Luciana Alencar

Dr. Luciana Alencar

Universidade Federal de Pernambuco
+1
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

22Years (2005-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 April 2017 in International Journal of Project Management
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MAMaria Creuza Borges de Araújo
Maria Creuza Borges de Araújo
LALuciana Alencar
Luciana Alencar
CMCaroline Mota
Caroline Mota

1 July 2017 in Journal of Cleaner Production
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MAMarcelo Hazin Alencar
Marcelo Hazin Alencar
LJLuiz Priori Jr.
Luiz Priori Jr.
LALuciana Alencar
Luciana Alencar

28 February 2009 in International Journal of Project Management
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
CMCaroline Mota
Caroline Mota
AAAdiel Teixeira de Almeida
Adiel Teixeira de Almeida
LALuciana Alencar
Luciana Alencar

1 April 2013 in Pesquisa Operacional
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DMDanielle Morais
Danielle Morais
LALuciana Alencar
Luciana Alencar
ACAna Paula Cabral Seixas Seixas Costa
Ana Paula Cabral Seixas Seixas Costa
RKRalph L. Keeney
Ralph L. Keeney
Value-Focused Thinking (VFT) provides a systematic approach to structure complex decisions for subsequent analysis. It is a powerful complement to decision analysis and its application has been growing in recent years. This paper discusses the application of VFT in Brazil to three problems in different contexts: water management, information system/information technology (IS/IT) strategic planning, and the disposal of plaster waste. This article describes how the VFT approach was used to structure these decision problems and identify alternatives to stall them, which led to developing qualitative and quantitative models for evaluating the alternatives, and discusses how such structures can be used in other similar problems

1 January 2015 in Mathematical Problems in Engineering
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DMDanielle Morais
Danielle Morais
AAAdiel Teixeira de Almeida
Adiel Teixeira de Almeida
LALuciana Alencar
Luciana Alencar
TCThárcylla Rebecca Negreiros Clemente
Thárcylla Rebecca Negreiros Clemente
CCCeres Zenaide Barbosa Cavalcanti
Ceres Zenaide Barbosa Cavalcanti
This paper puts forward a proposal for a multicriteria decision model for prioritizing technologies that are critical for power generation in the energy sector. It deals with the context of imprecise information regarding importance of criteria; then an integration of surrogate weights with the PROMETHEE method is undertaken in order to approach this context. In this type of strategic decision problem, how to deal with imprecise information is always a challenge. The use of surrogate weights presents a significant contribution and it can facilitate the assignment of weights in a decision ranking problem, which requires the decision-maker (DM) to order the criteria by their importance for the decision problem. Thus for this situation of assessing the readiness of technology for generating energy where the DM is able and feels comfortable to order all criteria by their relative importance, the proposed approach of surrogate weights in the PROMETHEE II method, the PROMETHEE-ROC model, is shown to be an adequate approach.

23 November 2023 in Sustainability
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
George da Mota Passos NetoGeorge da Mota Passos Neto
George da Mota Passos Neto
LALuciana Alencar
Luciana Alencar
RVRodolfo Valdes-Vasquez
Rodolfo Valdes-Vasquez
Studies related to social sustainability assessment have presented a variety of methods and criteria, but there is a need to better understand how these studies incorporate multiple criteria along with the issues addressed, the decision-makers, and the overall process followed to promote more socially sustainable outcomes. A systematic literature review methodology is conducted to identify, analyze, and synthesize scholarly articles that use multiple criteria to assess the built environment’s social sustainability. This study explores types of problems, decision-makers, criteria, and methods adopted by researchers. The analysis involved 42 studies identified in the Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Scopus databases. The results revealed a diverse range of studies, covering various issues, project types, and methodologies, highlighting the multifaceted nature of social sustainability evaluation in the context of the built environment. The most considered social sustainability issues in the studies were ‘Impacts in Community’ and ‘Employment’. While most of the selected papers used multi-criteria decision-making/aiding (MCDM/A), not all engaged in these methods for decision-making purposes. Moreover, despite the prevalence of studies involving multiple decision-makers, issues related to group decision-making were often insufficiently addressed. The types of problems that the methods are used for are discussed, as well as the decision context and the process for selecting methods, thereby highlighting future research opportunities. Future studies should ensure that the criteria used are manageable but encompass all facets of social sustainability in the built environment, prioritizing methodological rigor when selecting MCDM/A methods and focusing on the nuances of preference aggregation in group decision-making scenarios.