A long-term energy efficiency prediction model for the Brazilian automotive industry

Djan MAGALHÃES CASTRO

Resumo


According to law number 12.715/2012, Brazilian government instituted guidelines for a program named Inovar-Auto. In this context, energy efficiency is a survival requirement for Brazilian automotive industry from September 2016. As proposed by law, energy efficiency is not going to be calculated by models only. It is going to be calculated by the whole universe of new vehicles registered. In this scenario, the composition of vehicles sold in market will be a key factor on profits of each automaker. Energy efficiency and its consequences should be taken into consideration in all of its aspects. In this scenario, emerges the following question: which is the efficiency curve of one automaker for long term, allowing them to adequate to rules, keep balancing on investment in technologies, increasing energy efficiency without affecting competitiveness of product lineup? Among several variables to be considered, one can highlight the analysis of manufacturing costs, customer value perception and market share, which characterizes this problem as a multi-criteria decision-making. To tackle the energy efficiency problem required by legislation, this paper proposes a framework of multi-criteria decision-making. The proposed framework combines Delphi group and Analytic Hierarchy Process to identify suitable alternatives for automakers to incorporate in main Brazilian vehicle segments. A forecast model based on artificial neural networks was used to estimate vehicle sales demand to validate expected results. This approach is demonstrated with a real case study using public vehicles sales data of Brazilian automakers and public energy efficiency data. According to our results Inovar-Auto targets will be reached in spite of little progress over last four years.


Referências


MARDANI, A.; JUSOH, A.; ZAVADSKAS, E. K. Fuzzy multiple criteria decisionmaking

techniques and applications – two decades review from 1994 to 2014. v. 42, n. 8,

p. 4126 – 4148, 2015. 7, 18, 21, 22, 32, 40

JAHAN, A. et al. Material screening and choosing methods – a review. v. 31, n. 2, p.

– 705, 2010. 7, 21, 22, 23, 31, 32, 46

U.S. Department of Energy. Where the energy goes: gasoline vehicles. [S.l.], 2015.

Disponível em: . Acesso em: 17/10/2015.

, 27, 28

INMETRO. INSTITUTO NACIONAL DE METROLOGIA, QUALIDADE E

TECNOLOGIA. [S.l.], 2016. Disponível em:

rtac/pdf/RTAC002264.pdf>. Acesso em: 22/05/2016. 9, 26

STATISA. Vehicle sales in selected countries 2015 | Statistic. 2015. 15

INOVAR-AUTO. INOVAR-AUTO. Brasília, DF, 2012. Disponível em:

//www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2011-2014/2012/Decreto/D7819.htm>. Acesso

em: 17/10/2015. 15, 19, 26, 43

CHEAH, L.; HEYWOOD, J. Meeting US passenger vehicle fuel economy standards

in 2016 and beyond. v. 39, n. 1, p. 454–466, 2011. 15, 49, 50, 52

WADUD, Z. New vehicle fuel economy in the UK: Impact of the recession

and recent policies. Energy Policy, v. 74, p. 215–223, 2014. Disponível em:

. 15

OLIVER, H. H. et al. China’s fuel economy standards for passenger vehicles: Rationale,

policy process, and impacts. Energy Policy, v. 37, n. 11, p. 4720–4729, 2009. Disponível

em: . 15

LAI-2011. LAI-2011. Brasília, DF, 2012. Disponível em:

br/ccivil_03/_ato2011-2014/2011/lei/l12527.htm>. Acesso em: 17/10/2015. 16, 47

HILL, K.; SZAKALY, S.; EDWARDS, M. How automakers plan their products:

A primer for policymakers on automotive industry business planning. Center for

Automotive Research, 2007. 16, 17, 19, 59

SALLEE, J. M.; SLEMROD, J. Car notches: Strategic automaker responses to fuel

economy policy. v. 96, n. 11, p. 981–999, 2012. 16, 17, 19, 58, 59

PATTERSON, M. G. What is energy efficiency?: Concepts, indicators and

methodological issues. v. 24, n. 5, p. 377–390, 1996. 17, 25

BEHZADIAN, M. et al. A state-of the-art survey of topsis applications. v. 39, n. 17,

p. 13051 – 13069, 2012. 18, 20, 21, 30, 32, 36, 39, 40

Bibliography

POHEKAR, S. D.; RAMACHANDRAN, M. Application of multi-criteria decision

making to sustainable energy planning—a review. v. 8, n. 4, p. 365 – 381, 2004. 18, 19,

, 22, 23, 32, 38

KUCUKVAR, M. et al. Stochastic decision modeling for sustainable pavement

designs. v. 19, n. 6, p. 1185–1199, 2014. 18, 21

GOVINDAN, K.; JEPSEN, M. B. ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on

methodologies and applications. v. 250, n. 1, p. 1–29, 2015. 18, 21, 32

GUO, S.; ZHAO, H. Optimal site selection of electric vehicle charging station by

using fuzzy topsis based on sustainability perspective. v. 158, p. 390 – 402, 2015. 18, 21,

, 39, 42, 79

LOOTSMA, F. A. Multi-criteria decision analysis via ratio and difference judgement.

[S.l.]: Springer Science & Business Media, 2007. v. 29. 18, 21

BANAITIENE, N. et al. Evaluating the life cycle of a building: A multivariant and

multiple criteria approach. v. 36, n. 3, p. 429–441, 2008. 18, 21

MINTZBERG, H.; RAISINGHANI, D.; THEORET, A. The structure of"

unstructured" decision processes. p. 246–275, 1976. 19

FARAHANI, R. Z.; SteadieSeifi, M.; ASGARI, N. Multiple criteria facility location

problems: A survey. v. 34, n. 7, p. 1689 – 1709, 2010. 19, 21

FIROUZABADI, S. M. A. K.; HENSON, B.; BARNES, C. A multiple stakeholders’

approach to strategic selection decisions. v. 54, n. 4, p. 851 – 865, 2008. 19, 46, 79

SAATY, T. L. The analytic hierarchy process, new york: McGrew hill. 1980. 19, 23,

, 44, 46, 49

CHEN, A.; HSIEH, C.-Y.; WEE, H. M. A resilient global supplier selection

strategy—a case study of an automotive company. p. 1–16, 2014. 19

TSENG, M. L. et al. Using FANP approach on selection of competitive priorities

based on cleaner production implementation: a case study in PCB manufacturer, taiwan.

v. 10, n. 1, p. 17–29, 2007. 19, 29

BAI, C.; FAHIMNIA, B.; SARKIS, J. Sustainable transport fleet appraisal using a

hybrid multi-objective decision making approach. p. 1–32, 2015. 19, 39, 42, 79

SAATY, T. L.; OZDEMIR, M. S. Why the magic number seven plus or minus two.

v. 38, n. 3, p. 233–244, 2003. 19, 23

MILLER, G. A. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our

capacity for processing information. v. 63, n. 2, p. 81, 1956. 19

ORDOOBADI, S. M.; MULVANEY, N. J. Development of a justification tool for

advanced manufacturing technologies: system-wide benefits value analysis. v. 18, n. 2, p.

–184, 2001. 19

YANG, C.-C.; CHEN, B.-S. Supplier selection using combined analytical hierarchy

process and grey relational analysis. v. 17, n. 7, p. 926–941, 2006. 19

Bibliography 65

HOBBS, B. F.; HORN, G. T. Building public confidence in energy planning: a

multimethod mcdm approach to demand-side planning at bc gas. v. 25, n. 3, p. 357 –

, 1997. 20

HWANG, C.-L.; YOON, K. Multiple Attribute Decision Making. [S.l.]: Springer

Berlin Heidelberg, 1981. v. 186. (Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems,

v. 186). ISBN 978-3-540-10558-9 978-3-642-48318-9. 21

ZIO, S. D.; MARETTI, M. Acceptability of energy sources using an integration of

the delphi method and the analytic hierarchy process. v. 48, n. 6, p. 2973–2991, 2013.

, 46

SADEGHZADEH, K.; SALEHI, M. B. Mathematical analysis of fuel cell strategic

technologies development solutions in the automotive industry by the topsis multi-criteria

decision making method. v. 36, n. 20, p. 13272 – 13280, 2011. 21, 42, 79

CHEN, Y.; KILGOUR, D. M.; HIPEL, K. W. Screening in multiple criteria decision

analysis. v. 45, n. 2, p. 278–290, 2008. 21

CHAKRABORTY, S. Applications of the MOORA method for decision making in

manufacturing environment. v. 54, n. 9, p. 1155–1166, 2010. 21

MOKHTARIAN, M. N. A new fuzzy weighted average (FWA) method based on left

and right scores: An application for determining a suitable location for a gas oil station.

v. 61, n. 10, p. 3136 – 3145, 2011. 21

CHEN, J. et al. A multiple attribute-based decision making model for autonomous

vehicle in urban environment. In: Intelligent Vehicles Symposium Proceedings, 2014

IEEE. [S.l.: s.n.], 2014. p. 480–485. 21, 39, 79

TAVANA, M.; ZANDI, F. Applying fuzzy bi-dimensional scenario-based model to

the assessment of mars mission architecture scenarios. v. 49, n. 4, p. 629 – 647, 2012. 21

GOVINDAN, K.; SARKIS, J.; PALANIAPPAN, M. An analytic network processbased

multicriteria decision making model for a reverse supply chain. v. 68, n. 1, p.

–880, 2013. 21, 79

Vinod Yadav; Milind Kumar Sharma. Multi-criteria decision making for supplier

selection using fuzzy AHP approachnull. v. 22, n. 6, p. 1158–1174, 2015. 21, 23, 29, 38,

, 42, 79

YUN, C.-J.; YEH, C.-H. Customer order dependent supplier selection. In: Next

Generation Information Technology (ICNIT), 2011 The 2nd International Conference

on. [S.l.: s.n.], 2011. p. 57–62. 21, 79

KUMAR, A.; JAIN, V.; KUMAR, S. A comprehensive environment friendly

approach for supplier selection. v. 42, n. 1, p. 109 – 123, 2014. 21, 39, 79

BüYüKöZKAN, G.; ÇIFçI, G. A novel hybrid mcdm approach based on fuzzy

DEMATEL, fuzzy anp and fuzzy topsis to evaluate green suppliers. v. 39, n. 3, p. 3000 –

, 2012. 21, 29, 39, 42, 79

Bibliography

ORJI, I. J.; WEI, S. An innovative integration of fuzzy-logic and systems dynamics

in sustainable supplier selection: A case on manufacturing industry. v. 88, p. 1 – 12,

21, 23, 29, 38

AZADNIA, A. H. et al. Sustainable supplier selection based on self-organizing map

neural network and multi criteria decision making approaches. v. 65, p. 879 – 884, 2012.

KANNAN, D.; GOVINDAN, K.; RAJENDRAN, S. Fuzzy axiomatic design approach

based green supplier selection: a case study from singapore. v. 96, p. 194 – 208, 2015. 21

VILLANUEVA-PONCE, R. et al. Impact of suppliers’ green attributes in corporate

image and financial profit: case maquiladora industry. v. 80, n. 5, p. 1277–1296, 2015. 21

SAKUNDARINI, N. et al. Multi-objective optimization for high recyclability

material selection using genetic algorithm. v. 68, n. 5, p. 1441–1451, 2013. 21

MAITY, S. R.; CHAKRABORTY, S. A visual decision aid for gear materials

selection. v. 94, n. 3, p. 199–212, 2013. 21

SADIQ, R. et al. Evaluation of generic types of drilling fluid using a risk-based

analytic hierarchy process. v. 32, n. 6, p. 778–787, 2004. 21

HUANG, H. et al. Multi-criteria decision making and uncertainty analysis for

materials selection in environmentally conscious design. v. 52, n. 5, p. 421–432, 2010. 21

RAO, R. V. A decision making methodology for material selection using an improved

compromise ranking method. v. 29, n. 10, p. 1949 – 1954, 2008. 21, 46

KHORSHIDI, R. et al. Selection of an optimal refinement condition to achieve

maximum tensile properties of al–15%mg2si composite based on topsis method. v. 46, p.

– 450, 2013. 21

GIRUBHA, R. J.; VINODH, S. Application of fuzzy vikor and environmental impact

analysis for material selection of an automotive component. v. 37, p. 478 – 486, 2012. 21,

, 39, 42, 79

SHANIAN, A.; SAVADOGO, O. Topsis multiple-criteria decision support analysis

for material selection of metallic bipolar plates for polymer electrolyte fuel cell. v. 159,

n. 2, p. 1095 – 1104, 2006. 21

KHORSHIDI, R.; HASSANI, A. Comparative analysis between topsis and psi

methods of materials selection to achieve a desirable combination of strength and

workability in al/SiC composite. v. 52, p. 999 – 1010, 2013. 21

CHATTERJEE, P.; ATHAWALE, V. M.; CHAKRABORTY, S. Selection of

materials using compromise ranking and outranking methods. v. 30, n. 10, p. 4043 –

, 2009. 21

MILANI, A. S. et al. An application of the analytic network process in multiple

criteria material selection. v. 44, p. 622 – 632, 2013. 21

ANOJKUMAR, L.; ILANGKUMARAN, M.; SASIREKHA, V. Comparative analysis

of mcdm methods for pipe material selection in sugar industry. v. 41, n. 6, p. 2964 –

, 2014. 21

Bibliography 67

JAHANSHAHLOO, G. R.; LOTFI, F. H.; IZADIKHAH, M. Extension of the

TOPSIS method for decision-making problems with fuzzy data. v. 181, n. 2, p.

–1551, 2006. 21

HWANG, C.-L.; YOON, K. Multiple attribute decision making: methods and

applications a state-of-the-art survey. [S.l.]: Springer Science & Business Media, 2012.

v. 186. 21

NOORI, M. et al. A stochastic optimization approach for the selection of reflective

cracking mitigation techniques. v. 69, p. 367 – 378, 2014. 21

KAHRAMAN, C. Fuzzy multi-criteria decision making: theory and applications with

recent developments. [S.l.]: Springer Science & Business Media, 2008. v. 16. 22

NOGUéS, S.; GONZáLEZ-GONZáLEZ, E. Multi-criteria impacts assessment for

ranking highway projects in northwest spain. v. 65, p. 80 – 91, 2014. 22

CHEN, Y.-J. Structured methodology for supplier selection and evaluation in a

supply chain. v. 181, n. 9, p. 1651–1670, 2011. 23

SAATY, T. L. Decision making for leaders: the analytic hierarchy process for

decisions in a complex world. [S.l.]: RWS publications, 1990. 23, 25

ASGARI, N. et al. Sustainability ranking of the uk major ports: Methodology and

case study. v. 78, p. 19 – 39, 2015. 23

MAIER, K.; STIX, V. A semi-automated approach for structuring multi criteria

decision problems. v. 225, n. 3, p. 487 – 496, 2013. 23

HASSAN, M. N.; HAWAS, Y. E.; AHMED, K. A multi-dimensional framework for

evaluating the transit service performance. v. 50, p. 47 – 61, 2013. 23, 79

HO, W.; XU, X.; DEY, P. K. Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier

evaluation and selection: A literature review. v. 202, n. 1, p. 16–24, 2010. 23, 38

CHEN, Y. et al. A spatial assessment framework for evaluating flood risk under

extreme climates. v. 538, p. 512–523, 2015. 23

GOVINDAN, K. et al. Multi criteria decision making approaches for green supplier

evaluation and selection: a literature review. v. 98, p. 66 – 83, 2015. 23, 31, 32, 38

JAVID, R. J.; NEJAT, A.; HAYHOE, K. Selection of {CO2} mitigation strategies

for road transportation in the united states using a multi-criteria approach. v. 38, p. 960

– 972, 2014. 23, 38, 79

SOLTANI, A. et al. Multiple stakeholders in multi-criteria decision-making in the

context of municipal solid waste management: A review. v. 35, p. 318–328, 2015. 23, 38

TURCKSIN, L.; BERNARDINI, A.; MACHARIS, C. A combined AHPPROMETHEE

approach for selecting the most appropriate policy scenario to stimulate

a clean vehicle fleet. v. 20, p. 954 – 965, 2011. 23, 38, 79

WANG, L.; XU, L.; SONG, H. Environmental performance evaluation of beijing’s

energy use planning. v. 39, n. 6, p. 3483 – 3495, 2011. 23, 38

Bibliography

YOUSEFI, A.; HADI-VENCHEH, A. An integrated group decision making model

and its evaluation by dea for automobile industry. v. 37, n. 12, p. 8543 – 8556, 2010. 23,

, 39, 79

PéREZ, J. C.; CARRILLO, M. H.; MONTOYA-TORRES, J. R. Multi-criteria

approaches for urban passenger transport systems: a literature review. v. 226, n. 1, p.

–87, 2014. 23, 30, 32

DAğDEVIREN, M. Decision making in equipment selection: an integrated approach

with AHP and PROMETHEE. v. 19, n. 4, p. 397–406, 2008. 23

KONIDARI, P.; MAVRAKIS, D. A multi-criteria evaluation method for climate

change mitigation policy instruments. v. 35, n. 12, p. 6235–6257, 2007. 23

SAATY, T. L. The analytic hierarchy and analytic network processes for the

measurement of intangible criteria and for decision-making. In: Multiple Criteria Decision

Analysis: State of the Art Surveys. [S.l.]: Springer New York, 2005, (International Series

in Operations Research & Management Science, 78). p. 345–405. ISBN 978-0-387-23067-2

-0-387-23081-8. 23

LEE, G. K. L.; CHAN, E. H. W. The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) approach

for assessment of urban renewal proposals. v. 89, n. 1, p. 155–168, 2007. 23

VAHIDI, H. et al. Fuzzy analytical hierarchy process disposal method selection for

an industrial state; case study charmshahr. v. 39, n. 2, p. 725–735, 2013. 23, 29, 39

JANJIC, A.; VUKASINOVIC, A. Optimal vehicle fleet mix planning in a distribution

utility using fuzzy multi-criteria decision making. In: EUROCON, 2013 IEEE. [S.l.: s.n.],

p. 1173–1179. 23, 29

KAHRAMAN, C.; KAYA, h. A fuzzy multicriteria methodology for selection among

energy alternatives. v. 37, n. 9, p. 6270 – 6281, 2010. 23, 29

JANJIC, A. Two-step algorithm for the optimization of vehicle fleet in electricity

distribution company. v. 65, p. 307 – 315, 2015. 23, 29, 42, 79

LEE, S. K.; MOGI, G.; KIM, J. W. Decision support for prioritizing energy

technologies against high oil prices: A fuzzy analytic hierarchy process approach. v. 22,

n. 6, p. 915 – 920, 2009. 23, 29, 39

LEE, S. et al. Prioritizing the weights of hydrogen energy technologies in the sector

of the hydrogen economy by using a fuzzy ahp approach. v. 36, n. 2, p. 1897 – 1902,

23, 29

WANG, X. A comprehensive decision making model for the evaluation of green

operations initiatives. v. 95, p. 191 – 207, 2015. 23, 29

HOBBS, B. F.; MEIER, P. Energy decisions and the environment: a guide to the use

of multicriteria methods. [S.l.]: Springer Science & Business Media, 2012. v. 28. 23

NBR, A. 6601 veículos rodoviários automotivos leves–determinação de hidrocarbonetos,

monóxido de carbono, óxidos de nitrogênio e dióxido de carbono nos gás de

escapamento. 2012. 26

Bibliography 69

SAMARAS, C.; MEISTERLING, K. Life cycle assessment of greenhouse gas

emissions from plug-in hybrid vehicles: implications for policy. v. 42, n. 9, p. 3170–3176,

26

ABNT, N. 7024, 2010. 2010. 26

ZHANG, G. P.; QI, M. Neural network forecasting for seasonal and trend time series.

v. 160, n. 2, p. 501–514, 2005. 27, 28, 29, 46

RIEDMILLER, M. Advanced supervised learning in multi-layer perceptrons—from

backpropagation to adaptive learning algorithms. v. 16, n. 3, p. 265–278, 1994. 27, 46

ZHANG, G.; PATUWO, B. E.; HU, M. Y. Forecasting with artificial neural

networks:: The state of the art. v. 14, n. 1, p. 35–62, 1998. 27, 46

WANG, J.; WANG, J. Forecasting stock market indexes using principle component

analysis and stochastic time effective neural networks. v. 156, p. 68–78, 2015. 27, 28

SHARDA, R. Neural networks for the MS/OR analyst: An application bibliography.

v. 24, n. 2, p. 116–130, 1994. 28, 29

CAI, Q. et al. A new fuzzy time series forecasting model combined with ant colony

optimization and auto-regression. v. 74, p. 61–68, 2015. 28

CHEN, M.-Y.; CHEN, B.-T. A hybrid fuzzy time series model based on granular

computing for stock price forecasting. v. 294, p. 227–241, 2015. 28

LABOISSIERE, L. A.; FERNANDES, R. A.; LAGE, G. G. Maximum and

minimum stock price forecasting of brazilian power distribution companies based on

artificial neural networks. v. 35, p. 66–74, 2015. 28

TKáč, M.; VERNER, R. Artificial neural networks in business: Two decades of

research. v. 38, p. 788–804, 2016. 29

ANSUJ, A. P. et al. Sales forecasting using time series and neural networks. v. 31,

n. 1, p. 421–424, 1996. 29

VHATKAR, S.; DIAS, J. Oral-care goods sales forecasting using artificial neural

network model. v. 79, p. 238–243, 2016. 29

BUCKLEY, J. J. Fuzzy hierarchical analysis. v. 17, n. 3, p. 233–247, 1985. 29

ZADEH, L. A. A fuzzy-algorithmic approach to the definition of complex or

imprecise concepts. v. 8, n. 3, p. 249–291, 1976. 29

ZADEH, L. A. Fuzzy sets. v. 8, n. 3, p. 338–353, 1965. 29

DOWLATSHAHI, S.; KARIMI-NASAB, M.; BAHROLOLUM, H. A group

decision-making approach for supplier selection in configuration design: A case study.

v. 81, n. 5, p. 1139–1154, 2015. 29

FENG, C.; MAI, Y. Sustainability assessment of products based on fuzzy

multi-criteria decision analysis. p. 1–16, 2015. 29

Bibliography

WANG, T.-C.; CHANG, T.-H. Application of topsis in evaluating initial training

aircraft under a fuzzy environment. v. 33, n. 4, p. 870 – 880, 2007. 29

ABDULLAH, L.; ZAMRI, N. On the causes of road accidents: Fuzzy TOPSIS. In:

Computer Research and Development, 2010 Second International Conference on. [S.l.:

s.n.], 2010. p. 497–501. 29, 39, 42, 79

ISALOU, A. A. et al. Landfill site selection using integrated fuzzy logic and analytic

network process (f-ANP). v. 68, n. 6, p. 1745–1755, 2012. 29

VAHABZADEH, A. H.; ASIAEI, A.; ZAILANI, S. Green decision-making model in

reverse logistics using FUZZY-VIKOR method. v. 103, p. 125 – 138, 2015. 29

VATS, S. et al. Selection of optimal electronic toll collection system for india: A

subjective-fuzzy decision making approach. v. 21, p. 444 – 452, 2014. 29

TADIć, S.; ZEčEVIć, S.; KRSTIć, M. A novel hybrid mcdm model based on fuzzy

DEMATEL, fuzzy anp and fuzzy vikor for city logistics concept selection. v. 41, n. 18, p.

– 8128, 2014. 29

BAYKASOğLU, A. et al. Integrating fuzzy dematel and fuzzy hierarchical topsis

methods for truck selection. v. 40, n. 3, p. 899 – 907, 2013. 29, 39, 42, 79

ILGIN, M. A.; GUPTA, S. M.; BATTAïA, O. Use of mcdm techniques in

environmentally conscious manufacturing and product recovery: State of the art. p. 746

– 758, 2015. 31

SCOTT, J. A.; HO, W.; DEY, P. K. A review of multi-criteria decision-making

methods for bioenergy systems. v. 42, n. 1, p. 146 – 156, 2012. 31, 32

KITCHENHAM, B. et al. Systematic literature reviews in software engineering – a

systematic literature review. v. 51, n. 1, p. 7–15, 2009. 32, 33, 34

OKOLI, C.; SCHABRAM, K. A guide to conducting a systematic literature review

of information systems research. v. 10, p. 26, 2010. 32

STAPLES, M.; NIAZI, M. Experiences using systematic review guidelines. v. 80,

n. 9, p. 1425–1437, 2007. 32

ZEKRI, M.; JOUABER, B.; ZEGHLACHE, D. A review on mobility management

and vertical handover solutions over heterogeneous wireless networks. v. 35, n. 17, p.

– 2068, 2012. 32

HERVA, M.; ROCA, E. Review of combined approaches and multi-criteria analysis

for corporate environmental evaluation. v. 39, p. 355 – 371, 2013. 33

HISTORY, R. R. C. for; MEDIA, N. Zotero Tool. [S.l.], 2015. Disponível em:

. Acesso em: 02/08/2015. 34

LEVY, Y.; ELLIS, T. J. A systems approach to conduct an effective literature

review in support of information systems research. v. 9, n. 1, p. 181–212, 2006. 34, 35

SCIENCEDIRECT. SCIENCE DIRECT. [S.l.], 2015. Disponível em:

//www.sciencedirect.com/>. Acesso em: 02/08/2015. 35, 57

Bibliography 71

SPRINGER. SPRINGER. [S.l.], 2015. Disponível em:

gp/products/journals>. Acesso em: 02/08/2015. 35

EMERALD. EMERALD. [S.l.], 2015. Disponível em:

com/action/showPublications?> Acesso em: 02/08/2015. 35

IEEEXPLORE. IEEEXPLORE. [S.l.], 2015. Disponível em:

ieee.org/Xplore/home.jsp>. Acesso em: 02/08/2015. 35

HAMZEH, M.; ABBASPOUR, R. A.; DAVALOU, R. Raster-based outranking

method: a new approach for municipal solid waste landfill (MSW) siting. v. 22, n. 16, p.

–12524, 2015. 38

AJUKUMAR, V. N.; GANDHI, O. P. Evaluation of green maintenance initiatives

in design and development of mechanical systems using an integrated approach. v. 51, p.

– 46, 2013. 38

DIABAT, A.; KHODAVERDI, R.; OLFAT, L. An exploration of green supply chain

practices and performances in an automotive industry. v. 68, n. 1, p. 949–961, 2013. 38,

, 79

MELA, K.; TIAINEN, T.; HEINISUO, M. Comparative study of multiple criteria

decision making methods for building design. v. 26, n. 4, p. 716–726, 2012. 38

VAHDANI, B.; ZANDIEH, M.; TAVAKKOLI-MOGHADDAM, R. Two novel

fmcdm methods for alternative-fuel buses selection. v. 35, n. 3, p. 1396 – 1412, 2011. 39,

, 79

BüYüKöZKAN, G.; FEYZIOğLU, O.; NEBOL, E. Selection of the strategic alliance

partner in logistics value chain. v. 113, n. 1, p. 148 – 158, 2008. 39

BU, L. et al. Selection of city distribution locations in urbanized areas. v. 39, p.

– 567, 2012. 39, 79

MA, J.; KREMER, G. E. O. A fuzzy logic-based approach to determine product

component end-of-life option from the views of sustainability and designer’s perception.

p. 289 – 300, 2015. 42, 79

DEASON, K. S.; JEFFERSON, T. A systems approach to improving fleet policy

compliance within the us federal government. v. 38, n. 6, p. 2865 – 2874, 2010. 42, 46, 79

TAN, R. R.; CULABA, A. B.; PURVIS, M. R. I. Polcage 1.0—a possibilistic

life-cycle assessment model for evaluating alternative transportation fuels. v. 19, n. 10,

p. 907 – 918, 2004. 42, 79

YAVUZ, M. et al. Multi-criteria evaluation of alternative-fuel vehicles via a

hierarchical hesitant fuzzy linguistic model. v. 42, n. 5, p. 2835 – 2848, 2015. 42, 79

RASSAFI, A. A.; VAZIRI, M.; AZADANI, A. N. Strategies for utilizing alternative

fuels by iranian passenger cars. v. 3, n. 1, p. 59–68, 2006. 42, 79

GIL, A. C. Como elaborar projetos de pesquisa. v. 5, p. 61, 2002. 44

KOTHARI, C. R. Research methodology: Methods and techniques. [S.l.]: New Age

International, 2004. 44

Bibliography

UNEP. United Nations Environment Programme. [S.l.], 2015. Disponível em:

. Acesso em: 03/04/2016. 45

DeCicco, J.; ROSS, M. Recent advances in automotive technology and the

cost-effectiveness of fuel economy improvement. v. 1, n. 2, p. 79–96, 1996. 45

WU, C.-C. Constructing a weighted keyword-based patent network approach to

identify technological trends and evolution in a field of green energy: a case of biofuels.

p. 1–23, 2014. 46

GUMUS, A. T. Evaluation of hazardous waste transportation firms by using a two

step fuzzy-AHP and topsis methodology. v. 36, n. 2, p. 4067 – 4074, 2009. 46

JOZI, S. A. et al. An integrated shannon’s entropy–TOPSIS methodology for

environmental risk assessment of helleh protected area in iran. v. 184, n. 11, p. 6913–6922,

46

REN, J. et al. Hydrogen economy in china:

Strengths–weaknesses–opportunities–threats analysis and strategies prioritization.

v. 41, p. 1230 – 1243, 2015. 46

VINODH, S.; PRASANNA, M.; PRAKASH, N. H. Integrated fuzzy AHP–TOPSIS

for selecting the best plastic recycling method: A case study. v. 38, n. 19, p. 4662 – 4672,

46

WONG, F. S. Time series forecasting using backpropagation neural networks. v. 2,

n. 4, p. 147–159, 1991. 46

CHAMBERS, J. M. Programming with data: A guide to the S language. [S.l.]:

Springer Science & Business Media, 1998. 48

LEISCH, F. Creating r packages: A tutorial. In: Ludwig-MaximiliansUniversität

München, and R Development Core Team. [S.l.: s.n.], 2009. 49

ANFAVEA. Anuário da Indústria Automobilística Brasileira 2015. [S.l.], 2015.

Disponível em: . Acesso em: 02/08/2015.

BASTIN, C.; SZKLO, A.; ROSA, L. P. Diffusion of new automotive technologies

for improving energy efficiency in brazil’s light vehicle fleet. v. 38, n. 7, p. 3586–3597,

57

MELLO, A. M. de; MARX, R.; MOTTA, F. G. A PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS OF

INOVAR AUTO IMPACT ON THE BRAZILIAN AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY r & d

ACTIVITY. v. 13, n. 1, p. 47, 2016. 57

LIMA, U. M.; others. O Brasil e a Cadeia Automobilística: uma avaliação das

políticas públicas para maior produtividade e integração internacional entre os anos 1990

e 2014. [S.l.], 2016. 58

WTO-2012. WTO-2012. Brasília, DF, 2012. Disponível em:

org/english/news_e/news12_e/good_26nov12_e.htm>. Acesso em: 18/12/2016. 58

Bibliography 73

MENEZES, E.; MAIA, A. G.; CARVALHO, C. S. de. Effectiveness of low-carbon

development strategies: Evaluation of policy scenarios for the urban transport sector in

a brazilian megacity. 2016. 58

WHITEFOOT, K. S.; SKERLOS, S. J. Design incentives to increase vehicle size

created from the US footprint-based fuel economy standards. v. 41, p. 402–411, 2012. 52,

SHIAU, C.-S. N.; MICHALEK, J. J.; HENDRICKSON, C. T. A structural analysis

of vehicle design responses to corporate average fuel economy policy. v. 43, n. 9, p.

–828, 2009. 58

ZIELINSKI, J.; ANDREUCCI, R.; AKTAS, C. B. Prospects for meeting the

corporate average fuel economy standards in the US. v. 145, p. 460–467, 2016. 49, 52, 58

ANDRESS, D. et al. Status of advanced light-duty transportation technologies in

the US. v. 41, p. 348–364, 2012. 58

CHEAH, L. W. Cars on a diet: the material and energy impacts of passenger

vehicle weight reduction in the US. phdthesis — Massachusetts Institute of Technology,

49

STEWART, R. Lightweighting the automotive market. v. 53, n. 2, p. 14–21, 2009.

ULLMAN, D. F. A difficult road ahead: Fleet fuel economy, footprint-based CAFE

compliance, and manufacturer incentives. v. 57, p. 94–105, 2016. 49, 50

BORBA, B. S. M. C. Metodologia de regionalização do mercado de combustíveis

automotivos no Brasil. phdthesis — UNIVERSIDADE FEDERAL DO RIO DE

JANEIRO, 2008. 52

PLOTKIN, S. E. Examining fuel economy and carbon standards for light vehicles.

v. 37, n. 10, p. 3843–3853, 2009. 52

FISCHER, C. Comparing flexibility mechanisms for fuel economy standards. v. 36,

n. 8, p. 3116–3124, 2008. 56

BUSSE, M. R.; KNITTEL, C. R.; ZETTELMEYER, F. Are consumers myopic?

evidence from new and used car purchases. v. 103, n. 1, p. 220–256, 2013. 56

CHANTAKSINOPAS, I.; OOTHONGSAP, P.; PRAYOTE, A. Network selection

delay comparison of network selection techniques for safety applications on VANET. In:

Network Operations and Management Symposium (APNOMS), 2011 13th Asia-Pacific.

[S.l.: s.n.], 2011. p. 1–7. 79

DATTA, S. et al. ANP based vertical handover algorithm for vehicular

communication. In: Recent Advances in Information Technology (RAIT), 2012 1st

International Conference on. [S.l.: s.n.], 2012. p. 228–234. 79

MAHMOUDI, G.; MULLER-SCHLOER, C. Semantic multi-criteria decision

making SeMCDM. In: Computational intelligence in miulti-criteria decision-making,

mcdm ’09. ieee symposium on. [S.l.: s.n.], 2009. p. 149–156. 79

Bibliography

CHICA, M. et al. Integration of an EMO-based preference elicitation scheme

into a multi-objective ACO algorithm for time and space assembly line balancing. In:

Computational intelligence in miulti-criteria decision-making, 2009. mcdm ’09. ieee

symposium on. [S.l.: s.n.], 2009. p. 157–162. 79

LI, G. et al. Fuzzy multiple attribute decision routing in VANETs. In:

Communication Systems (ICCS), 2014 IEEE International Conference on. [S.l.: s.n.],

p. 564–568. 79

QIU, N. et al. Crashworthiness analysis and design of multi-cell hexagonal columns

under multiple loading cases. v. 104, p. 89 – 101, 2015. 79

AL-OQLA, F. M. et al. Predicting the potential of agro waste fibers for sustainable

automotive industry using a decision making model. v. 113, p. 116 – 127, 2015. 79

LIM, M. C. H. et al. A comparative study of the elemental composition of the

exhaust emissions of cars powered by liquefied petroleum gas and unleaded petrol. v. 40,

n. 17, p. 3111 – 3122, 2006. 79

LIM, M. C. H. et al. The effects of fuel characteristics and engine operating

conditions on the elemental composition of emissions from heavy duty diesel buses. v. 86,

n. 12, p. 1831 – 1839, 2007. 79

CHAKRABORTY, D.; VAZ, W.; NANDI, A. K. Optimal driving during electric

vehicle acceleration using evolutionary algorithms. v. 34, p. 217 – 235, 2015. 79

LUCA, S. d. Public engagement in strategic transportation planning: An analytic

hierarchy process based approach. v. 33, p. 110 – 124, 2014. 79

LIM, M. C. H. et al. Effect of fuel composition and engine operating conditions on

polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon emissions from a fleet of heavy-duty diesel buses. v. 39,

n. 40, p. 7836 – 7848, 2005. 79

AYOKO, G. A. et al. Characterization of vocs from lpg and unleaded petroleum

fuelled passenger cars. v. 115, p. 636 – 643, 2014. 79

ONAT, N. C. et al. Combined application of multi-criteria optimization and

life-cycle sustainability assessment for optimal distribution of alternative passenger cars

in u.s. v. 112, p. 291 – 307, 2015. 79

FRIEND, A. J.; AYOKO, G. A.; GUO, H. Multi-criteria ranking and receptor

modelling of airborne fine particles at three sites in the pearl river delta region of china.

v. 409, n. 4, p. 719 – 737, 2011. 79

LIM, M. C. H.; AYOKO, G. A.; MORAWSKA, L. Characterization of elemental

and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon compositions of urban air in brisbane. v. 39, n. 3,

p. 463 – 476, 2005. 79

TAN, R. R. Rule-based life cycle impact assessment using modified rough set

induction methodology. v. 20, n. 5, p. 509 – 513, 2005. 79

LIM, M. C. H. et al. Influence of fuel composition on polycyclic aromatic

hydrocarbon emissions from a fleet of in-service passenger cars. v. 41, n. 1, p. 150 – 160,

79

Bibliography 75

FU, C.; CHIN, K.-S. Robust evidential reasoning approach with unknown attribute

weights. v. 59, p. 9 – 20, 2014. 79

MAY, G. J.; CALASANZIO, D.; ALIBERTI, R. VRLA automotive batteries for

stop&go and dual battery systems. v. 144, n. 2, p. 411–417, 2005. 84


Apontamentos

  • Não há apontamentos.




Projetos, Dissertações e Teses em Sistemas de Informação e Gestão do Conhecimento
ISSN 2358-5501 (Online)