English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The urban policies and territorial live a period of profound transformation, characterized by a shift to new approaches and governance tools. Public intervention implemented through programs active an application for assessment: beyond the explicit applications contained in the various intervention tools, the decision-making sphere, facing the loss of representativeness of organized politics and the growing complexity of the variables that influence the public choices has the absolute necessity of auxiliary tools that allow you to optimize the use of available resources and at the same time make the decision-making path shareable and transparent. Fewer resources always available, the importance of the time during transformation processes, the rational legitimacy of choices - pose a number of difficult problems to solve that lead to the need to experiment with new tools to support decision makers, from the early stage of planning or in the pre-design phase (Saaty, 1990; 2008).In this valuation context of compatible functional solutions, the Multiple-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methodologies (Roy &amp; Bouyssou, 1993), and the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in particular, play a significant role as they allow to be taken into account all the intrinsic values of the assets in question, both economic and extra-economic. The use of these methods can provide choices that are not always based on the best cost-benefit ratio (NesticÃ², Macchiaroli, &amp; Pipolo, 2015).Â  As well as guaranteeing the presence and the clarification of different values, the formalisation of an evaluation process carried out in these terms, expression of the community needs, also allows the control and the correspondence between general and specific choices. Since the asset is of particular value, it is, however, necessary that the various criteria and weights taken on the basis of the evaluation are shared by the community or rather, by direct users and by potential or future users.

The Economic Evaluations and the Real Estate Appraisals for the Effectiveness, Feasibility and Sustainability of Urban Regeneration Measures