Infrastructure decision-making has traditionally been focused on the use of cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA). Nevertheless, there remains no consensus in the infrastructure sector regarding a favored approach that comprehensively integrates resilience principles with those tools. This review focuses on how resilience has been evaluated in infrastructure projects. Initially, 400 papers were sourced from Web of Science and Scopus. After a preliminary review, 103 papers were selected, and ultimately, the focus was narrowed down to 56 papers. The primary aim was to uncover limitations in both CBA and MCDA, exploring various strategies for amalgamating them and enhancing their potential to foster resilience, sustainability, and other infrastructure performance aspects. Results were classified based on different rationalities: i) objectivist, ii) conformist, iii) adjustive, and iv) reflexive. The analysis revealed that while both CBA and MCDA contribute to decision-making, their perceived strengths and weaknesses differ depending on the chosen rationality. Nonetheless, embracing a broader perspective, fostering participatory methods, and potentially integrating both approaches seem to offer more promising avenues for assessing the resilience of infrastructures. The goal of this research proposal is to devise an integrated approach for evaluating the long-term sustainability and resilience of infrastructure projects and constructed assets.