Journal of the Korea Safety Management & Science (대한안전경영과학회지)

Korea Safety Management & Science (대한안전경영과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Evaluations of Industrial Accident Prevention Program of Korea by using Analytic Hierarchy Process(AHP) method

AHP기법을 적용한 산업재해예방사업 심층평가 항목의 가중치 설정

  • Lee, June-Hee (Graduate School of Public Health, Yonsei University and Institute for Occupational Health, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Jung, Pilkyun (Graduate School of Public Health, Yonsei University and Institute for Occupational Health, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Rhie, Jeongbae (Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Dankook University Medical Center) ;
  • Roh, Jaehoon (Department of Preventive Medicine and Institute for Occupational Health, Yonsei University College of Medicine) ;
  • Won, Jong-Uk (Department of Preventive Medicine and Institute for Occupational Health, Yonsei University College of Medicine)
  • 이준희 (연세대학교 보건대학원 및 의과대학 산업보건연구소) ;
  • 정필균 (연세대학교 보건대학원 및 의과대학 산업보건연구소) ;
  • 이정배 (단국대학교병원 직업환경의학과) ;
  • 노재훈 (연세대학교 의과대학 예방의학교실 및 산업보건연구소) ;
  • 원종욱 (연세대학교 의과대학 예방의학교실 및 산업보건연구소)
  • Received : 2013.10.20
  • Accepted : 2013.12.02
  • Published : 2013.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

We undertook the quantitative evaluations of Industrial Accident Prevention Program (IAPP). The six parameters, such as relevance, efficiency, consistency, sustainability, effectiveness, coherence, were chosen by expert plenary sessions. Two stage of Analytic Hierarchy Process were used to determine the weighted value of assessment criteria. This expert plenary suggests that the six parameters and its weight values are useful for quantitative evaluations of IAPP. Additional researches regarding the real world application of this assessment tool should be initiated.

Keywords

References

  1. Winslow, C.E.A. The Untilled Fields of Public Health. Science, n.s. p. 23, 1920.01
  2. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Office of the Director, Office of Strategy and Innovation. Introduction to program evaluation for public health programs: A self-study guide. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2005.11
  3. GAO, Evaluations Help Measure or Explain Performance. United States General Accounting Office. 2000.02
  4. Rossi, P.H., Freeman, H.E., & Lipsey, M.W. Evaluation: A systematic approach. Edition 6. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc 1999.02
  5. Chen, H. Practical Program Evaluation: Assessing and Improving Planning, Implementation, and Effectiveness. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc 2005.12
  6. EU, European Commission Evaluation of EU activities 2005.06
  7. Yarbrough, D. B., Shulha, L. M., Hopson, R. K., and Caruthers, F. A. The program evaluation standards: A guide for evaluators and evaluation users (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2011.03
  8. GAO. Program Evaluation. Experienced agencies follow a similar model for priority research. United States General Accounting Office. 2011.04
  9. Scriven, Micahel. Beyond formative and summative evaluation. In Gredler, M. E. Program Evaluation. (p. 16) New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1991.07
  10. Executive Board of the United Nations Development Programme and of the Unitied Nations Population Fund. The evaluation policy of UNDP - Item 4 of the provisional agenda Evaluation. NY. 2011.02
  11. Chen, H.T. Practical program evaluation. Assessing and improving planning, implementation and effectiveness. Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications, 2005.02
  12. 권민영, 구본재, 이국희. AHP 기법을 적용한 IT프로젝트 사전타당성 평가항목의 가중치 산출. Information Systems Review, 한국경영정보학회지, 8(1), 265-285, 2006.04
  13. 송성환, 권성훈, 박진범 외. Delphi를 사용한 AHP 방법론에 관한 연구. 대한산업공학회지 26(1): 53-64, 2008.10
  14. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), Thomas Saaty, 1980.05
  15. 한국직업능력 개발원, 고용보험 사업심층 평가, 2010.02

Cited by

  1. Development of Decision Method for Investment Priority of River Flooding Disaster Risk Zone vol.19, pp.6, 2013, https://doi.org/10.9798/kosham.2019.19.6.267