Comparative Analysis of Multi-Criteria Methods for the Enhancement of Historical Buildings

Abstract

The protection of cultural heritage is essential to preserve the memory of the territory and its communities, but its enhancement is also important. In this perspective, the theme of choosing the best use for historic buildings, which often make up a substantial and widespread part of real estate and which can become a driving force for the sustainable development of cities, is important. These decision-making processes find effective support tools in Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods, able to consider the multiple financial, social, cultural, and environmental effects that the enhancement project generates. In order to identify the most appropriate evaluation approach to select the best use of the building, this paper proposes a comparison between some of the best-known MCDM methods: Analitic Hierarchy Process (AHP), ELimination Et Choix Traduisant la REalité (ELECTRE), Tecnique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), and the Compromise Ranking Method (VIKOR). The comparative analysis gives rise to the validity of the AHP, which is useful for reducing the problem into its essential components, so as to make a rational comparison among the design alternatives based on different criteria. The novelty of the research is the characterization of the hierarchical structure of the model, as well as the selection of criteria and indicators of economic evaluation. The application of the model to a real case of recovery and enhancement of a former convent in the province of Salerno (Italy) verifies the effectiveness of the tool and its adaptability to the specificities of the case study.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 79 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.