• IE interfaces
• /
• v.15 no.4
• /
• pp.460-473
• /
• 2002

The objective of this paper is to design a Goal Alternatives Disposition System having three main subsystems for setting, evaluating and selecting goal alternatives. For setting of goal alternatives, System Alternatives Tree(SAT) structure will be developed, which has a computation algorithm for setting decision alternatives by the concept of System Priority Number(SPN). For evaluating and selecting of goal alternatives; First, Normative and Exploratory Priority Indices which consider technical performance to the goal, cost and feasibility are developed respectively. Second, Integrated Priority Index is built up to determine the total priority of the Goal Alternatives Disposition(GAD) system. For the design and verification of the GAD system, technological forecasting structure theory, systems engineering methodology will be used.

• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.12 no.12
• /
• pp.1-11
• /
• 2014

This article has reviewed some possible factors of priority setting in the government R&D investment, and also reviewed the roles of scientific community. Recently many development countries have planned more and more large-scale researches which require huge resources. Many large-scale researches have presented strikingly poor performance records in terms of efficiency. Nevertheless, more and more large-scale researches have been selected and executed. According to this article, some factors such as attracting attention of the media and the public, enhancing national prestige, raising the technological independence for economic growth were raised. As implications for policy, this article presented a necessity of strengthening the public control for priority setting of government R&D investment. And new procedures such as public discourse and National Assembly's in-depth deliberation were presented.

• Journal of Biosystems Engineering
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.187-194
• /
• 2004

The study focused on setting priority among the future core technologies that were derived by Delphi in agricultural management ＆ information using analytic hierarchy process(AHP). Items for setting priority were decided as ‘technology’, ‘market’, and ‘public concerns’by council. The future core technologies were divided into four parts by importance and R＆D level. Technologies which consisted of upper two parts having higher importance were considered in the study. Questionnaires were given to 9 specialists in biosystems engineering. As the results, ‘market’ was decided as a most important item. The most important technologies were ‘Developing technology and system of post harvest processing for higher quality rice’ in group I, and ‘Developing sensor technology to evaluate quality and safety for agricultural products’ in group II.

• Proceedings of the Technology Innovation Conference
• /
• 2002.02a
• /
• pp.183-203
• /
• 2002

The governments investment in R&D has rapidly increased so that a comprehensive and coherent approach to resource allocation has necessitated. Therefore the need for priorities in science and technology has been increased according to growing resources to science and technology. This study presents the methodology, process and results of priority-setting of national strategic technologies(IT, BT, NT, ST, ET, CT) through which 77 national key technologies are selected based on the criteria. Specifically it is intended to identify strategically necessary areas of focus for R&D, help leverage limited resources most effectively, and help coordinate government R&D activities by supplying ministries with a common set of priorities.

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.25-54
• /
• 2005

In this study, priority setting model of new promising IT industries which will be the growth engines for the Korean IT industry, was established. Based on the AHP model, priority setting of IT new promising IT industries was conducted. Firstly, the selection cases of the new promising IT industries and major priority setting methodologies including the AHP methodology, were analyzed. The AHP model was selected as the most feasible methodology for priority setting of the new IT industries, among the various priority setting methodologies. Secondly, in setting up the AHP model for prioritization of the new promising If industries, a 'goal' was established to be priority setting of the new promising IT industries, and an 'alternatives' to be 18 new promising IT industries. Then a logical and a systematic assessment criteria including 5 main criteria('Technological Innovation', 'Market Ability', 'SPin-off Effect', 'Public Benefit', 'Strategic Importance') and 14 sub-criteria, were developed for priority setting of the 18 new promising industries. Finally, with the AHP model, the substantial analysis was made to set up priority of the 18 new promising IT industries. The substantial analysis showed the following priority setting results and implications for the 18 new promising IT industries.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.2 no.2
• /
• pp.201-218
• /
• 1999

The article contains an introduction of possibility of applying Multi-Attribute Utility Theory(MAUT) for priority setting of R&D projects. MAUT is compared with AHP, which is widely used recently. These two techuiques are applied to set priorities of R&D projects In a Government-funded Research Institute. Six criteria are chosen from consultation with decision makers. They are composed of 1) validity as representative projects, 2) possibility of resource mobilization, 3) spillover effect of developed technologies, 4) possibility of success, 5) scope of participation and 6) clarity of research goal. To set priorities of R&D projects, SMART(Simple MultiAttribute Rating Technique) and DVM(Difference Value Measurement) out of many MAUT methods are used to design the utility function and to determine the weights among criteria. The aggregation model is additive on the assumption the criteria are independent. AHP executes pairwise comparisons for criteria and alternatives. From the results of the case study, the results and theoretical characteristics are compared.

• Journal of Korean Society of Rural Planning
• /
• v.9 no.3 s.20
• /
• pp.41-46
• /
• 2003

The study was focused on setting priority for future core technologies in rural development and resources using AHP. The technologies were derived by Delphi method. Evaluation criteria for the priority setting were decided as 'technology', 'market oriented', and 'public concerns' by council. The future core technologies were divided as four groups by importance and R&D level. Technologies in upper two groups were considered in the study. Group I had high importance and high R&D level. Group II had high importance and lower R&D level. Questionnaires were given to 9 specialists in agricultural resources. As the results, 'public concerns' was decided as a most important evaluation criterion. The most important technologies are "technology developing for animal feces and urine treatment, and restoration it to farm land" in group I, and "technology developing for agricultural by-products as energy source" in group II.

• Journal of Korea Technology Innovation Society
• /
• v.4 no.3
• /
• pp.255-274
• /
• 2001

This study aims to provide information about the priority setting and budget coordination of government R&D spendings in Korea. Based on the result of "Survey, Analysis and Evaluation of National R&D Programs"in FY 2000. this paper reviews the government R&D expenditures by the concerned variables such as program objectives, sector of performance, character of work and technology fields. It is found that R&D spendings on the areas of industrial development, information technology, and development research are funded pretty high. Also, it turns out that, considering program objectives and character of work, there are some redundancies of R&D programs among government agencies. Policy implications are suggested.

• KOREAN JOURNAL OF CROP SCIENCE
• /
• v.49 no.6
• /
• pp.546-551
• /
• 2004

The study was focused on setting priority for future core technologies in crops using Analytic Hierarchy Process (ARP). The technologies were derived by Delphi method. Evaluation criteria for the priority setting were decided as 'technology', 'market oriented', and 'public concerns' by council. The future core technologies were divided as four groups by importance and R&D level. Technologies in upper two groups were considered in the study. Group I had high importance and high R&D level. Group II had high importance and lower R&D level. Questionnaires were given to 8 specialists in crops. As the results, 'public concerns' was decided as the most important evaluation criterion. The most important technologies are 'developing of growing technology that has low inputs and production cost for environmental friendly agriculture' in group I, and 'developing of gene searching, characteristics transformation, and commercialization technologies for crops using bio-technology' in group II.

• Proceedings of the Technology Innovation Conference
• /
• 1999.06a
• /
• pp.245-265
• /
• 1999

MAUT and AHP are widely used for quantification of subjective judgements in various fields of decision making. This study focuses on the introduction and application of MAUT/AHP method which is a hybrid of MAUT and AHP techniques in R&D project priority setting. This hybrid model can clarify each factors' contribution using MAUT method and can reduce the number of pairwise comparisons of AHP method. This study applies AMUT/AHP method to the evaluation of R&D projects in a Government - funded research institute. To evaluate R&D projects, six evaluation factors are derived. SMART(Simple MultiAttribute Rating Technique) and DVM(Difference Value Measurement ) out of many MAUT methods are used to design the utility function ad AHP is used to allocate the weights among evaluation factors. The major findings of this study can be summarized as follows. First, the SMART/AHP and the DVM/AHP have the same results with the SMART and the DVM, and they are different results with AHP. It is very hard to decide which one is better. Second, MAUT/AHP's strength is analyzed. MAUT reflects utility values of evaluators to alternatives and AHP results objective and consistent weights of factors through pariwise comparisons. Third, its possible application fields are proposed. It is applicable to subjective decision making problems with high complexity and inter-independent factors.