Selecting the Best Composting Technology Using Analytical Hierarchy Process (Ahp)

Abstract

The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) has been used widely to solve multi-criteria selection problem. It is a technique that allows the decision makers to set their priorities and help make the best selection when both tangible and intangible aspects need to be considered. This study uses the AHP to select the best composting technology for the UKM composting centre where the accumulation of organic wastes are generated daily from the cafeteria and landscape activities within the UKM campus. Experts who are familiar and who have some years of experience on solid waste management at UKM were interviewed to do the pair wise comparisons which are structured with four criteria namely environmental, economy, social and technical aspects. These criteria then expanded into a few more sub-criteria. The alternatives for the composting technology are windrow composting and in-vessel composting. The analysis is done using the Super Decisions software. The result shows that technical factor is the most important factor with (0.5000), followed by environmental (0.2517), economy (0.1941) and social (0.0542) factors. The end result shows that windrow composting is the best composting technology according to these four factors with the priority of 0.6236 while composting in—vessel has the priority of 0.3765.

Assessment of Composting Technologies for Organic Waste Management

“…The emphasis in social and technical aspects in the decision-making process has developed in recent years (Ghinea & Gavrilescu, 2010). Therefore, to ensure the sustainability of the decision support framework regarding composting technology for organic waste management, all four criteria (environmental, economic, social, and technical) need to be evaluated (Zurbrügg et al, 2014;Zaini et al, 2015;Bababola, 2015;Coelho et al, 2017). Table 1 shows a simplified set of criteria and sub-criteria as a basis of assessment for selecting a suitable composting technology based on previous studies.…”

“…In contrast, assessment via MCDM considers more than just two pillars of sustainability, focusing on environmental, economic, social, and technical aspects (Zaini et al, 2015;Coelho et al, 2017). Because it analyzes multiple conflicting criteria, MCDM is regarded as a complete method and the most effective decision support framework when evaluating existing or potential alternatives (Allesch & Brunner, 2014;Corelho et al, 2017).…”

“…Each criterion must be evaluated via quantitative or qualitative indicators, and the experts, decision makers, and stakeholders will act as the evaluators. They will use numerical values to represent the weight or degree of importance of each criterion (Nasrin & Susanna, 2013;Zaini et al, 2015) when assessing the technologies. Sometimes data normalization is necessary for comparability among indicators when presented with different units or scales (Coelho et al, 2017).…”

“…Most of these aspects or criteria vary with composting technology. Composting can be performed using different methods or systems, such as the static pile system (Ilham & Esa, 2017;Lim et al, 2017), windrow system (Zaini et al, 2015;Ilham & Esa, 2017), in-vessel system (Zaini et al, 2015;Ilham & Esa, 2017;Malakahmad et al, 2017), and vermicomposting system (Fauziah & Agamuthu, 2009). Therefore, selecting the best composting technology is not a straightforward process.…”

Ranking project success criteria in power engineering companies using fuzzy decision-making method

“…AHP was known as an of a set of multi-attribute decision analysis methods (Hamid-Mosaku et al, 2016;Khalila et al, 2015;Umara et al, 2015;Nguyen et al, 2016b;Zaini et al, 2015). However, decision-makers regularly found that it is more convenient and more confident to use interval judgments than only a fixed value opinion (Kabir and Sumi, 2014;Paksoy et al, 2012).…”