After defining variable or parameter identification, the next step is define the weighting of parameters and variable and scoring sub variable. For this
purposes, the analysis form experts is required to define the range of its value whether good, fair or poor. All standard values have been simulated before and
the final range is taken from average range of all the experts marking. Experts are chosen randomly based on their environment expertise and mining expertise. All
these scoring value of sub variable will multiply with the weighting of parameters and variable to define the range of final performance.
3.3.4.1. Prospective Analysis
Brougeois 2002 in Sardjadidjaja 2005 explained the idea of prosprective analysis is to prepare several strategic action plans and show the
changes is required in the future. The information about influence between factors is regarded from respondent’s interview. Respondent has been choose
from mining expert and the environment experts such Government Directorate of Mineral and Coal Engineering and Environment Ministry, private environment
consulting Respondents try to identify variable which is influenced to the topic and
then analysis of relative dependence from one variable to the others with a scale 0 means that not dependence, scale 1 low dependence, scale 2 adequate
dependence, and 3 high dependence. The result of computerized influence dependence matrix will show in
quadrant level of dependence Figure 3.6. Quadrant I is the key variable input, quadrant II is connector variable stakes, quadrant III is autonomous variable
unused and quadrant IV is tied variable output.
Figure 3.6. Illustration of influenced factors in quadrant modified from Sardjadidjaja, 2005
3.3.4.2. Weighting and Scoring
Score evaluation is part of evaluation system which quantitative parameters include their variables try to be performed using weighting and
scoring. Weighting of each variable is regard from their position in interest quadrant Q and the value V of quadrant shown Figure 3.6. Scoring can be
signed by performance value with scale 3 adequate, scale 2 intermediate and scale 1 inadequate. Total value of each variable will be categorized into the rank
of evaluation. Formula for weighting follow:
• Value in Q1 A = V1 X • Variable in Q1 • Value in Q2 B = V2 X • Variable in Q2
• Value in Q3 C = V3 X • Variable in Q3 • Value in Q4 D = V3 X • Variable in Q4
Total Value TV = A + B + C + D
Weight in Q1 WQ1 = A TV Weight in Q2 WQ2 = B TV
Weight in Q3 WQ3 = C TV Weight in Q4 WQ4 = D TV
Weight for each Variable Q1 WvQ1 = WQ1 • Variable in Q1 X 100 Weight for each Variable Q2 WvQ2 = WQ2 • Variable in Q2 X 100
Weight for each Variable Q3 WvQ3 = WQ3 • Variable in Q3 X 100 Weight for each Variable Q4 WvQ4 = WQ4 • Variable in Q4 X 100
Formula for scoring follow:
Score of Intensity Scale: 3 Adequate
2 Intermediate 1 Inadequate
Weighted Maximum Score: WcQ x Score of Intensity Scale Total Score = • Weighted Maximum Score
Rank of Evaluation Score: 2.56 Very Good
2.16 – 2.55 Good 1.49 – 2.15 Adequate
0.95 – 1.48 Bad 0.95 Worst
3.3.5. System Design
