**7. Conclusion**

The evaluation process satisfied the participants to the NAPA project concerning the devel‐ opment of the Port of Trieste: the objective of the evaluation was achieved, and the result was useful for the next stages of the project. The AHP allowed the implementation of a multi‐criteria model in which the most important elements of the evaluation (key stakeholders and criteria aligned with EU's TEN‐T policy) are plainly represented. This made the model transparent and easily understandable by the participants. An early involvement of the key stakeholders, who provide information that is essential to the assessment, can surely improve the quality of the evaluation, which depends on the knowledge of the problem and, perhaps less importantly, on the level of expertise in the technical field. The AHP may offer a representation of the decision problem that is too simplified in some cases; in particular, when interdependencies between elements of the problem cannot be overlooked. However, it is essential to consider if the improvement in the accuracy of the model is worth the increase in model complexity and in the amount (and quality) of the information that is required to produce reliable results.
