The behaviour of reinforced concrete frames with masonry wall infills is influenced a lot by the stiffness and strength difference between the frame and the infill, causing early detrimental damage to the infill or to the critical concrete columns. The paper reports the results from shake table seismic tests on a full-scale reinforced concrete (RC) frame building with modified hollow clay block (orthoblock brick) infill walls, within INMASPOL SERA Horizon 2020 project. The building received innovative resilient protection using Polyurethane Flexible Joints (PUFJs) made of polyurethane resin (PU), applied at the frame-infill interface in different schemes. Further, PUs were used for bonding of glass fibre grids to the weak masonry substrate to form Fibre Reinforced Polyurethanes (FRPUs) as an emergency repair intervention. The test results showed enhancement in the in-plane and out-of-plane infill performance under seismic excitations. The results confirmed remarkable delay of significant infill damages at very high RC frame inter-story drifts as a consequence of the use of PUFJs. Further, the PUFJ protection enabled the resilient repair of the infill even after very high inter-story drift of the structure up to 3.7%. The applied glass FRPU system efficiently protected the damaged infills against collapse under out-of-plane excitation while they restored large part of their in-plane stiffness.

Enhancing territorial resilience while reducing risks is of paramount importance for communities, especially for those in historic areas where vulnerability is a significant component of risk, and where cultural heritage serves as a catalyst for collective identity. However, policies and planning tools designed to protect historic areas from natural and anthropic risks remain fragmented. The aim of this paper is to provide evidence-based guidance to help policymakers build tailored roadmaps for reducing the seismic vulnerability of historic areas. This research focuses on the Adriatic–Ionian region, with six countries identified as case studies. The methodology is structured in three phases. First, good practices for addressing seismic vulnerability are identified and codified to improve existing knowledge. Second, a replicability and scalability assessment of the good practices is performed for each case study. Finally, roadmaps are developed as ready-to-use tools to support the implementation of measures to reduce seismic vulnerability. Although the results reveal considerable variability in the readiness levels of the six case studies to act for reducing seismic vulnerability, the overall methodology effectively supports policymakers in moving from good practice selection to tailored roadmaps for enhancing resilience.