Protection of cultural heritage buildings and artistic assets from seismic hazard: A hierarchical approach

Sustainability (Switzerland)

Volumn 12, Issue 4, 2020, Pages

  D'Alpaos, Chiara ^a   Valluzzi, Maria Rosa ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA   (Italy)

Author keywords

AHP; Artistic assets; Cultural heritage; Multicriteria decision aid; Seismic hazard

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS; BUILDING; NATURAL DISASTER; SEISMIC HAZARD; STRATEGIC APPROACH;

EID: 85081683039     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20711050     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/su12041608     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Valluzzi, M.R. On the vulnerability of historical masonry structures: Analysis and mitigation. Mater. Struct. 2007, 40, 723-743. [CrossRef]
2. Binda, L.; Cardani, G.; Saisi, A.; Valluzzi, M.R.; Munari, M.; Modena, C. Multilevel approach to the vulnerability analysis of historic buildings in seismic areas-Part 1: Detection of parameters for the vulnerability analysis through on site and laboratory investigations. Int. J. Restor. Build. Monum./Internationale Zeitschrift für Bauinstandsetzen und Baudenkmalpflege 2007, 13, 413-426.
3. D'Ayala, D.; Speranza, E. Definition of collapse mechanisms and seismic vulnerability of historic masonry buildings. Earthq. Spectra 2003, 19, 479-509. [CrossRef]
4. Lagomarsino, S.; Podesta, S. Seismic Vulnerability of Ancient Churches: I. Damage Assessment and Emergency Planning. Earthq. Spectra 2004, 20, 377-394. [CrossRef]
5. Valluzzi, M.R.; Munari, M.; Modena, C.; Binda, L.; Cardani, G.; Saisi, A. Multilevel approach to the vulnerability analysis of historic buildings in seismic areas-Part 2: Analytical interpretation of mechanisms for the vulnerability analysis and the structural improvement. Int. J. Restor. Build. Monum./Internationale Zeitschrift für Bauinstandsetzen und Baudenkmalpflege 2007, 13, 427-441.
6. da Porto, F.; Silva, S.; Costa, C.; Modena, C. Macro-Scale Analysis of Damage to Churches after Earthquake in Abruzzo (Italy) on April 6, 2009. J. Earthq. Eng. 2012, 16, 739-758. [CrossRef]
7. Modena, C.; Valluzzi, M.R.; da Porto, F.; Casarin, F. Structural aspects of the conservation of historic stone masonry constructions in seismic areas. Int. J. Archit. Herit. 2011, 5, 539-558. [CrossRef]
8. Della Spina, L.; Calabro, F. Decision Support Model for Conservation, Reuse and Valorization of the Historic Cultural Heritage. In Computational Science and Its Applications, Proceedings of the ICCSA 2018, Melbourne, Australia, 2-5 July 2018; Gervasi, O., Murgante, B., Misra, S., Stankova, E., Torre, C.M., Rocha, A.M., Taniar, D., Apduhan, B.O., Tarantino, E., Ryu, Y., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; Volume 10962, pp. 3-17.
9. Bottero, M.; D'Alpaos, C.; Oppio, A. Ranking of adaptive reuse strategies for abandoned industrial heritage in vulnerable contexts: A multiple criteria decision aiding approach. Sustainability 2019, 11, 785. [CrossRef]
10. Ribera, F.; Nesticò, A.; Cucco, P.; Maselli, G. A multicriteria approach to identify the Highest and Best Use for historical buildings. J. Cult. Berit. 2019, 41, 166-177. [CrossRef]
11. Bottero, M.; D'Alpaos, C.; Marello, A. An Application of the A'WOT Analysis for the Management of Cultural Heritage Assets: The Case of the Historical Farmhouses in the Aglié Castle (Turin). Sustainability 2020, 12, 1071. [CrossRef]
12. Saaty, T.L. The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation; McGraw-Hill: New York, NY, USA, 1980.
13. Bhushan, N.; Rai, K. Strategic Decision Making Applying the Analytic Hierarchy Process; Springer: London, UK, 2004.
14. Yau, Y. Multi-criteria decision making for urban built heritage conservation: Application of the analytic hierarchy process. J. Build. Apprais. 2008, 4, 191-205. [CrossRef]
15. Kutut, V.; Zavadskas, E.K.; Lazauskas, M. Assessment of priority alternatives for preservation of historic buildings using model based on ARAS and AHP methods. Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng. 2014, 14, 287-294. [CrossRef]
16. Aliabadi, S.F.; Sarsangi, A.; Modiri, E. The social and physical vulnerability assessment of old texture against earthquake (case study: Fahadan district in Yazd City). Arab. J. Geosci. 2015, 8, 10775-10787. [CrossRef]
17. Vodopivec, B.; Žarnica, R.; Tamošaitiene, J.; Lazauskas, M.; Šelih, J. Renovation priority ranking by multi-criteria assessment of architectural heritage: The case of castles. Int. J. Strateg. Prop. Manag. 2014, 18, 88-100. [CrossRef]
18. Valluzzi, M.R.; Calò, S.; Giacometti, G. Correlation of vulnerability and damage between artistic assets and structural elements: The DataBAES archive for the conservation planning of CH masonry buildings in seismic areas. Sustainability 2020, 12, 653. [CrossRef]
19. Technologies for the Seismic Protection and Valorization of Cultural Heritage. Available online: https: //databaes.dicea.unipd.it/ (accessed on 18 November 2019).
20. D.P. C (Italian Department of Civil Protection); Work Group for Protection of Cultural Heritage against Natural Risks. Scheda per il Rilievo dei Beni Culturali-Danno alle Chiese-Modello A-DC (in Italian). 2001. Available online: http://www.beniculturali.it (accessed on 18 November 2019).
21. Grünthal, G. European Macroseismic Scale 1998. Cahiers du Centre Européen de Géodynamique et de Séismologie 1998, 15, 1-97.
22. CNR-ICR. Raccomandazioni NorMaL-1/88. Alterazioni Macroscopiche Dei Materiali Lapidei: Lessico. Roma (in Italian). 1990. Available online: https://www.unirc.it/documentazione/materiale_didattico/597_ 2011_287_13564.pdf (accessed on 10 January 2020).
23. Saaty, T.L. Decision making, new information, ranking and structure. Math. Model. 1987, 8, 125-132. [CrossRef]
24. Ferreira, F.A.; Santos, S.P.; Dias, V.M. An AHP-based approach to credit risk evaluation of mortgage loans. Int. J. Strateg. Prop. Manag. 2014, 18, 38-55. [CrossRef]
25. De Felice, F.; Petrillo, A. Absolute measurement with analytic hierarchy process: A case study for Italian racecourse. Int. J. Appl. Decis. Sci. 2013, 6, 209-227. [CrossRef]
26. Abastante, F.; Lami, I.M. An analytical model to evaluate a large scale urban design competition. Geoingegneria Ambientale e Mineraria 2013, 139, 27-36.
27. Nicu, I.C. Cultural heritage assessment and vulnerability using Analytic Hierarchy Process and Geographic Information Systems (Valea Oii catchment, North-eastern Romania). An approach to historical maps. Int. J. Disaster Risk Reduct. 2016, 20, 103-111. [CrossRef]
28. Ma, H.; Li, S.; Chan, C.-S. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)-based assessment of the value of non-World Heritage Tulou: A case study of Pinghe County, Fujian Province. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2018, 26, 67-77. [CrossRef]
29. Vargas, L.G. An overview of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1990, 48, 2-8. [CrossRef]
30. Banzato, D.; Canesi, R.; D'Alpaos, C. Biogas and biomethane technologies: An AHP model to support the policy maker in incentive design in Italy. In Smart and Sustainable Planning for Cities and Regions; SSPCR 2017. Green Energy and Technology; Bisello, A., Vettorato, D., Laconte, P., Costa, S., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 223-231. [CrossRef]
31. D'Alpaos, C.; Bragolusi, P. Multicriteria prioritization of policy instruments in buildings energy retrofit. Valori e Valutazioni 2018, 21, 15-25.
32. D'Alpaos, C.; Bragolusi, P. Prioritization of energy retrofit strategies in public housing: An AHP model. In New Metropolitan Perspectives; ISHT 2018. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies; Calabro, F., Della Spina, L., Bevilacqua, C., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; Volume 101, pp. 534-541. [CrossRef]
33. Roy, B. Metodologie Multicritère d'Aide à la Decision; Economica: Paris, France, 1985.
34. Vincke, P. Multicriteria Decision-Aid; John Wiley & Sons: New York, NY, USA, 1992.
35. Saaty, T.L. Fundamentals of Decision Making and Priority Theory with the Analytic Hierarchy Process; RWS Publications: Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 2000.
36. Saaty, T.L. The Analytic Hierarchy Process in Conflict Management. Int. J. Confl. Manag. 1990, 1, 47-68. [CrossRef]
37. Ishizaka, A.; Labib, A. Review of the main developments in the analytic hierarchy process. Expert Syst. Appl. 2011, 38, 14336-14345. [CrossRef]
38. Saaty, T.L. Decision-making with the AHP: Why is the principal eigenvector necessary. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2003, 145, 85-91. [CrossRef]
39. Saaty, T.L. A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J. Math. Psychol. 1977, 15, 234-281. [CrossRef]
40. Alonso, A.J.; Lamata, M.T. Consistency in the Analytic Hierarchy Process: A New Approach. Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl. Based Syst. 2006, 14, 445-459. [CrossRef]
41. Perez-Gladish, B.; M'Zali, B. An AHP-based approach to mutual funds' social performance measurement. Int. J. Multicriteria Decis. Mak. 2010, 1, 103-127. [CrossRef]
42. Saaty, T.L.; Vargas, L.G.; Dellmann, K. The allocation of intangible resources: The analytic hierarchy process and linear programming. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 2003, 37, 169-184. [CrossRef]
43. Saaty, T.L. Absolute and relative measurement with the AHP. The most livable cities in the United States. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 1986, 20, 327-331. [CrossRef]
44. Saaty, T.L. Rank from comparisons and from ratings in the analytic hierarchy/network processes. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2006, 168, 557-570. [CrossRef]
45. Saaty, T.L. Decision-making with the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Int. J. Serv. Sci. 2008, 1, 83-98. [CrossRef]
46. Rafikul, I.; Mohd Rasad, S. Employee performance evaluation by AHP: A case study. In Proceedings of the ISAHP 2005, Honolulu, HI, USA, 8-10 July 2005.
47. Saaty, T.L.; Odzemir, M.S. Why the magic number seven plus or minus two. Math. Comput. Model. 2003, 38, 233-244. [CrossRef]
48. Tramarico, C.L.; Marins, F.A.; Urbina, L.M.; Salomon, V.A.P. Benefit assessment of training on supply chain management. Int. J. Anal. Hierarchy Process. 2015, 7, 240-255. [CrossRef]
49. Saaty, T.L.; Wei, L. Should the UK have brexited the European Union? Int. J. Anal. Hierarchy Process 2016, 8, 206-223. [CrossRef]
50. Salomon, V.A.P. Absolute measurement and ideal synthesis on AHP. Int. J. Anal. Hierarchy Process. 2016, 8, 538-545. [CrossRef]
51. Saaty, T.L.; Peniwati, K. Group Decision Making: Drawing Out and Reconciling Differences; RWS Publications: Pittsburgh, PA, USA, 2012.
52. Dias, L.C.; Antunes, C.H.; Dantas, G.; de Castro, N.; Zamboni, L. A multi-criteria approach to sort and rank policies based on Delphi qualitative assessments and ELECTRE TRI: The case of smart grids in Brazil. Omega 2018, 76, 100-111. [CrossRef]
53. Kintarso, H.; Peniwati, K. Developing and selecting business strategy, and prioritizing strategic actions for a tool steel company with the analytic hierarchy process'. In Proceedings of the 7th Asia Pacific Management Conference, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 27-31 January 2001.
54. Senge, P.M. The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of the Learning Organization; Currency Doubleday: New York, NY, USA, 2006.
55. Xu, Z. On consistency of the weighted geometric mean complex judgement matrix in AHP. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2000, 126, 683-687. [CrossRef]
56. Grošelj, P.; Zadnik Stirn, L. Acceptable consistency of aggregated comparison matrices in analytic hierarchy process. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2012, 223, 417-4201. [CrossRef]