholders and the original spirit of democracy is upheld — “of the people, for the people and by the people”. I would like to suggest that, in reality, there is a big gap between citizen expectation and citizen commitment.

My bolder suggestion is that Malaysians seem to have a warped understanding of ethics and integrity, and are to a great extent, gullible, if not corruptible.

People are quick to point fingers at the government and those in positions of authority, but do not realise or want to admit that they themselves are part of the web of corruption and abuse of the law that takes place.

A democratic government is not an abstract construct, but a physical one, comprising people who bring to bear upon their conduct and behaviour, their socio-cultural values and traditions, both in their private lives and in the workplace.

The democratic rights and liberties of citizens come with great responsibilities for them to uphold the laws of the land and the norms of society spelt out both by decree and by convention.

This is something that needs to be emphasised over and over again. Malaysians must accept that there are laws and rules of conduct and behaviour, of ethics and governance incumbent upon us as responsible citizens in our respective fields.

Written laws, rules and regulations exist in every functioning democracy, but there are also unwritten norms and conventions, namely the religious and cultural traditions which instil in us standards of ethical behaviour.

Malay cultural values such as adab and religious principles such as amanah roughly equivalent to the English notions of ethics and integrity, which should govern the Malays in our daily lives, must also be our guiding principles at work, in government and business.

I’m sure there are similar notions in the traditions of the other communities. In the last 50 years, Malaysia’s young democracy has seen rapid economic development which opened up enormous opportunities for doing business with a government committed to building the country’s physical, economic and technological infrastructure.

Unfortunately, this has also created opportunities for making quick and easy money by giving or accepting bribes to induce quick decisions in one’s favour.

The private sector gives and the public sector takes, the public sector gives and the private sector takes, in the vicious circle of graft, bribery and corruption.

Gullible citizens, who are also the government officers managing the country’s resources and enforcement agencies such as the police, Customs and Immigration, succumb to the inducements offered by the equally corruptible man in the street wanting to bid for a tender and shortcut procedures or beat the brunt of the law.

And so, the old cultural tradition of scratching one another’s backs to cari makan or earn a living continues to this day. It has been suggested by cultural experts that this is the phenomenon of living together in peace and harmony.

This is how the communities coexist, and Malaysians accommodate one another in order to partake of the country’s progress and development. It seems that this is real equity at work. It would be unwise to end on this depressingly negative note; so, I would like to stress that a very important aspect of fighting corruption and building ethics, governance and integrity into a democracy is to make sure that the right regulations and laws are in place.

More importantly, we have to ensure that these formal guidelines are drafted to be as watertight as possible, and enforced consistently and fairly, so that justice is executed without fear or favour.

Unethical government and business leaders must stop instructing their crafty and unethical lawyers and accountants to look for loopholes in corporate and tax laws, governance procedures or office rules and regulations in order to cover their tracks.

There must be a genuine desire by Malaysians at all levels of society to be honest and truthful in their daily lives at home and at work.

People must be committed to achieving greater balance between their ambitions and moral and ethical standards of behaviour.

One must not be compromised at the expense of the other. Most of all, our leaders and role models in government, politics, business, academia, schools and institutions of learning and the other key organisations, in their bid to build this nation, must search their hearts and minds for the best ways to balance Malaysia’s economic achievements with the highest standards of moral development.

Ethics and integrity must not just appear in slogans and headlines but must be a living entity in the soul of the nation and its people.

This quest is not an impossibility, as Malaysians are blessed with the rich cultural and spiritual heritage of the world’s major faiths and religions, Islam, Buddhism, Christianity and Hinduism, as well as the other belief systems.

It is not far-fetched to suggest that the most relevant moral values and principles in these faiths and religions be extracted and drafted into a national code of ethics and integrity.

The Rukun Negara has summarised the following five principles:

BELIEF in God;
LOYALTY to king and country;
UPHOLDING the Constitution;
RULE of law; and,
GOOD behaviour and morality.

Instead of paying mere lip service to our expertly crafted national philosophy, there must be genuine effort to revive it and to translate it in detail into a national code of ethics and integrity.

A version of this was presented at the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Foundation Conference last month.

Changing mindset on STEM

ENTERING 2016, we still hear complaints on the state of science and technology (S&T) in the country. These include poor mastery of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) among students, decreasing number of science students, lack of research commercialisation and the state of research facilities in the country.

From the perspective of Islam, research is essential in establishing facts for knowledge and understanding. It provides a platform for further comprehension of the scheme of things. Islam encourages its believers to observe the creations of God to attain a greater and stronger level of piety and devotion.

Verse 19 of Surah al-Mulk encourages observation, one of the key elements in research: “Do they not observe the birds above them, spreading their wings and folding them in? None can uphold them except (God) Most Gracious: truly it is He that watches over all things.”

Islam has always placed utmost importance on the quest for knowledge. It is each person’s responsibility to seek knowledge.

One of the factors that qualify mankind as the khalifah (vicegerent) of God in this world is the ability to accept, process and develop data; and to process information and extract knowledge. This whole process of obtaining knowledge is research.

A friend expressed his doubts on the future of science and scientists in the country. He believes S&T should be the way forward for Malaysia as it is impossible to compete on the basis of manual labour.

However, he felt that some of the equipment used in laboratories in the country is in need of serious upgrade to keep up with the pace of current technology.

The concern is valid. As a researcher at one of the leading universities in the country, he finds that the research facility that he used as an undergraduate in a foreign university is far more advanced than the one used by professors here.

If this is true and not just unique to that particular university, then the situation is serious indeed, for the simple reason that we are aiming to become a developed country, and yet we seem to fall short on the one criterion for seeing this aim materialised: facilitating S&T research.

Research is important for a variety of reasons. To manufacturers and industrialists, it is important to develop new products and services. This is where the term “research and development” comes in.

To a scientist, research is essential in finding answers to questions or mysteries of science, a quest to better understand the world we live in.

Research is a necessity. For Muslims, research can help in understanding the Greatness of the Almighty and appreciating His Creation.

From the perspective of Islam, knowledge would increase humility and piety towards God. This is as stated in verse 28 of Surah Fathir: “Those truly fear God, among His Servants, who have knowledge: for God is Exalted in Might, Oft-forgiving.”

This year will herald even greater challenges for Muslims.

Even before Francis Bacon coined the phrase “knowledge is power,” Islam had already recognised this through the various verses in the Quran as well as the Prophetic traditions which firmly emphasise the importance of acquiring knowledge.

However, in today’s reality, the total Gross National Product (GNP) of Muslim countries is less than 5% of the world’s GNP. Therefore, most Muslim countries could only allocate less than 0.5% of their budget for research and development. This is in contrast to the 2% to 3% allocated by developed nations.

Reflecting on the macro-economy, nations enjoying the highest per capita income are either strong both in S&T innovations, such as the United States and Germany, or strong in technological innovation without necessarily being strong in science, like Japan.

It is seen that countries which are strong in science but not strong in innovativeness do not enjoy high per capita income. Thus, innovativeness becomes the key determinant of a successful and profitable science and technology policy.

Scientific research should be looked upon as the prerequisite for innovations, leading to products, services or processes that can later be commercialised, or otherwise applied. The strategy of efficiency-driven growth, as opposed to input-driven growth, should be the focus for Malaysia.

Efficiency-driven growth focuses on increasing returns on investment which is mostly technology-based and dependent on factors such as production capability, technological innovativeness and application of information technology throughout all sectors.

However, most of the research work in the country is done purely for academic purposes. Perhaps in order to generate income for the research findings as well as to be able to “re-fund” other research work, research activities should be more “commercialised”, particularly in the universities.

It is also equally important for Malaysia to have a strong champion in S&T. The champion has to be a scientist, and not purely an administrator. This is critical so that the country’s S&T vision is clear.

Prof Dr Ahmed Zewail, a Nobel laureate, noted that one of the barriers that needed to be overcome is an incoherent vision for S&T in Muslim countries.

Most Muslim countries lack a clear plan as to how to build indigenous S&T capabilities, create a culture of scientific and technological innovation, and develop local scientists and technologists.

Without a clear vision, most definitely we will lose our focus and direction. Then there is no point in having state-of-the-art research facilities.

Advanced research facilities are important – no doubt about it.

However, without a clear vision, we would just be spending millions in buying equipment without a clear idea of what to do and where to go. As such it is equally critical for Malaysians to also have state-of-the-art mindset towards S&T in order to spur the culture of research and development in the country.