4. Conclusion
The model in the study exemplifies the possibility of using ANP method with expert opinion to evaluate physical processes such as sustainable tourism. An important aspect of the approach proposed here is its hybrid nature, which combines spatial data with expert evaluations. In order to run the model, the spatial data were compiled from various sources thus represent objective data. Other aspects of the information used by the model were collected from the expert’s opinion and introduced into the model. Another point worth highlighting is the network structure of ANP. This can be regarded as one of the strength of the method, since it offers the possibility of simulating complex physical processes through expert opinion. The major hitch of the network structure is the large number of pairwise comparisons needed for its implementation. Thus, even with a simple network structure of this case study, there were a large number of pairwise comparisons. Greater potential of ANP over analytic hierarchy process (AHP) must also be discussed, in that it allowed for interaction and feedback among factors responsible for sustainable tourism development. Indeed, the network structure is an important advance on a hierarchical structure. However, the cost of this advance is the greater number of pairwise comparisons required as mentioned earlier. The model could be replicated in highlands with similar characteristics to the one in focus; due to its flexible nature of accommodating changes in the decision maker’s preference. These could be achieved by modifying sustainable tourism development factors and interdependences based on the local condition.