GMO Biosafety Research 2014, Vol.6, No.1, 1-9
4
simplified and expedited. AHP is considered from the
experts judgment to capture variety of information
from multiple influential elements on the completion
of the case. This method uses knowledge as an
analysis tool and then processes them into the
components arranged hierarchy, both structurally and
functionally (Marimin 2005). The AHP method used
was developed by Saaty & Saaty (2003). This research
involved five experts from various institutions
associated with GEPs management policy in
Indonesia. Final data used was the geometric average
of the aggregate opinion of those experts. The
judgment of each level was obtained from completed
filled questionnaires of some experts from different
backgrounds of scientific fields that may represent
their own institutions. First level called ‘focus to only
one element’ is the target to be achieved on the
research. The next level, each of them is composed of
several elements corresponding to the input from the
experts. By using AHP analysis, the order of priority
of each element is expressed in numerical values or
percentage. Then, every element at each level is
weighted by the experts using the eigen as defined by
Saaty & Saaty. (2003). Next, the processing of the
data to determine the priority element in the decision-
making of sustainable GEPs management policy will
use the Software
Expert Choice 2000
.
Hierarchy GEPs management policy are arranged
according to the experts justification that consist of
four levels; objectives (purposes), factors, criteria and
alternatives, which can describe the condition of GEP
management today in Indonesia. The hierarchy
arrangements are:
• First Level: the focus of sustainable GEP
management policy
• Second Level: the factors that play a role in influencing
GEP management that consist of environmental,
economic, social and technological factors
• Third Level: the criteria of each factor for the
environment that consists of GMO safety to non-target
organisms & potential biodiversity, transfer of genetic
material, improving environmental quality and the
safe GEP for the environment itself. Economic factors
consist of the stability of production criteria, the
reducing of production costs and the increasing of
farmers' income. Then, the criteria for social factors
consist of the public perception and acceptance, public
education, GEP safety for human health and the
commercialized of GEP Labeling. Last, technological
factors consist of human resources capability criteria
in doing biological safety testing and human resource
capability in doing basic research until GEP obtaining.
• Fourth Level: the alternatives that have been
restricted by experts into twelve alternatives that can
be considered in the decision making of sustainable
GEP management policy.
After having gained the eigen for each level with AHP
processing, specifically at the alternative level
followed will be continued by analyzing of sub
element on the complex system based on the experts
opinion, with ISM. The method of ISM decision
making was developed by Saxena et al
.
(1992).
Fundamental principles of ISM are the identification
of structures in a system that gives a very clear
description of the elements system and its flowing
relations in order to obtain a better decision (Eriyatno
1998). Classification of sub- elements in a single
element is based on the refined of
Reachability Matrix
(RM) by knowing
Driver-Power Dependence
value.
The classifications of sub- elements is classified into
four sectors; Autonomous (Sector I), Dependent
(Sector II); Linkage (Sector III) and Independent
(Sector IV), while the data processing using
Excel
2007 program.
Result and Discussion
a. Hierarchy GEPManagement Policy using AHP
Synthesized results and the eigen values for each
option based on level in the structure of AHP depicted
cumulatively as shown in Figure 4.
The interest rates based on the role of each level are
analyzed to the implementation of GEP management
policy bases the continuous study. Based on the
experts judgment, hierarchy at the factor level that
influence the GEP management, seem to have an
almost equal eigen (Figure 5). The judgment result to
environmental aspects with eigen 0.258, 0.232 for
economic aspects, 0.278 for social aspects and 0.232
for technological aspects. The almost equal values of
all the aspects (factors) are related to the principle of
sustainable development that should pay attention to
the main three main factors as pillars; economic,
environmental and social (Cunningham & Saigo 2001).
