Arms import decisions have a significant impact on certain nations. Priorities based on diverse policies are a major cause of conflict and dissent among policy decision makers and practitioners. This is because there are many competing qualitative and quantitative decision elements from varying perspectives. Hence, it has been difficult to compare them and rank their contributions to the final decision. Instead, a common approach has been to make decisions reacting to the situation at hand and on a case by case basis. Another approach is to use a rational decision model and expert judgments to assess arms import policies. For this, a hierarchical decision model (HDM) is used to identify the decision elements. Once a model framework is established many aspects of the results can be studied. In this research, a decision model based on technology, economics, politics, industry, and military (TEPIM) perspectives is developed for assessment of arms import policies. The case of the Republic of Korea is considered. The perspectives and their composite criteria are then ranked using the consensus of panels of experts and decision makers. An important aspect of expert judgment consensus is the management and analysis of disagreements. This study includes hierarchical cluster analyses and MANOVA of the disagreements between the decision makers and practitioners. We have confirmed that the stakeholder arms procurement organizations are guided by their organizational mission and this has an impact on their policy priorities and hence can result in disagreements.
